From reeza at flex.com Sun Oct 1 00:55:23 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 21:55:23 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: HOME MADE BOMBS In-Reply-To: <21.1935b90.270781d2@aol.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20000930215142.00d6d7b0@flex.com> At 01:50 PM 30/09/00 -0400, Texasman8012 at aol.com wrote: >NEED INFO >TEXASMAN8012 Go rent a super8 video device. Film two cats fucking. Sell the film to anyone you can. If you are lucky, you will get enough to cover the cost of the super8 device, the film and development. It'll be a bomb at the box office. From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 1 00:27:18 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 00:27:18 -0700 Subject: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001001002040.00ba0ab8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 12:30 PM 9/28/2000 +0300, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > > > Oh but it is quite possible to put people in similar trouble if > > > we grant that the right to property is absolute - if somebody > > > owns on a sufficiently wide scale the basic commodities one > > > needs to survive in the modern world (like fresh water, farming > > > land, employment opportunities), others are born right in the > > > middle of the proverbial desert. James A. Donald: > > But in a free market this never happens. It only happens when the > > government intervenes. Thus, for example, we only see > > homelessness where there is rent control, we only see hunger where > > there is rationing and collectivized farming, and so on and so > > forth. At 11:27 AM 9/29/2000 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: > I assume (hope!) that you are merely being sarcastic. I am simply reporting what any fool can see. Where do we see mass starvation? today we see it in North Korea, where the government has charge of food production and distribution, and a little earlier we saw it in Ethiopia where the same system applied. All the big famines were created by governments. Similarly, where do we see homelessness? Most of it is in San Francisco, half jokingly known as the people's republic as San Francisco, because of its drastic governmental management of housing. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG t5O4eL2x0M6k7ndK2ThplFXEUsakal5yFhuyqT6b 446e1qEYP/CB8TwFUBQP4NPbSlL+pdOJj4HbaMaPi From bill.stewart at pobox.com Sun Oct 1 01:28:39 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 01:28:39 -0700 Subject: CDR: RE: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001001002040.00ba0ab8@shell11.ba.best.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001001012839.00a052b0@idiom.com> At 12:27 AM 10/1/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >Similarly, where do we see homelessness? Most of it is in San Francisco, >half jokingly known as the people's republic as San Francisco, because of >its drastic governmental management of housing. There are a few causes, some the fault of government, some not. First of all, the weather here (and most of the California coast south of here) is much better than inland - it's hard to freeze to death. If you're going to be homeless, it's a lot better here than New York or Wisconsin. And the city's relatively tolerant of bums, in spite of occasional mayoral progams to make them go away. Another is the government's policy on mental health funding - some years ago, they started dumping previously-government-funded mental patients on the streets, even if they were somewhat crazy. Then there's the price of black-market heroin - some of the homeless I know are drunks; others are junkies when they can afford junk. San Francisco housing is expensive enough even if you're not spending your welfare check on the black market. Then of course there's the problem that San Franciscans don't like new buildings in their back yards, whether they're businesses or houses, especially yuppie houses or apartments for poor people. And they don't like landlords, so it's seldom worthwhile to go through the hassle and expense of getting permits to build apartments that'll get rent-controlled. So the price of existing housing goes through the roof, and anybody in a rent-controlled place can't afford to move to a non-rent-controlled place. And business rents go way up, so warehouses and other marginal buildings get replaced with condos, and live-work spaces get used for offices instead of residences. Meanwhile, of course, San Franciscans are Liberals who don't want anybody living in substandard housing, so non-city-funded flophouses tend to get closed down or remodeled into yuppie housing, and small cheap crowded tenement housing isn't legal either. It wasn't very good, but it was better than being on the streets. Of course, some of the fires in local flophouses really _have_ been caused by smoking in bed, as opposed to creative avoidance of laws against tearing down buildings to build better ones. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 1 03:40:16 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 06:40:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: police IR searches to Supremes In-Reply-To: <39D397BE.A00557AC@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Message-ID: On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Harmon Seaver wrote: > I'm having a very difficult time comprehending how plant >lights could even remotely be construed as "probable cause" -- don't the >courts have any idea of the millions of little old ladies (and whoever) >who use plant lights for their house plants? Or of the multitudes who >use them to jump start gardens every Spring, or the many who actually >grow veggies hydroponically in their basement? Well, considering that race seems to constitute probable cause, too... Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 1 04:43:27 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 07:43:27 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: no fedbucks means freedom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, A. Melon wrote: >"Because the school accepts no government aid and prohibits its students from doing the same, it >has the right to discriminate on the basis of religion." > >from a story http://www.newsday.com/ap/text/national/ap170.htm >about a college for home-schoolers. > >Re: why govt subsidized arenas have to be neutral wrt who you kiss, a >recent thread here. Somebody might then argue that education received in a private institution cannot be guaranteed to include social/moral/whatever lessons which are to be expected in a society and so private education should not be recognized as valid. Of course, this is nonsensical from an American point of view. From a Finnish one, not as clearly - Finnish universities and far over 90% of schools are governmental institutions, so making the above move would force people to attend a public school in order to be eligible for further education. In fact, private schools based on the Steiner and Montessori pedagogies fought quite a fight to be recognized, here. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 1 04:51:29 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 07:51:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: IR "TEMPESTING" (was Re: police IR searches to Supremes) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Alan Olsen wrote: >I wonder if the average citizen can buy this sort of equiptment? Would be >interesting to start scanning the houses of LEA officials and see what >kind of justification they use to try and stop you. I think one of the average-people-only laws would do it. For instance, call it stalking. I'm not quite sure how police officers on active duty could be found to 'stalk' anyone, even if found in possession of an IR camera. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 1 05:30:04 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 08:30:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: More Columbine fall-out In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Alan Olsen wrote: >I wonder if they will practice their raids by converting the plans into >Quake III levels... That would be even more satisfying, here - building blueprints have to be turned over to the city building office regardless of whether the building is public or not. I.e., there exists a central database in every town mapping out - at best in millimetre accuracy, thanks to GPS - its layout. I've always thought that realizing such a map would be a fun exercise in 3D coding, especially if applied online... Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ravage at ssz.com Sun Oct 1 06:48:54 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 08:48:54 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: RE: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001001002040.00ba0ab8@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: > Similarly, where do we see homelessness? Most of it is in San Francisco, > half jokingly known as the people's republic as San Francisco, because of > its drastic governmental management of housing. That is an entirely too simple-minded explanation of homelessness. To buy into this spin doctor bullshit line. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From allyn at well.com Sun Oct 1 09:15:46 2000 From: allyn at well.com (Mark Allyn) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 09:15:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: HOME MADE BOMBS In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000930215142.00d6d7b0@flex.com> Message-ID: 1. fill jelly jar with water to the top. 2. Screw the lid on tight 3. Put jelly jar into freezer 4. Water exapands as it freezes 5. Pfft! The jar cracks! 6. Safe example of what could be called a bomb From allyn at well.com Sun Oct 1 09:22:26 2000 From: allyn at well.com (Mark Allyn) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 09:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: HOME MADE BOMBS In-Reply-To: <00093021522201.00271@elevator> Message-ID: On Sat, 30 Sep 2000, Olav wrote: > Maybe someone could make a statistic. How many please-delete-this, > I-need-bomb-plans, I-need-these-xxx-passwords-now, You-need-killing--tim > or whatever mails are there per month? I just respond with stupid answares like putting water in a jelly jar in the freezer or forget the xxx passwords; undress and look at yourself in the mirrors. This might shut them up and convince them of their stupid questions. Mark From kimber25 at a1isp.com Sun Oct 1 09:33:49 2000 From: kimber25 at a1isp.com (kim) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 09:33:49 Subject: CDR: Register Your Domain Name For Free With Hosting Message-ID: <200010011335.GAA01199@toad.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 7507 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 1 11:17:29 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 11:17:29 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Natural rights (was Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001001104946.01990f50@shell11.ba.best.com> -- > I and most others on this list utterly reject that crap. As James > Donald's .sig used to say (and maybe still does) "We have the right > to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals > that we are." Still does in the newsgroups. For technical reasons I am not using a sig file in email at the moment. But if Sampo continues with his pious and benevolent totalitarianism, I think I will fix that and start using my sig in email again. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 7RXBB96F+KEuHOew1oL5VwfnSt0KYAavfMWY/aZ6 4Bc5vyHAtmzcehTolgQTP47X/iKXVa6NGHuPPo099 From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 1 11:21:46 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 11:21:46 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001001103446.01990f50@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 02:05 PM 10/1/2000 +0300, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > I believe death precisely of the kind described above do/did occur > (e.g. the famines in Africa, often caused by those responsible for > the production of food acting purely in their own interest) That is nonsense. Famines in Africa are caused by communism and socialism, notably the famous Ethiopian famines that occurred under Mengistu, or by war, notably the famous Biafran famine. Famines are never caused by people acting in their own interests. They are most commonly caused by pious benevolent socialists imposing the greater good with whip and red hot irons, burning, torturing and killing because they love people so very much. Famines are most commonly caused by socialists whose care for the suffering of anonymous strangers is so deep and heartfelt, whose love and concern for the faceless oppressed masses is so vast, that they will hold a child's face in the flames to force her mother to reveal where the seed corn is hidden. After all, we cannot let those damned peasants look out for their own selfish interests, can we? We love them too much to permit them such wickedness, and the flesh burning off from the bone on the face of a child is proof of how vital our mission is to save the peasants from themselves, proof of how much the peasant's wicked greedy selfishness puts them in need of our vast benevolent virtue, kindness, and generosity. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG WHgM6bgCZEmn9Quy1QeqWHncZdBzSxBjw/Hx/QyQ 41uHa233d7BE6K/WL7V4TqV6ovKUt4romaxLWduGE From bear at sonic.net Sun Oct 1 09:58:42 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 12:58:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: no fedbucks means freedom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >Somebody might then argue that education received in a private institution >cannot be guaranteed to include social/moral/whatever lessons which are to >be expected in a society and so private education should not be recognized >as valid. Of course, this is nonsensical from an American point of >view. From a Finnish one, not as clearly - Finnish universities and far over >90% of schools are governmental institutions, so making the above move would >force people to attend a public school in order to be eligible for further >education. In fact, private schools based on the Steiner and Montessori >pedagogies fought quite a fight to be recognized, here. Typically in the US, a college has entrance exams. If you can pay the tuition and pass the entrance exam, they don't care where or even whether you got your primary and secondary education. There's even a recognized class of "jailhouse lawyers" -- people who got arrested, studied the law on their own while in jail in order to handle their own appeals pro se, and who, when finally released from jail, found that they knew enough law to pass the entrance exams for law school and went on to become attorneys. "Social" or "Moral" lessons are considered to be reflected in performance only, and training is quite irrelevant to them. If a jailhouse lawyer takes a bribe or wilfully conceals evidence from disclosure or whatever, and the bar association discovers the fact, then she'll be disbarred the same as anybody else, but until something like that happens, she's assumed equal. The interesting bit is that the relative quality of public and private schools varies a whole lot. In sunny California, which has been neglecting its public school system, all the quality colleges are private and the entrance exams for them are all really tough -- students who've gone to a mere public school are unlikely to be able to get in. The curriculums are fairly mild, but since the graduates are all people who were bright enough to get in in the first place, they retain it well and function well in the world. If you don't do well enough in high school to qualify for the private colleges, you have to go the inferior public-college route. By contrast, in states like Kansas, which have a strong tradition of public schooling, the huge public universities have "warm body" admissions. This means anyone who can pass a GED exam or who has graduated from any public or private high school is automatically accepted -- but the curriculum is some of the toughest in the world and if you're unprepared you flunk out (Along with three quarters or more of your class). In the midwest, the graduates are the ones who were bright enough to *NOT FLUNK OUT*, and they retain their education well and function well in the world. If you can't cut it in the intensely competitive universities, then you have to pull out and go to an inferior private college instead. Ray From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 1 04:05:26 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 14:05:26 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Ray Dillinger wrote: >If so then what motive does anyone have to get their own food, as long >as their neighbor has enough to feed them? At what point does A stop >looking like a victim to you and start looking like a leech? Pretty soon, I suppose. I would have a hard time drawing the exact line. This is, I guess, the thing that most bothers people with current models of welfare, especially when somebody perceived as being an outsider is taken within such a system. >can be born in the middle of another's desert. But people can only >be born to parents who are somehow surviving in that environment. >The implication is that the environment is survivable after all, and >your life does *NOT* in fact depend on the power to make a burdensome >demand. The Western civilization supports individuals to such a degree that the above does not apply. People can indeed be born to parents which could not survive in the ideal libertarian society. In other parts of the world, and in earlier times, I believe death precisely of the kind described above do/did occur (e.g. the famines in Africa, often caused by those responsible for the production of food acting purely in their own interest) and are perceived as barbarian by us. That is one of the reasons why we measure a society by, e.g., its infant mortality. As for what this means purely within our hypothetical world of absolute ownership and slim governments, we get proles dependent on the owning class for survival. It is never in the best interest of the owner to kill the dependent one, just to extort him/her. I perceive this as a very concrete threat to liberty. >I had a pretty serious "desert" to work my way out of, so I know what >you're talking about in a way that most americans won't. That is a powerful argument against any personal motives I may have. But it is still well documented that financial inequality is on a rise all over the world, that is, the deserts are getting bigger. Might be that in a hundred years, you would have been awarded a life of financial slavery. >I believe in enough government to provide elementary education for >all who want it, to break up monopolies occasionally when there is >really egregious abuse of monopoly power, and to stop people from >stealing from one another or killing one another. To the extent >that governments do other things, they are exceeding the authority >I'd have assigned them. I mostly agree. I do not like broad governments or legistlative bloat either. I just can't seem to shake some of the less humane consequences of liberalism. >I don't believe in protecting idiots from themselves. Agreed. Paternalism *is* Bad. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Oct 1 12:33:21 2000 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 14:33:21 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001001103446.01990f50@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: > That is nonsense. Famines in Africa are caused by communism and socialism, Again, a simple-minded answer to a very complicated issue. There are political, racial, religous, and geographic issues that are involved here. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From galt at inconnu.isu.edu Sun Oct 1 16:18:36 2000 From: galt at inconnu.isu.edu (John Galt) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 17:18:36 -0600 (MDT) Subject: CDR: Re: HOME MADE BOMBS In-Reply-To: <21.1935b90.270781d2@aol.com> Message-ID: LIBRARY. GALT61613(F0AD in decimal...) On Sat, 30 Sep 2000 Texasman8012 at aol.com wrote: > NEED INFO > TEXASMAN8012 > -- Galt's sci-fi paradox: Stormtroopers versus Redshirts to the death. Who is John Galt? galt at inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 1 19:01:42 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 19:01:42 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: rose icon meaning? In-Reply-To: <6a7388a02221672803fd0512c76f1a99@remailer.ch> References: <6a7388a02221672803fd0512c76f1a99@remailer.ch> Message-ID: At 1:34 AM +0000 10/2/00, Anonymous wrote: >Could someone explain or provide a reference for what the rose icon >signifies? > >-Anon > >Tim writes: >> [...] >> >> Gilding the lily...or the "Cypherpunks rose," appropriately. If you dug this out of the archives, including the extrapolation from my brief mention of "Cypherpunks rose" to "rose icon," then you are presumably smart enough to be able to enter the right terms into a search engine. Or maybe not. It matter not. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From rah at shipwright.com Sun Oct 1 16:03:51 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 19:03:51 -0400 Subject: CDR: Niiice kitty.... Message-ID: Another addition to my expanding .sig file quote collection. Personally, of course, I think Chomsky something of a brilliant yutz, politically, :-). Nonetheless, the Churchill quote below is especially apt in describing the USA's current geopolitical situation. Here's hoping the US fares better in its own version of the 20th-century British tiger-ride. Cheers, RAH --- begin forwarded text From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 1 19:07:33 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 19:07:33 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: HOME MADE BOMBS In-Reply-To: <21.1935b90.270781d2@aol.com> References: <21.1935b90.270781d2@aol.com> Message-ID: At 1:50 PM -0400 9/30/00, Texasman8012 at aol.com wrote: >NEED INFO >TEXASMAN8012 Sorry, TEXASMAN8012, we are stll fulfilling the "help me make bombz" and "send me kiddie porn" requests of many before you. After we fulfill the request sent in by Hackerdood, aka Stockton Police Department, and after the many requests of Cryptogrrllzz, aka Patterson, NJ Child Crimes Unit, and the many other PDs and DA's offices, we will get to your request for bomb information. On the other hand, some are arguing that we simply kill cops and narcs like you. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From lroot at flinthills.com Sun Oct 1 17:55:12 2000 From: lroot at flinthills.com (All family) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 19:55:12 -0500 Subject: CDR: disney dollars. Message-ID: <39D7DCF0.5DD17DF2@flinthills.com> Hello. My name is Sandy and I had seen an article that you had or have disney dollars. The reason I am asking is that my father is a currency collector and is looking for the disney dollars. As you know that the old versions are of course very hard to find. Him being with out web access, it is my job to help is seek and find the newest craze to currency collecting. If you could be of any help, I would deeply appreciate it. Thanks for your time and have a wonderful week. Sandy Manhattan,KS From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 1 20:10:13 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 20:10:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> -- > I've been reading Noam Chomsky's book on Kosovo and came across this > quote from a Cabinet note written by Churchill in January 1914 > explaining the need for increased military expenditure (taken in > turn from Clive Ponting's Churchill, 1994, P 132): > > "We are not a young people with an innocent record and a scanty > inheritance. We have engrossed to ourselves an altogether > disproportionate share of the wealth and traffic of the world. We > have got all we want in territory, and our claim to be left in the > unmolested enjoyment of vast and splendid possessions, mainly > acquired by violence, largely maintained by force, often seems less > reasonable to others than to us." Chomsky is hardly a reliable source. He routinely fabricates or falsifies quotes. I suggest you check his alleged sources. Chances are you will be unable to find his alleged source. In the unlikely event that you are able to find it, it will not say quite what Chomsky claims it said. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG x0mHawqf6qCPceEVKqvbMFm+dlud44bypomUe7yL 4fNdHawWLRaiwAZBTwUDBTep99D3yN2eWM3SZs4Xc From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 1 20:18:32 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 20:18:32 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: rose icon meaning? In-Reply-To: <6a7388a02221672803fd0512c76f1a99@remailer.ch> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001001201435.0174fdf0@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 01:34 AM 10/2/2000 +0000, Anonymous wrote: > Could someone explain or provide a reference for what the rose icon > signifies? See: http://catalog.com/jamesd/Kong/Kong.htm#ECHAP --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG kcUHSyna1NizLzpZ4PCqWC5j62HH//jCYUXtgQ6q 4tlZsR1yYowigjMdNc3shs+drnU4tnIgRYX3x8yF5 From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 1 20:20:33 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 20:20:33 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: rose icon meaning? In-Reply-To: References: <6a7388a02221672803fd0512c76f1a99@remailer.ch> <6a7388a02221672803fd0512c76f1a99@remailer.ch> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001001201848.0167d910@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 1:34 AM +0000 10/2/00, Anonymous wrote: > > Could someone explain or provide a reference for what the rose > > icon signifies? At 07:01 PM 10/1/2000 -0700, Tim May wrote: > If you dug this out of the archives, including the extrapolation > from my brief mention of "Cypherpunks rose" to "rose icon," then you > are presumably smart enough to be able to enter the right terms into > a search engine. > > Or maybe not. It matter not. Tim, if you are really too grouchy and too short of time to answer the guy, why post at all? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG YlnMLFBNPxAKcm/scddMwS/Ijtrn5tEhsjGtVhpH 4tV71s9/WNy8uqsqPIzDA4GT6SDgB3u8u+hhNSsu9 From George at Orwellian.Org Sun Oct 1 17:34:08 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 20:34:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: "soft" handwriting Message-ID: <200010020034.UAA20818@www4.aa.psiweb.com> Tonight's 60" had curmudgeon Andy Rooney and some handwriting experts. They went over a Bush campaign letter that had blue cursive writing of Dubya. (mass reproduced). The experts agreed: it was computer generated from a number of samples of Bush's handwritings. Anyone familiar with this software? Dubya must be one busy Leghorn Foghorn. From Somebody Sun Oct 1 12:42:05 2000 From: Somebody (Somebody) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 20:42:05 +0100 Subject: Power politics Message-ID: Bob, I've been reading Noam Chomsky's book on Kosovo and came across this quote from a Cabinet note written by Churchill in January 1914 explaining the need for increased military expenditure (taken in turn from Clive Ponting's Churchill, 1994, P 132): "We are not a young people with an innocent record and a scanty inheritance. We have engrossed to ourselves an altogether disproportionate share of the wealth and traffic of the world. We have got all we want in territory, and our claim to be left in the unmolested enjoyment of vast and splendid possessions, mainly acquired by violence, largely maintained by force, often seems less reasonable to others than to us." I thought you might appreciate it. --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "...our claim to be left in the unmolested enjoyment of vast and splendid possessions, mainly acquired by violence, largely maintained by force, often seems less reasonable to others than to us." -- Winston Churchill, January 1914 From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 1 22:22:15 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 22:22:15 -0700 Subject: CDR: More news from Somalia Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001001220756.00bb3670@shell11.ba.best.com> -- Many of you may have seen news items about another attempt to form a government in Somalia. Many of you may have seen a news item that the president entered Mogadishu, the former capital of former Somalia, surrounded by a large military force, and was warmly welcomed. Well it seems that most of that force was not fighters loyal to the president, but fighters loyal to various factions and conflicting and incompatible special interests to which the president had made all sorts of promises. It is not clear to what extent the forces were there to protect him and ensure he was obeyed, and to what extent they were there to make sure he delivered on his diverse promises to diverse interest groups. The president entered Mogadishu without a shot fired. He also left it without a shot fired, though a few prominent Somalis have announced a policy of killing him on sight. As far as anyone can tell the president spent one day in Somalia, and is now back to leading a government-in-exile. This does not mean that the attempt to form a government has failed, but it has not yet succeeded. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Id0ZhxXLfjOd/3uSMCJcK/BNoXTdziRYHThMFxA2 4wULaLgFycpPD/YzYSa7uh+mmlCX8vLBlgr7qs7cO From nobody at remailer.ch Sun Oct 1 18:34:59 2000 From: nobody at remailer.ch (Anonymous) Date: 2 Oct 2000 01:34:59 -0000 Subject: CDR: rose icon meaning? Message-ID: <6a7388a02221672803fd0512c76f1a99@remailer.ch> Could someone explain or provide a reference for what the rose icon signifies? -Anon Tim writes: > [...] > > Gilding the lily...or the "Cypherpunks rose," appropriately. From editorschoice at mail.0mm.com Mon Oct 2 02:42:43 2000 From: editorschoice at mail.0mm.com (Powerize/Hoover's) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 03:42:43 -0600 Subject: CDR: Editor's Choice: Winning Stocks in the Insurance Industry, 10/2/00 Message-ID: <20001002034243.000179@ms3out1.messagemedia.com> =========================================================== TODAY'S NEWSLETTER LOOKS AT WINNING STOCKS IN THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY A number of insurance stocks hit 52-week highs in recent weeks, in part because several Wall Street analysts raised their ratings and earnings estimates for these firms. Over the past three months, insurance shares are up 9 percent while the S&P 500 index has dipped 2 percent. What many investors like about these companies is their growth beyond the insurance business. Many providers are looking like financial services firms with diverse product lines. Other firms are expanding their businesses globally or raising their premiums. In today's newsletter, we look at companies, trends, and financial performance in the insurance business. =========================================================== A Word From Our Sponsor ========================================================== Get practical advice that will help you grow your business. Every month, the Small Business Connections newsletter will provide informative business building ideas written by small business expert Jane Applegate. Issues will feature money-saving tips, insights on how to use the internet more effectively for business and time- saving advice specifically geared to small businesses. Sign up now -- FREE! http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283001 =========================================================== 1. EDITOR'S CHOICE STORIES FROM: National Underwriter, Rough Notes, 123Jump, and American Agent & Broker 2. FREE SAMPLES OF THE DAY FROM: SNL Securities and Graham & Whiteside 3. COMPANY OF THE DAY: ACE Limited (ACL) 4. INDUSTRY UPDATES 5. HTML VERSION OF EDITOR'S CHOICE NEWSLETTER 6. SIGN UP FOR INDUSTRY NEWS DIGESTS - WIN A PALM Vx! =============================================== 1. EDITOR'S CHOICE STORIES a. "INSURER STOCKS SOAR" Source: National Underwriter, September edition Stock prices in the property-casualty insurance industry continue to hit 52-week highs. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283002 b. "THE EVOLUTION OF AXA" Source: Rough Notes, September 27 edition The insurance giant has embarked on a program to transform its career agents into financial advisers. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283003 c. "SECTOR PROFILE: INSURANCE STOCKS" Source: 123Jump, September 29 article This group of stocks in the insurance sector is up 237 percent this year. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283004 d. "LOOKING AT THE INTERNET'S IMPACT ON INSURANCE PROVIDERS" Source: American Agent & Broker, September edition The ability to perform meaningful insurance transactions via the Web continues to present many challenges. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283005 2. FREE SAMPLES OF THE DAY Available exclusively to Hoover's Members through the Hoover's Editor's Choice Newsletter. These documents are free to Members for one week. a. "SNL INSURANCE DAILY", from the September 29 edition of SNL Insurance Daily, courtesy of SNL Securities. A look at the latest company news, events, and top-performing stocks in the insurance industry. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283006 SNL Insurance Daily summarizes the previous day's news and market information affecting the insurance industry. This newsletter gives you information on top-performing stocks, insider trades, ownership and disclosure filings, company news and events, M&A activity, and legislative issues. SNL Securities reports are available on a pay-per-view basis through Hoover's Archived News for $35.00. To search them, select "Insurance Industry News" on Archived News Advanced Search page. Sample Search: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283001 b. GRAHAM & WHITESIDE MAJOR COMPANIES REPORT: ACE LIMITED, courtesy of Graham & Whiteside. ACE Limited (ACL) sells property-casualty insurance to industrial, commercial, and other clients in the U.S., the UK, Ireland, and Bermuda. For more information about ACE Limited, our company of the Day, see below. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283008 Graham & Whiteside's Major Companies Database is the leading source of global company information based on thorough research by specialist editors with years of experience collecting international business information. The data provided includes (where available) company address, telephone, telex, fax, directors, senior management, activities, trade names, branch offices (not for Europe), principal agencies (not for Europe), parent company, subsidiary and associated companies, banks, auditors, lawyers, financial information, public/private status, principal shareholders, number of employees, date of establishment (not for Europe), and SIC codes. Graham & Whiteside Profiles are available on a pay-per-view basis through Hoover's Archived News for $5.00. To search them, select "Company Profiles (Pay)" on Hoover's Advanced Search page. Sample Search: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283009 =========================================================== A Word From Our Sponsor =========================================================== The Dow Jones Publications Library from Factiva gives you access to over 6000 publications. Registration and searching by keyword, company name and symbol are free. You are charged only for articles you read, and you can view purchase confirmation and account activity online. Register now with Qpass & save 50% on first two articles! http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283010 =========================================================== 3. COMPANY OF THE DAY: ACE Limited (ACL) ACE Limited's shares, which hit a new 52-week high of $40.188 Friday, are up about 140 percent this year. Analyst Ronald W Frank at Salomon Smith Barney recently gave the company a "buy" rating, and raised his price target to $44. For a comprehensive picture of ACE Limited through company profiles, recent news stories, recent press releases, and research reports, follow the links below into Hoover's vast databases: Hoover's Company Capsule: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283011 Other Company Profiles: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283012 Recent News Stories: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283013 Recent Press Releases: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283014 Recent Research Reports: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283015 =========================================================== A Word From Our Sponsor =========================================================== Looking for one of those three-letter jobs -- CEO, CIO, CFO, SVP? Hoover's Career Business Links connects executives to the nation's top recruiting companies. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283016 =========================================================== 4. INDUSTRY UPDATES Industry Updates feature important industry news stories from around the world, culled from thousands of Hoover's's brand-name sources and constantly updated throughout the day. Each Industry Update also features links to Updates about the leading companies in that industry. Advertising: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283362 Aerospace & Defense: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283363 Automotive: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283364 Aviation: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283365 Banking & Financial: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283366 Chemicals: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283367 Computers & Internet: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283368 Energy & Utilities: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283369 Healthcare: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283370 Insurance: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283371 Media: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283372 Pharmaceuticals: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283373 Telecommunications: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283374 ================================================================== 5. HTML VERSION OF EDITOR'S CHOICE NEWSLETTER The Editor's Choice Newsletter is also available in HTML format. If you're currently viewing this newsletter in plain Text format, your email software is unable to read HTML, or has been set up to receive only plain Text. If you'd like to receive the HTML version, contact Customer Support at support at powerize.com. To see a sample of the HTML page, click the link below: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283017 =================================================================== 6. SIGN UP FOR INDUSTRY NEWS! SIGN UP FOR INDUSTRY NEWS DIGESTS - WIN A PALM Vx! At the end of October, we'll randomly select a name from among those who've subscribed to any of our eight Industry News Digests, and that person will receive a Palm Vx, valued at over $400! Why wait until tomorrow to get today's major industry news? Every weekday afternoon, Hoover's Industry News Digests deliver summaries of the day's most significant news stories in each major industry. Each Industry News Digest features hyperlinks to the full text of featured stories, so that you can read the complete details about the stories and events that most interest you. To see a sample of the Internet News Digest, click the link below: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283018 To subscribe, click here: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283019 =================================================================== For information on advertising in this email or on the Hoover's Web site, please email us at advertise at powerize.com. For information on becoming an affiliate and earning commissions by selling Hoover's's content through your Web site, please email us at affiliates at powerize.com. If you are not 100% satisfied with a purchase you make on Hoover's, we will refund your money. Registered User Agreement: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283378 =================================================================== Editor's Choice is an original publication of Hoover's Online =================================================================== You are receiving this e-mail because you opted to subscribe to Hoover's daily e-mail newsletter services. If you want to be removed from this e-mail list, simply reply to this message with "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. You are subscribed at: cypherpunks at toad.com Do you have any comments or suggestions regarding this newsletter or a specific feature of Hoover's Online? We'd like to hear from you at http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283020. Hoover's Online Terms & Conditions http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283021 Copyright 2000 Hoover's, Inc. All rights reserved. From rah at shipwright.com Mon Oct 2 04:49:45 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 07:49:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: At 8:10 PM -0700 on 10/1/00, James A.. Donald wrote: > > (taken in > > turn from Clive Ponting's Churchill, 1994, P 132): > > > Chomsky is hardly a reliable source. He routinely fabricates or falsifies > quotes. I suggest you check his alleged sources. > > Chances are you will be unable to find his alleged source. In the unlikely > event that you are able to find it, it will not say quite what Chomsky > claims it said. While I would expect that Dr. Chomsky didn't "manufacture" some "consent" of his own here, I wouldn't be surprised, given his fetish about same, and, since it's pretty trivial to prove or disprove, I'll get back to you when I get around to looking it up. Someday. If you're in a hurry to actually back up your assertion, however, you're welcome to do so sooner, if you would like. :-). Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From reinhold at world.std.com Mon Oct 2 05:24:17 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 08:24:17 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: AES winner to be announced Monday. In-Reply-To: <9a9074440a285dfd0fb89d90d50c91e4@dizum.com> References: <9a9074440a285dfd0fb89d90d50c91e4@dizum.com> Message-ID: The following information from the Rijndael Page http://www.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/~rijmen/rijndael/index.html may come in handy later today when NIST announces the new Advanced Encryption Standard (AES): 'Rijndael FAQ 1.How is that pronounced ? If you're Dutch, Flemish, Indonesian, Surinamer or South-African, it's pronounced like you think it should be. Otherwise, you could pronounce it like "Reign Dahl", "Rain Doll", "Rhine Dahl". We're not picky. As long as you make it sound different from "Region Deal". 2.Why did you choose this name ? Because we were both fed up with people mutilating the pronunciation of the names "Daemen" and "Rijmen". (There are two messages in this answer.) 3.Can't you give it another name ? (Propose it as a tweak!) Dutch is a wonderful language. Currently we are debating about the names "Herfstvrucht", "Angstschreeuw" and "Koeieuier". Other suggestions are welcome of course. Derek Brown, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, proposes "bob".' At 9:50 PM +0200 9/30/2000, Nomen Nescio wrote: > >Though NIST is being very secretive regarding the AES announcement, >they let the following rumors leak: > >1. There is a single winner. >2. It is not an American design. > >If so, this rules out MARS, RC6, and Twofish. But now comes the >third rumor: > >3. The winner is not covered by any patent or patent claim >identified or disclosed to NIST by interested parties. > >Assuming this is true, there is only one algorithm that is not >explicitly mentioned in Hitachi's claim: Rijndael. From reeza at flex.com Mon Oct 2 11:31:35 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 08:31:35 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: HOME MADE BOMBS In-Reply-To: <00093021522201.00271@elevator> References: <21.1935b90.270781d2@aol.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001001223747.00b12f00@flex.com> At 09:44 PM 30/09/00 +0200, Olav wrote: >On Sat, 30 Sep 2000, Texasman8012 at aol.com wrote: >> NEED INFO >> TEXASMAN8012 > >Maybe someone could make a statistic. How many please-delete-this, >I-need-bomb-plans, I-need-these-xxx-passwords-now, You-need-killing--tim >or whatever mails are there per month? We could expand this. X-results from domain alpha, Y-results from domain bravo, Z-results from domain charlie, and so on. Perhaps, if those who've posted, have done so from providers who provide IP addresses, we can isolate localities that generate the greatest number of trolls, so that we know which localities to place at the top of our,,, errr, lists, and such. or something. Reese From reeza at flex.com Mon Oct 2 11:32:39 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 08:32:39 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.1.2.20001001103446.01990f50@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001001224610.00cef740@flex.com> At 02:33 PM 01/10/00 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: > >On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: > >> That is nonsense. Famines in Africa are caused by communism and socialism, > >Again, a simple-minded answer to a very complicated issue. There are >political, racial, religous, and geographic issues that are involved here. And they could be overcome, save for collectivist, totalitarian, and at times, even capitalistic elements. Reese From bruble-admin at nym.alias.net Mon Oct 2 01:40:33 2000 From: bruble-admin at nym.alias.net (Admin of Bruble Anonymous Remailer) Date: 2 Oct 2000 08:40:33 -0000 Subject: CDR: Bruble2 address change Message-ID: <20001002084033.31574.qmail@nym.alias.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 4295 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dis-list at rebelbase.com Mon Oct 2 09:34:01 2000 From: dis-list at rebelbase.com (Nomen Nescio) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 09:34:01 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: would it be so much to ask.. In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20000921210322.02412f90@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <200009211732.SAA00943@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001002092829.04423ed8@mail.rebelbase.com> > > That was precisely my point: socialism doesn't necessarily mean > > centralised statism, wage controls or limited speech. > >Yes it does. Socialists may not always intend that outcome, but that is >the outcome they are necessarily going to get, want it or not. Not entirely true. Many socialist pursue a socialist economical party while adhering to democratic elective notions, I.E. Democratic Socialist (used to be referred to as Troskietes) >And the reaction of Western socialists to real life repressive governments >shows that most western socialists do indeed want exactly that. Their >love of Castro turned to hate only when Castro liberalized Cuba. They >blandly overlooked the crimes of Khmer Rouge until the Soviet Union and >its sattelites quarreled with them. Again not true. The capitalist countries blandly overlooked the crimes of the Khmer Rouge and would have continued to do so if not for education and protest by human rights activists (you would find a significant amount of socialist among activists). >They worshipped the Sandinistas, while fiercely condemning Latin American >governments that were vastly less repressive. Not true You sure use a sweeping amount of those socialist blah blah blah statements. You hang out with a lot of socialist? -Ian Drug War The root password to the Bill of Rights... From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 2 00:51:49 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 09:51:49 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Why Free Speech Matters References: <20000929150549.D12223@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: <39D83E95.5BFDE61C@ricardo.de> "Riad S. Wahby" wrote: > The only catch is that the fine print on the ticket tells you that by > using the ticket you are entering into an agreement whereby you can be > ejected from the game without refund. This gets into contract law, > but ignoring this fine point, we basically agree. I've got to claim ignorance here, since I didn't know about this fine print. I don't go to these games. From edt.edt at libertysurf.fr Mon Oct 2 06:52:58 2000 From: edt.edt at libertysurf.fr (edtj2000) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 09:52:58 -0400 Subject: CDR: Business link Message-ID: <39D88B51.4BDE2099@libertysurf.fr> http://www.edtj2000.com/mail.asp -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mail.asp Type: text/html Size: 6016 bytes Desc: not available URL: From honig at sprynet.com Mon Oct 2 08:10:40 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 11:10:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: thought police Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001002080131.007b3970@pop.sprynet.com> Oct 2, 2000 - 10:40 AM Court Allows Suspension of Student for Drawing Pictures of Confederate Flag The Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) - A Kansas youth suspended from school for three days after he drew a picture of a Confederate flag lost a Supreme Court appeal Monday. The court, without comment, turned away arguments that the suspension violated the youth's freedom of speech and other constitutionally protected rights. T.J. West was a seventh-grader at Derby Middle School in Sedgwick, Kan., when in spring 1998 he made a 4-by-6 inch sketch of the Confederate flag during a math class. West later told his assistant principal a friend had urged him to draw the flag, and that he knew what it was but not what it meant. West also knew drawing the flag violated a "racial harassment and intimidation" policy the school district had adopted after incidents of racial tension in 1995. The policy banned, among other things, students from possessing "any written material, either printed or in their own handwriting, that is racially divisive or creates ill will or hatred." Confederate flags were specifically listed as such material. During the racial tensions at Derby High School and the middle school in 1995, at least one fight had broken out as a result of a student wearing a Confederate flag headband. During that time, the Aryan Nation held a recruiting drive directly across the street from Derby High School and the Ku Klux Klan distributed literature to students near the high school. West and his father challenged the boy's suspension from school, but a federal trial judge and the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled for the school district. The appeals court, in its ruling last March, noted that West had been suspended earlier that school year for calling another student "blackie" and had been reminded at that time about the harassment and intimidation policy. The case is West v. Derby Unified School District No. 260, 99-2039. http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAX5X89UDC.html "The electron, in my judgment, is the ultimate precision-guided munition." -John Deutsch, CIA Director From honig at sprynet.com Mon Oct 2 08:10:42 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 11:10:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: Supremes defer Sony vs. Fair Use soft emulator Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001002080810.007ba710@pop.sprynet.com> Oct 2, 2000 - 10:31 AM Supreme Court Sidesteps PlayStation Dispute By Laurie Asseo Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court stayed out of a dispute between Sony and another company whose software allows people to run Sony PlayStation games on personal computers. The court, without comment Monday, let Connectix continue selling its Virtual Game Station until a lower court rules on Sony's claim of unfair competition. Sony has sold 50 million PlayStations - small computers with hand controls - that plug into a television set and allow consumers to play games inserted into the computer on a compact disc. The PlayStation's software program is protected by copyright. In January 1999, Connectix of San Mateo, Calif., began selling the Virtual Game Station, which allows people to run PlayStation games on their own personal computers. The Virtual Game Station software does not contain any of Sony's copyright material. But in developing it, Connectix used the PlayStation's software program by extracting its code from a chip and copying it repeatedly on its own computer to see how it worked. Sony filed a copyright-infringement lawsuit, and a federal judge in San Francisco halted sales of the Virtual Game Station in April 1999 pending a ruling. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted that order last February, saying Connectix's action amounted to a "fair use" of Sony's software. The court said Connectix was a "legitimate competitor" in creating computer platforms on which Sony games can be played, adding that copyright law does not allow Sony to monopolize that market. In the appeal acted on Monday, Sony's lawyers said the ruling erodes copyright protection for computer programs. Connectix's actions were "pure free-riding, using the protected work to develop a substitute far more quickly and inexpensively than the original," Sony's lawyers said. Sony invested three years and $500 million to develop the PlayStation, its lawyers said, while Connectix took six months and $150,000 to create its product. Connectix's lawyers said the company created "an entirely new environment" for playing PlayStation games. A 1998 federal law boosting copyright protections for the computer industry endorsed the process used by Connectix, the lawyers said. In May, a federal judge in San Francisco threw out seven of Sony's nine allegations against Connectix in the copyright case, allowing Sony to pursue claims of violating trade secrets and unfair competition. The case is Sony Computer Entertainment v. Connectix, 00-11. http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAEWJW8UDC.html "The electron, in my judgment, is the ultimate precision-guided munition." -John Deutsch, CIA Director From support at photopoint.com Mon Oct 2 08:28:29 2000 From: support at photopoint.com (support at photopoint.com) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 11:28:29 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: CDR: PhotoPoint Password Reminder Message-ID: <200010021531.MAA32257@mail.photopoint.com> As requested, here's a reminder of your PhotoPoint password: Username: cypherpunks at toad.com Password: cypherpunks If you want to change your password, just go to "User Preferences" once you've logged in. Any time you forget your password, you can request it from the PhotoPoint Login page and it will be emailed to you again. If you need any other support, just go to our member "Help" section at http://www.photopoint.com/help/index.html. Thank you for your participation in PhotoPoint, the World's Favorite Place to Share Photos Online. And remember, membership in PhotoPoint is free, so send our URL http://www.photopoint.com to your family and friends and encourage them to sign up. From rah at shipwright.com Mon Oct 2 08:56:48 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 11:56:48 -0400 Subject: CDR: Fwd: AES winner webcast 4pm today Message-ID: Strangely enough, http://real.nist.gov/ is, of course, choked. :-). Anyone heard yet who the winner is? Cheers, RAH --- begin forwarded text From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Mon Oct 2 02:08:54 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 12:08:54 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: >Chomsky is hardly a reliable source. He routinely fabricates or falsifies >quotes. I suggest you check his alleged sources. Do you have some past examples at hand?` Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From codewhacker at yahoo.com Mon Oct 2 10:27:21 2000 From: codewhacker at yahoo.com (Roy Silvernail) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 12:27:21 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Fwd: AES winner webcast 4pm today Message-ID: <000a01c02c96$068af360$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> Rijndael. http://csrc.nist.gov/encryption/aes/ -----Original Message----- From: R. A. Hettinga Subject: CDR: Fwd: AES winner webcast 4pm today >Strangely enough, http://real.nist.gov/ is, of course, choked. :-). > >Anyone heard yet who the winner is? _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From iang at systemics.com Mon Oct 2 09:36:00 2000 From: iang at systemics.com (Ian Grigg) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 12:36:00 -0400 (AST) Subject: Rijndael is GREEN Message-ID: For Release 11.00 EDT Monday 2nd October 2000 Rijndael is GREEN NIST chooses Rijndael as the Advanced Encryption Standard Announced today in Washington, DC, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has chosen Rijndael as the Advanced Encryption Algorithm for the 21st century. Rijndael -- pronounced Rhine-Dahl -- is the creation of two Belgian cryptographers, Joan Daemen and Vincent Rijmen. The Cryptix Development Team congratulates Vincent and Joan on their extraordinary achievement and announces the immediate release of the Cryptix JCE and Cryptix 3.2, both enabled with AES as Rijndael. International Cryptoplumbing An international team of open source crypto volunteers from The Cryptix Development Team supported the cryptographers participating in the NIST contest, efforts that were recognised with the award of a Certificate Of Appreciation from the United States Department Of Commerce. Raif S. Naffah, from Australia, led the Cryptix AES Support Project which provided the Java code and tools for most finalists, including Rijndael, for submission to NIST. Paulo Barreto, Brazilian mathematician and programmer, provided coding support for optimising Rijndael implementations; he has been coding and reviewing algorithms for the Belgian team for many years, including the predecessor to Rijndael, the Square cipher. Free Crypto Under the terms of the NIST contest, Rijndael is free and unencumbered for all purposes and all peoples. Cryptix developers have agreed to match this condition, and hereby place their Rijndael code in the public domain. Normally, all Cryptix code is free for all purposes, but requires acknowledgement of The Cryptix Foundation as owners under an extremely liberal "BSD licence." Even this condition is now dropped for the Rijndael code, so that all commercial providers of Java cryptography, including Sun, Baltimore, RSA Labs, and IAIK, may quickly offer their customers the best code. No Arms Race Need Apply Cryptography has long been treated as a munition by the US government. Today's decision marks the end of an era stretching back to the days of Enigma and Magic intercepts. The new algorithm and the accompanying code base is absolutely unimpaired by political or commercial limitations. As a science, cryptography is the special domain of mathematicians; formulas flow across borders as fast as emails. As an idea, the Rijndael cipher can be written out in 10 or so pages of paper, making it impermeable to regulations. Fuel For The Revolution As a tool, code for the new AES algorithm is less than 10,000 bytes, and thus cryptography slips into the average application with less implication on costs than the price of a new PC. As a building block, AES will help to fuel the new industrial revolution in electronic commerce. Ciphers such as Rijndael will keep valuable messages secure in the wild west of the Internet far better than the old methods of obscurity and regulation. Released by The Cryptix Foundation Limited, a Nevis corporation dedicated to the spread of strong crypto. Links: NIST announces the winner of AES as Rijndael: http://www.nist.gov/aes/ The Rijndael page of the Cryptography team, Joan Daemen and Vincent Rijmen: http://www.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/~rijmen/rijndael/ Cryptix places Rijndael code in public domain: http://www.cryptix.org/aes/ Cryptix products JCE and Cryptix 3 now released with Rijndael as AES: http://www.cryptix.org/news/02102000.html http://www.cryptix.org/products/jce/index.html http://www.cryptix.org/products/cryptix31/index.html http://www.cryptix.org/products/aes/index.html About The Rijndael Team Dr Joan Daemen is currently employed by Proton World International. Dr Vincent Rijmen is a cryptography researcher with Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium. About Cryptix Java cryptography was first provided under the label of Cryptix in 1996. The Cryptix Development Team now includes crypto- plumbers -- programmers who work with the algorithms and ciphers of cryptographers to produce code and applications -- from 8 countries and publishes the most popular Java cryptography suite. Cryptix products are generally published under the BSD licence, making them free for all purposes when used with due acknowledgement as to source. The Cryptix implementations of Rijndael, written as part of our AES support project, are now placed in the public domain so that all commercial suppliers can proceed to support the AES without having to give any acknowledgement. About National Institute of Standards and Technology The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), an agency of the U.S. Department Of Commerce, is charged by the US Congress with developing standards for industry. Many of its standards achieve world-wide acceptance, and the predecessor DES has been accepted as the de facto standard for encryption for three decades, albeit with much controversy. About the Advanced Encryption Standard In order to allay concerns of interference, NIST sponsored the open competition for the new algorithm, encouraging entries from around the world. Some 21 submissions were narrowed down to five finalists. NIST encouraged competing cryptographers and the NSA (the world's largest employer of cryptographers and mathematicians) to critique the algorithms, building up a body of review that led to today's choice of the new standard. End. --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From gbroiles at netbox.com Mon Oct 2 12:57:57 2000 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 12:57:57 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Lon Horiuchi freed In-Reply-To: ; from mclow@owl.csusm.edu on Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 08:39:44AM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20001002125757.A19360@ideath.parrhesia.com> On Thu, Jun 15, 2000 at 08:39:44AM -0700, Marshall Clow wrote: > Real-To: Marshall Clow > > SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The FBI agent who killed the wife of white separatist Randy > Weaver during the Ruby Ridge standoff is immune from state prosecution in Idaho, a > federal appeals court ruled Wednesday. On September 29, the 9th Circuit voted to review this case en banc; Horiuchi's not done yet. -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com PO Box 897 Oakland CA 94604 From rah at shipwright.com Mon Oct 2 10:02:59 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 13:02:59 -0400 Subject: CDR: Rijndael is GREEN Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From freematt at coil.com Mon Oct 2 10:50:42 2000 From: freematt at coil.com (Matthew Gaylor) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 13:50:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: First, Mexico's future lies with free, "open source" software like the operating system Linux, and Gnome Message-ID: [Sent with permission-MG] DIGITAL NATION Mexico Has Resources for High-Tech Success By Gary Chapman Copyright 2000, The Los Angeles Times, All Rights Reserved An open letter to Mexican President-elect Vicente Fox: Congratulations on your historic victory in the presidential election. About 100 million Mexicans and others who love Mexico are eager for change in your country, and they have high hopes when your new administration takes office in December. But clearly, one issue of great importance is how to bring Mexico into the "new economy" of the Internet, high tech and global commerce. Mexico has many resources in technology to exploit, but they have been obstructed by weak or bad government policies. You can change this. Let me offer you some suggestions on how you might start. First, Mexico's future lies with free, "open source" software like the operating system Linux, and Gnome, another open-source effort to build a Windows-like screen. Gnome itself was developed by a young Mexican programmer, Miguel de Icaza, who is 27 years old. This summer, De Icaza started the Gnome Foundation (http://www.gnome.org) to unify and stabilize the Linux desktop software, and he acquired the support of IBM, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard and Compaq, among other major U.S. companies. He is a hero to young programmers around the world, and he should be a hero to all Mexicans. You should meet with Miguel de Icaza and get to know him and young people like him. They are the best hope for Mexico. Obviously, the biggest benefit of free software to Mexico is that it's literally free, and Mexico is a poor country that needs to preserve its capital. Mexico has a new law on software piracy, for example, and your government will need to enforce this law for Mexico to be regarded as a trusted partner in high-tech trade. But if you do enforce the software piracy law effectively, it will result in a massive transfer of pesos to the United States, and principally to Microsoft, the largest victim of software piracy in Mexico. Alternatively, you could promote the use of free software such as Linux, Gnome and application packages such as Sun Microsystems' StarOffice suite, which are all free. No pesos would leave Mexico and you would get all of the functionality of modern software. Indeed, you'd become part of a trend that is sweeping the computing field in the U.S. IBM, Dell, Hewlett-Packard and Compaq are all offering Linux on computers now. IBM is essentially a Linux company these days, an astonishing transformation. Mexico would not lose anything by adopting free software, indeed, it would move to the cutting edge of technology. Your government should also think about creating an elite but grassroots-oriented corps of young free-software evangelists, programmers, hackers and systems developers who could build on the culture and spirit of the embryonic free-software movement. Give them an identity with special shirts or jackets and specially painted pickup trucks to go out to villages and towns, and elevate them to hero status in Mexico. They should have an esprit de corps that reflects both their enthusiasm for their work and their patriotism. Send them around the world to technical and trade conferences and make them stand out -- make them the young, technically skilled enthusiasts everyone wants to work with. Joakim Ziegler is one of these wizard-like programmers. He's Norwegian, but he lives in Mexico City because he loves it there. He works for Helix Code, the company started by Miguel de Icaza. Ziegler is also in his twenties. He told me, "A change as radical as the internal use of free software" -- meaning use by the government itself -- "would be an indication of real change." The Federal Election Commission in Mexico used free software to run this year's election, but other government agencies have yet to grasp its benefits. Ziegler also said, "Small companies run by enthusiastic young people don't have a lot of status in Mexico right now." Too many of Mexico's young entrepreneurs have moved to the U.S. to start companies. In Mexico, there's too much government red tape, credit is too expensive and there is a culture of "not what you do, but who you know," all of which are obstacles to building the kind of entrepreneurial spirit Mexico needs. You should make Mexico a place that is as easy to start a business in as it is in California or Texas. Mexico also needs a better telecommunications infrastructure. Telmex, the recently privatized national phone company, and its competitors, such as Avantel, are slowly building up their capabilities. But they will not soon reach the vast numbers of Mexicans who live in underserved and poor areas. So you should pay attention to a San Diego company called Tachyon Inc.(http://www.tachyon.net), which is doing business in Mexico. Tachyon has a contract for using SatMex 5, the powerful Mexican satellite that covers all of Mexico. Tachyon is offering inexpensive two-way Internet service via satellite, and it can serve every town and village in Mexico right now. The company's vice president, Santiago Ontañon, who is 33 and from Mexico City, told me that its price for broadband Internet connectivity for a typical Mexican school with five to 10 computers is only about $300 to $400 per month. This is thousands of dollars less than what Telmex can offer, and it can happen tomorrow, not in some indefinite future. Incidentally, the ground equipment Tachyon provides its customers runs on Linux. With the combination of free software and inexpensive Internet connectivity, as well as building on Mexico's Red Escolar (SchoolNet) program for wiring Mexican schools, the country could become the world's leading example of affordable high-tech infrastructure for the rest of the world's developing nations. Moreover, the philosophy behind free, open-source software fits well with your important ideas about a new "open society" in Mexico. There will be strong pressures, both internally and externally, for Mexico to adopt a conventional model of development, dependent on big corporate players and mega-deals. But you have the opportunity to foster something different and far more interesting. Throw your power, prestige and vision to your young people, to your entrepreneurs and innovators and to the practical idealists of the free software movement. This will pay off in the long run, and it could dramatically transform Mexico Gary Chapman is director of the 21st Century Project at the University of Texas at Austin. He can be reached at gary.chapman at mail.utexas.edu. ------------------------------------------ ************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt at coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per month) Matthew Gaylor,1933 E. Dublin-Granville Rd., PMB 176, Columbus, OH 43229 (614) 313-5722 Archived at http://www.egroups.com/list/fa/ ************************************************************************** From lucky at article27.com Mon Oct 2 11:25:50 2000 From: lucky at article27.com (lucky at article27.com) Date: Mon Oct 02 14:25:50 EDT 2000 Subject: CDR: Lucky People Center is Out There. Message-ID: <0437430422002a0BIGEMMA@www.bigemma.com> Hey! We haven't heard from you! So we thought we would email you again to remind you Lucky People Center International - that fantastic celebration of dance, music and life - is out there and available from article27 at www.article27.com See it, feel it, use it to wake you up in the mornings or get you up for a night out. Lucky People Center is the first of many great films from article27 - the new film distribution company here to connect film lovers with the films you want to see. Films like the Oscar nominated Genghis Blues, due for release next week, months before anyone else! And Guy Maddin's Archangel and Twilight of the Ice Nymphs - visually incredible and surreal films, which have enthralled audiences worldwide. If you are interested in hearing more about article27 and our films, feel free to visit us at www.article27.com. Know your friends would be into any of these movies? Feel free to pass a copy of this email on. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- This mailing is brought to you by article27. To unsubscribe forward this message to unsubscribe at article27.com (please forward the entire message, or it will not unsubscribe you) If you have any feedback on this email please feel free to contact article27 at help at article27.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Mon Oct 2 11:36:02 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 14:36:02 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Fw: Others are protecting freedom of speech too. Message-ID: The article is in this month or last month's Sci Am. Peter Trei > ---------- > From: Bill Stewart[SMTP:bill.stewart at pobox.com] > Reply To: Bill Stewart > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 11:41 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: Fw: Others are protecting freedom of speech too. > > Marcel - did the original posting to the mh_mirror or freenet-chat > lists indicate where the article was from? If you removed it, > could you send me the originals? > It looks newspaperish, but doesn't indicate (AP) or (NYTimes) or whatever. > If it's a newspaper that takes replying letters to the editor, > or at least to the author, it deserves a reply. > > The reason I ran a remailer was that it > we can prevent violent people from telling others what they > can and can't say, whether those violent people are > spouse-beating individuals or citizen-beating governments, > and any one person in the world can stand up to all of them. > That doesn't mean it won't be abused (of course it will, > and I eventually took mine down because of abuse, > as most remailer-operators have), but we don't have to put up > with violence any more. > > At 12:30 PM 9/26/00 -0400, Marcel Popescu wrote: > >< >laws instead of technology," says Joan E. Bertin, executive director of > the > >National Coalition Against Censorship.>> > > Yes, and if they worked, there wouldn't be a need for a > National Coalition Against Censorship :-) > > > >ROTFL... > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >X-Loop: openpgp.net > >From: "mh mirror" > >To: > >Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 2:52 PM > >Subject: [Freenet-chat] Others are protecting freedom of speech too. > > > > > >........ > > INTERNET_ANONYMITY > > > > Speech without Accountability > > > > New software makes it nearly impossible to > > remove illegal material from the Web--or to find out who > put > >it there > > > > SAN FRANCISCO--In the centuries-long struggle to decide what > people > >may say without > > fear of prosecution, almost all the big decisions have been made > by > >constitution writers, > > judges and politicians. When things work properly, these players > ...... > > But is it an appropriate response for a small number of computer > >scientists to create software that subverts the efforts of governments > > who must answer to citizens, and of companies, who must answer > > to both governments and customers? > > ...... > > > > --W. Wayt Gibbs > > > Thanks! > Bill > Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com > PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 > > From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Mon Oct 2 11:41:44 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 14:41:44 -0400 Subject: AES winner to be announced Monday. Message-ID: Careful on attributions. I did not say this - I quoted a usenet posting which included this line. No harm done. Peter Trei > ---------- > From: Paulo S. L. M. Barreto[SMTP:paulo.barreto at terra.com.br] > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 6:27 PM > To: Trei, Peter; 'cypherpunks at openpgp.net'; 'cryptography at c2.net'; > 'coderpunks at toad.com' > Subject: Re: AES winner to be announced Monday. > > On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Trei, Peter wrote: > > > They (explicitly) won't say yet how many algorithms > > have been chosen as the AES. > > So NIST will be silent for three more days. How about the finalist > submitters? > Did *they* tell anything? I'll bet NIST has contacted (or will contact) > them regarding the forthcoming announcement. And the e-mail address > means that at least the RC6 team is easily > accessible, > isn't it? > > Paulo Barreto. > From I.Brown at cs.ucl.ac.uk Mon Oct 2 07:08:26 2000 From: I.Brown at cs.ucl.ac.uk (Ian Brown) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 15:08:26 +0100 Subject: AES winner webcast 4pm today Message-ID: COMMERCE DEPARTMENT TO ANNOUNCE CHOICE FOR PROPOSED CRYPTOGRAPHY STANDARD On October 2 at 11 a.m. ET, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, an agency of the Commerce Department's Technology Administration, will hold a press briefing to announce its proposed choice to become the Advanced Encryption Standard, a new code designed to scramble information in the 21st century. This announcement marks the completion of a three-year, open competition conducted by NIST to select the final AES candidate. Dr. Cheryl L. Shavers, Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology, and Ray Kammer, Director of NIST, will make brief presentations followed by a question and answer period for reporters. The public is invited to follow the announcement by live webcast at http://real.nist.gov/ --- end forwarded text --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From reeza at flex.com Mon Oct 2 18:49:18 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 15:49:18 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001002154745.00ded4c0@flex.com> At 08:10 PM 01/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >Chomsky is hardly a reliable source. He routinely fabricates or falsifies >quotes. I suggest you check his alleged sources. > >Chances are you will be unable to find his alleged source. In the unlikely >event that you are able to find it, it will not say quite what Chomsky >claims it said. Are there any examples of this documented anywhere, preferably on the web? Reese From paulo.barreto at terra.com.br Mon Oct 2 11:53:15 2000 From: paulo.barreto at terra.com.br (paulo.barreto at terra.com.br) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 15:53:15 -0300 Subject: AES winner to be announced Monday. Message-ID: <200010021853.PAA23062@srv9-sao.sao.terra.com.br> You are right, I'm sorry. Anyway, it's no longer necessary to ask the AES finalist teams (all of which seem to have been offline for the last few days) about NIST's announcement. Sorry again, and best wishes, Paulo. > Careful on attributions. I did not say this - I quoted a usenet > posting which included this line. No harm done. > > Peter Trei > > > ---------- > > From: Paulo S. L. M. Barreto[SMTP:paulo.barreto at terra.com.br] > > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 6:27 PM > > To: Trei, Peter; 'cypherpunks at openpgp.net'; 'cryptography at c2.net'; > > 'coderpunks at toad.com' > > Subject: Re: AES winner to be announced Monday. > > > > On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Trei, Peter wrote: > > > > > They (explicitly) won't say yet how many algorithms > > > have been chosen as the AES. > > > > So NIST will be silent for three more days. How about the finalist > > submitters? > > Did *they* tell anything? I'll bet NIST has contacted (or will contact) > > them regarding the forthcoming announcement. And the e-mail address > > means that at least the RC6 team is easily > > accessible, > > isn't it? > > > > Paulo Barreto. > > From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 2 16:07:37 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 16:07:37 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Down with techno-egalitarinism, from a reluctant cpunk In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20000929180831.01e737a0@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20000929180831.01e737a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 5:05 PM -0400 10/2/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >Below is a response from one of the students, forwarded here with permission. > >-Declan > >****** > >>From: "Christopher Fazekas" >>To: >>Subject: Your speech last night. >>Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:23:41 -0400 >>... >> However, what makes this topic interesting, bothers me as well. >>I was the individual who asked the "prepayment" question concerning >>intellectual property and proper remuneration thereof. Fantastic >>new economic models would be forced to be created to describe this >>"market response" to the dissolution of intellectual property >>rights. So, I will not venture an opinion on such subject. Yet, I >>think it is important to mention that there is a fine line between >>anarchism and libertarianism. At least I find there to be one. >>Hence, when we talk about the overthrow of the nation state, it >>sets off quite a few bells. Not surprising that it should "set off quite a few bells." The technologies are likely to profoundly change a lot of things, and ring a lot of bells. >>I do not believe judicial systems should be cast to the wayside in >>favor of techno-egalitarianism, and I feel that the dissolution of >>intellectual property would sincerely stress current social >>institutions which I do not believe need to be overthrown, but >>strengthened as government power is retracted. However, a case >>could be made that the two are intricately connected to one another. Christopher Fazekas is thinking about the issue from the wrong perspective. It is not a matter of society deciding, or him deciding, or the voters deciding, whether or not to "cast to the wayside" certain systems, any more so than society faced a social decision to accept or reject the implications of the printing press, or the telephone, or technology in general. (See, for example, numerous historical studies. A recent one is Ithiel de sola Pool's "Technologies of Freedom," focussing on the telephone and its implications for society. A few societies have attempted to make the judgement call that some technology, even a whole set of technologies, needed to be rejected. China, for example, withdrew its trading/exploration fleets and banned many technologies...this back in the middle of the last millennium. (And, some would say, in later echoes...) Usually it is well-nigh impossible to ban such technologies, and rulers end up fighting delaying actions only. Examples abound in the past century, from control of birth control information to control of copying machines. I think it certain that strong crypto and its implications is already well along and cannot be reversed or even effectively reigned in. (Metaphors as appropriate: genie out of the bottle, Pandora's box open, fire already stolen from the gods, horses out of the barn, etc.) I expect that Mr. Fazekas, now that he has been more thoroughly exposed to these ideas, will be able to see the upcoming "fork in the road": Path 1: Strong crypto is restricted, communications are widely and pervasively tapped, the First and Fourth Amendments are gutted, rules of evidence are changed, all financial transactions are required to be reported, communication across national borders is restricted, travel to foreign nations is strictly controlled, etc. (I'll leave it for a later discussion, if there's any doubt, about just how difficult it has already become to attempt _any_ of these measures. I spelled it out in 1988 in my Crypto Anarchist Manifesto--transparent borders, satellites, steganography, etc. Kevin Kelly's book "Out of Control" includes my circa 1990 outlook on the difficulties facing those who would attempt to control bits.) Path 2: Citizen-units ignore rules (a la Napster, Gnutella, Freenet), they do what they want. Lots of bandwidth sloshing around, lots of "degrees of freedom" (a key concept from control theory/physics, and a good punning connection to crypto anarchy). Governments freak out as the sheeple are downloading files, vising Neo-Nazi and porn Web sites, exchanging lists of those Clinton had killed, and so on. Clerics call for more control, ragheads demand disconnecting from the Satanic West. Politicians scream about "saving the children." But nothing does more than slightly slow the inrushing wave. Governments warn about how digital money will undermine tax collection and faith in the entire system...Cypherpunks say "Yep, that's what we were saying more than ten years ago." Academics write papers on the implications of regulatory arbitrage, on the undermining of international law. Meanwhile, more bandwidth, more untaxed transactions, more offshore gambling, more porn, more political sites. Even women in Saudi Arabia discover that birth control information denied to them locally is available on the Net...though they'd better use anonymous remailers and ZKS and Mojo Nation! Is there a "middle path"? Can the center hold, as the Brits would ask? Doesn't look like it to me. Oh, sure, there will still be taxes. The governments can still tax houses, and cars, and threaten meatspace people with various dire actions if they don't cough up some geld to the protection racket. But the exponential increase in bandwidth and the accompanying degrees of freedom will forever change things politically. And this is not new. I mentioned printing. It revolutionized Europe and led to the destruction of guilds--the "intellectual property" holders of their day. (Make no mistake, the Guild of Leather Tanners "owned" their knowledge in a way quite similar to how modern corporations and governments claim to own knowledge.) Printing made "how to" books possible (the next most popular books after religious hymnals and bibles). The power of guilds began to decline. Likewise, religion changed dramatically...courtesy of "95 Theses" and accessibility of pamphlets and bibles written in the common languages of the time. The Industrial Revolution was another "knowledgequake" which triggered vast changes in the landscape of politics, the law, and everything else. Including taxation, interestingly enough. (Left to the reader to consider how modern factories made possible certain types of taxation and centralization of power.) Suppose an earlier version of Mr. Fazekas was asking whether these changes--printing, steam engines, factory production, electrification, automobiles, computers, the list is long--should be "allowed"? Allowed by _whom_? Now, I grant that we don't know yet know if the Net and its related technologies (crypto, notably) is comparable to the invention of printing and the Industrial Revolution. Or even as important as the telephone. Personally, I think the Net--or, more broadly, the colonization of cyberspace--is a dramatic, world-changing event. Not exactly a surprising revelation to most folks today, given the changes in just the past five years that Web browsers have been commonly available. But profound nonetheless. Where will government be in twenty years? What will happen to local laws when cyberspace makes movement around the world so easy? When regulatory arbitrage moots nearly any law? When untraceable and unbreakable crypto allows "impenetrable bobbles" (a la Vinge) to be erected at will? When digital reputations, handled on a peer-to-peer basis and not subject to "top-down" commands, become the currency of cypherspace? Unrealistic? Check back in a decade and see where things are headed. Meanwhile, I welcome Mr. Fazekas to our community. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From fm at espace.net Mon Oct 2 08:36:53 2000 From: fm at espace.net (Fearghas McKay) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 16:36:53 +0100 Subject: Fwd: AES winner webcast 4pm today Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From apoio at giganetstore.com Mon Oct 2 08:43:33 2000 From: apoio at giganetstore.com (apoio at giganetstore.com) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 16:43:33 +0100 Subject: CDR: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Uma_Ma=E7a_chamada_APPLE?= Message-ID: <0072633431502a0WWWNETSTORE@wwwnetstore> Pensa que o iMac se parece com um visitante do futuro? O iMac não só parece que vem do futuro como pode transportá-lo para lá. Todos os produtos têm OFERTA de um Polo Apple e um convite para a Inforpor Campanha válida até dia 08/10/2000 Para retirar o seu email desta mailing list clique em: http://www.giganetstore.com/retirar_mail.as p -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 2806 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Oct 2 14:52:10 2000 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 16:52:10 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: would it be so much to ask.. In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001002092829.04423ed8@mail.rebelbase.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Nomen Nescio wrote: > Not entirely true. Many socialist pursue a socialist economical party > while adhering to democratic elective notions, I.E. Democratic Socialist > (used to be referred to as Troskietes) There are no elections in a socialism. One of my main complaints about Democratic Socialist is they have never explained how one has a central party running everything and yet let everyone have a choice on how it should be run. Of course there is NOTHING in the Democratic Socialist part that actualy commits the central party to the outcome of the elections either. Sort of a empty promise. ___________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From declan at well.com Mon Oct 2 14:05:36 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 17:05:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: Down with techno-egalitarinism, from a reluctant cpunk Message-ID: <4.3.0.20000929180831.01e737a0@mail.well.com> I spoke Thurs night at the University of Virginia (http://www.politechbot.com/p-01393.html). I talked a lot about cypherpunkly topics (added some stuff that I haven't seen here, and plan to turn into an article) and even gave the how-to-join address of the cpunx list. Below is a response from one of the students, forwarded here with permission. -Declan ****** >From: "Christopher Fazekas" >To: >Subject: Your speech last night. >Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:23:41 -0400 > >Dear Mr. McCullagh: > > I thank you for a wonderful presentation last evening. It is rare > that I am presented with a political subject that grabs my attention. > Though I participate actively in political forum, until your speech last > evening, it had begun to feel as though I was "going through the motions" > so to speak with the boring, redundant ideological pissing matches that > characterize University discussion. Thank you for the new subject matter > to tackle. > > However, what makes this topic interesting, bothers me as well. I was > the individual who asked the "prepayment" question concerning > intellectual property and proper remuneration thereof. Fantastic new > economic models would be forced to be created to describe this "market > response" to the dissolution of intellectual property rights. So, I will > not venture an opinion on such subject. Yet, I think it is important to > mention that there is a fine line between anarchism and libertarianism. > At least I find there to be one. Hence, when we talk about the overthrow > of the nation state, it sets off quite a few bells. I do not believe > judicial systems should be cast to the wayside in favor of > techno-egalitarianism, and I feel that the dissolution of intellectual > property would sincerely stress current social institutions which I do > not believe need to be overthrown, but strengthened as government power > is retracted. However, a case could be made that the two are intricately > connected to one another. > > I realize all this is speculation. So, I will leave it at that. > Suffice to say I'm not sure the world is intellectually or socially > prepared for anarchy, though I believe it to be our saving end. Once > again, thank you for a wonderful discussion and keep in touch. > > Please keep me in your list of contacts. As I will be entering law > school next fall, I hope to devote a great portion of my career to the > preservation of liberty, and make way for this great anonymous freedom. > >Sincerely, > >Christopher Fazekas >Chairman >Classical Liberal Roundtable at the University >2432 C-4 Arlington Blvd. >Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 From billp at nmol.com Mon Oct 2 18:04:47 2000 From: billp at nmol.com (billp at nmol.com) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 19:04:47 -0600 Subject: CDR: Rumkowski and the Lodz ghetto Message-ID: <39D930AF.3E91D336@nmol.com> Interesting history http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/ http://members.tripod.com/bill_3_2/ http://www.nmol.com/users/billp/ We must be careful. Keep up-wind From jamesd at echeque.com Mon Oct 2 21:11:16 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 21:11:16 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.1.2.20001001103446.01990f50@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001002210229.02954de8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- James A. Donald: > > Famines in Africa are caused by communism and socialism, notably > > the famous Ethiopian famines that occurred under Mengistu, or by > > war, notably the famous Biafran famine. At 0233 PM 10/1/2000 -0500, Jim Choate wrote > Again, a simple-minded answer to a very complicated issue. So give an example of an important twentieth century famine not caused by socialism or war. It really is that simple. The commies did it. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG tbBYjHfydLTBu3hVBm2I+dVKybOHpU+RGP+BTDuO 420u0ce5VEiOiN2t/tkM3WcN1Sv8EAGydLBZWgLeD From cesargar at usc.edu Mon Oct 2 21:59:05 2000 From: cesargar at usc.edu (Cesar Garcia) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 21:59:05 -0700 Subject: CDR: AFF Message-ID: <000a01c02cf6$a973f620$d9c156d8@mminternet.com> hello, do you know how i can get a password for adultfriendfinder.com thanks in advance cesar -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 671 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jimmy at mailhost.tld.net Mon Oct 2 22:10:40 2000 From: jimmy at mailhost.tld.net (jaime Lomba) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 22:10:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: OPORTUNIDAD DE NEGOCIOS "UNICA" Message-ID: <20001002220478.SM00249@localhost> INFORME ESPECIAL En momentos de crisis financiera o económica, hay personas que se unen para ayudarse mutuamente a obtener los ingresos que necesitan para sus proyectos laborales o de negocios. Si las grandes empresas hacen lo que les conviene y se unen para crecer, los particulares también podemos hacerlo. Conozca a fondo la propuesta contestando éste email para más información. jimmy at tld.net j_lomba at yahoo.com http://www.geocities.com/vinci2020/jimmy.htm#F ********************************************************************** Su dirección fue obtenida de un sitio público y nuestra intención es informarle nuestra propuesta, le pedimos disculpas si no resultase de su interés. A todos los efectos nos adherimos a las consideraciones establecidas para el United States Federal Requeriments for Commercial E-mail Bill, Section 301.Este mail se envía por única vez. En caso de recibirlo nuevamente será por un error y si eso ocurriera, le pido por favor me lo retorne pidiéndome que lo remueva. Sus datos no forman parte de banco de datos alguno en mi poder.- Atte. JAIME. From sfurlong at acmenet.net Mon Oct 2 19:20:09 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 22:20:09 -0400 Subject: CDR: US crypto on classified info References: <200010021709.OAA30982@srv11-sao.sao.terra.com.br> <200010022336.TAA07993@granger.mail.mindspring.net> Message-ID: <39D94236.8AF55739@acmenet.net> John Young wrote: > > The AES Q&A notes that the technology will be used > to protect non-classified government material. What > cryptosystems are used to protect classified information > -- that is, either with hardware implementation or with > software only? Or are these methods themselves > classified? Yep, for the higher-classified material, anyway. And having said that, I'm going to have to weasel out. I don't remember what I can talk about and what's classified. Sorry for my bad memory. Ta, SRF, former Captain, MI, US Army -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From jamesd at echeque.com Mon Oct 2 22:34:20 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 22:34:20 -0700 Subject: CDR: Shunning, lesbians and liberty Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001002222550.01ec5b70@shell11.ba.best.com> -- James A. Donald > > > > Famines in Africa are caused by communism and socialism, > > > > notably the famous Ethiopian famines that occurred under > > > > Mengistu, or by war, notably the famous Biafran famine. At 0233 PM 10/1/2000 -0500, Jim Choate wrote > > > Again, a simple-minded answer to a very complicated issue. James A. Donald > > So give an example of an important twentieth century famine not caused by socialism or war. At 2335 -0500 10/2/00, Jim Choate wrote > Um, changing the rules in the middle of the game are we... > > How did war get in there Sampos original claim was that famine was caused by private enterprise and free markets. My original counter claim (which you dishonestly altered in each post) was that all famines were caused by socialism or war. You on two separate occaisions have edited my original claim to make it easier to rebut. Each time I edited it back, and each time you deleted what I wrote to change the meaning. The first time was just careless editing. The second time was a lie. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG SMZlD/UI8j53FygnoP4krJHCVx1j1mqDEPPKQeMM 4Qj4MKVIjcgU5oLidjh2Cg7KDjnQUL5FYCrYKZGKw From jamesd at echeque.com Mon Oct 2 22:34:55 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 22:34:55 -0700 Subject: CDR: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001002222811.01f02de0@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 11:52 PM 10/2/2000 -0500, Kevin Elliott wrote: > However I'll bite by asking the inverse of the question- name one > large scale famine that occurred in any country not under some form > of "forcible rule" (forcible rule being defined as some sort of > communist, socialism, or dictatorship, for the purpose of this > question). A less precise way of putting this is present one > example of a country in which free election are/were taking place > for a reasonable period of time, during which that country > experienced mass starvation of a significant portion of it's > population. You are putting ordinary dictatorships, like Pinochet's Chile or Park's Korea, in the same category as communist dictatorships, like Castro's Cuba or Mengistu's Ethiopia. That is ridiculouys. The difference between normal dictatorships and totalitarian regimes is enormous, vastly greater than the difference between dictatorships and ordinary democracies, and the distribution of famine (excluding famines caused by war) illustrates that difference. So let us go back to the original question: Where was there a significant twentieth century famine other than those caused by war or socialism? It is absurd to use categories that put normal dictatorships in the same category as totalitarian dictatorships. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG XA5dUKG3q6hJeBTz4HeNScT8fe/40IKiok46xSjj 4VMa7FUolej7nOJCk26xL8WmXqoVPFFufxonhuwhR From jamesd at echeque.com Mon Oct 2 22:41:30 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 22:41:30 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001002223645.01ec5b70@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 07:49 AM 10/2/2000 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote: If you're in a hurry to actually back up your assertion, however, you're welcome to do so sooner, if you would like. :-). How can I prove Churchill did not say this? The problem is the curious absence of evidence that he did say it. The words sound more Chomskian than Churchillian. As with so many remarkably Chomsy sounding quotes the source is so vague that failure to find it can never be held as proof that Chomsky made it up. If Churchill really said such a thing, we would have some source better than Chomsky for it, and if Churchill really did say it, Chomsky would have given us a source that was possible to verify. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG szxxNSRTF2hqGokTe4pEi1HN0v7ML+gJClXW1Vcu 4i2EZSRU++C5ilvvAmDcHPpIjAAdRwU9+ndWqhck2 From sfurlong at acmenet.net Mon Oct 2 19:48:17 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 22:48:17 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: one time pad and random num gen References: <3.0.5.32.20001002094530.009809b0@idiom.com> Message-ID: <39D948DD.82B4BF1A@acmenet.net> Bill Stewart wrote: > By contrast, if you've got a pseudo-random number generator, > which uses some mathematical process to generate the numbers, > knowing bits 1...I-1 tells you something about bits I...N, > so if the message has structure to it, you can often exploit it. Isn't a good definition of a cryptographically-strong PRNG that even if you know bits 1..I-1, you still don't know anything about bit I? (Unless you know the internal state of the PRNG, of course.) A c-strong PRNG shouldn't be susceptible to any currently known analyses. Perhaps that's just a theoretical definition, and no existant PRNGs come close. But I thought some good ones were out there. Ta, SRF -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From sfurlong at acmenet.net Mon Oct 2 19:59:49 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 22:59:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: Anonymous Remailers Message-ID: <39D94B8D.FE35481C@acmenet.net> Does anyone have any suggestions for setting up an anonymous remailer? I found a FAQ from a "Cypherpunks Home Page" mirror, but that's from _1993_! I assume there's more recent work out there somewhere, but I didn't see anything on Google or Packetstorm, nor mentioned in Phrack or some other zines. I'd like a HOWTO, suggesting software to use and how to set it up. I'm pretty clueless as to what would be needed, but I have a FreeBSD box and a DSL line with no usage restrictions. If need be I can set up another box, dedicated to this purpose. I should have the means once I get whapped with a cluestick. I'd also like discussions of real-world problems that people have found. What kind of things cause you to think about shutting down your remailer? Technical abuse, legal difficulties, or what? Thanks, SRF -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 2 21:23:46 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 23:23:46 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001002154745.00ded4c0@flex.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Reese wrote: > > Are there any examples of this documented anywhere, preferably on the web? > I'm not aware of any overt instances. I From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 2 21:25:44 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 23:25:44 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: <39D94B8D.FE35481C@acmenet.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > I'd also like discussions of real-world problems that people have found. > What kind of things cause you to think about shutting down your > remailer? Technical abuse, legal difficulties, or what? Lawyer fees. There is no clear mechanism to fund anonymous remailers and their resource requirements can be potent. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 2 21:28:05 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 23:28:05 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... (try 2) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Jim Choate wrote: > > On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Reese wrote: > > > > > Are there any examples of this documented anywhere, preferably on the web? > > > > I'm not aware of any overt instances. I > Ok, let's try that one again.... I think my machine is digitaly hallucinating... Anyway. I 'm not aware of any overt instances. I did some checking of resoruces when I read "Deterring Democracy". All of them (maybe a dozen) checked out and the quotes were reasonably represented. I'd be very interested in any verifiable instances myself. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From jamesd at echeque.com Mon Oct 2 23:30:23 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 23:30:23 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001002154745.00ded4c0@flex.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001002231430.00ba5ee0@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 08:10 PM 01/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >Chomsky is hardly a reliable source. He routinely fabricates or falsifies >quotes. I suggest you check his alleged sources. > >Chances are you will be unable to find his alleged source. In the unlikely >event that you are able to find it, it will not say quite what Chomsky >claims it said. At 03:49 PM 10/2/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: Are there any examples of this documented anywhere, preferably on the web? No one has been able to disprove any quotes or citations by Chomsky, (at least none that cannot be explained away as Chomsky giving improbable paraphrases or interpretations of other peoples words) but his works are tightly packed with remarkable and improbable vaguely sourced quotes and citations that somehow no one has ever been able to actually verify: For example: : : To continue, high US officials cited by the : : highly-respected Asia correspondent of the (eminently : : respectable) Far Eastern Economic Review predicted that 1 : : million would die as a consequence of the US bombings. US : : aid officials leaving Phnom Penh when the KR took over : : predicted that two years of "slave labor" would be : : necessary to overcome the effects of the bombing. : : provided analyses by highly qualified specialists who have : : studied the full range of evidence available, and who : : concluded that executions have numbered at most in the : : thousands; that these were localized in areas of limited : : Khmer Rouge influence and unusual peasant discontent, where : : brutal revenge killings were aggravated by the threat of : : starvation resulting from the American destruction and : : killing. These reports also emphasize both the : : extraordinary brutality on both sides during the civil war : : (provoked by the American attack) and repeated discoveries : : that massacre reports were false Presumably the "at most in the thousands" is a highly imaginative interpretation of Nayan Chanda, who said nothing of the kind. As to where "repeated discoveries that the massacre reports were false" comes from, no one has ever been able to suggest a source, although Chomsky clearly leads the reader to believe that the source is the Far Eastern Economic Review. Obviously however it is not the Far Eastern Economic Review, which failed to report any such discoveries, so presumably it is Chomsky's fertile imagination. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG lOZVJf2FnXr1XSCfVIrBPFZtIfqj/mnVwLjf0flm 4cZ2yI3bqXz2LWRu63XeD6HZovh1aXML0NYP3IBP2 From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 2 21:35:05 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 23:35:05 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001002210229.02954de8@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: > James A. Donald: > > > Famines in Africa are caused by communism and socialism, notably > At 0233 PM 10/1/2000 -0500, Jim Choate wrote > > Again, a simple-minded answer to a very complicated issue. > > So give an example of an important twentieth century famine not caused by > socialism or war. Um, changing the rules in the middle of the game are we... How did war get in there and why should I accept it as a synonym to communism? It is clear that war has more causes than communism or socialism. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From vin at shore.net Mon Oct 2 20:36:29 2000 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 23:36:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & NTRU In-Reply-To: <00100219183902.00394@anubis> References: <4.2.2.20001002163127.00bd8b50@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002163127.00bd8b50@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Vin McLellan wrote: >> Apparently the selection of Rijndael -- pronounced "Reign Dahl" or "Rain >> Doll" -- was not a big surprise to everyone. >> >> Just got a note from Scott Crenshaw, the CEO of NTRU Cryptosystems >> (, one of the firms I consult for), expressing satisfaction at >> having "backed the right horse" while others dozed;-) Paulo Barreto quipped: >Or it might not have occurred to everyone to prepare just-in-case releases for >each of the finalists and wait for NIST's verdict ;-) Yeah, I thought of that too;-) The NTRU folk, however, didn't wait for today's announcement to place their bet. The NTRU reference implementation for embedded systems -- the NERI toolkit the company has been shipping for a couple of months -- includes Rijndael code described as "an excellent complement to our core public key technology." Anyone know of any other commercial firms (other than the respective developers) which made an overt pre-announcement commitment to one of the AES candidates? Apparently the fact that Rujndael was the/a leading AES candidate was apparent to some prescient souls (not me ) at least since AES3 in N.Y. last April. As Bram Cohen put it: .> The selection of Rijndael was actually quite predictable - the round 2 .> report made it pretty clear that the only real contenders were Rijndael .> and Twofish, and hey, that last coin toss is free with 20/20 hindsight :) Suerte, _Vin From jamesd at echeque.com Mon Oct 2 23:44:01 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 23:44:01 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... (try 2) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001002233754.0170e1e8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- Jim Choate wrote > Anyway. I 'm not aware of any overt instances. I did some checking > of resoruces when I read "Deterring Democracy". All of them (maybe a > dozen) checked out and the quotes were reasonably represented. Really? Most Chomsky citations are extremely difficult to check, and a great many of them, strange to report, turn out to be entirely impossible to check. You checked out half a dozen in a few minutes? How very remarkable! --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG +ULkUJ6F6POuhFkkprznYvQ9VqUZBmjw6cBLfjxc 4eX28OVflu3GWQzcA5Q7J6EPe3uQyD+P3PER7iiqY From k-elliott at wiu.edu Mon Oct 2 21:52:19 2000 From: k-elliott at wiu.edu (Kevin Elliott) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 23:52:19 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 23:35 -0500 10/2/00, Jim Choate wrote: >On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: > >> James A. Donald: >> > > Famines in Africa are caused by communism and socialism, notably > >> At 0233 PM 10/1/2000 -0500, Jim Choate wrote >> > Again, a simple-minded answer to a very complicated issue. >> >> So give an example of an important twentieth century famine not caused by >> socialism or war. > >Um, changing the rules in the middle of the game are we... > >How did war get in there and why should I accept it as a synonym to >communism? It is clear that war has more causes than communism or >socialism. Because the causes of war are suffeciently diverse and unpredicatable that including war in the pool muddies the waters enough to make things unclear. However I'll bite by asking the inverse of the question- name one large scale famine that occurred in any country not under some form of "forcible rule" (forcible rule being defined as some sort of communist, socialism, or dictatorship, for the purpose of this question). A less precise way of putting this is present one example of a country in which free election are/were taking place for a reasonable period of time, during which that country experienced mass starvation of a significant portion of it's population. -- "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Justice William O. Douglas ____________________________________________________________________ Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott ICQ#23758827 From declan at well.com Mon Oct 2 21:02:36 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 00:02:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: House scheduled to vote Tuesday on sex-wiretapping bill Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001003000138.00aba1c0@mail.well.com> http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.03484: SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS IN THE INVESTIGATION OF SEXUAL CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN. (a) CHILD PORNOGRAPHY- Section 2516(1)(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting `section 2252A (relating to material constituting or containing child pornography),' after `2252 (sexual exploitation of children),'. (b) COERCION AND ENTICEMENT TO ENGAGE IN PROSTITUTION OR OTHER ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY- Section 2516(1)(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting `section 2422 (relating to coercion and enticement),' after `section 2321 (relating to trafficking in certain motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts),'. (c) TRANSPORTATION OF MINORS TO ENGAGE IN PROSTITUTION OR OTHER ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY- Section 2516(1)(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the matter added to that section by subsection (b) of this section the following: `section 2423 (relating to transportation of minors)'. From declan at well.com Mon Oct 2 21:24:05 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 00:24:05 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: <39D94B8D.FE35481C@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001003002454.00ac7440@mail.well.com> You need to find the remailer operators mailing list. But I'd be interested in hearing some folks running remailers answer your question. -Declan At 22:59 10/2/2000 -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: >Does anyone have any suggestions for setting up an anonymous remailer? I >found a FAQ from a "Cypherpunks Home Page" mirror, but that's from >_1993_! I assume there's more recent work out there somewhere, but I >didn't see anything on Google or Packetstorm, nor mentioned in Phrack or >some other zines. > >I'd like a HOWTO, suggesting software to use and how to set it up. I'm >pretty clueless as to what would be needed, but I have a FreeBSD box and >a DSL line with no usage restrictions. If need be I can set up another >box, dedicated to this purpose. I should have the means once I get >whapped with a cluestick. > >I'd also like discussions of real-world problems that people have found. >What kind of things cause you to think about shutting down your >remailer? Technical abuse, legal difficulties, or what? > > >Thanks, >SRF > >-- >Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel > 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net > From nobody at remailer.privacy.at Mon Oct 2 15:33:02 2000 From: nobody at remailer.privacy.at (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 00:33:02 +0200 Subject: CDR: CDF releases "data" on "child" gun deaths. Message-ID: <3b65dab541271324d2fc0747d2e841f8@remailer.privacy.at> In conjunction with First Monday's "Unite to End Gun Violence" campaign, the Children's Defense Fund (motto: Defend Children, Not Guns) released a report today on "Children and Guns." http://www.childrensdefense.org/youthviolence/Gun-report-2000.htm Readers will be unsurprised and unimpressed by the CDF's usual tactics, including definition of 19-yr-old gang bangers as "children." ObCrypto: Children should have widespread access to *all* munitions... not just naughty handguns. From k-elliott at wiu.edu Mon Oct 2 21:43:09 2000 From: k-elliott at wiu.edu (Kevin Elliott) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 00:43:09 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: one time pad and random num gen In-Reply-To: <39D948DD.82B4BF1A@acmenet.net> References: <3.0.5.32.20001002094530.009809b0@idiom.com> Message-ID: At 22:48 -0400 10/2/00, Steve Furlong wrote: >Bill Stewart wrote: >> By contrast, if you've got a pseudo-random number generator, >> which uses some mathematical process to generate the numbers, >> knowing bits 1...I-1 tells you something about bits I...N, >> so if the message has structure to it, you can often exploit it. > >Isn't a good definition of a cryptographically-strong PRNG that even if >you know bits 1..I-1, you still don't know anything about bit I? (Unless >you know the internal state of the PRNG, of course.) A c-strong PRNG >shouldn't be susceptible to any currently known analyses. Actually if you can pull that off you've got yourself a darn fine real random number generator- any PRNG has to have some period after which it will begin to recycle (assuming no other randomness in introduced into the system), in which case you just set i>the period and read off future states using current state +1 = current state - period + 1. Assuming I< the period then I believe you have a fairly good definition. A cryptographically strong PRNG would then be a PRNG with a very large period and some way of reinjecting randomness to guarantee the device never begins to recycle. -- "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Justice William O. Douglas ____________________________________________________________________ Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott ICQ#23758827 From sfurlong at acmenet.net Mon Oct 2 21:51:11 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 00:51:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers References: Message-ID: <39D965B6.60E198EB@acmenet.net> Jim Choate wrote: > > On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > > > I'd also like discussions of real-world problems that people have found. > > What kind of things cause you to think about shutting down your > > remailer? Technical abuse, legal difficulties, or what? > > Lawyer fees. There is no clear mechanism to fund anonymous remailers and > their resource requirements can be potent. Quite a reasonable answer in today's America. But how much of your answer is supposition based on the general climate and how much is actual cases? If a remailer accepts all comers, with no filtering of content, can he claim common carrier exemption from liability, or has that been taken away for the chiiiildren? In my case, I already have the hardware and DSL line, so the physical cost might be a little extra electricity. No funding is necessary unless the usage is so high that my ISP bitches at me. Personal time involved in maintaining the system will, I hope, be low; if it's more than negligible I won't be able to do it. I can see the sense of running the plan past a lawyer, but why would there be a continuing expense in this area? Thanks, SRF -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 2 22:39:55 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 01:39:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: <39D94B8D.FE35481C@acmenet.net> References: <39D94B8D.FE35481C@acmenet.net> Message-ID: At 10:59 PM -0400 10/2/00, Steve Furlong wrote: >Does anyone have any suggestions for setting up an anonymous remailer? I >found a FAQ from a "Cypherpunks Home Page" mirror, but that's from >_1993_! I assume there's more recent work out there somewhere, but I >didn't see anything on Google or Packetstorm, nor mentioned in Phrack or >some other zines. Perhaps Google is blocking you, as I was able to find more recent pages, including: http://www.obscura.com/~loki/remailer/mixmaster-faq.html http://anon.efga.org/~rlist/ http://www.skuz.net/potatoware/reli/OperMan.htm (This last one is a detailed page on setting up a client.) I agree that there seem to be fewer, proportionately, articles than in the heyday of remailers, circa 1994-5. Why there are not more "How to Set Up a Remailer" current FAQs and pages is unclear. Making remailers easy to set up, especially in this era of Linux and DSL/cable modems, would seem to be a big win. > >I'd like a HOWTO, suggesting software to use and how to set it up. I'm >pretty clueless as to what would be needed, but I have a FreeBSD box and >a DSL line with no usage restrictions. If need be I can set up another >box, dedicated to this purpose. I should have the means once I get >whapped with a cluestick. > >I'd also like discussions of real-world problems that people have found. >What kind of things cause you to think about shutting down your >remailer? Technical abuse, legal difficulties, or what? As Declan said, find the Remailer Operators list. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From sfurlong at acmenet.net Mon Oct 2 23:23:03 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steven Furlong) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 02:23:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... References: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.1.2.20001002223645.01ec5b70@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <39D97B2F.5CD52211@acmenet.net> "James A.. Donald" wrote: > If Churchill really said such a thing, we would have some source better > than Chomsky for it, and if Churchill really did say it, Chomsky would have > given us a source that was possible to verify. But if Chomsky were in the habit of making up or "massaging" quotes, perhaps he wouldn't give full reference information even for real quotes. That way, when he did make up a quote, the lack of full cite wouldn't count as a datum supporting the "made up" hypothesis. Double-thinkingly yours, SRF -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From editorschoice at mail.0mm.com Tue Oct 3 02:40:42 2000 From: editorschoice at mail.0mm.com (Hoover's Online) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 03:40:42 -0600 Subject: CDR: Editor's Choice: The Red-Hot Server Appliance Market, 10/3/00 Message-ID: <20001003034042.000175@ms2out1.messagemedia.com> =========================================================== TODAY'S NEWSLETTER LOOKS AT LEADING PLAYERS IN THE RED-HOT SERVER APPLIANCE MARKET Sun Microsystems (SUNW) thinks so highly of the server appliance market that it plans to spend about $2 billion to buy Cobalt Networks (COBT). Sales of scaled-down servers, which help manage how desktop machines communicate and work together, are expected to reach more than $12 billion by 2004. That's up from around $1 billion this year, according to IDC. The market continues to attract some major players hoping to target small business and Web site hosting firms looking to buy server appliances to help manage networks. In today's newsletter, we look at the companies leading the migration toward server appliances. =========================================================== A Word From Our Sponsor ========================================================== Looking for business contacts? Use Hoover's Lead Finder, powered by clickdata.com, to tap into Hoover's database of more than 15,000 companies. With a few simple steps, you can build custom lists of contacts and ready-to-go mailing lists. Start your search now! http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585001 =========================================================== 1. EDITOR'S CHOICE STORIES FROM: Federal Computer Week, 123Jump, Electronic News, and Computer Dealer News 2. FREE SAMPLES OF THE DAY FROM: Newsbytes and Market Guide 3. COMPANY OF THE DAY: Network Appliance (NTAP) 4. INDUSTRY UPDATES 5. HTML VERSION OF EDITOR'S CHOICE NEWSLETTER 6. SIGN UP FOR INDUSTRY NEWS DIGESTS - WIN A PALM Vx! =============================================== 1. EDITOR'S CHOICE STORIES a. "STORAGE IS PUT ON THE LINE" Source: Federal Computer Week, September 26 edition New network-attached devices are redefining the data storage business. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585002 b. "SECTOR PROFILE: HARDWARE STOCKS" Source: 123Jump, September 29 article MMC Networks (MMCN) and Network Appliance (NTAP), up 388 percent and 219 percent respectively this year, are standouts in the computer hardware sector. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585003 c. "INTERNET APPLIANCES ARE TAKING THE MARKET BY STORM" Source: Electronic News, September 28 edition The hot trend this year is definitely the Internet appliance, both in terms of technical programming and exhibits. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585004 d. "GOOD THINGS ARE IN STORE" Source: Computer Dealer News, September 28 edition New appliances are providing the missing pieces for many storage- area network (SAN) vendors. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585005 2. FREE SAMPLES OF THE DAY Available exclusively to Hoover's Members through the Hoover's Editor's Choice Newsletter. These documents are free to Members for one week. a. "APPLIANCES PREDICTED TO PLUG NETWORK LOOPHOLES IN E-BUSINESS", from a October 1 article in Newsbytes, courtesy of Newsbytes. Network appliances are providing businesses with a cost-effective alternative to adding more costly hardware. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585006 Newsbytes is a news service of Post-Newsweek Business information, updated daily, that covers the computer and telecommunications industries. Articles from Newsbytes are available on a pay-per-view basis through Hoover's Archived News for $1.00. To search them, select "Computers/Internet News" on Archived News Advanced Search page. Sample Search: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585007 b. MARKET GUIDE PROVESTOR REPORT: NETWORK APPLIANCE, courtesy of Market Guide. Network Appliance (NTAP) designs, manufactures, markets, and supports high performance network-attached data storage and access devices that provide file service and content delivery solutions for data-intensive network environments. For more information about Network Appliance, our company of the Day, see below. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585008 Market Guide ProVestor Reports provide historical quarterly and annual financial statements, a company brief, ratio and comparisons, institutional ownership and insider trading data, price performance, short interest information, key officers, address and more. Market Guide ProVestor Reports are available on a pay-per-view basis through Hoover's Archived News for $16.95. To search them, select "Company Profiles (Pay)" on Archived News Advanced Search page. Sample Search: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585009 =========================================================== A Word From Our Sponsor =========================================================== Mimeo.com is the superior way to print, bind and deliver your important color and black & white business documents and presentations. With the free Mimeo.com Exact Printsm Software, customers are able to use the Internet to manage their document production in a secure, dependable and convenient environment. Superior quality print originals are bound to order and delivered via FedEx anywhere in the U.S. and Canada. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585010 =========================================================== 3. COMPANY OF THE DAY: Network Appliance (NTAP) Network Appliance was re-issued a near-term "buy" rating by analyst Thomas Kraemer at Merrill Lynch. The long-term rating was also re-issued as a "buy", and given a price target of $185 per share. For a comprehensive picture of Network Appliance through company profiles, recent news stories, recent press releases, and research reports, follow the links below into Hoover's vast databases: Hoover's Company Capsule: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585011 Other Company Profiles: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585012 Recent News Stories: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585013 Recent Press Releases: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585014 Recent Research Reports: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585015 =========================================================== A Word From Our Sponsor =========================================================== Leaving on a Jet Plane (Maybe) Did you know that if you are involuntarily bumped from a flight and the airline arranges substitute transportation scheduled to arrive at your destination between one and two hours after your original arrival time (between one and four hours on international flights), the airline must pay you an amount equal to your one-way fare, with a $200 maximum? Find more tips and "Strategies for Traveling Stress-Free" at Hoover's Business Travel. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585016 =========================================================== 4. INDUSTRY UPDATES Industry Updates feature important industry news stories from around the world, culled from thousands of Hoover's brand-name sources and constantly updated throughout the day. Each Industry Update also features links to Updates about the leading companies in that industry. Advertising: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283362 Aerospace & Defense: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283363 Automotive: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283364 Aviation: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283365 Banking & Financial: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283366 Chemicals: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283367 Computers & Internet: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283368 Energy & Utilities: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283369 Healthcare: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283370 Insurance: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283371 Media: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283372 Pharmaceuticals: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283373 Telecommunications: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283374 ================================================================== 5. HTML VERSION OF EDITOR'S CHOICE NEWSLETTER The Editor's Choice Newsletter is also available in HTML format. If you're currently viewing this newsletter in plain Text format, your email software is unable to read HTML, or has been set up to receive only plain Text. If you'd like to receive the HTML version, contact Customer Support at support at powerize.com. To see a sample of the HTML page, click the link below: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585017 =================================================================== 6. SIGN UP FOR INDUSTRY NEWS! SIGN UP FOR INDUSTRY NEWS DIGESTS - WIN A PALM Vx! At the end of October, we'll randomly select a name from among those who've subscribed to any of our eight Industry News Digests, and that person will receive a Palm Vx, valued at over $400! Why wait until tomorrow to get today's major industry news? Every weekday afternoon, Hoover's Industry News Digests deliver summaries of the day's most significant news stories in each major industry. Each Industry News Digest features hyperlinks to the full text of featured stories, so that you can read the complete details about the stories and events that most interest you. To see a sample of the Internet News Digest, click the link below: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585018 To subscribe, click here: http://www.0mm.com/powerize/ =================================================================== For information on advertising in this email or on the Hoover's Web site, please email us at advertise at powerize.com. For information on becoming an affiliate and earning commissions by selling Hoover's content through your Web site, please email us at affiliates at powerize.com. If you are not 100% satisfied with a purchase you make on Hoover's, we will refund your money. Registered User Agreement: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283378 =================================================================== Editor's Choice is an original publication of Hoover's Online =================================================================== You are receiving this e-mail because you opted to subscribe to Hoover's daily e-mail newsletter services. If you want to be removed from this e-mail list, simply reply to this message with "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. You are subscribed at: cypherpunks at toad.com Do you have any comments or suggestions regarding this newsletter or a specific feature of Hoover's Online? We'd like to hear from you at http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585019 Hoover's Online Terms & Conditions http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz585020 Copyright 2000 Hoover's, Inc. All rights reserved. From sales at abcard.com Tue Oct 3 03:49:34 2000 From: sales at abcard.com (American Benefits Corporation) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 3:49:34 PM -0800 Subject: CDR: We heard you could use a FREE vacation! Message-ID: <200010031549.PAC5553@xxbc.clwok.okkt.com> TALK ABOUT A HEALTHY LIFESTLYE READ ON AND GET READY TO SMILE :) See below to receive 2 FREE airline tickets or 2 FREE hotel nights (your choice) and get ready to smile :) Interested in getting all that life has to offer but don't want to pay full-price? Here are two opportunities that will make your wishes come true. For a limited time, ABCard.com Health Care is offering great savings on a variety of health care benefits and to show you we are serious about giving you one less thing to worry about, we are throwing in (as in FREE), a pair of roundtrip airline tickets or 2 FREE hotel nights (your choice) just for checking out our program on our site. To take advantage of this outrageous offer, click on this link or cut and paste it in your browser address bar: http://www.abcard.com/index11.asp We are so confident you will see the value in our health care program, we are willing to give you the FREE airline tickets or FREE hotel nights with NO PURCHASE IS REQUIRED. As you might imagine, this is an offer that only a company with a superior product can make. Well, what are you waiting for, click on this link or cut and paste it in your browser address bar: http://www.abcard.com/index11.asp We look forward to serving you and adding you to our growing list of satisfied users who are receiving the piece of mind that comes with health benefits for you and your family. This is a limited time offer that expires on October 15th. So do not delay in taking advantage of this fabulous promotion. http://www.abcard.com/index11.asp From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 3 02:29:57 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 05:29:57 -0400 Subject: CDR: Experimental Economics (was Re: Edupage, October 2 2000) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 5:44 PM -0600 on 10/2/00, EDUCAUSE wrote: > HOW ECONOMISTS HELP PREDICT BEHAVIOR ONLINE > Experimental economics, which has been long been viewed as > impractical, is now being deemed relevant due to the rise of the > Web. Experimental economists use data to predict market > behavior, and are increasingly attracting attention from U.S. > business schools, the FCC, and businesses such as IBM and > Hewlett-Packard. IBM has opened an experimental-economics lab, > which Robert Baseman, IBM's senior research manager, says will > help clients develop and deploy their e-markets. University of > Arizona professor Vernon Smith, who uses an experimental > economics game to study trust relationships, says that such > exercises connect to IBM's e-business focus. Smith, who spoke at > the dedication of IBM's experimental lab, says that the anonymity > of the Internet and e-commerce calls for reputation-building > systems to enable trust-based trading. > (Wall Street Journal, 02 October 2000) -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 3 02:44:11 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 05:44:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001002223645.01ec5b70@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.1.2.20001002223645.01ec5b70@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: At 10:41 PM -0700 on 10/2/00, James A.. Donald wrote: > How can I prove Churchill did not say this? The problem is the curious > absence of evidence that he did say it. Weirdly enough, I may actually be working on it. A friend of friend may be able to lay hands on the source documents. Wouldn't that be strange? Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From mmotyka at lsil.com Tue Oct 3 06:05:29 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (Michael Motyka) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 06:05:29 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gore Office Accused of e-mail Diversion Message-ID: <39D9D999.87B9C263@lsil.com> I see no big deal here : you can only produce records that exist. Making the choice to delete e-mails simply means that you want them to be more like a conversation than a printed document. Destroying a document prior having received an order to produce it as far as I know is no crime. Almost like an ISP service having a stated policy of not keeping logs beyond some fixed time period. Next. What I would love to see is one of our sneaky little politicians being ordered to turn over e-mails and offering them in encrypted form. Let's see how they would feel about compelled disclosure of keys. Mike From paulo.barreto at terra.com.br Tue Oct 3 01:26:14 2000 From: paulo.barreto at terra.com.br (Paulo S. L. M. Barreto) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 06:26:14 -0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & NTRU In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> References: <4.2.2.20001002163127.00bd8b50@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <00100306320901.00413@anubis> On Tue, 03 Oct 2000, Vin McLellan wrote: > Anyone know of any other commercial firms (other than the > respective developers) which made an overt pre-announcement commitment to > one of the AES candidates? I've been told that entrust is embedding CAST-256, but this don't seem to matter that much. I wouldn't be surprised if RSA did the same with RC6; it is much less probable that IBM or Counterpane do this regarding MARS and Twofish, respectively. Counterpane lists several products known to implement Twofish. The shareware library MIRACL includes Rijndael for a long time now. I don't think it's difficult to find more examples. Paulo. From paulo.barreto at terra.com.br Tue Oct 3 01:34:59 2000 From: paulo.barreto at terra.com.br (Paulo S. L. M. Barreto) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 06:34:59 -0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & NTRU In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> References: <4.2.2.20001002163127.00bd8b50@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <00100306360103.00413@anubis> On Tue, 03 Oct 2000, Vin McLellan wrote: > Apparently the fact that Rujndael was the/a leading AES candidate > was apparent to some prescient souls (not me ) at least since AES3 in > N.Y. last April. As Bram Cohen put it: > > .> The selection of Rijndael was actually quite predictable - the round 2 > ..> report made it pretty clear that the only real contenders were Rijndael > c.> and Twofish, and hey, that last coin toss is free with 20/20 hindsight :) Actually I had the clear impression that there were three real contenders: Rijndael, Serpent, and Twofish, in this order. Paulo. From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 05:26:30 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 07:26:30 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: <39D965B6.60E198EB@acmenet.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > Quite a reasonable answer in today's America. But how much of your > answer is supposition based on the general climate and how much is > actual cases? If a remailer accepts all comers, with no filtering of > content, can he claim common carrier exemption from liability, or has > that been taken away for the chiiiildren? Actual cases of what? Remialers win very few cases. Ask the remailer operators how many complaints they handle per day and how much money and time comes out of their pocket with little hope of recovery. You can't 'claim' commen carrier, that must be earned by going through a long difficult process of vetting through the government. Besides, commen carrier status brings with it lots of other aspects such as covert regulation by your 'public utility commission' or whatever they call it that reduce your freedom. You should talk to a real lawyer about the various aspects of remailer operation. I did several years ago when the Austin Cypherpunks was running kourier.ssz.com. It was clear that to do it right was going to be very expensive. > In my case, I already have the hardware and DSL line, so the physical > cost might be a little extra electricity. No funding is necessary unless > the usage is so high that my ISP bitches at me. Personal time involved > in maintaining the system will, I hope, be low; if it's more than > negligible I won't be able to do it. I can see the sense of running the > plan past a lawyer, but why would there be a continuing expense in this > area? It isn't a technical issue that makes remailers hard, it's the people side of thing. You really should have a lawyer look this over, especialy your ISP contract. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 05:34:24 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 07:34:24 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... (try 2) In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001002233754.0170e1e8@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: > Really? > > Most Chomsky citations are extremely difficult to check, and a great many > of them, strange to report, turn out to be entirely impossible to > check. You checked out half a dozen in a few minutes? How very remarkable! Most of the stuff in "Dettering Democracy" is newspaper articles, books, and government reports. Much of it was sitting in the stacks at the UT Austin library (UT Austin supports LANL which is a major Latin America resource and "Deterring Democracy" is about central America in large part). Wasn't very hard to check at all. I've only read a couple of Chomsky's books (the other being parrt of "The Chomsky Reader") so I can't speak to all of them. But then again, your claim is that he DID cite non-existant sources or took them out of context. Surely you can point to a single book, a single chapter, and a single cite that you KNOW is provably incorrect or clearly out of context. The difficulty of verifying the rest of the cites is moot at that point after all. Where is the bogus cite? ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 05:35:49 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 07:35:49 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Experimental Economics (was Re: Edupage, October 2 2000) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > At 5:44 PM -0600 on 10/2/00, EDUCAUSE wrote: > > > > HOW ECONOMISTS HELP PREDICT BEHAVIOR ONLINE > > Experimental economics, which has been long been viewed as > > impractical, is now being deemed relevant due to the rise of the > > Web. Experimental economists use data to predict market > > behavior, and are increasingly attracting attention from U.S. > > business schools, the FCC, and businesses such as IBM and > > Hewlett-Packard. IBM has opened an experimental-economics lab, > > which Robert Baseman, IBM's senior research manager, says will > > help clients develop and deploy their e-markets. University of > > Arizona professor Vernon Smith, who uses an experimental > > economics game to study trust relationships, says that such > > exercises connect to IBM's e-business focus. Smith, who spoke at > > the dedication of IBM's experimental lab, says that the anonymity > > of the Internet and e-commerce calls for reputation-building > > systems to enable trust-based trading. > > (Wall Street Journal, 02 October 2000) > > -- > ----------------- > R. A. Hettinga > The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation > 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA > "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, > [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to > experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' > From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 05:36:43 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 07:36:43 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > Weirdly enough, I may actually be working on it. A friend of friend may be > able to lay hands on the source documents. Wouldn't that be strange? I'd call it 'justice'. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 05:45:48 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 07:45:48 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001002222550.01ec5b70@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: > At 2335 -0500 10/2/00, Jim Choate wrote > > Um, changing the rules in the middle of the game are we... > > > > How did war get in there > > Sampos original claim was that famine was caused by private enterprise and > free markets. My original counter claim (which you dishonestly altered in > each post) was that all famines were caused by socialism or war. How? Where is the change to your quote? What did I alter? You claim that I used your quote to lie yet you can't show where I did anything but cut your comments in context. Calling somebody a liar without evidence is also lying. Typical. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From freematt at coil.com Tue Oct 3 04:48:08 2000 From: freematt at coil.com (Matthew Gaylor) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 07:48:08 -0400 Subject: CDR: Gore Office Accused of e-mail Diversion Message-ID: From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 05:58:46 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 07:58:46 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: A famine averted... Message-ID: Hi, The thesis has been made that all famines are the cause of government intervention. I was asked to provide two examples. I also thought of an example where a famine was averted due to government intervention. The current hurricane in Belize. Had the government not stepped in and 'price fixed' the stores would have been depleted and cached by the few a week ago. Why in major disasters do prices go up, when it is clear this is contrary to the best interest of the market? That without price fixing the majority of people will be left without. Why is this hands-off philosophy not held accountable for its failings? I must assume that the resultant famine due to price inflation by the individual resource owners is still a result of that government interference. ;) ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 3 08:45:16 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 08:45:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: AFF In-Reply-To: <000a01c02cf6$a973f620$d9c156d8@mminternet.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Cesar Garcia wrote: >hello, > >do you know how i can get a password for adultfriendfinder.com > >thanks in advance Of course I know. Just point your browser at adultfriendfinder.com, pull out your credit card, and follow the links that say "open an account". Fill out the little form that comes up with your name, age, and credit card info, and then you can copy down the password that will appear on your browser. glad to help, Bear From marcel at aiurea.com Tue Oct 3 06:17:51 2000 From: marcel at aiurea.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 09:17:51 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Choate physics again References: Message-ID: <008501c02d3c$4ba3fd60$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> From dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu Tue Oct 3 06:18:13 2000 From: dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu (dmolnar) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 09:18:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Jim Choate wrote: > > On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > > > I'd also like discussions of real-world problems that people have found. > > What kind of things cause you to think about shutting down your > > remailer? Technical abuse, legal difficulties, or what? > > Lawyer fees. There is no clear mechanism to fund anonymous remailers and > their resource requirements can be potent. By the way, reading the newsgroup alt.privacy.anon-server offers a view as to what one anon-remailing "scene" looks like these days. Lots of stories there about experiences running remailers, dealing with ISPs, complaints from recipients, and so on. -David From dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu Tue Oct 3 06:26:23 2000 From: dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu (dmolnar) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 09:26:23 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: <39D965B6.60E198EB@acmenet.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > cost might be a little extra electricity. No funding is necessary unless > the usage is so high that my ISP bitches at me. Personal time involved > in maintaining the system will, I hope, be low; if it's more than > negligible I won't be able to do it. I can see the sense of running the > plan past a lawyer, but why would there be a continuing expense in this > area? People will use your remailer to send spam and death threats. There may even be people who will use your remailer to send spam and death threats to themselves, simply because they hate remailers. The recipients will contact you and your ISP. Repeatedly. My impression from reading alt.privacy.anon-server is that for many ISPs, it doesn't take too much of this before the ISP asks the remailer to leave. It's not a question of legal liability so much as the spam and the hassle. (An example of how life is lived mainly outside the law, though maybe in view of it.) You can implement spam-blocking filters on your remailer...but that's another can of worms. -David From mcbride at countersiege.com Tue Oct 3 07:08:53 2000 From: mcbride at countersiege.com (Ryan McBride) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 10:08:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, dmolnar wrote: > > but why would there be a continuing expense in this area? > > People will use your remailer to send spam and death threats. > The recipients will contact you and your ISP. Repeatedly. One of the ways to mitigate this risk is to set up your remailer in middleman mode (at least in 2.9beta23). To quote from the installer: Mixmaster can be installed in the low-maintenance `middleman' mode. In that mode, it will send mail to other remailers only, to avoid complaints about anonymous messages. Obviously this isn't a perfect solution, but it helps somewhat. It's what I'm planning on doing until I can familiarize myself with the legal ramifications of running an "open" remailer. -Ryan -- Ryan McBride - mcbride at countersiege.com Systems Security Consultant Countersiege Systems Corporation - http://www.countersiege.com From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 3 07:48:07 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 10:48:07 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk Message-ID: > ---------- > From: dmolnar[SMTP:dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu] > On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > > > cost might be a little extra electricity. No funding is necessary unless > > the usage is so high that my ISP bitches at me. Personal time involved > > in maintaining the system will, I hope, be low; if it's more than > > negligible I won't be able to do it. I can see the sense of running the > > plan past a lawyer, but why would there be a continuing expense in this > > area? > > People will use your remailer to send spam and death threats. There may > even be people who will use your remailer to send spam and death threats > to themselves, simply because they hate remailers. The recipients will > contact you and your ISP. Repeatedly. > > My impression from reading alt.privacy.anon-server is that for many ISPs, > it doesn't take too much of this before the ISP asks the remailer to > leave. It's not a question of legal liability so much as the spam and the > hassle. (An example of how life is lived mainly outside the law, though > maybe in view of it.) > > You can implement spam-blocking filters on your remailer...but that's > another can of worms. > > -David > [Warning in advance: I don't run a remailer, and never have, so what follows could be labled uninformed speculation]. I would like to suggest that a remailer could eliminate nearly all it's problems by only sending out encrypted mails - that is, if after removing the encryption that was applied using it's own private key, it finds that the result is plaintext, it simply drops the message. This has some neat and useful properties. * It eliminates spam. Spammers would have to encrypt each individual message with the key of the recipient, which is too much hassle. * It eliminates any possibility of the remailer knowing the content, which alleiviates him/her of responsibility for that content. * The remailer still operates fine as a mid-chain remailer. * All recipients need to have keypairs. They are thus at least somewhat crypto-savvy people, and unlikely to place unreasonable requests on the remailer or his/her ISP. The only bad point: * All recipients need to have key pairs. Thus, a crypto-only remailer can't be a terminal remailer to mailing lists, newsgroups, or individuals without keypairs. Peter Trei From vab at metanet.org Tue Oct 3 08:00:55 2000 From: vab at metanet.org (V. Alex Brennen) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 11:00:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: ANNC: GnuPG Keysigning Party HOWTO Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1270 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mike at otak.freeserve.co.uk Tue Oct 3 03:26:09 2000 From: mike at otak.freeserve.co.uk (mike d) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 11:26:09 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001002231430.00ba5ee0@shell11.ba.best.com>; from jamesd@echeque.com on Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 11:30:23PM -0700 References: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001002154745.00ded4c0@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001002231430.00ba5ee0@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <20001003112608.A327@otak.freeserve.co.uk> James A.. Donald wrote: > : : To continue, high US officials cited by the > : : highly-respected Asia correspondent of the (eminently > : : respectable) Far Eastern Economic Review predicted that 1 > : : million would die as a consequence of the US bombings. US > : : aid officials leaving Phnom Penh when the KR took over > : : predicted that two years of "slave labor" would be > : : necessary to overcome the effects of the bombing. > > > : : provided analyses by highly qualified specialists who have > : : studied the full range of evidence available, and who > : : concluded that executions have numbered at most in the > : : thousands; that these were localized in areas of limited > : : Khmer Rouge influence and unusual peasant discontent, where > : : brutal revenge killings were aggravated by the threat of > : : starvation resulting from the American destruction and > : : killing. These reports also emphasize both the > : : extraordinary brutality on both sides during the civil war > : : (provoked by the American attack) and repeated discoveries > : : that massacre reports were false > > Presumably the "at most in the thousands" is a highly imaginative > interpretation of Nayan Chanda, who said nothing of the kind. As to where > "repeated discoveries that the massacre reports were false" comes from, no > one has ever been able to suggest a source, although Chomsky clearly leads > the reader to believe that the source is the Far Eastern Economic > Review. Actually it isn't clear if this is what he implies, because you have left out the middle of the quotation. You also haven't said where you're quoting from - a title and page number would let the rest of us check that you haven't just stuck two unrelated passages together to prop up your argument. mike. From bogus@does.not.exist.com Tue Oct 3 11:33:50 2000 From: bogus@does.not.exist.com () Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 11:33:50 "GMT" Subject: [www.washtimes.com] Gore Office Accused of e-mail Diversion Message-ID: ----------------------------------------------------------- GORE OFFICE ACCUSED OF E-MAIL DIVERSION Jerry Seper THE WASHINGTON TIMES ----------------------------------------------------------- House investigators yesterday accused Vice President Al Gore's office of hiding e-mail records by bypassing a White House computer backup system that resulted in the loss of critical messages over six years. "There can be little doubt that the vice president's advisers knew their actions would permit his office to operate in a manner that would make it less susceptible to oversight," investigators for the House Government Reform Committee said in a report to be released Thursday. "In effect, they 'reinvented government' to stay above the law and congressional oversight." Investigators said a two-year probe by the committee found that the vice president's office "took affirmative steps" to avoid routing personal e-mail messages to and from Mr. Gore to the White House's Automated Records Management System (ARMS), including those sought by the Justice Department, independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr and Congress in separate investigations. The ARMS system was designed to allow the White House to comply with subpoena requests and congressional oversight. The report said the missing e-mail messages cover a variety of topics, including campaign finance abuses. Some of the missing Gore e-mail messages are being reconstructed by the FBI, although House investigators said a year's worth of Gore e-mail messages had no computer backup at all, meaning any that were deleted "are lost forever." Investigators said it was "highly likely" Mr. Gore or his staff was responsible for the decision not to send the e-mail messages to the ARMS system to prevent them from being turned over to Congress, the Justice Department and the independent counsel's office. "It is clear that searches for e-mails in the Office of the Vice President were incomplete. Only those e-mails that OVP staff choose to print out or had saved on their computers could have been retrieved," the report said. White House spokesman Elliot Diringer dismissed the accusations as old news. "We haven't been given the courtesy of getting a copy of the report, but we understand its contents already have been widely publicized," he said. "It appears [Rep. Dan] Burton has stapled together old press releases and, coincidentally, issued them a day before the first presidential debate." Mr. Burton, Indiana Republican, is chairman of the Government Reform Committee. Earlier this year, White House Counsel Beth Nolan acknowledged to the panel that "much, if not all" of Mr. Gore's e-mail messages had not been retrieved by the ARMS system, but said it was "entirely unintentional." Investigators, according to the report, urged Attorney General Janet Reno to name a special counsel to probe the e-mail matter, saying the Justice Department was representing the White House in a pending lawsuit in the e-mail matter while conducting a criminal investigation into the missing documents. They also said the department had devoted insufficient resources to the e-mail inquiry, had failed to interview a number of key witnesses and that several White House officials, including former Counsel Charles F.C. Ruff and former Deputy Counsel Cheryl Mills, had obstructed justice and made false statements in the e-mail probe. Investigators also said Todd Campbell, counsel to the vice president, "personally decided" that Mr. Gore would not store his records "in a way that would permit compliance with document requests." They said e-mail users were told that they would be able to search what was in their electronic mailbox at any given moment, but they would not be able to produce records that had been deleted. They said the vice president's office "adopted a prophylactic program to guarantee that fewer documents would exist in the event the document requests were made." Calls to Mr. Gore's office for comment were referred to Mr. Diringer. The committee, along with the Justice Department, is probing accusations that the Clinton administration hid thousands of e-mail messages sent to more than 400 White House officials between September 1996 and November 1998, and that Mr. Gore's office prevented both incoming and outgoing e-mail messages to be captured by the ARMS system as required by law. The report also said: � The White House knew that the e-mail problems discovered in November 1998 meant there had been incomplete production of documents to pending subpoenas, but senior White House personnel "did nothing" to correct the problem until it was independently discovered. � Mr. Ruff and Chief of Staff John Podesta "were clearly told" about the e-mail problems and their statements to the contrary were "implausible" based on available White House records. � Northrop Grumman Corp. contract employees who worked on the White House computer system, after they discovered the e-mail problem, were threatened by White House staff to keep the matter secret. The Justice Department probe has focused on accusations that the White House hid the e-mail messages after threatening White House contract workers to keep the documents secret. Campaign Finance Task Force chief Robert J. Conrad Jr. said in court papers he wanted to know if subpoenas issued by his office for the e-mail messages were "fully complied with" and if Northrop Grumman employees were "threatened with retaliation" to keep the messages from being turned over. Northrop Grumman employees found the problem in May 1998, which was traced to an August 1996 programming error. The problem was fixed in November 1998. ----------------------------------------------------------- This article was mailed from The Washington Times (http://www.washtimes.com). For more great articles, visit us at http://www.washtimes.com Copyright (c) 2000 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved. ************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt at coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per month) Matthew Gaylor,1933 E. Dublin-Granville Rd., PMB 176, Columbus, OH 43229 (614) 313-5722 Archived at http://www.egroups.com/list/fa/ ************************************************************************** From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 3 08:38:26 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 11:38:26 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: one time pad and random num gen In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Kevin Elliott wrote: >A >cryptographically strong PRNG would then be a PRNG with a very large >period and some way of reinjecting randomness to guarantee the device >never begins to recycle. >-- > Isn't that a misnomer though? If randomness is reinjected to prevent the system from falling into a period, then it won't be possible to generate the same sequence of bits twice -- so you can't use such a system for a PSEUDO-random generator, in applications like a stream cipher or whatever. Programs rely on the same sequence coming out of the same initial state with a PRNG -- otherwise things like stream ciphers can't be decrypted. What you describe above, I'd have termed an RNG - not a PRNG. Bear From gbroiles at netbox.com Tue Oct 3 12:07:23 2000 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 12:07:23 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Gore Office Accused of e-mail Diversion In-Reply-To: <39D9D999.87B9C263@lsil.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001003113357.00cfe790@mail.speakeasy.org> At 06:05 AM 10/3/00 -0700, Michael Motyka wrote: >I see no big deal here : you can only produce records that exist. Making >the choice to delete e-mails simply means that you want them to be more >like a conversation than a printed document. Destroying a document prior >having received an order to produce it as far as I know is no crime. >Almost like an ISP service having a stated policy of not keeping logs >beyond some fixed time period. Next. This is not so simple, when the person/entity destroying the records is a government agency - they have a statutory duty to maintain records according to sometimes complicated schedules. Government officials, when conducting government (er, the people's) business, can't just delete things they find inconvenient or embarrassing the same way that individuals can. Corporate or organizational actors may also be limited in their ability to destroy records by statute or by organizational rules designed to create and maintain accountability. -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com From gbroiles at netbox.com Tue Oct 3 12:10:24 2000 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 12:10:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001003120745.00c56a20@mail.speakeasy.org> At 10:08 AM 10/3/00 -0400, Ryan McBride wrote: >Obviously this isn't a perfect solution, but it helps somewhat. It's what >I'm planning on doing until I can familiarize myself with the legal >ramifications of running an "open" remailer. This short discussion of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act might be helpful in that regard, at least with respect to copyright liability, which seems to be the biggest legal problem. -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 3 09:12:16 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 12:12:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: one time pad and random num gen In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Kevin Elliott wrote: >Actually if you can pull that off you've got yourself a darn fine >real random number generator- any PRNG has to have some period after >which it will begin to recycle (assuming no other randomness in >introduced into the system), in which case you just set i>the period >and read off future states using >current state +1 = current state - period + 1. True, but the period can be made such that the last star in the universe will die and grow cold first. If you have for example a 256-byte internal state, and your PRNG is a full permutation (ie, eventually every possible state is on the path of the "cycle") you don't really need to worry about it. Bear From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Tue Oct 3 05:02:12 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 13:02:12 +0100 Subject: CDR: Shunning, lesbians and liberty References: <4.3.1.2.20001002222811.01f02de0@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <39D9CAC4.27296C08@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Someone calling themselves James dribbled: > You are putting ordinary dictatorships, like Pinochet's Chile or Park's > Korea, in the same category as communist dictatorships, like Castro's Cuba > or Mengistu's Ethiopia. That is ridiculouys. You really are a prat aren't you? So it is OK to be killed by a fascist bullet but not by a communist one? There are a few million dead who would have been happy had they known that before the likes of Pinochet or Franco murdered them. > The difference between normal dictatorships and totalitarian regimes is > enormous, vastly greater than the difference between dictatorships and > ordinary democracies, What a load of shit. When someone kicks you in the face do you ask them which cobbler made their shiny leather boot? This is just the typical excuse of Americans who support totalitarian dictators like Pinochet and his fellow murderers and want to sleep easy with themselves. You pretend to be "libertarian" and in favour of freedom but what you really mean is freedom for you and your friends to do as they like & the rest of us get to live with, or under, your police and your armies. You don't give a damn about dictators or oppressors so long as they are your dictators pissing out. > and the distribution of famine (excluding famines > caused by war) illustrates that difference. > So let us go back to the original question: Where was there a significant > twentieth century famine other than those caused by war or socialism? Why include the word "socialism"? Almost without exception, war is almost the only thing that ever caused a prolonged famine. The flavour of dictatorship in power at the time has very little to do with it. > It is absurd to use categories that put normal dictatorships in the same > category as totalitarian dictatorships. This being the Reaganite definition of "totalitarian" as "people who we don't like"? How many years did you spend in the CIA then? Yes, there is a distinction between "ordinary" dictatorships and the sort of utterly over-the-top government that isn't so much trying to rule a country as destroy it. Most dictatorships try to keep their victims at least reasonably peaceful and prosperous, if only so the rulers can carry on stealing from them (geese, golden eggs & all that). But a few seem to live to destroy. Some governments become unsupportable, they either have to be fought against or you die. Romania under Ceaucescu, anywhere under the Nazis, Pol Pot and his friends, Stalin's times in Russia, the Taliban right now. In places like that the government is in fact at war with the people. I hope whenever you Americans see on the news what is going on in Afghanistan you remember that your government paid for their weapons and their training, that those guys were educated in US-run schools and guerilla warfare training camps - all because Reagan and Bush came out with this shit about "totalitarian" being the only bad thing & non-communists couldn't possibly be "totalitarian". Whatever the Taliban were, they certainly weren't communists. So in goes the CIA, and the money, and the guns, and look what came out. These aren't necessarily "socialist" or claiming to be socialist. In fact "socialism" vs. "capitalism" is redundant in this context - they are words that describe economic systems and places like that are beyond economics. When the rapist is in your bedroom you don't wonder how he earns his living. When some Nazi gauleiter is turning your home town into a death camp there is no point asking him his opinion on Value Added Tax (or even anonymous internet bearer transactions.) "Ordinary" dictatorships aren't necessarily anti-socialist either. Most people, most of the time, get on with their own lives under constant interference and supervision by the government. You can get shot if you criticise the government. You get very restricted freedom as to where you can go to school, or live, or work. In other words just a more extreme, or more obvious, case of the kind of things that go on in any government. Think of almost any South or Central American statelet between the 1880s and the 1980s. (Although Paraguay in the 19th century & some central American places in the 20th got pretty near being death states), or almost any Middle Eastern country now (Iran is of course a representative democracy, the only functioning one in the Middle East). Cuba is by any sane standards an "ordinary" dictatorship as were Poland and Czechoslovakia before 1989. Ditto Serbia, or Iraq. Even Russia actually approached it in the 1960s & 70s, they cleaned up their act a lot. Loads of them paid lip-service to socialism, but loads of them claimed to be capitalist as well - like your CIA-inspired regimes in Indonesia and Pakistan and the Philippines and Chile and Guatemala and Nicaragua and Panama that you dropped like the smelly shit they were as soon as you don't need them to scare the Russians any more. And most of these places were better off as soon as you Americans stopped trying to enforce your favourite dictators on them in the name of "freedom". Some of them even turned themselves into reasonable facsimiles of democracies. Except for Pakistan of course. And their Taliban puppets that developed a life of their own in Afghanistan. To lump all those places together as "socialist" on the basis of which side they took (or were coerced into taking) in the squabble over spoils between the victors of WW2 (that we now call the "Cold War") is to ignore reality in favour of ideology. When someone is oppressing you does it really matter whether he is doing it with Czech guns bought with Russian money or British guns bought with US money? (apart from the fact that US money works a lot better than Russian) Of course, I forget, to you and your fellow so-called "libertarians" (why, oh why are so many of you so afraid of the word "anarchist"? (Tim May excepted of course) Maybe because you aren't really anarchists, or even libertarians. You don't want freedom for anyone except yourself and the rest of us can put up with your jackbooted thugs), to you and your fellow so-called "libertarians" words like "socialism" and "capitalism" aren't words about economics at all, you use them as words of moral approval or disapproval, you twist language away from meaning, these words are no longer used to describe things but just to explain how you feel about them, for you "socialism" just means "any government I don't like" (& therefore for some of you "any government at all" - which of course would make your original contention tautological) and "freedom" means "any state of affairs that I like". Empty rhetoric. I much prefer Tim's rants. At least he is honest about all this, and he has the decency to disassociate himself from some of the evil nonsense that your government (and my government - this is not an anti-American rant), have perpetrated over all these years. Ken From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 3 13:21:49 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 13:21:49 -0700 Subject: CDR: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001003132149.00a4ec80@idiom.com> At 07:58 AM 10/3/00 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: >I also thought of an example where a famine was averted due to government >intervention. >The current hurricane in Belize. Had the government not stepped in and >'price fixed' the stores would have been depleted and cached by the few a >week ago. Doesn't make sense. If the government imposed rationing, that would have kept a few people from buying up everything, or if they required the price to be very high, it would do that, but I assume you're saying they artificially kept the price low - in that case, it's *easier* for somebody to buy up everything and hoard it. >Why in major disasters do prices go up, when it is clear this is contrary >to the best interest of the market? Duh - basic supply and demand. Major disasters imply that obtaining more stuff in the near future will be difficult or impossible, so buyers have an incentive to pay more money to get anything they can right now, and sellers have an incentive to ask for more money for the stuff they've got. If the sellers gouge too hard, they risk alienating customers and losing future business to their competitors, but the goods they have are worth more now. >That without price fixing the majority of people will be left without. >Why is this hands-off philosophy not held accountable for its failings? >I must assume that the resultant famine due >to price inflation by the individual resource owners is still a result of >that government interference. ;) > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From schear at lvcm.com Tue Oct 3 10:40:58 2000 From: schear at lvcm.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 13:40:58 -0400 Subject: CDR: Wired article on P2P Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.0.20001003103742.0482b970@pop3.lvcm.com> The October issue, page 234, has a good article on the technological underpinnings, social and market impact. It includes a tearout "yellow pages" of file sharing sites (including Mojo Nation). steve From sdpofkso at uwibuy02.ibersis.com.uy Tue Oct 3 14:06:13 2000 From: sdpofkso at uwibuy02.ibersis.com.uy (sdpofkso at uwibuy02.ibersis.com.uy) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 14:06:13 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <213.631073.720266@mail.mindspring.com> GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From Martin.T.Burkhouse at usdoj.gov Tue Oct 3 11:29:29 2000 From: Martin.T.Burkhouse at usdoj.gov (Burkhouse, Martin T) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 14:29:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: UDP Traffic Message-ID: <"JMD0111-001003182929Z-9024*/PRMD=USDOJ-JCON/ADMD= /C=US/"@MHS> Can anyone provide me with pointers to materials on the risks of allowing unfiltered UDP traffic into a network. Thanks From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Tue Oct 3 06:54:34 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 14:54:34 +0100 Subject: CDR: A famine averted... References: Message-ID: <39D9E51A.CA23BE39@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Jim Choate wrote: > Why in major disasters do prices go up, when it is clear this is contrary > to the best interest of the market? Because markets have no interests, the participants in them do. The argument is exactly the same as that advanced by biologists against the idea of group selection. NB in a real famine (as opposed to temporary shortages, which a place like Belize can probably get through with less hassle than a richer more efficient economy with all our "Just in Time" suppliers) food prices go *down* at first... strange but true. It is due to farmers unloading stock to get money in as quickly as they can. Ken From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Tue Oct 3 06:59:56 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 14:59:56 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... References: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.1.2.20001002223645.01ec5b70@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <39D9E65C.E61B7398@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> The quote it attributed to Clive Ponting's book on Churchill. So all anyone has to do is check that. Ponting is a reasonably well-known author it should be possible to find the book and check page 132. Whether Ponting was telling the truth is another matter - but he isn't Chomsky. Nor is he a socialist of course. Chomsky is a left socialist anarchist so JAD assumes that anything he says has to be a lie, with or without evidence. Ken > If Churchill really said such a thing, we would have some source better > than Chomsky for it, and if Churchill really did say it, Chomsky would have > given us a source that was possible to verify. > 4i2EZSRU++C5ilvvAmDcHPpIjAAdRwU9+ndWqhck2 > As Winston Churchill observed in a paper > submitted to his Cabinet colleagues in January 1914, > "we are not a young people with an innocent record > and a scanty inheritance. We have engrossed to > ourselves...an altogether disproportionate share > of the wealth and traffic of the world. We have > got all we want in territory, and our claim to > be left in the unmolested enjoyment of vast and > splendid possessions, mainly acquired by violence, > largely maintained by force, often seems > less reasonable to others than to us." > To be sure, such honesty is rare in respectable > society, though the passage would be acceptable > without the italicized phrases, as Churchill > understood. He did make the paper public in the > 1920s, in The World Crisis, but with the offending > phrases removed.{Clive Ponting, Churchill > (Sinclair-Stevenson 1994), 132.} From mmotyka at lsil.com Tue Oct 3 15:12:05 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (Michael Motyka) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 15:12:05 -0700 Subject: CDR: gore e-mails Message-ID: <39DA59B5.861B496B@lsil.com> > > Investigators said a two-year probe by the committee found > that the vice president's office "took affirmative steps" to > avoid routing personal e-mail messages to and from Mr. Gore > to the White House's Automated Records Management System > (ARMS), including those sought by the Justice Department, > independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr and Congress in > separate investigations. > Possibly personal e-mails are different. A matter of address maybe? Al@ vs. veep@? From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 13:48:47 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 15:48:47 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Choate physics again In-Reply-To: <008501c02d3c$4ba3fd60$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Marcel Popescu wrote: > Huh? The photons from my TV screen arrive all at different times, and yet > the picture is pretty good :) No, they don't. The electron beam scans across your screen in a VERY tightly sychronized dance. Vertical retrace, horizontal retrace, etc. Each scan line data, etc. Television has all sorts of methods to sychronize the emission of photons. There is a sampling window issue here related to responce time of the eye as well. Then let's not forget that the rays your eye gets are all closely parallel also. If you think this doesn't matter play with a time delay and a television. Pay attention to standard high voltage technique. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 13:49:55 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 15:49:55 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: <39D9E51A.CA23BE39@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Ken Brown wrote: > Because markets have no interests, the participants in them do. There is NO difference between a 'market' and the 'participants in them'. Silly pseudo-economics. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 3 13:02:49 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 16:02:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk Message-ID: At 10:48 AM -0400 on 10/3/00, Trei, Peter wrote: > The only bad point: > > * All recipients need to have key pairs. Thus, a crypto-only remailer > can't be a terminal remailer to mailing lists, newsgroups, or > individuals without keypairs. Not a problem, one would think. Just need to have a key-pair for a list-server or mail-to-news-gateway. If it gets onerous, each mail or newsgroup on the server can have its own keypair as well. RSA signatures are public domain now, right? :-). Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From nobody at dizum.com Tue Oct 3 13:10:22 2000 From: nobody at dizum.com (Nomen Nescio) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 16:10:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers Message-ID: <290a9146b950456972eedb598a550368@dizum.com> On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > Does anyone have any suggestions for setting up an anonymous remailer? You can get the source for the current version of Mixmaster (2.9b23) via anonymous FTP from mixmaster.anonymizer.com. Send mail to remailer-operators-request at anon.lcs.mit.edu for info on the remop mailing list. There's also a Mixmaster-specific list: mix-l-subscribe at jpunix.com. If you run into trouble during install, mail either of the lists with your questions. > I'd like a HOWTO, suggesting software to use and how to set it up. There isn't one, yet. It's being worked on. Slowly. > I'm pretty clueless as to what would be needed, but I have a FreeBSD box > and a DSL line with no usage restrictions. If need be I can set up > another box, dedicated to this purpose. I should have the means once I > get whapped with a cluestick. You're set with what you have. In theory, maintaining a separate remailer box may insulate the rest of your hardware should LEOs come a'knocking some day, but I wouldn't count on it. (I also wouldn't worry about this scenario too much.) > I'd also like discussions of real-world problems that people have found. > What kind of things cause you to think about shutting down your > remailer? Technical abuse, legal difficulties, or what? Make damned sure you're on good terms with your ISP and whoever handles your DNS. Your remailer may get shut down when you're not looking. That said, I've never given serious consideration to shutting down my remailer. It's certainly been a headache on numerous occasions, but so are many things. Like children. "Technical abuse" has been only a minor annoyance for me. I've received several letters from PIs ranging from demands to reveal a user's identity, to simple inquiries on how remailers work. I also have a small collection of letters from standard lawyers, and from Scientologist ones as well. I frequently receive notes informing me that Such-and-Such Police Department has been informed of my "crimes," but I tend to ignore those. Get used to receiving a lot of hate mail. In all the time I've been running a remailer, I've gotten one thank you note, and countless threats. Of course, said threats are frequently so poorly written, you may find they make an attractive addition to your refrigerator door. The real trick for me has been figuring out when to reply to an inquiry/complaint, and when to forward it to /dev/null.* It's quite possible that you'll receive tens of complaints of "abuse" every day. They'll range anywhere from illiterate demands to cancel "Ann Onymous's subscrivtion" for making an off-topic post in rec.pets.cats, to notification that "Interpol, the FBI, and my brother, the cop," are all coming to get you...for something. I'm particularly fond of the "crimes" of which I'm frequently accused by these complainers. My personal favourite involved an astute AOLer who informed me that "accessory to acomplise harassment" is not looked upon favourably in Washington State. I laughed for days. Separating the kooks and the nitwits from the legitimate (i.e. legal) threats is just something you'll have to learn. It should be fairly easy for you -- you read cypherpunks. * At least two Cypherpunk regulars have suggested piping all abuse@ mail off to /dev/null. While this is nice in theory, it could be disastrous for a DSL subscriber with a toothy ToS agreement. From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 3 13:12:22 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 16:12:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk Message-ID: > ---------- > From: R. A. Hettinga[SMTP:rah at shipwright.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 3:59 PM > To: Trei, Peter; Multiple recipients of list > Subject: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk > > At 10:48 AM -0400 on 10/3/00, Trei, Peter wrote: > > > > The only bad point: > > > > * All recipients need to have key pairs. Thus, a crypto-only remailer > > can't be a terminal remailer to mailing lists, newsgroups, or > > individuals without keypairs. > > Not a problem, one would think. Just need to have a key-pair for a > list-server or mail-to-news-gateway. If it gets onerous, each mail or > newsgroup on the server can have its own keypair as well. > No, it's still a problem. The goals here are to insulate intermediaries from responsibility for content, and make the intermediaries unfriendly to spammers. With your suggestion, the responsibility for content - and spamming - is dumped on the list-server or gateway owner, which is no better than dumping it on the terminal remailer. I no more want to see a listserv or gateway owner in trouble than I do a remailer operator. Forwarding plaintext, or exploding plaintext to many recipients is what can get you into trouble. [...] Peter Trei > Cheers, > RAH > > From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 14:25:26 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 16:25:26 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Trei, Peter wrote: > I would like to suggest that a remailer could eliminate nearly all it's > problems by only sending out encrypted mails - that is, if after > removing the encryption that was applied using it's own private > key, it finds that the result is plaintext, it simply drops the message. And just exactly what algorithm is that you're using to determine crypt-v-plaintext? Ain't no such beast and won't be until somebody comes up with nearly infallible translation technology. We're closer to quantum computers and making the whole thing moot than we are to having near-flawless translation technology. If a bullfrog had wings, it wouldn't bump its butt when it jumped. And let's not forget the key managment problem if remailers impliment such a policy. Without a secure key management scheme then the 'encrypted body' approach won't work because Mallet has the keys. Key management and a billing model are what is required to make anonymous remailers work. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 15:00:17 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 17:00:17 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: <39DA5364.8C6E978E@acmenet.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > Why not just read the first 20 bytes of the body? If 90% or more aren't > printable ASCII assume the message is encrypted. So, how come all of a sudden we're injecting algorithms that the users must know to even access the network? What sort of regulatory mechanism is required to mediate changes to the process? So, we can't send uuencoded text to guard against ASCII-pure (i.e. 7-bit) machines? Why not? I actualy prefer that sort of stuff because as a last resort I can check it visualy for errors. Why not offer a set of services and 'default' or 'best practice' suggestions, leaving the actual decisions up to the user where it belongs? A remailer should do NO content checking, ever. It's ONLY job is to route and destroy traffic analysis. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From sunder at sunder.net Tue Oct 3 14:33:51 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 17:33:51 -0400 Subject: CDR: Sony loses anti-reverse engineering suit against Connectix!!! Message-ID: <39DA50BF.918BCC0@sunder.net> http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-2915049.html?tag=st.ne.1002.thed.ni Sony loses appeal in PlayStation copyright fight By Bloomberg News October 2, 2000, 9:15 a.m. PT WASHINGTON--Sony today lost a U.S. Supreme Court bid to limit rivals from using reverse engineering to create competing products. The justices, without comment, refused to consider Sony's appeal of a decision rejecting its copyright claims against Connectix, whose Virtual Game Station competes with Sony's top-selling PlayStation game console. Heh - apparently the judge decided that it's okay to allow reverse engineering in this case. Wonder how this will affect DeCSS... -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From sfurlong at acmenet.net Tue Oct 3 14:46:24 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 17:46:24 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: Message-ID: <39DA5364.8C6E978E@acmenet.net> Jim Choate wrote: > > On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Trei, Peter wrote: > > > I would like to suggest that a remailer could eliminate nearly all it's > > problems by only sending out encrypted mails - that is, if after > > removing the encryption that was applied using it's own private > > key, it finds that the result is plaintext, it simply drops the message. > > And just exactly what algorithm is that you're using to determine > crypt-v-plaintext? Why not just read the first 20 bytes of the body? If 90% or more aren't printable ASCII assume the message is encrypted. SRF -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 3 14:47:24 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 17:47:24 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2581 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sfurlong at acmenet.net Tue Oct 3 15:22:47 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 18:22:47 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: Message-ID: <39DA5C01.7E77FEA2@acmenet.net> <> Jim Choate wrote: > >> <> >> > On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > > > Why not just read the first 20 bytes of the body? If 90% or more aren't > > printable ASCII assume the message is encrypted. > > So, how come all of a sudden we're injecting algorithms that the users > must know to even access the network? What sort of regulatory mechanism is > required to mediate changes to the process? Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes. This subthread came along because some people have noticed that anonymous remailers are used for an awful lot of spam. Peter Trei proposed that remailers could pass along only encrypted mail. My understanding was that Alice, the message's author, would encrypt the message with Bob's public key; Bob is the end recipient: a person or a mailing list or whatever. Alice would send the message through Ramona, the anonymous remailer. Ramona is requiring that messages be encrypted as a means of filtering out spam. Ramona does not need to know Bob's public or private keys; Ramona cares only that the message is encrypted. I'm assuming there's a way to tell with minimal difficulty if a message is encrypted, without relying on an easily-spoofed X header line. Perhaps someone who knows more about all of the many message protocols can weigh in here. > So, we can't send uuencoded text to guard against ASCII-pure (i.e. 7-bit) > machines? Why not? I actualy prefer that sort of stuff because as a last > resort I can check it visualy for errors. You could uuencode your original message before encrypting it. You're right, there could be a problem if one of the boxes in the chain handled only 7 bits. Is that a realistic problem anymore? (That was a serious question, not a dig.) > A remailer should do NO content checking, ever. It's ONLY job is to route > and destroy traffic analysis. This would be an additional service for the recipients, filtering out probable spam. It might be a minor inconvenience for Alice. On a message-by-message basis it could be a minor inconvenience for Bob, but if Bob had been receiving a lot of spam through the remailer it'd be a neg gain. It'd be a huge inconvenience for Sue, the spammer, as intended. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From iang at cs.berkeley.edu Tue Oct 3 16:00:03 2000 From: iang at cs.berkeley.edu (Ian Goldberg) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 19:00:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Sony loses anti-reverse engineering suit against Connectix!!! Message-ID: In article <39DA50BF.918BCC0 at sunder.net>, sunder wrote: >Heh - apparently the judge decided that it's okay to allow reverse >engineering in this case. Wonder how this will affect DeCSS... Well, the MPAA v 2600 case ("constructing and trafficing in a circumvention device") isn't about reverse engineering, so "not at all". The weaker DVD-CCA case ("theft of a trade secret in violation of a clickthrough licence agreement" (said agreement having been clicked through by a minor in anither country, of course)) depends on how the reverse-engineering Connectix did relates to that done by the original CSS extractors. - Ian From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 3 19:13:28 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 19:13:28 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: References: <39DA5364.8C6E978E@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001003191328.00a2bde0@idiom.com> At 05:00 PM 10/3/00 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: >A remailer should do NO content checking, ever. >It's ONLY job is to route and destroy traffic analysis. No, its ONLY job is to do whatever the operator says it will do. You can choose to use it or not based on that. However, if you allow non-encrypted email in or out, you are enabling traffic analysis, so by your assertion, failing to require encrypted outgoing mail is wrong. >So, how come all of a sudden we're injecting algorithms that the users >must know to even access the network? What sort of regulatory mechanism is >required to mediate changes to the process? Algorithms the users must know, and don't, lead to random failures, low reliability, complaints to the admins, and people not using the remailer. That regulatory mechanism is called the market :-) (even in a gift economy.) There are several remailer-pinging services out there, and unless they fall into the category of things the remailer supports, the reliability numbers they report on the remailer will be quite low. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From declan at well.com Tue Oct 3 16:37:09 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 19:37:09 -0400 Subject: CDR: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: ; from ravage@ssz.com on Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 07:58:46AM -0500 References: Message-ID: <20001003193709.A24784@cluebot.com> Ah, but who decides what the best interests of the market are? Its participants, of course, by pricing things as they see fit. The best interest of the market, arguably, is to be left alone, or at least interfered with in a very predictable way. -Declan On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 07:58:46AM -0500, Jim Choate wrote: > Why in major disasters do prices go up, when it is clear this is contrary > to the best interest of the market? That without price fixing the majority From njohnson at interl.net Tue Oct 3 18:33:43 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 20:33:43 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: <39DA5C01.7E77FEA2@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <012301c02da3$25c28c80$0100a8c0@nandts> Checking the first 20 bytes just means the spammer will just add 20 bytes of junk to the start of their message. Spammers unfortunately, can be pretty smart, look at all the work they will do to cull addresses from newsgroups and mail lists, even looking for "mailto:fred at NOSPAM.fff.com (Remove NOSPAM to send me a message)" type addresses. Better to have it run the message through the encryption program (PGP or Mix) somehow to see if it is a well formed (contains valid packets). Of course that means restricting users to PGP or other standard encryption systems (I can see it now, all SPAM will arrive starting with "------ BEGIN PGP ENCRYPTED MESSAGE ----") :) I always liked the proposal of using crypto to force users pay money to have the message sent, then be refunded if the recipient feels the message was worthwhile. Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Furlong" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 5:22 PM Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk > < the traffic be encrypted>> > > Jim Choate wrote: > > > >> <> > >> > > On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > > > > > Why not just read the first 20 bytes of the body? If 90% or more aren't > > > printable ASCII assume the message is encrypted. > > > > So, how come all of a sudden we're injecting algorithms that the users > > must know to even access the network? What sort of regulatory mechanism is > > required to mediate changes to the process? > > Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes. This subthread came along > because some people have noticed that anonymous remailers are used for > an awful lot of spam. Peter Trei proposed that remailers could pass > along only encrypted mail. My understanding was that Alice, the > message's author, would encrypt the message with Bob's public key; Bob > is the end recipient: a person or a mailing list or whatever. Alice > would send the message through Ramona, the anonymous remailer. Ramona is > requiring that messages be encrypted as a means of filtering out spam. > Ramona does not need to know Bob's public or private keys; Ramona cares > only that the message is encrypted. > > I'm assuming there's a way to tell with minimal difficulty if a message > is encrypted, without relying on an easily-spoofed X header line. > Perhaps someone who knows more about all of the many message protocols > can weigh in here. > > > > So, we can't send uuencoded text to guard against ASCII-pure (i.e. 7-bit) > > machines? Why not? I actualy prefer that sort of stuff because as a last > > resort I can check it visualy for errors. > > You could uuencode your original message before encrypting it. You're > right, there could be a problem if one of the boxes in the chain handled > only 7 bits. Is that a realistic problem anymore? (That was a serious > question, not a dig.) > > > > A remailer should do NO content checking, ever. It's ONLY job is to route > > and destroy traffic analysis. > > This would be an additional service for the recipients, filtering out > probable spam. It might be a minor inconvenience for Alice. On a > message-by-message basis it could be a minor inconvenience for Bob, but > if Bob had been receiving a lot of spam through the remailer it'd be a > neg gain. It'd be a huge inconvenience for Sue, the spammer, as > intended. > > -- > Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel > 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net > > From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 3 20:48:58 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 20:48:58 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.5.32.20001003190811.00a88770@idiom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001003204858.00a85d20@idiom.com> At 10:26 PM 10/3/00 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: >On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Bill Stewart wrote: >> Remember that we're talking about detecting spam on *outgoing* messages - > >No, we're not. We ARE talking bout checking incoming messages to ensure >the body of the message is encrypted. No unencrypted traffic. End to end >crypto, all the way baby... Sure are - it's a followon to Peter Trei's message dated Tue, 3 Oct 2000 10:48:07 -0400 which said = I would like to suggest that a remailer could eliminate nearly all it's = problems by only sending out encrypted mails - that is, if after = removing the encryption that was applied using it's own private = key, it finds that the result is plaintext, it simply drops the message. That's a remailer checking outgoing mail to be sure it's encrypted, as well as checking incoming mail. >What algorithm is proposed that can reliably determine the difference >between plaintext and cyphertext, note that we don't know what algorithm >is used, with only 20 bytes/char's? On incoming messages, it's easy to tell if it's encrypted to *you* - decrypt it with your private keys, job's done. If you don't recognize the algorithm, the message wasn't for you. >Another question I have is, does this mean that anonymous stego isn't >possible now with this approach. Hmmm. That's a more interesting problem - this does seem to have the tradeoff that if you want to get messages sent to you using stego, you shouldn't use a remailer that has a PGP-out-only policy. On the other hand, mail from a known Cypherpunks Anonymous Secret Message Remailer adds a certain amount of suspiciousness anyway. You want to get your stego messages from "Fred's GIF-of-the-Day" or "Pirate-Muzick-R-Us" or something that's a better cover story - so make sure those sites accept incoming PGP mail. >What algorithm will reliably find stego data? If you can reliably find it, it's not very good stego :-) Open source stego that's not key-based has inherent weaknesses - the eavesdroppers can easily extract the message from the cover text, so the message needs to be binary random-looking noise which somewhat plausibly belongs in the message (e.g. low bits of sound samples.) Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From reeza at flex.com Tue Oct 3 23:52:28 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 20:52:28 -1000 Subject: CDR: Fwd: Re: Niiice kitty.... Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001003204509.00cbd250@flex.com> James A. Donald's claim below was mostly anonymized by a 3rd party I shared this with, it was then forwarded to another list. I've anonymized these two replies, and add this to the ongoing thread for continued comment. James? What would be a good question to ask entity 1? Reese entity 1 writes: I'm not sure what this thread is about, but when I scrolled down I saw something pretty familiar. That would be the phrase "digsig," which is the handle of one James Donald. This guy has to be one of the nuttier infamous people on the Internet. He has been waging an anti-Chomksy war on various anarchist and libertarian newsgroups for OVER 5 YEARS. One of his favorite libels is to claim that Chomsky supported the Khymer Rouge. If Chomsky was any cuter and a Hollywood celebrity, this guy would have been arrested for stalking a long time ago. I don't read Usenet much, but everytime I check in, he's there posting away. I can only imagine what his den looks like. I'm sure he has a Chomsky picture on the dartboard and the rest of his office is arranged to aid him in his campaign to make the world safe for libertarian capitalists who need a life. .sig entity 2 wrote: > > On the quote in question, I have a copy of Clive Ponting's Churchill > book balanced on my knee right now, and I can confirm that the quote is > word for word, except that the emphases have fallen off it with the loss > of italics ('an innocent record and' 'altogether disproportionate' > 'mainly acquired by violence, largely maintained by force'). > > Strike one to Chomsky. > > .sig > > > entity 3 writes > >Well, > > > >Where's the evidence that he misquotes more often than any other > >researcher [let alone deliberately]. Has someone compiled a compendium > >of his misdeeds? > > > >.sig > > entity 4 writes: > >> this was posted on the cypherpunks list. the respondent maintains > >> that chomsky is well-known for misquoting or twisting quotes/sources. > >> never heard that come up here in all our discussions... comments? > >> cypherpunks is archived if you want more info. > >> > >> .sig > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > I've been reading Noam Chomsky's book on Kosovo and came across this > >> > quote from a Cabinet note written by Churchill in January 1914 > >> > explaining the need for increased military expenditure (taken in > >> > turn from Clive Ponting's Churchill, 1994, P 132): > >> > > >> > "We are not a young people with an innocent record and a scanty > >> > inheritance. We have engrossed to ourselves an altogether > >> > disproportionate share of the wealth and traffic of the world. We > >> > have got all we want in territory, and our claim to be left in the > >> > unmolested enjoyment of vast and splendid possessions, mainly > >> > acquired by violence, largely maintained by force, often seems less > >> > reasonable to others than to us." > >> > >> > >> Chomsky is hardly a reliable source. He routinely fabricates or > >> falsifies quotes. I suggest you check his alleged sources. > >> > >> Chances are you will be unable to find his alleged source. In > >> the unlikely event that you are able to find it, it will not > >> say quite what Chomsky claims it said. > >> > >> --digsig > >> > >> > >> From reeza at flex.com Tue Oct 3 23:56:49 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 20:56:49 -1000 Subject: CDR: Fwd: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001003205354.00d3e520@flex.com> Another one, Entity 5 writes: >This is a calumny. I have personally checked hundreds, and I do mean >hundreds--probably over 500--Chomsky citations to original texts and >documents, and have never found any error that was not an obvious >typographical error, a misprint or something like that. One can always >argue about meaning and context, but the person who says that Chomsky >is a fabricator is ignorant or lying. --.sig > Entity 4 wrote: ><< this was posted on the cypherpunks list. the respondent maintains that >chomsky is well-known for misquoting or twisting quotes/sources. never >heard that come up here in all our discussions... comments? cypherpunks >is archived if you want more info. > >.sig > > > -- > > I've been reading Noam Chomsky's book on Kosovo and came across this > > quote from a Cabinet note written by Churchill in January 1914 > > explaining the need for increased military expenditure (taken in > > turn from Clive Ponting's Churchill, 1994, P 132): > > > > "We are not a young people with an innocent record and a scanty > > inheritance. We have engrossed to ourselves an altogether > > disproportionate share of the wealth and traffic of the world. We > > have got all we want in territory, and our claim to be left in the > > unmolested enjoyment of vast and splendid possessions, mainly > > acquired by violence, largely maintained by force, often seems less > > reasonable to others than to us." > > >Chomsky is hardly a reliable source. He routinely fabricates or falsifies >quotes. I suggest you check his alleged sources. > >Chances are you will be unable to find his alleged source. In the unlikely >event that you are able to find it, it will not say quite what Chomsky >claims it said. > > --digsig > > > > > > > > >> From jamesd at echeque.com Tue Oct 3 20:58:15 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 20:58:15 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <20001003112608.A327@otak.freeserve.co.uk> References: <4.3.1.2.20001002231430.00ba5ee0@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001002154745.00ded4c0@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001002231430.00ba5ee0@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001003204826.0184fef0@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 11:26 AM 10/3/2000 +0100, mike d wrote: > Actually it isn't clear if this is what he implies, because you have > left out the middle of the quotation. You also haven't said where > you're quoting from - a title and page number would let the rest of > us check that you haven't just stuck two unrelated passages together > to prop up your argument. These are two infamous, passages, from two very different but equally infamous documents. I tend to foolishly assume that everyone is as familiar with these endlessly repeated Chomsky debates as I am and will recognize these infamous quotes on sight. One document is Chomsky conforming to the post 1979 Soviet orthodoxy on Cambodia, one is Chomsky, with equal veracity, conforming to the pre 1979 Soviet orthodoxy on Cambodia. The latter quote comes from Chomsky's infamous Nation article, quoted in full at http://www.jim.com/jamesd/chomsdis.htm It serves my purpose of demonizing anarcho socialists better than the former quote, since the pre 1979 orthodoxy is now so wonderfully politically incorrect. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 6e1SkGRRzBiT0RVevQocjqwX3A8pSroNyXabpQg3 4GSg98I6PZcb+D1s7uIOIUrBNuIZ5phKaE7IVyxRZ From devegili at inf.ufsc.br Tue Oct 3 16:59:40 2000 From: devegili at inf.ufsc.br (Augusto Jun Devegili) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 20:59:40 -0300 (EST) Subject: CDR: HTTP and SSL Message-ID: Hi all, I need to implement a C++ client (Linux) which must connect to an HTTP Server using SSL (HTTPS). Which libraries could I possibly use, considering both SSL and HTTP? TIA, Augusto From jamesd at echeque.com Tue Oct 3 21:11:30 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 21:11:30 -0700 Subject: CDR: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: <39D9CAC4.27296C08@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> References: <4.3.1.2.20001002222811.01f02de0@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001003205913.02023c90@shell11.ba.best.com> -- James A. Donald: > > You are putting ordinary dictatorships, like Pinochet's Chile or > > Park's Korea, in the same category as communist dictatorships, > > like Castro's Cuba or Mengistu's Ethiopia. That is ridiculous. 01:02 PM 10/3/2000 +0100, Ken Brown wrote: > You really are a prat aren't you? > > So it is OK to be killed by a fascist bullet but not by a communist > one? There are a few million dead who would have been happy had they > known that before the likes of Pinochet or Franco murdered them. Pinochet was not a fascist, not a totalitarian, and murdered only two or three thousand. Any communist ruler that murdered so few would be hailed as a living saint and the moral equivalent of Ghandi. Franco was a fascist, a totalitarian, but milder than most fascists, and most fascists are milder than most communists. Franco only murdered fifty to a hundred thousand, which would not quite qualify him for sainthood if he was a communist, but close enough. James A. Donald: > > and the distribution of famine (excluding famines caused by war) > > illustrates that difference. So let us go back to the original > > question: Where was there a significant twentieth century famine > > other than those caused by war or socialism? 01:02 PM 10/3/2000 +0100, Ken Brown wrote: > Why include the word "socialism"? Almost without exception, war is > almost the only thing that ever caused a prolonged famine. The > flavour of dictatorship in power at the time has very little to do > with it. Only if you define socialism as war. Socialist famines are usually imposed once the proletariat have been completely disarmed, and all resistance has been shattered. The Ukrainian famine, the hungry ghosts famine, and the recent North Korean famine are all good examples of such famines. Socialist famines are incomparably more severe and prolonged than war famines, the two greatest famines of the twentieth century being the liquidation of the kulaks, and the hungry ghosts. Socialist famines are in a sense caused by war, in the sense that socialism tends to be unending war against a disarmed and already conquered populace. So let us go back to the original question: Where was there a significant twentieth century famine other than those caused by war or socialism? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG lnvt63+kFATuzbBdfp7sBHqo5VLNB3h9fUgBl0Kg 4lX0FbyttnyjptykIBLTgR2aDJiF2Ik1nFC8DF2QR From mike at otak.freeserve.co.uk Tue Oct 3 13:27:14 2000 From: mike at otak.freeserve.co.uk (mike d) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 21:27:14 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty In-Reply-To: <39D9CAC4.27296C08@ccs.bbk.ac.uk>; from k.brown@ccs.bbk.ac.uk on Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 01:02:12PM +0100 References: <4.3.1.2.20001002222811.01f02de0@shell11.ba.best.com> <39D9CAC4.27296C08@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Message-ID: <20001003212713.A371@otak.freeserve.co.uk> Ken Brown wrote: > Cuba is by any sane standards an "ordinary" dictatorship as were > Poland and Czechoslovakia before 1989. Ditto Serbia, or Iraq. Just to get off the point, Serbia isn't *actually* a dictatorship. It may be a pretty feeble example of a democracy, but they do hold real elections, and it is (constitutionally at least) possible to kick the ruling party out of power. Whether it or not it now *turns into* a dictatorship following Milosevic losing the elections is another matter entirely. mike. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 3 18:33:22 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 21:33:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: <39DA5364.8C6E978E@acmenet.net> References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001003183220.00a764a0@idiom.com> At 05:46 PM 10/3/00 -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: >Jim Choate wrote: >> >> On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Trei, Peter wrote: >> >> > I would like to suggest that a remailer could eliminate nearly all it's >> > problems by only sending out encrypted mails - that is, if after >> > removing the encryption that was applied using it's own private >> > key, it finds that the result is plaintext, it simply drops the message. >> >> And just exactly what algorithm is that you're using to determine >> crypt-v-plaintext? > >Why not just read the first 20 bytes of the body? If 90% or more aren't >printable ASCII assume the message is encrypted. Doesn't work - many mail packages will encode non-printable characters in ASCII, either with MIME or UUENCODE or hex or whatever, and many encryption packages, like PGP, do that already. If you require PGP Encryption, you can look for the -----BEGIN PGP ENCRYPTED STUFF------ line. That still gets you into trouble with MIME if you're not careful, so either be careful or don't :-) The only way you can really tell if something is encrypted is for a human to look at it. Otherwise people will figure out that they can send messages saying -----BEGIN PGP ENCRYPTED STUFF------ HaHaWeFooledTheRemailer. You suck! -----END PGP ENCRYPTED STUFF----- But still, you can keep out all but really determined abusers, and all but incredibly determined spammers. (Even basic encryption will keep out almost all spammers.) (You could check that the whole message follows PGP syntax, but without knowing at least one decryption key you can't tell if it's valid or if they wrote the abuse on top of an otherwise syntactically correct encrypted message.) If you want to get fancier, you can also limit destinations to known remailers or to people who've replied to a "You have anonymous mail - return this cookie if you want to receive it. " request. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 3 19:03:03 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 22:03:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: one time pad and random num gen In-Reply-To: <39D948DD.82B4BF1A@acmenet.net> References: <3.0.5.32.20001002094530.009809b0@idiom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001003190220.00a81aa0@idiom.com> At 10:48 PM 10/2/00 -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: >Bill Stewart wrote: >> By contrast, if you've got a pseudo-random number generator, >> which uses some mathematical process to generate the numbers, >> knowing bits 1...I-1 tells you something about bits I...N, >> so if the message has structure to it, you can often exploit it. > >Isn't a good definition of a cryptographically-strong PRNG that even if >you know bits 1..I-1, you still don't know anything about bit I? (Unless >you know the internal state of the PRNG, of course.) A c-strong PRNG >shouldn't be susceptible to any currently known analyses. > >Perhaps that's just a theoretical definition, and no existant PRNGs come >close. But I thought some good ones were out there. The internal state of the PRNG is precisely the question. In a PRNG-based cryptosystem, there are N bits of key, and if you know them, you can crack the rest of the message. There are a variety of attacks, including chosen plaintext, chosen cyphertext, known plaintext, etc. that can tell you different amounts of information about the key or message. Some cryptosystems are quite strong, and make the work of guessing the key based on known quantities too large to be solvable. Others are quite weak, and mathematicians being the devious sorts that they are, they can often find ways to exploit the weaknesses. With a one-time pad, the state of the cryptosystem is as large as the message itself - you've got one key bit applied independently on each bit of message. There is no state of the system that's smaller than the message itself, and no way to tell if any bit you guess is valid or not, because there's one key bit that will produce a 0 for it and one that produces a 1. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 3 19:14:09 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 22:14:09 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: <012301c02da3$25c28c80$0100a8c0@nandts> References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001003190811.00a88770@idiom.com> Remember that we're talking about detecting spam on *outgoing* messages - any incoming messages have to be encrypted also, which is too much work for almost all most spammers, and requires them to do computation on each message (especially if you only output one outgoing message per incoming.) At 09:33 PM 10/3/00 -0400, Neil Johnson wrote: >Checking the first 20 bytes just means the spammer will just add 20 bytes of >junk to the start of their message. > >Spammers unfortunately, can be pretty smart, look at all the work they will >do to cull addresses from newsgroups and mail lists, even looking for >"mailto:fred at NOSPAM.fff.com (Remove NOSPAM to send me a message)" type >addresses. > >Better to have it run the message through the encryption program (PGP or >Mix) somehow to see if it is a well formed (contains valid packets). > >Of course that means restricting users to PGP or other standard encryption >systems > >(I can see it now, all SPAM will arrive starting with "------ BEGIN PGP >ENCRYPTED MESSAGE ----") Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From iang at cs.berkeley.edu Tue Oct 3 15:15:31 2000 From: iang at cs.berkeley.edu (Ian Goldberg) Date: 3 Oct 2000 22:15:31 GMT Subject: CDR: Re: Sony loses anti-reverse engineering suit against Connectix!!! References: <39DA50BF.918BCC0@sunder.net> Message-ID: <8rdlq3$5vg$1@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu> In article <39DA50BF.918BCC0 at sunder.net>, sunder wrote: >Heh - apparently the judge decided that it's okay to allow reverse >engineering in this case. Wonder how this will affect DeCSS... Well, the MPAA v 2600 case ("constructing and trafficing in a circumvention device") isn't about reverse engineering, so "not at all". The weaker DVD-CCA case ("theft of a trade secret in violation of a clickthrough licence agreement" (said agreement having been clicked through by a minor in anither country, of course)) depends on how the reverse-engineering Connectix did relates to that done by the original CSS extractors. - Ian From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 3 20:26:07 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 22:26:07 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001003190811.00a88770@idiom.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Bill Stewart wrote: > Remember that we're talking about detecting spam on *outgoing* messages - No, we're not. We ARE talking bout checking incoming messages to ensure the body of the message is encrypted. No unencrypted traffic. End to end crypto, all the way baby... My question is still, What algorithm is proposed that can reliably determine the difference between plaintext and cyphertext, note that we don't know what algorithm is used, with only 20 bytes/char's? Another question I have is, does this mean that anonymous stego isn't possible now with this approach. Though it does pose another facet to the algorithm issue, What algorithm will reliably find stego data? That's a doozie. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 3 22:41:46 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 22:41:46 -0700 Subject: CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Three: >[Warning in advance: I don't run a remailer, and never have, so what >follows could be labled uninformed speculation]. > >I would like to suggest that a remailer could eliminate nearly all it's >problems by only sending out encrypted mails - that is, if after >removing the encryption that was applied using it's own private >key, it finds that the result is plaintext, it simply drops the message. <...> >The only bad point: > >* All recipients need to have key pairs. Thus, a crypto-only remailer >can't be a terminal remailer to mailing lists, newsgroups, or >individuals without keypairs. Simple fix is to add a "Decrypt using this key" header (or prepend to the body, which is "wrong" in that a MTA shouldn't screw much with the body). It should stop spammers since their targets usually won't be expecting encrypted messages etc. and would be much less likely to bother decrypting them. It could still be used as a terminal to a mailing list or newsgroup, just with a bit of extra hassle. Additionally, remailers could advertise selective use of this--i.e. they have certain addresses (mail to news gateways, mailing lists that don't mind anonymous traffic etc.) that they don't encrypt to. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 3 19:54:45 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 22:54:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Spam free secure email accounts. In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001003190811.00a88770@idiom.com> Message-ID: Here's an interesting idea for a service... since most folks are agreed that spammers won't do encryption, does it not make sense to have spam-free email accounts on some server somewhere? You can do this pretty simply -- all non-encrypted messages are forwarded to dev/null. If the user wants to, she could use a procmail script that sends a bounce message -- or a procmail script that doesn't. If you're worried about spammers using the service to send mail, you can just adopt the same policy for outgoing messages. So you could have an address where it was enforced that nobody could contact you there without encrypting the message, and then you wouldn't have to worry about carnivores sniffing something sensitive, or about server logs giving snoops your mail, or etc. And as a side benefit, you'd get zero spam -- at least until the spammers ran out of people they could spam more easily. I think I like this idea, because it would elevate encrypted email from an abberation to be tracked to the universal condition, at least for that system -- and introduce a reason for people out there to *learn* to use crypto software, if they wanted to talk to people on the system. Ray From jamesd at echeque.com Tue Oct 3 21:18:03 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 00:18:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <39D97B2F.5CD52211@acmenet.net> References: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001003202716.02036ed8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 02:23 AM 10/3/2000 -0400, Steven Furlong wrote: > But if Chomsky were in the habit of making up or "massaging" quotes, > perhaps he wouldn't give full reference information even for real > quotes. That way, when he did make up a quote, the lack of full cite > wouldn't count as a datum supporting the "made up" hypothesis. Chomsky gives what sounds like full reference information for citations, but often these citations turn out to be unverifiable or highly misleading. My favorite example is of course "repeated discoveries that the massacre reports were false". (No one has been able to find these discoveries) Charles Kalina's favorite example is Chomsky's fabricated quotes supposedly from Shawcross attributing ridiculous views to Shawcross. However I am not much interested in those. Charles Kalina seeks to argue that Chomsky is a cult leader, not a legitimate scientist, so the example of a lie that has the effect of libelling those of Chomsky's fellow leftists who failed to follow Chomsky's leadership serves Kalina's purpose well. My purpose is different from Kalina's. I seek to show that "anarcho socialists" are for the most part merely Marxists who have escalated the rhetoric about the state withering away, so the example of a lie that has the effect of serving the then Moscow line serves my purpose well. Chomsky's pre1979 lies on Cambodia serve my purpose particularly well because the Moscow line on the Khmer Rouge changed abruptly in January 1979. Since nearly all today's anarcho socialists are incapable of issuing a statement that differs from the Moscow line as it was in 1987, they are severely handicapped in defending Chomsky. They cannot say that what he said then about the Khmer Rouge was true, since after 1979 it became officially untrue. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG z53ZKZUN3B2Ev4r0h6bnHrb16EHfH+WcY8O6DvZC 4/CssZ9J/joHF24TL2z55D2+xp6uWfYgChGl4yeyb From roach_s at intplsrv.net Tue Oct 3 23:05:28 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 02:05:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: <39DA5C01.7E77FEA2@acmenet.net> References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001004005626.00bf7730@mail.intplsrv.net> At 05:22 PM 10/3/2000, Steve Furlong wrote: ... >I'm assuming there's a way to tell with minimal difficulty if a message >is encrypted, without relying on an easily-spoofed X header line. >Perhaps someone who knows more about all of the many message protocols >can weigh in here. ... Excuse me for butting in here, as my knowledge of crypto can be expressed on one page, double spaced, but. I believe Robert Morris, father of the (in)famous RTM, wrote a "spellchecker" for UNIX back in the 70's that was based on character probability. He's also, from my understanding, responsible for the one way hash that keeps UNIX passwords secure, and he later signed on with the NSA. Couldn't something that A. Watched for a limited list of known words, (including the header information for UUENCODED, and MIME encoded, GIF's, JPG's, BMP's, MP3's etc, along with a dictionary of very common 6+ letter words. and B. Back that up with some simple analysis, of the sort that can break single alphabet cyphers, (finding the e's, etc). Correct me if I'm wrong, and I may very well be, but, wouldn't an ecrypted message using modern techniques have a near flat distribution of all characters used? Good luck, Sean Roach From George at Orwellian.Org Tue Oct 3 23:07:57 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 02:07:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: U.S., EU move toward cybercrime treaty Message-ID: <200010040607.CAA29933@www9.aa.psiweb.com> Pull up URL for full article. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/zd/zd7.htm "When the U.S. government cannot get a controversial policy adopted domestically, they pressure an international group to adopt it, and then bring it back to the U.S. as an international treaty - which obliges Congress to enact it," wrote David Banisar, a senior fellow at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, in a commentary on the draft treaty for Web site SecurityFocus.com. From dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu Tue Oct 3 23:27:00 2000 From: dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu (dmolnar) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 02:27:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Ryan McBride wrote: > Mixmaster can be installed in the low-maintenance > `middleman' mode. In that mode, it will send mail to > other remailers only, to avoid complaints about > anonymous messages. > > Obviously this isn't a perfect solution, but it helps somewhat. It's what > I'm planning on doing until I can familiarize myself with the legal > ramifications of running an "open" remailer. It's a nice first step...it's just that if an adversary knows you are running a middleman and has control over one of the hosts relaying mail for your ISP, it may be able to 1. send mail ostensibly to a legitimate, remailer address via your "middleman" remailer 2. intercept the message you send out at the captured mail relay 3. change the header so the mail you thought was going to a remailer ends up in someone else's e-mail account. or maybe the e-mail account of the adversary so he can pose as an aggreived user. A contact to the ISP follows. You can try to convince your ISP that "no, this shouldn't happen because I'm running as a middleman," but it's not clear how you could prove that you're under this kind of attack. The threat here is an adversary who wants to see the remailer go down, but is unwilling or unable to just mailbomb it. The adversary succeeds after your ISP gets enough complaints about your crappy remailer administration to pull the plug. I'd have to go read the code to figure out whether a plaintext message could be sent this way, or just a message actually encrypted to another remailer. Might not be so bad if only encrypted messages go through, but if an adversary can get plaintext messages through then you seem to have the same possible exposure as if you were a public remailer. (though in real life, of course, it will be much less because who's going to do this?) -David From geplastics.e-marketing at gep.ge.com Tue Oct 3 19:37:29 2000 From: geplastics.e-marketing at gep.ge.com (geplastics.e-marketing at gep.ge.com) Date: 4 Oct 2000 02:37:29 GMT Subject: CDR: Design Solutions Center e-Capable Message-ID: <200010031853.LAA28695@cyberpass.net> Dear Joe Cypherpunk, Click or copy and paste for: Espanol: http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/SPANISH?_ED=VCnv4vYYLXQ9-9TcsL8fgE Francais: http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/FRENCH?_ED=4T94Aq1C3YUXIj7RgJhO8a Deutsch: http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/GERMAN?_ED=oW6tiey0otiHhw3pGscM.e Italiano: http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/ITALIAN?_ED=hp6BYe4GVV2IIzKrE-9gcm In our previous e-Capable!, we sent you details of GE Plastics' comprehensive range of e-services. We've now added to these with the launch of our new Design Solutions Center - our online resource providing advice and information on everything from material selection to feasibility studies for new application designs. Design Solutions Center http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/DESIGN_SOLS_RDT?_ED=L9dv3l02uvQICr0hMsmTsu A visit to the Design Solutions Center will help you accelerate your new product design process and so decrease time to market - because in it, you'll find a set of easy-to-use tools that will help you to achieve better results, faster! Material Selector http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/MATERIAL_REDIRECT?_ED=H6VvTBOvm5Uk8g8aW9OSWq Quickly identifies the GE Plastics resins you need, based on your performance requirements. And, when you've found the material you want, you can view or download the relevant datasheets. Visualizer http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/VISUAL_REDIRECT?_ED=0UL-qsZ9fn2gZf5SF8rbue Enables you to view actual multi-point test data - essential for more complex engineering analyses. Color Selector http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/COLOR_SELECTOR_REDIRECT?_ED=CZyDAaghzAEmMQEXXi83zi Choose from our online library of thousands of existing colors. When you've found the one you want, you can also order a color standard and have it ready for shipping to you within 48 hours. Troubleshooter http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/TROUBLESHOOTER_REDIRECT?_ED=0Wb59YZ3506E2o0eJlPLwy Use this knowledge-based system for the diagnosis and resolution of injection molding problems when using thermoplastic resins. e-Seminars http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/ESEMINARS_REDIRECT?_ED=mfsd5VtH74MILZh5z54O5A At the Design Solutions Center you also can interact with us "live" in our virtual conference center, during one of our many e-seminars. So why not take the opportunity to check out our calendar of upcoming events? Click any of the links for more information on the Design Solutions Center and the tools available. Or, if you'd prefer not to receive notification concerning the Design Solutions Center, please reply to this email with the word "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the subject line (Please also include the body of this message when responding). European Customer Solutions Center http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/EURO_CSC_RDT?_ED=VCOYF2qGe.UFZWr84vmLum Another vital component of GE Plastics' e-business strategy is our new European Customer Solutions Center, which is designed to improve our service to our customers in their own language. The first stage in this went live on 1st August, and enables you to get quick and comprehensive answers to your questions regarding our resins and their applications. You can access the European Customer Solutions Center via our toll free numbers (00) 800 1234 4000 or (00) 800 1 Plastic. Or you can click on "Talk to GE Plastics live" on the GE Plastics website (www.geplastics.com/resins). Finally, if for any reason you didn't receive the previous e-Capable! and you would like to view it, please click below: http://geplastics.emarkethost.net/mk/get/E-CAPABLE_1?_ED=B3eAp54pT5YHWQowYountA GE Plastics' Design Solutions Center - the online resource that helps you sharpen your competitive edge. Visit us soon! -----------Please do not change the next line----------- ABAAIDMGABBACPHNABEBDAIBIAEBCPMG- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 8226 bytes Desc: not available URL: From vin at shore.net Wed Oct 4 00:00:04 2000 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 03:00:04 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & NTRU In-Reply-To: <00100306360103.00413@anubis> References: <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002163127.00bd8b50@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> > As Bram Cohen put it: > > > > .> The selection of Rijndael was actually quite predictable - the round 2 > > ..> report made it pretty clear that the only real contenders were Rijndael > > c.> and Twofish, and hey, that last coin toss is free with 20/20 > hindsight :) > >Actually I had the clear impression that there were three real contenders: >Rijndael, Serpent, and Twofish, in this order. Not to take anything from Rijndael, which is both popular and widely respected among many critical professionals, but I suspect that one of the more long-lasting (pseudo-conspiratorial) theories about the selection of Rijndael as the AES will be built around the fact that Rijndael's design apparently allowed it -- and it alone of the final five -- to escape the scope of a current US patent issued to Hitachi (which is said to cover the use of data rotation in encryption.) (Thus -- as the tale may be told -- did the "inadequacies" of the US Patent and Trademark Office define US and world crypto standards for the 21st Century;-) I can't (for the life of me;-) figure out which of Hatachi's US crypto patents this claim is based upon, but the formal Hitachi warning to NIST -- dated last April -- that Hitachi had IP (US patents) which covered AES candidates is at: . I noticed, Paulo, that you were one of those who were (unsuccessfully) nagging NIST for information about their reaction to the Hitachi IP claims. Any thoughts -- or additional information to offer -- in the aftermath of the coronation? Surete, _Vin From editorschoice at mail.0mm.com Wed Oct 4 02:40:39 2000 From: editorschoice at mail.0mm.com (Hoover's Online) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 03:40:39 -0600 Subject: CDR: Editor's Choice: Leading Classic-Growth Stocks, 10/4/00 Message-ID: <20001004034039.000165@MS7OUT1.messagemedia.com> =========================================================== TODAY'S NEWSLETTER LOOKS AT LEADING CLASSIC-GROWTH STOCKS FOR THE LONG-TERM INVESTOR Classic-growth companies, which have grown steadily for years, have predictable earnings and stock prices that perform well over time. Many classic-growth companies also have household-name brands that have become classics in their own time. These companies earn high marks for profitability, financial health, and valuation--three key measures that investors should consider before purchasing any stock. In today's newsletter, we look at the strongest firms that fit into the classic-growth category. =========================================================== A Word From Our Sponsor ========================================================== Get practical advice that will help you grow your business. Every month, the Small Business Connections newsletter will provide informative business building ideas written by small business expert Jane Applegate. Issues will feature money-saving tips, insights on how to use the internet more effectively for business and time-saving advice specifically geared to small businesses. Sign up now -- FREE! http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588001 =========================================================== 1. EDITOR'S CHOICE STORIES FROM: Kiplinger's Personal Finance Magazine, The Des Moines Register, Dsn Retailing Today, and CT Wireless 2. FREE SAMPLES OF THE DAY FROM: IN VIVO: The Business & Medicine Report and FIRST CALL 3. COMPANY OF THE DAY: Wells Fargo (WFC) 4. INDUSTRY UPDATES 5. HTML VERSION OF EDITOR'S CHOICE NEWSLETTER 6. SIGN UP FOR INDUSTRY NEWS DIGESTS =============================================== 1. EDITOR'S CHOICE STORIES a. "MONEY TO LAST A LIFETIME" Source: Kiplinger's Personal Finance Magazine, October edition Adding classic-growth stocks and funds is helping investors bolster their long-term investment strategies. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588002 b. "MUTUAL RETURNS SWAP: OLD IS NEW, NEW IS OLD" Source: The Des Moines Register, October 1 edition Reality and rotation have returned. Long-forgotten energy stocks are up, and health and biotech are having a great year. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588003 c. "HOME DEPOT LAUNCHES E-TAILING" Source: Dsn Retailing Today, October 2 edition Home Depot's (HD) e-commerce initiative should drive incremental sales to their retail stores. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588004 d. "BELLSOUTH-SBC VENTURE - NOW COMES THE HARD PART" Source: Computer Dealer News, September 28 edition Despite its growth potential, SBC Communications (SBC) faces an investing market no longer smitten with everything wireless. (FREE TO MEMBERS) http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588005 2. FREE SAMPLES OF THE DAY Available exclusively to Hoover's Members through the Hoover's Editor's Choice Newsletter. These documents are free to Members for one week. a. "DEALMAKING ALONG THE FAULTLINES", from the September edition of IN VIVO: The Business & Medicine Report, courtesy of Windhover Information. Despite all of the dealmaking in the pharmaceutical industry, very few major drug companies are showing double-digit returns. Pharmacia (PHA) is one notable exception. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588006 IN VIVO: The Business & Medicine Report delivers analysis of the trends, technologies, and competitive moves redefining the health care marketplace. Coverage includes industry-wide developments affecting pharmaceutical, biotechnology, diagnostic, service, research/analytical, clinical lab, and supply, equipment & device companies. Articles from IN VIVO are available on a pay-per-view basis through Hoover's Archived News. Short articles are $25, longer ones are $100. To search them, select "Healthcare Industry News" on Archived News Advanced Search page. Sample Search: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588007 b. FIRST CALL COMPANY ESTIMATE PROFILE: WELLS FARGO, courtesy of FIRST CALL. Wells Fargo, the seventh-largest bank in the U.S., offers consumer and business banking services, investment services, real estate services, and consumer loans. The company is one of the largest mortgage bankers in the U.S. For more information about Wells Fargo, our company of the Day, see below. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588008 FIRST CALL Company Estimate Profile provides access to the current consensus earnings estimates, recommendations, and growth rates for individual companies. They also include the EPS trend history, comparisons to each company's industry and sector, and the company's expected earnings reporting date. FIRST CALL Company Estimate Profiles are available on a pay-per-view basis through Hoover's Archived News for $3.00. To search them, select "Company Profiles (Pay)" on Hoover's Advanced Search page. Sample Search: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588009 =========================================================== A Word From Our Sponsor =========================================================== Now you can test your business ideas, survey your customer's attitudes, evaluate your web site and more like never before. Use InsightExpress to create a custom survey in minutes and get results beginning in hours. All for as little as $450. You can benefit from better decision making everyday. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588010 =========================================================== 3. COMPANY OF THE DAY: Wells Fargo (WFC) Wells Fargo wants to dramatically increase its insurance and securities business -- possibly through acquisition -- to help transform itself into a financial services giant. The company's shares, which closed at $47.68 Tuesday, are on the verge of hitting a new 52-week high. For a comprehensive picture of Wells Fargo through company profiles, recent news stories, recent press releases, and research reports, follow the links below into Hoover's vast databases: Hoover's Company Capsule: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588011 Other Company Profiles: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588012 Recent News Stories: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588013 Recent Press Releases: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588014 Recent Research Reports: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588015 =========================================================== A Word From Our Sponsor =========================================================== Hoover's Business Links: What's In A Name? Hoover's Directory is still here. We've just changed the name to Business Links. Look for the Links buttons throughout our site for quick access to thousands of useful business sites. http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588016 =========================================================== 4. INDUSTRY UPDATES Industry Updates feature important industry news stories from around the world, culled from thousands of Hoover's brand-name sources and constantly updated throughout the day. Each Industry Update also features links to Updates about the leading companies in that industry. Advertising: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283362 Aerospace & Defense: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283363 Automotive: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283364 Aviation: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283365 Banking & Financial: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283366 Chemicals: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283367 Computers & Internet: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283368 Energy & Utilities: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283369 Healthcare: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283370 Insurance: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283371 Media: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283372 Pharmaceuticals: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283373 Telecommunications: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283374 ================================================================== 5. HTML VERSION OF EDITOR'S CHOICE NEWSLETTER The Editor's Choice Newsletter is also available in HTML format. If you're currently viewing this newsletter in plain Text format, your email software is unable to read HTML, or has been set up to receive only plain Text. If you'd like to receive the HTML version, contact Customer Support at support at powerize.com. To see a sample of the HTML page, click the link below: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588017 =================================================================== 6. SIGN UP FOR INDUSTRY NEWS! SIGN UP FOR INDUSTRY NEWS DIGESTS Why wait until tomorrow to get today's major industry news? Every weekday afternoon, Hoover's Industry News Digests deliver summaries of the day's most significant news stories in each major industry. Each Industry News Digest features hyperlinks to the full text of featured stories, so that you can read the complete details about the stories and events that most interest you. To see a sample of the Internet News Digest, click the link below: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588018 To subscribe, click here: http://www.0mm.com/powerize/ =================================================================== For information on advertising in this email or on the Hoover's Web site, please email us at advertise at powerize.com. For information on becoming an affiliate and earning commissions by selling Hoover's content through your Web site, please email us at affiliates at powerize.com. If you are not 100% satisfied with a purchase you make on Hoover's, we will refund your money. Registered User Agreement: http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz283378 =================================================================== Editor's Choice is an original publication of Hoover's Online =================================================================== You are receiving this e-mail because you opted to subscribe to Hoover's daily e-mail newsletter services. If you want to be removed from this e-mail list, simply reply to this message with "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. You are subscribed at: cypherpunks at toad.com Do you have any comments or suggestions regarding this newsletter or a specific feature of Hoover's Online? We'd like to hear from you at http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588019 Hoover's Online Terms & Conditions http://wwwrd.0mm.com/pwz588020 Copyright 2000 Hoover's, Inc. All rights reserved. From WBNixon at aol.com Wed Oct 4 00:41:59 2000 From: WBNixon at aol.com (WBNixon at aol.com) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 03:41:59 EDT Subject: CDR: Complete Guidebook and Workplace Violence Prevention Video series Message-ID: <50.ba6e255.270c3947@aol.com> Good Morning! I am Barry Nixon, Executive Director, The National Institute for the Prevention of Workplace Violence and am creating a workplace violence superstore on line with the intent to have a wide array of workplace violence prevention products for sale. Your video series would be an excellent addition to the online superstore so could you please send me information about the steps necessary to make this happen. I can be contacted via email at WBNixon at AOL.com, telephone at 949-770-5264 and fax 949-597-0977. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Wed Oct 4 00:42:19 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 03:42:19 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.1.20001004005626.00bf7730@mail.intplsrv.net> References: <39DA5C01.7E77FEA2@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001004001224.00a7a620@idiom.com> At 02:05 AM 10/4/00 -0400, Sean Roach wrote: >At 05:22 PM 10/3/2000, Steve Furlong wrote: >... >>I'm assuming there's a way to tell with minimal difficulty if a message >>is encrypted, without relying on an easily-spoofed X header line. >>Perhaps someone who knows more about all of the many message protocols >>can weigh in here. >... .... >Couldn't something that A. Watched for a limited list of known words, >(including the header information for UUENCODED, and MIME encoded, GIF's, >JPG's, BMP's, MP3's etc, along with a dictionary of very common 6+ letter >words. and B. Back that up with some simple analysis, of the sort that >can break single alphabet cyphers, (finding the e's, etc). Interesting idea, but far more trouble and CPU than it's worth, especially if you handle all the cases of MIME-encoded and UUencoded stuff. Also, it'll probably decide GIFs, JPEGs, MP3s, and WAVs are encrypted data. It's not going to stop all the harassers either, just force them to be more clever, while slightly decreasing the reliability of your remailer. It's probably better to use simple detection of encryption (look for the headers) and put in your own Subject: and header lines advising the recipient that it's an anonymous message and how to block it, which will take care of most of the anklebiters and let you be really apologetic to the recipient about how the abuser is trying real hard to work around your protections. Subject: Anonymous Message - Info at http://foobar.remailer.cc/policy.html At some point, you might decide that Type I remailers aren't really secure enough, and just run Mixmaster anyway. Then most of this goes away. The place I found that remailers really get into trouble is Usenet. It's not the messages directly to the harasser, it's things like forged flamebait sent to gay newsgroups or rec.pets.cats. Limiting yourself to encrypted output makes it hard to post. If you're going to post directly to Usenet, it's safe to append and prepend a bunch of disclaimers to the message body (since nobody reads headers) about how this was an anonymous message, it's untraceable, there aren't any records, it's probably forged anyway, and the web page for complaints and instructions is http://foobar.remailer.cc/policy.html Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From sms at online.com Tue Oct 3 16:47:53 2000 From: sms at online.com (SMS) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 03:47:53 +0400 Subject: CDR: SMS SISTEMA Message-ID: <200010032351.QAA15556@toad.com> Здравствуйте! Вашему вниманию предлагается совершенно новая разработка в сфере Интернет Спама...! Только теперь область ее деятельности расширяется и приобреает новые возможности для спама - это SMS Спамер. Спамер, который отсылает сообщения непосредственно на сотовые телефоны в сети МТС и БаЛайн. Наш сайт: http://e-sms.i-connect.com На нем вы найдете более подробную информацию о нашей разработке, а так же многое другое...! С уважением, Группа разработчиков [SMS] http://e-sms.i-connect.com From tom at ricardo.de Wed Oct 4 01:41:00 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 04:41:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: Message-ID: <39DAEC21.633640A0@ricardo.de> "Trei, Peter" wrote: > I would like to suggest that a remailer could eliminate nearly all it's > problems by only sending out encrypted mails - that is, if after > removing the encryption that was applied using it's own private > key, it finds that the result is plaintext, it simply drops the message. I like that idea. so much that I might start a remailer with these properties, in order to test it out. single question left: what is a reliable way to see whether or not a text is plain or cipher? From tom at ricardo.de Wed Oct 4 01:50:03 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 04:50:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: <39DA5364.8C6E978E@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <39DAEE29.F7264D80@ricardo.de> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1142 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tom at ricardo.de Wed Oct 4 02:01:07 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 05:01:07 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Spam free secure email accounts. References: Message-ID: <39DAF09D.32DBBA67@ricardo.de> Ray Dillinger wrote: > I think I like this idea, because it would elevate encrypted > email from an abberation to be tracked to the universal > condition, at least for that system -- and introduce a reason > for people out there to *learn* to use crypto software, if they > wanted to talk to people on the system. same problem here: how do you find out whether or not a message is encrypted? From George at Orwellian.Org Wed Oct 4 02:29:13 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 05:29:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: ICANN's final list of new TLDs Message-ID: <200010040929.FAA22988@www2.aa.psiweb.com> It's comment time. http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-applications-lodged-02oct00.htm Gee, I wonder what the rules for ".sucks" will be, legally. From paulo.barreto at terra.com.br Wed Oct 4 01:09:14 2000 From: paulo.barreto at terra.com.br (Paulo S. L. M. Barreto) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 06:09:14 -0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & NTRU In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> References: <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <00100406300501.00415@anubis> On Wed, 04 Oct 2000, Vin McLellan wrote: > Not to take anything from Rijndael, which is both popular and > widely respected among many critical professionals, but I suspect that one > of the more long-lasting (pseudo-conspiratorial) theories about the > selection of Rijndael as the AES will be built around the fact that > Rijndael's design apparently allowed it -- and it alone of the final five > -- to escape the scope of a current US patent issued to Hitachi (which is > said to cover the use of data rotation in encryption.) > > (Thus -- as the tale may be told -- did the "inadequacies" of the > US Patent and Trademark Office define US and world crypto standards for the > 21st Century;-) > > I can't (for the life of me;-) figure out which of Hatachi's US > crypto patents this claim is based upon, but the formal Hitachi warning to > NIST -- dated last April -- that Hitachi had IP (US patents) which covered > AES candidates is at: > . > > I noticed, Paulo, that you were one of those who were > (unsuccessfully) nagging NIST for information about their reaction to the > Hitachi IP claims. > > Any thoughts -- or additional information to offer -- in the > aftermath of the coronation? Hmm, pseudo-conspiratorial indeed, to say the least. I certainly noticed the fact that Rijndael was not mentioned in the Hitachi claim. However, so did Bruce Schneier, and he pointed out that Rijndael's ShiftRow operation is in fact a rotation, and so it should be also be covered by Hitachi's claims. Therefore, all AES finalists were seemingly equally endangered. I personally find Hitachi's claims absurd, and I wanted to know whether NIST thought the same way as I did. However, I think you might use the 21st century US legal system to manifest your concerns, if indeed you have any, that Hitachi's patent hindered the choice of any other algorithm (as this was rumoured a few days ago in this list -- I wonder who posted it, don't you, Vin?), against NIST's own statement on the contrary, made in the final report available from NIST's web site. I'll bet most people that were committed (perhaps financially) to any other of the finalists will show a reaction similar to yours. Well, this reaction is not unexpected anyway -- just remember that saying about Greeks and Trojans. Auguri, Paulo. From wantong at public1.sz.js.cn Tue Oct 3 16:34:27 2000 From: wantong at public1.sz.js.cn (wantong) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 07:34:27 +0800 Subject: CDR: microfiber cleaning cloth Message-ID: <017b01c02d92$7950fdc0$82426fca@abc> Dear sir: We specializing manufacture the various Micro-fiber Cleaning Towels and Wipe Cloth from JiangSu ZhangJiaGang China. the suchas terry towels;suede knit towels;bath towels;gloves;mops and other microfiber wipe cloth products Size : 15x18cm ;20x21cm ;14x32cm ;32x32cm ;40x40cm 34cmx86cm....;various colour and weight1 1.microfiber warp terry towels 260gm-600gm/2 perUSD9.00/KG 2.microfiber weft terry towels 260gm-400gm/2 perUSD7.5/KG 3.40cm X 40cm carton 77X47X33/216PCS Our the newest price as followes:F.O.B ZHANGJIAGANG JIANGSU CHINA 1.microfiber towels: 1)microfiber weft towels white:40X40CM 38g/pc FOB USD0.33/PC 40X40CM 48G/PC FOB USD0.40/PC 2)MICROFIBER WARP TOWELS WHITE 40X40CM 38G/PC FOB USD0.33/PC 40X40CM 48G/PC FOB USD0.35/PC ANY COLOUR ADD 0.02-0.03USD/PC 2.MICROFIBER SUEDE 20X20CM 8.00G/PC FOB USD0.14/PC ( ALMOST NO DESPITEFULLY HAIR) KNITTED SUEDE:20X20 CM 6.4G/PC FOB USD 0.08/PC ( ALMOST NO DESPITEFULLY HAIR) 3.China export commodity autumn the guangzhou fair,Our BOOTH NO:6-4B38 If you request the samples and any inquire.please confirm your detail information to me.We look forward to your early reply.thank you! Best regards Mr. wang xue lin Company: China HuaTai Microfiber Ware Factory Address: 52.SiYanRoad,ZhangJiaGangCity,JiangSu,China. TEL:0086-520-8690368 FAX: 0086-520-8678990 Mobile:013701560020 http://bizsouces.virtualave.net email: uugift at public1.sz.js.cn -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 2681 bytes Desc: not available URL: From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Wed Oct 4 01:33:29 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 09:33:29 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: <39DA5364.8C6E978E@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <39DAEB59.848090D8@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Steve Furlong wrote: > Why not just read the first 20 bytes of the body? If 90% or more aren't > printable ASCII assume the message is encrypted. Or compressed, or a bitmap, or executable code, or coming from an EBCDIC machine, or using a weird variant of Unicode that you weren't previously aware of, or audio, or video... Without a header at the front saying "This is PGP version such-and-such" (or whatever other algorithm is used) there is no way to tell well-encrypted text from some sorts of compressed files. That is part of the point - if the encrypted text was obviously different from random data the difference could contain clues. Ken From mcbride at countersiege.com Wed Oct 4 06:45:29 2000 From: mcbride at countersiege.com (Ryan McBride) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 09:45:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, dmolnar wrote: > if an adversary knows you are running a middleman and has control over > one of the hosts relaying mail for your ISP, it may be able to > > 1. send mail ostensibly to a legitimate, remailer address > via your "middleman" remailer > > 2. intercept the message you send out at the captured mail > relay > > 3. change the header so the mail you thought was going to > a remailer ends up in someone else's e-mail account. or > maybe the e-mail account of the adversary so he can > pose as an aggreived user. > > A contact to the ISP follows. You can try to convince your ISP that > "no, this shouldn't happen because I'm running as a middleman," > but it's not clear how you could prove that you're under this kind of > attack. An individual can simply fabricate an e-mail outright (requesting the help file to provide himself with an easily-modified template and log entries on on the mail relayy) or just not even show it. "Umm...Like I got this death threat... but I deleted it" would be sufficient for some of the more spineless providers. > I'd have to go read the code to figure out whether a plaintext message > could be sent this way, or just a message actually encrypted to another > remailer. It seems as though if you're running as a middleman and you encounter a plaintext message, it'll encrypt the message with the next remailer's key before it mails it out. But I only took a quick look at the code. -Ryan -- Ryan McBride - mcbride at countersiege.com Systems Security Consultant Countersiege Systems Corporation - http://www.countersiege.com From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Wed Oct 4 01:48:26 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 09:48:26 +0100 Subject: CDR: A famine averted... References: Message-ID: <39DAEEDA.E5BB977E@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Hang about! You asked why sellers wanted to put prices up when they thought a big storm was coming, when "the good of the market" might want prices kept down (as the government tried to do). I was pointing out that there is no "good of the market" in this context at all, just the interests of the participants. If someone thinks they can get more money by selling at a higher price, they probably will, regardless of any concept they (or you) might ave of the interests of the market as a whole. Not pseudo-economics at all. Now you seem to be accusing me of saying what you said... Jim Choate wrote: > > On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Ken Brown wrote: > > > Because markets have no interests, the participants in them do. > > There is NO difference between a 'market' and the 'participants in them'. > > Silly pseudo-economics. From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Wed Oct 4 01:54:10 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 09:54:10 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... References: <39D9E51A.CA23BE39@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> <20001003230426.A1408@rho.invalid> Message-ID: <39DAF032.240F7F40@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Ulf Mvller wrote: > On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 02:54:34PM +0100, Ken Brown wrote: > > > NB in a real famine (as opposed to temporary shortages, which a place > > like Belize can probably get through with less hassle than a richer more > > efficient economy with all our "Just in Time" suppliers) food prices go > > *down* at first... strange but true. It is due to farmers unloading > > stock to get money in as quickly as they can. > > Why would they want to do that? Because they are afraid they will need to get out quickly so they want to turn goods into money if they can. Also there is the price-of-meat effect which has often been observed in Africa, as much as 18 months before a famine gets serious. If people are running out of feed for their livestock (for example in a drought) they sell them rather than watch them starve. So the price of meat goes down. This can also temporarily depress the price of other food (which, of course, doesn't help peasant farmers or nomads who graze their cattle). Ken From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Wed Oct 4 07:01:07 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:01:07 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk Message-ID: There's no way which can't be spoofed by a determined opponent willing to send truly weird looking messages (as I demonstrated in an earler post), but that's not the point. I suggest that you just look for ascii-armouring - ie, long (>50 byte) printable character strings without embedded spaces. If the majority of the body has this format, then call it encrypted. And/or look for the standard tag strings for smime or pgp encrypted text, if you're worried about unencrypted but uuencoded naughty pictures being sent. You can't catch everything, but you can do reasonable due diligence to stop spammers and filter out non-contrived unencrypted content. Peter Trei > ---------- > From: Tom Vogt[SMTP:tom at ricardo.de] > Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 4:36 AM > To: Trei, Peter > Cc: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk > > "Trei, Peter" wrote: > > I would like to suggest that a remailer could eliminate nearly all it's > > problems by only sending out encrypted mails - that is, if after > > removing the encryption that was applied using it's own private > > key, it finds that the result is plaintext, it simply drops the message. > > I like that idea. so much that I might start a remailer with these > properties, in order to test it out. > > single question left: what is a reliable way to see whether or not a > text is plain or cipher? > From marcel at aiurea.com Wed Oct 4 07:16:43 2000 From: marcel at aiurea.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:16:43 -0400 Subject: CDR: VASCO gizmos Message-ID: <001501c02e0d$aef9c170$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Hi! Anybody knows anything about the VASCO Data Security gizmos' algorithm? [You enter your pin, and it generates a 7-digit number, which is synchronized with the number on the server you're authenticating to; the number is valid for 30 secs or 1 minute, I'm not sure.] We just got some at our company, and they're open to at least a replay attack, but I'm curious what algorithm do they use for generating those numbers. Mark --- All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification. From tom at ricardo.de Wed Oct 4 01:29:21 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 10:29:21 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty References: <4.3.1.2.20001001103446.01990f50@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.1.2.20001002210229.02954de8@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <39DAEA61.CE8EE512@ricardo.de> "James A.. Donald" wrote: > James A. Donald: > > > Famines in Africa are caused by communism and socialism, notably > > > the famous Ethiopian famines that occurred under Mengistu, or by > > > war, notably the famous Biafran famine. > > At 0233 PM 10/1/2000 -0500, Jim Choate wrote > > Again, a simple-minded answer to a very complicated issue. > > So give an example of an important twentieth century famine not caused by > socialism or war. stupidity. while not exclusively 20th century, it's main area is the western hemisphere, and specifically the united states. and it's still spreading. From tom at ricardo.de Wed Oct 4 01:43:24 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 10:43:24 +0200 Subject: CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: Message-ID: <39DAEDAC.61E4EF0A@ricardo.de> Jim Choate wrote: > And just exactly what algorithm is that you're using to determine > crypt-v-plaintext? that's a problem. if no such algorithm exists, I suggest that - for this specific purpose - a few heuristics would do. suggestion (version 0.1): - dictionary of 100 most common words from english plus a couple other languages. if more than 1% of the text fits, it's either plaintext or a really weird cipher. - look for PGP-style "encrypted message starts here" tags - look for "multipart/encrypted" headers it's not perfect, but it should do if the mailer policy clearly explains it. > And let's not forget the key managment problem if remailers impliment such > a policy. Without a secure key management scheme then the 'encrypted body' > approach won't work because Mallet has the keys. that's not the issue, is it? the purpose here is: a) make the remailer spam-proof. the requirement to encrypt every mail (i.e. encrypt 1000 times if you send to 1000 people) drives the costs for spam up to where it no longer pays the bills. b) make the remailer censor-proof. if I can show that I have no idea of what's going through my server, you can't force me to filter out specific content (same idea works on freenet) From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Wed Oct 4 07:45:27 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:45:27 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: VASCO gizmos Message-ID: Vasco uses DES (I don't know the details). It's a minor player in the authentication token field. RSA Security (my employer) has the largest share of the market. Peter Trei Disclaimer: I am not a spokesman for my employer, and the above represent my opinion only. > ---------- > From: Marcel Popescu[SMTP:marcel at aiurea.com] > Reply To: Marcel Popescu > Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 10:16 AM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: VASCO gizmos > > Hi! Anybody knows anything about the VASCO Data Security gizmos' > algorithm? > [You enter your pin, and it generates a 7-digit number, which is > synchronized with the number on the server you're authenticating to; the > number is valid for 30 secs or 1 minute, I'm not sure.] We just got some > at > our company, and they're open to at least a replay attack, but I'm curious > what algorithm do they use for generating those numbers. > > Mark > > --- > All inventions or works of authorship original to me, > herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public > domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, > without permission, attribution, or notification. > > > > > From tom at ricardo.de Wed Oct 4 01:49:41 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 10:49:41 +0200 Subject: CDR: HTTP and SSL References: Message-ID: <39DAEF25.7F7807EC@ricardo.de> Augusto Jun Devegili wrote: > I need to implement a C++ client (Linux) which must connect to an HTTP > Server using SSL (HTTPS). Which libraries could I possibly use, > considering both SSL and HTTP? you could look at a program called "curl". it does implement HTTPS and the source is available. depending on the specific license and on what you're writing, you may be able to just copy&paste that code. From bear at sonic.net Wed Oct 4 07:52:58 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:52:58 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Spam free secure email accounts. In-Reply-To: <39DAF09D.32DBBA67@ricardo.de> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: >same problem here: how do you find out whether or not a message is >encrypted? Plaintext looks like plaintext. This isn't even a "real" problem, once you look at the text produced by, eg, PGP, GPG, and whatever else you allow on the system. You don't even have to have a human look at it; a simple program to count character distributions, character contacts, and line lengths can identify something as being the legitimate output of PGP, or whatever encryption program, with a margin of error so flat it's only theoretical. It would need to make a "profile" for PGP, another one for GPG, etc -- then look at incoming messages to see if they match the profile. I mean, yeah, people could theoretically get stuff past it, or it could theoretically bounce encrypted messages -- but people can also theoretically guess a 128-bit encryption key on the first try, and I wouldn't expect that to happen. Ray From Somebody Wed Oct 4 11:31:02 2000 From: Somebody (Somebody) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 11:31:02 -0700 Subject: A .cash domain? Message-ID: Diebold has applied for .cash, , .global, and .secure. For their internet ATMs? An ip address for every bank vault? http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-applications-lodged-02oct00.htm --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From secret_squirrel at nym.alias.net Wed Oct 4 08:41:38 2000 From: secret_squirrel at nym.alias.net (Secret Squirrel) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 11:41:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: anarchism = socialism Message-ID: <1062a58d484ca101d1f386ad18af0aa6@anonymous> ...read on and learn also that capitalism == mass slavery [LART], and that, very definitely, property == theft [LART]. For an anarchist, he also seems a little too eager to invoke the authority of the dictionary to support his claims [CLUESTICK - get 2 free LARTs]. FableOfNamesMonger ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Forwarded from Purported Author/Host: (Reach out and touch him ;-) TRUE OR FALSE? "Anarchism is really a synonym for socialism. The anarchist is primarily a socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man." This statement was made by Daniel GuZrin in his excellent book, _Anarchism_. I included it at the top of my web page as a way of making it clear that anarchism isn't merely a lifestyle or is somehow compatible with capitalism, but is a radical, revolutionary social theory that, should it ever be successfully implemented (barring the genocidal force that capitalist powers have and continue to put to bear against any popular socialist revolutions that arise), would transform society in ways we can scarcely imagine today. The ideas of the key thinkers as well as the history and practice of anarchism backs this view up. *_"Anarchism is really a synonym for socialism"_* What does this mean? To the individual raised on decades of unrelenting anti-communist propaganda, the mere mention of the word "socialism" prompts a knee-jerk reaction, typically involving references to evil, repression, mass murder, totalitarianism. This is largely a result of the multi-million dollar campaigns waged for the past 80 years against socialism by the capitalist nations of the world. Apologists cite the brutality of Stalin as "proof" that socialism is synonymous with mass murder. However, it should be noted that the capitalist West actually INVADED the nascent USSR in the immediate wake of the October Revolution. President Woodrow Wilson ordered Marines sent to Russia, who ransacked villages, murdered peasants, and threw their lot in with the Tsarist White Russians (beginning an long-repeated tradition of support for fascist/monarchist regimes at the expense of popular uprisings). So, even before Stalin came onto the scene, the capitalist West was determined that socialism be stamped out! But one thing that is very important to note is that what came about in the USSR wasn't really socialism in practice--rather, the Bolsheviks seized political power and control of the state (and set about destroying the anarchists within Russia, who actually took the revolution seriously--from 1917-1921, the indigenous anarchist movement in the USSR was systematically wiped out, making the anarchists the first victims of Bolshevik repression!) So what we had in the USSR was a party vanguard (the Bolsheviks) seizing power FOR the people. Lenin, Trotsky, and the other Bolsheviks had no intention of allowing the state to "wither away". They, instead, killed the Revolution and spent time consolidating their power. And this, first off, is a very important distinction: the Communist Party ruled in the USSR; NOT the people themselves. Thus was totalitarianism born. Socialism, according to the _American Heritage Dictionary_, is defined as: 1. A social system in which the producers possess both political power and the means of producing and distributing goods. Think about that for a moment. *- Were the Bolsheviks the producers? NO! They were a vanguard party acting (so they said) IN THE INTERESTS OF THE WORKERS. This is an important distinction. They used brutal police and military force to enforce their power over the genuine producers. *- Did the workers of the USSR possess the means of producing and distributing goods? NO! In fact, it was the actions of the anarchists in the Ukraine, in the worker soviets, and in the City of Kronstadt to do precisely that (worker control of production and distribution of goods) that the Bolsheviks put a violent end to! In other words, the Bolsheviks wanted to put an end to SOCIALISM! Why? Because they wanted to secure power for themselves. And that they did, as history has shown. Let's look at the definition of communism, for the sake of completeness... 1. A social system characterized by the absence of classes and by common ownership of the means of production and subsistence. 2.a. A political, economic, and social doctrine aiming at the establishment of such a classless society So we see that the defining principle of communism proper is by definition common ownership of productive means and an absence of classes. - *_Were productive means commonly owned in any "state socialist" regimes?_* NO! They were owned by the state, by the government. The workers had no say in what was produced, hence the "command economy" or state-planned economy that characterized this system. - *_Was Soviet society classless?_* NO! For, after all, the concept of the "state" is largely an abstraction. What is the state, or government? It is an idea. Without people, there could be no free-standing state. Thus, the government is actually whomever controls the means of authority in a given region. And in the USSR (and the other "state socialist" regimes) that was the Communist Party. Thus, within these societies, there WAS a class: it was membership within the ruling political elite, or failure to belong...two classes: worker and vanguard party member. So we find that the "cardinal example" of "socialism" and "communism" to not be much of an example at all, to not even match up to a couple of basic definitions of the terms. Thus, what resulted in the wake of the Bolshevik coup of 1917, in the Maoist uprising of 1948, and in the Cuban revolution of 1959 (and elsewhere) followed the party vanguard (or Marxist-Leninist) model of POLITICAL, and not SOCIAL, revolution. The Marxist-Leninist model of political revolution was an aberration, producing vanguardist, command-economy states, and NOT true socialist communities. Rather than liberating the oppressed workers by dissolving the power structure of government, the vanguardists merely put themselves in charge of the same power structure, confident that THEY would not succumb to the temptations of power. So, when you compare the definitions of socialism and communism with anarchism, you see that far from being antithetical, they are complementary... *- For a society to be anarchistic (e.g., no rulers) would it have to classless? YES. *- For a society to be anarchistic, would producers have to have common control of the means of production? YES. *- For a society to be anarchistic, would all people have to have political power? YES. It is in this sense that the first part of GuZrin's statement is, in fact, accurate. It is also for this reason that some anarchists term themselves "libertarian socialists" as a way of showing the obvious link between the theories: libertarian polity, socialist economy. For, when you contrast what happened in the vanguardist regimes with the core principles of socialism, you can see how socialism is, in fact, incompatible with the desire to secure power for oneself or one's party. *_"The anarchist is primarily a socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man."_* This is the key statement to explore, for if someone doesn't have a problem with the exploitation of man by man, they are in no way an anarchist. It simply isn't ideologically consistent, and, as radicals, we put much importance on this. The anarchist rejection of rulers stems from our opposition to exploitation. Why do we oppose the government? Because the government's purpose is to control the populace: the only reason people "need" to be controlled is to allow their exploitation to continue (and expand) unfettered. Government exists to protect property. That is the sole reason for its existence. Without a government (of some sort, meaning a relative and systematic monopoly of influence in a given region) to enforce property rights, there is simply NO WAY for capitalists to make their profits from others' labor. The fiction of "natural law" establishes that property rights are a "natural state" for mankind; however, this is simply not true: property rights can only be maintained through force. Once a given group "claims" X plot of land, they have to defend that claim. If property rights were natural, they wouldn't need force to maintain them. Anarchists have always opposed property for this reason; property is claimed to make the owner rich. That is why property exists. It's not unlike a profit-generating battery, although it's important to note that the profit comes from the labor of the workers, rather than simply magically appearing...money does not as yet grow on trees. Workers are routinely and systematically exploited by capitalism. After all, if workers were actually paid the value of their labor (represented by the goods they produced), the owners wouldn't make a profit! Profit is, in its nature, SURPLUS. This surplus comes from selling the manufactured goods at a higher cost than it did to make them (anywhere from a 30% to a 300% markup, even more, if demand is high). Which means that no worker is ever paid the full value of what they produce. It is this con-game that allows the owner to grow rich atop the backs of the workers. Because this is not an equal transaction between owner and worker, the worker is being exploited. Would the workers *voluntarily* accept this ripoff in the absence of a government power to enforce this? Of course not. The government (whatever that particular government is, e.g., whoever rules) protects the owners from the consequences of their exploitation and allows them to profit accordingly. It is for this reason that *_anarchists were among the most militant opponents of capitalism, and remain so today_*. Government and capitalism walk hand-in-hand, partners in crime, robbing the vast majority of the people for the private gain of an elite. Capitalists continue to underpay and overwork their workers (one California sweatshop paid its workers $.60 an hour and forced them to work 70-80 hour weeks), make use of child labor (this is on a comeback, sadly; anarchists around the turn of the century fought child labor vigorously, forcing reformists to draft child labor laws--this has been largely circumvented by NAFTA, where less-stringent restrictions on child labor can allow capitalists to make use of this cheap pool of labor now more than ever by relocating their factories in Third and Fourth World nations). The exploitation will continue and will expand unabated, because capitalism is, in fact, synomyous with exploitation. The exploitation produces the profit by which owners grow very, very rich. So, far from being hyperbole, GuZrin's statement is an accurate one, as has been shown in history by the direct action and commitment to social revolution that characterizes true anarchism. Anarchists have uniformly risen against exploitation wherever it has arisen, at the cost of many of their lives. It is why we oppose vanguardist state socialists as much as capitalists and their fascist cronies. It is our dream to ultimately bring about a successful social revolution that will put an end to the institutionalization of exploitation that is characterized, practiced, and manifested by government and capitalism. *- DO CAPITALISTS OPPOSE EXPLOITATION? *_Economists are agreed that there are four methods by which wealth is acquired by those who do not produce it. These are: interest, profit, rent and taxes, each of which is based uupon special privilege, and all are gross violations of the principle of equal liberty. --Charles T. Sprading, _Liberty and the Great Libertarians_* First, I'll define my terms: exploit: 1. To employ to the greatest possible advantage; utilize; 2. To make use of selfishly or unethically. exploitation: 1. The act of exploiting; 2. The utilization of another person for selfish purposes. The capitalist is one who profits from the labor of others by virtue of their ownership of productive means, like a business, or factory, or even the tools used by workers. The capitalist makes money by not paying the workers the full value of what they produce. If workers were paid the full value of a given product they manufactured, there would simply be nothing "left over" for the capitalist to steal. The justification for this theft is that, without the capitalist, the workers would be unemployed, and therefore the capitalist is doing the workers a favor by even hiring them in the first place. However, this is a circular, self-serving argument, viewing workers as simple drudges -- capital assets waiting to be used. However, it _does_ illustrate the utility of unemployment to the capitalist -- it creates a labor pool of individuals suitably desperate enough to take _any_ job offered, no matter how demeaning. If the "choice" is homelessness and starvation to employment in a bad job, the rational worker "chooses" continued survival. So, this arrangement, erroneously termed "free agreement" (in which the worker is "free" to starve if they don't want to work for someone) is innately exploitative, because it: 1. Allows a privileged owner, the capitalist, to profit from others' labor 2. Eliminates the free choice of the worker -- in propertarian society, you cannot choose not to work and expect to thrive What is considered a "fair" wage is one that the worker will accept -- in other words, a wage that is better than the alternative of homelessness and starvation, which is invariably the bludgeon used to control the worker in capitalist society. Only capitalist apologists can deny the exploitative nature of their economic system with a straight face. However, they do so only by ignoring the realities of the transaction involved. The worker will never, ever get rich; the capitalist will, by virtue of the unequal, unjust distribution of profits inherent in this system. Thus, the definition _cannot_ read: *-The capitalist is one who opposes the exploitation of man by man. because exploitation is build directly into the system. A better definition is: *_The capitalist is one who exploits the labor of others for personal profit by virtue of private ownership of productive means!_* This is an accurate definition of what it means to be a _capitalist_. The libertarian socialist model of production revolves around the collective or the commune, where all workers within the given collective profit _equally_ from what they produce. *_The ones who actually do the work get the profit_*. This is, in essence, the core of our economic ideology. Return to the Anarchy for Anybody Homepage. From tom at ricardo.de Wed Oct 4 02:54:30 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 11:54:30 +0200 Subject: CDR: anonymous PGP-only remailers Message-ID: <39DAFE56.E9D46069@ricardo.de> "cypherpunks write code", wasn't it? :) here's my first proposal. a simple perl script that should find out whether any given message (piped from stdin) is a PGP message or not. it does NOT accept messages with more than 10 non-blank, non-encrypted lines. why? well, you might have a few lines of .sig, but we don't want to accept your spam simple because you have three fake PGP-lines at the bottom, right? I'm not a perl-guru, so this can most likely be reduced to less than half the space. :) and no, it's NOT an algorithm that can check whether something is plain- or ciphertext. it's for PGP messages ONLY. please tell me whether or not you find a way to make it accept spam as legitimate, or deny a PGP mail. #!/usr/bin/perl $is_crypted=false; $stage=0; $body=0; $lines=0; $lines_fit=0; $other_lines=0; while (<>) { if ($body==0&&/^$/) { $body=1; } if ($body==0) { next; } if ($stage==0&&/^-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----$/) { $stage=1; next; } if ($stage==1&&//) { $stage=2; next; } if ($stage==2&&/^-----END PGP MESSAGE-----$/) { if ($lines_fit+3>$lines) { $stage=3; } else { print "malformed PGP message\n"; exit 1; } } if ($stage==2&&/^(.*)$/) { $line=$1; $line =~ s/ //g; if (length($line)>0) { $lines++; } if (length($line)==64) { $lines_fit++; } next; } $other_lines++; } if ($other_lines>10) { print "too many non-encrypted lines\n"; exit 1; } if ($stage==3) { exit 0; } else { print "not a PGP message\n"; exit 1; } From marcel at aiurea.com Wed Oct 4 09:02:45 2000 From: marcel at aiurea.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 12:02:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: VASCO gizmos References: Message-ID: <001d01c02e1c$839388e0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> From declan at well.com Wed Oct 4 09:17:22 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 12:17:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Events in DC: Gun control, McCaffrey on "Our Balanced Approach to Drug Policy is Working" Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001004121715.00a7d350@mail.well.com> (resend) SOCIAL ISSUES News conference to highlight the negligence of the House of Representatives to act on sensible gun safety proposals. Participants: Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn.; Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y.; Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., and Nina Butts, Texans Against Gun Violence Location: HC-5, U.S. Capitol. 1 p.m. Contact: 202-225-3661 SOCIAL ISSUES National Public Broadcasting/FRONTLINE and National Public Radio Symposium on "U.S. Drug War Policy" for media and invited guests. Highlights: 8:55 a.m. - Panel 1, "Treatment and Educations v. Prohibition and Punishment" 10:10 a.m. - Panel 2, "Social Justice and the War on Drugs" 11:45 a.m. - Barry McCaffrey, national drug czar, "Our Balanced Approach to Drug Policy is Working" 2 p.m. - Panel 3, "The International War on Drugs," broadcast live on NPR News' "Talk of the Nation" 3 p.m. - Panel 4, "The Drug Business," broadcast live Location: Georgetown University Law Center, New Jersey Ave., NW. 8:45 a.m. Contact: To join broadcast discussions call 800-989-TALK; for information call Chris Kelly, 617-300-3375 HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE Jeremy and Julia Crime Subcommittee hearing on H.R.469, Jeremy and Julia's Law. Location: 2237 Rayburn House Office Building. 1:30 p.m. Contact: 202-225-3951 http://www.house.gov/judiciary SOCIAL ISSUES Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) National Youth Summit to Prevent Underage Drinking, September 29-October 4. Highlights: 9:45 a.m. - Party Group #6 11 a.m. Closing General Session: "So Now What Do We Do?" Location: National 4-H Center, 7100 Connecticut Ave., Chevy Chase, MD. 9:45 a.m. Contact: 214-744-6233, ext. 216, or http://www.madd.org TECHNOLOGY Wall St. Journal Technology Summit 2000: The Next Economy - Business, Public Policy and the Internet. Location: Ronald Reagan Building, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW. Contact: 800-457-5766; http://www.tpsite.com/wsj_TS2000/program.html TELECOMMUNICATIONS Nortel Networks Policy luncheon on the issue of "Exploring Broadband Possibilities." Participants: Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.; Clarence Chandran, COO, Nortel Networks and Elliot Maxwell, special adviser to the Secretary of Commerce for the digital economy Location: 902 Hart Senate Office Building. 12 noon Contact: Walter Kallaur, 202-508-3607 From declan at well.com Wed Oct 4 10:23:41 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 13:23:41 -0400 Subject: CDR: Is Judge Jackson backing away from Microsoft breakup? Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001004132322.00a8fbf0@mail.well.com> http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/04/1714217&mode=nested Is Judge Jackson Backing Away from MS Breakup? posted by cicero on Wednesday October 04, @12:07PM from the so-much-for-a-quick-and-dirty-breakup-eh? dept. Erick Gustafson writes in about a Valley News article on the Microsoft antitrust case: "Evidently Jackson is on a speaking tour to distance himself from the breakup remedy. Jackson seems to be deliberately lessening pressure for the appellate court to uphold his decision. What do you think?" Gustafson works for Citizens for a Sound Economy, a free-market group that opposes the lawsuit. He may have a point: Judge Jackson recently said similar things at another conference last week. The Valley News (a New Hampshire paper) article isn't online, so we'll include an excerpt below. The Valley News article excerpts: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/04/1714217&mode=nested Judge Jackson's comments from last week: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/09/30/0150210 From CMazzarella at LloydStaffing.com Wed Oct 4 10:54:40 2000 From: CMazzarella at LloydStaffing.com (Christine Mazzarella) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 13:54:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: Job opportunity Message-ID: <24C73B21D264D4118AF000508BEE0E3B238CDA@EXCHANGE-01> I was referred to you...I am a recruiter with an excellent opportunity....OPEN salary for someone in with knowledge of ITARS licensing for the Export industry in a Defense Manufacturer on Long Island.. Is this the same ITARS you are teaching...could I post the position with you or could you recommend anyone?? I'm really stuck on this one..I understand that these types hang around Washington DC, but that's my only clue into solving this puzzle....anything to help me solve it? Much appreciated, Christine Mazzarella, CPM Staffing Specialist Supply Chain Management Division LLOYD STAFFING 631-777-7600 x718 Fax: 631-777-7626 From mike at otak.freeserve.co.uk Wed Oct 4 06:56:02 2000 From: mike at otak.freeserve.co.uk (mike d) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:56:02 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001002231430.00ba5ee0@shell11.ba.best.com>; from jamesd@echeque.com on Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 11:30:23PM -0700 References: <4.3.1.2.20001001200337.00ba1140@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001002154745.00ded4c0@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001002231430.00ba5ee0@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <20001004145601.A1043@otak.freeserve.co.uk> A quick compare and contrast: Chomsky said: >: : and repeated discoveries >: : that massacre reports were false James A. Donald said: > As to where > "repeated discoveries that the massacre reports were false" comes from ^^^ and: > My favorite example is of course "repeated discoveries that the massacre > reports were false". ^^^ The first one means "reports of a significant number of massacres were discovered to be false". The second and third ones means "it was repeatedly discovered that all of the reports of massacres were false". "fabricates or falsifies quotes" eh? mike. From HotStock at real.com Wed Oct 4 16:48:00 2000 From: HotStock at real.com (HotStock at real.com) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 16:48:00 Subject: CDR: WHY SO MUCH SMART MONEY IS SO HIGH ON READ-RITE !! Message-ID: <200010042050.EAA21247@baosoft.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/plain, charset="iso-8859-1" Size: 4777 bytes Desc: not available URL: From apoio at giganetstore.com Wed Oct 4 09:07:54 2000 From: apoio at giganetstore.com (apoio at giganetstore.com) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 17:07:54 +0100 Subject: CDR: Ainda pode poupe poupar 30Cts no seu IRS Message-ID: <0369e54071604a0WWWNETSTORE@wwwnetstore> Sabia que pode poupar 30 contos no seu IRS ? No IRS de 2000 poderá declarar despesas efectuadas na compra de computadores e equipamentos informáticos. Assim é dedútivel 20% do montante dispendido até ao valor máximo de 30.600$00 *Computadores *Modems e RDIS *Acessórios e outros equipamentos Só falta mesmo é encontrar a loja certa... Para mais informações contacte o nosso Serviço de Apoio a Clientes 808 210 808, apoio at giganetstore.com Para retirar o seu email desta mailing list deverá entrar no nosso site http://www.giganetstore.com , ir à edição do seu registo e retirar a opção de receber informação acerca das nossas promoções e novos serviços. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 3964 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jimdbell at home.com Wed Oct 4 17:39:27 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 17:39:27 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Is Judge Jackson backing away from Microsoft breakup? References: <4.3.0.20001004132322.00a8fbf0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <002c01c02e64$b773c9c0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Declan McCullagh Subject: Is Judge Jackson backing away from Microsoft breakup? > Judge Jackson's comments from last week: > http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/09/30/0150210 Quote from article above: --- Trying to undo his reputation as a ferocious supporter of high-tech regulation, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson on Thursday revealed the real reason for his ruling against Microsoft. It didn't have anything to do with Microsoft's market share or Jackson's apparent disdain for Bill Gates. The reason, according to Jackson, was "Microsoft's intransigence." Huh -- Microsoft gets slammed in the stomach by the long arm of the law for being stubborn? Since when were judges supposed to take things personally? At least Jackson admitted that his decision may be far from reasonable. "Virtually everything I did may be vulnerable on appeal," he told a conference. Thank goodness for checks and balances. ================================= This case stank to high heaven: The "fast-tracking" it was put on made that obvious. IBM's '69 case took 13+ years before it was killed. Interestingly, the subsequent 10 years proved that far from being an unassailable monopoly, IBM's hold on the market was fleeting. I think we'll discover that the only purpose of the MS case was to twist a few arms in order to get government leverage on the computer market. Didn't work. Jim Bell From ravage at ssz.com Wed Oct 4 16:07:56 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 18:07:56 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Spam free secure email accounts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Ray Dillinger wrote: > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: > > >same problem here: how do you find out whether or not a message is > >encrypted? > > Plaintext looks like plaintext. Yeah, if the only thing you right is simple English. Most of the planet doesn't speak English and their plaintext doesn't necessarily look like plaintext. This is a xenophobic view. > This isn't even a "real" problem, once you look at the text produced by, eg, > PGP, GPG, and whatever else you allow on the system. Ah, here's the rub. Here we are trying to stop the government and other organizations from dictating 'standards' and yet here you are wanting to impose another one. The function of an anonymous remailer should NOT be context/content sensitive. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From nl998 at usa.net Wed Oct 4 18:54:34 2000 From: nl998 at usa.net (nl998 at usa.net) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 18:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: A Bomb Has Just Been Dropped! Message-ID: <200010050154.SAA22715@toad.com> AN AMAZING 96,000 MEMBERS ENROLLED IN JUST 8 WEEKS! IT HAS BEATEN EVERY PROGRAM LAUNCHED ON THE NET! IT'S YOUR TURN TO SUCCEED! So, please take advantage NOW! Hello, My name is Nils Luyt and I have just come across an opportunity that is like finding a Huge Pot of Gold at the end of a Rainbow and quite frankly.....I wanted to share this with as many people as I can. I want to tell you that I'm really excited and you probably will be too. I know you are looking to make a good income from your home based business and I am confident THIS IS THE ONE! This program will have a Major...Global Impact upon all of us. This is proof that the GREAT POTENTIAL of this SENSATIONAL OPPORTUNITY has been widely acknowledged! Everybody who enrolls will benefit from this UNIQUE NEW PAYMENT CONCEPT! Have you ever heard of a system that pays you a commission check after you've enrolledjust TWO people? WELL, THIS COMPANY DOES!!!! And after that, you receive commissions on ALL SALES the company makes! Not only on YOUR sales, but ON ALL SALES! This company is rapidly becoming bigger than Skybiz and you can still join & get in at the top! YOU WILL BE ABSOLUTELY BLOWN AWAY WHEN YOU HEAR ABOUT THE AWESOME PRODUCT AND COMPENSATION PLAN THIS COMPANY HAS TO OFFER! No products to stock - no meetings to attend - & it's GLOBAL. You can make $5,000 per week in 30 - 45 days from now with very little effort! THAT'S THE POWER OF THE INTERNET! OUTSTANDING company backup and promotion! They have a server 100 times stronger than Ebay! NOW....how would you like to be in on the ground floor of a Dot Com Company that has combined the best of SkyBiz, Freenet, Km.Net,Evision, BigSmart and Priceline.net (and an international long distance service as well as an E-Mall where you will be able to purchase Brand Name Merchandise at a HUGE DISCOUNT)? BUT LET'S FORGET ABOUT THE HYPE FOR A MOMENT.......and be realistic... Would an extra $200 per week pay some bills? An extra $500 per week could pay the mortgage! And would an extra $1,000 per week change your lifestyle? It is all possible. If you introduce only 2 members, (your sister and your brother in law perhaps?) you will qualify already for your first paycheck! Here are some of the major selling points of this opportunity combining the major trends.... 1. Low start up cost. 2. Unique marketing plan...A New Hybrid Plan. a. Straight-line b. Non Flushing Binary. c. 3 x 10 Matrix with matching bonus' (when you cycle in the straight line you are entered into the Non Flushing Binary (like SkyBiz) and then finally... into the 3 x 10 Matrix. 3. They are catching all the major, huge trends. Web sites & education, "tools for internet marketers, international Long Distance "Flat Rate," and a plan to offer ISP and DSL service (FREE). 4. They are doing everything they can to develop a formula to pay a matching bonus on the straight-line, as well as the Binary part of the compensation plan! Think about that...has it hit you yet? 5. THIS COMPANY IS GLOBAL! To find out more about this HOT, Dot-Com Opportunity, send me an email with !!youre first + last name!! in the subject, to: ep1 at soneramail.nl and I'll rush you the URL of our web site. Do it NOW! If you don't take a look you'll NEVER know what you are missing. Sending an email to ep1 at soneramail.nl will take you only 10 seconds......and it will be your best 10 seconds ever spent. YOU CAN FINALLY BE INVOLVED IN SOMETHING THAT WORKS! GET READY TO BE EXCITED!!!!! See you AT THE TOP!!! Have a great day. Nils Luyt ----------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent in compliance of the new e-mail bill: SECTION 301. Per Section 301, paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 1618. This message is NOT Spam as long as you are provided with a way to remove your name from this mailing list. All further transmissions to you from me may be stopped at no cost to you by sending a reply to this email address (ep1 at soneramail.nl) with the word "REMOVE" in the subject line. ----------------------------------------------------------- From bear at sonic.net Wed Oct 4 20:16:09 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 20:16:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Spam free secure email accounts. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Jim Choate wrote: > >On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Ray Dillinger wrote: >> Plaintext looks like plaintext. > >Yeah, if the only thing you right is simple English. Most of the planet >doesn't speak English and their plaintext doesn't necessarily look like >plaintext. > >This is a xenophobic view. No, it's not. Every natural language has a detectable frequency distribution and contacts. *ALMOST* every cipher does not. Someone could be writing martian using the cyrillic alphabet, and you could still look at it and say "this character occurs seven times as often as average and is never followed by that character. This other character is preceded by the same character fully half the time it appears. And over here we have a set of characters one of which *always* follows any appearance of any member of this other set of characters (which is a constant in almost all languages with plosive consonants -- the only thing that normally follows a plosive consonant is a vowel...) You don't have to know what it says or what language it is. Plaintext looks like plaintext, and by the time you have more than 50 characters the probability curve of mistaking it for anything else is flat as a goddamn strap. >> This isn't even a "real" problem, once you look at the text >> produced by, eg, PGP, GPG, and whatever else you allow on >> the system. >Ah, here's the rub. Here we are trying to stop the government and other >organizations from dictating 'standards' and yet here you are wanting to >impose another one. Did I say someone else couldn't set up a crypto-only mailer using DES and AES? You always get to dictate 'standards' for systems you own. I always get to dictate standards for systems I own. And the government rightfully gets to dictate standards for systems it owns. Sometimes it tries to do more than is rightful, but that is another question. >The function of an anonymous remailer should NOT be context/content >sensitive. Uh, now who's trying to impose a standard? You want a system that _someone_else_ runs to conform to _your_ ideas of what it ought to do. You get to dictate standards on systems _YOU_ own -- not on anyone else's. Bear From devegili at inf.ufsc.br Wed Oct 4 16:36:19 2000 From: devegili at inf.ufsc.br (Augusto Jun Devegili) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 20:36:19 -0300 (EST) Subject: CDR: Signing data in IE Message-ID: Hi all, I've been able to sign data in an HTML form (prior to sending it to the Web server) using crypto.SignText (Netscape Navigator JavaScript function). However, I haven't found a way to do the same thing in Internet Explorer. Has anyone got any ideas? TIA, Augusto From hermanb at vincysurf.com Wed Oct 4 20:51:13 2000 From: hermanb at vincysurf.com (Herman Bailey) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 20:51:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: free satelite tv Message-ID: <002701c02e7f$82be2e80$1fcdd6cd@computer> How can I get a free satellite tv. I am from St.VincentThanks Herman Bailey -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 382 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rah at shipwright.com Wed Oct 4 14:10:48 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 22:10:48 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: A .cash domain? Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 4 22:12:46 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 22:12:46 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Complete Guidebook and Workplace Violence Prevention Video series In-Reply-To: <50.ba6e255.270c3947@aol.com> References: <50.ba6e255.270c3947@aol.com> Message-ID: At 3:41 AM -0400 10/4/00, WBNixon at aol.com wrote: >Good Morning! > >I am Barry Nixon, Executive Director, The National Institute for the >Prevention of Workplace Violence and am creating a workplace violence >superstore on line with the intent to have a wide array of workplace violence >prevention products for sale. Your video series would be an excellent >addition to the online superstore so could you please send me information >about the steps necessary to make this happen. > >I can be contacted via email at WBNixon at AOL.com, telephone at 949-770-5264 >and fax 949-597-0977. Thank you for your interest in our video series. Which ones are you interested in? #12-1: "What to Do When Your Boss Needs Killing" (45 min, VHS, PAL) #12-2: "Shotgun or Rifle...The Choice is Yours!" (50 min, VHS) #12-3 "Defeating Security Cameras and Intrusion Alarms," (120 min, VHS, DVD avail in October 2000) #12-4 "Why the Columbine Boys Were So Incompetent..Lessons on Increasing the Kill Factor" (discontinued until our lawyers say we can resume selling it) We hope we can be of assistance. "Tools for a World Where Vengeance Really Matters!" -- -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 4 22:30:36 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 22:30:36 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: anarchism = socialism In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.1.20001004220121.00c0c9a0@mail.intplsrv.net> References: <4.3.2.7.1.20001004220121.00c0c9a0@mail.intplsrv.net> Message-ID: At 10:54 PM -0500 10/4/00, Sean Roach wrote: >Beautiful sentiment, and much of it I'm not prepared to argue with. I'm also not going to argue with it, because arguing with lefties who spout tired old chestnuts like: >>'Workers are routinely and systematically exploited by capitalism. >>After all, if >>workers were actually paid the value of their labor (represented by the goods >>they produced), the owners wouldn't make a profit! Profit is, in its nature, SURPLUS. " is a waste fingers applied to a keyboard. That you would say "beautiful sentiment" to the overall article you quoted is...scary. Jeez, what kind of fools are we attracting to the list these past few years? --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From roach_s at intplsrv.net Wed Oct 4 20:54:51 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 22:54:51 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: anarchism = socialism In-Reply-To: <1062a58d484ca101d1f386ad18af0aa6@anonymous> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001004220121.00c0c9a0@mail.intplsrv.net> Beautiful sentiment, and much of it I'm not prepared to argue with. First of all, I'm going to place my comments among your message. This is not to present the appearance of a winning arguement, but only for ease of keeping track of the points. At 10:41 AM 10/4/2000, Secret Squirrel wrote, or rather forwarded: >...read on and learn also that capitalism == mass slavery [LART], >and that, very definitely, property == theft [LART]. > >For an anarchist, he also seems a little too eager to invoke the authority >of the dictionary to support his claims [CLUESTICK - get 2 free LARTs]. > > >FableOfNamesMonger > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Forwarded from >Purported Author/Host: (Reach out and touch him ;-) > > >TRUE OR FALSE? > > "Anarchism is really a synonym for socialism. The anarchist is primarily a > socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man." > > >This statement was made by Daniel GuÚrin in his excellent book, >_Anarchism_. I >included it at the top of my web page as a way of making it clear that >anarchism >isn't merely a lifestyle or is somehow compatible with capitalism, but is a >radical, revolutionary social theory that, should it ever be successfully >implemented (barring the genocidal force that capitalist powers have and >continue to put to bear against any popular socialist revolutions that >arise), >would transform society in ways we can scarcely imagine today. > >The ideas of the key thinkers as well as the history and practice of >anarchism >backs this view up. > > >*_"Anarchism is really a synonym for socialism"_* > >What does this mean? To the individual raised on decades of unrelenting >anti-communist propaganda, the mere mention of the word "socialism" prompts a >knee-jerk reaction, typically involving references to evil, repression, mass >murder, totalitarianism. > >This is largely a result of the multi-million dollar campaigns waged for the >past 80 years against socialism by the capitalist nations of the world. >Apologists cite the brutality of Stalin as "proof" that socialism is >synonymous >with mass murder. However, it should be noted that the capitalist West >actually >INVADED the nascent USSR in the immediate wake of the October Revolution. >President Woodrow Wilson ordered Marines sent to Russia, who ransacked >villages, >murdered peasants, and threw their lot in with the Tsarist White Russians >(beginning an long-repeated tradition of support for fascist/monarchist >regimes >at the expense of popular uprisings). > >So, even before Stalin came onto the scene, the capitalist West was >determined >that socialism be stamped out! News to me, I won't argue. We've done it before, we're doing it now, we'll do it again. >But one thing that is very important to note is that what came about in >the USSR >wasn't really socialism in practice--rather, the Bolsheviks seized political >power and control of the state (and set about destroying the anarchists >within >Russia, who actually took the revolution seriously--from 1917-1921, the >indigenous anarchist movement in the USSR was systematically wiped out, >making >the anarchists the first victims of Bolshevik repression!) > >So what we had in the USSR was a party vanguard (the Bolsheviks) seizing >power >FOR the people. Lenin, Trotsky, and the other Bolsheviks had no intention of >allowing the state to "wither away". They, instead, killed the Revolution and >spent time consolidating their power. > >And this, first off, is a very important distinction: the Communist Party >ruled >in the USSR; NOT the people themselves. Thus was totalitarianism born. >Socialism, according to the _American Heritage Dictionary_, is defined as: > > >1. A social system in which the producers possess both political power and > the means of producing and distributing goods. > >Think about that for a moment. > >*- Were the Bolsheviks the producers? NO! They were a vanguard party >acting (so > they said) IN THE INTERESTS OF THE WORKERS. This is an important > distinction. They used brutal police and military force to enforce their > power over the genuine producers. > >*- Did the workers of the USSR possess the means of producing and >distributing > goods? NO! In fact, it was the actions of the anarchists in the > Ukraine, in > the worker soviets, and in the City of Kronstadt to do precisely that > (worker control of production and distribution of goods) that the > Bolsheviks > put a violent end to! > > >In other words, the Bolsheviks wanted to put an end to SOCIALISM! Why? >Because >they wanted to secure power for themselves. And that they did, as history has >shown. > >Let's look at the definition of communism, for the sake of completeness... > >1. A social system characterized by the absence of classes and by common > ownership of the means of production and subsistence. 2.a. A political, > economic, and social doctrine aiming at the establishment of such a > classless society > >So we see that the defining principle of communism proper is by definition >common ownership of productive means and an absence of classes. > >- *_Were productive means commonly owned in any "state socialist" >regimes?_* NO! > They were owned by the state, by the government. The workers had no > say in > what was produced, hence the "command economy" or state-planned > economy that > characterized this system. > >- *_Was Soviet society classless?_* NO! For, after all, the concept of >the "state" > is largely an abstraction. What is the state, or government? It is an > idea. > Without people, there could be no free-standing state. Thus, the > government > is actually whomever controls the means of authority in a given > region. And > in the USSR (and the other "state socialist" regimes) that was the > Communist > Party. Thus, within these societies, there WAS a class: it was > membership > within the ruling political elite, or failure to belong...two classes: > worker and vanguard party member. > >So we find that the "cardinal example" of "socialism" and "communism" to >not be >much of an example at all, to not even match up to a couple of basic >definitions >of the terms. > >Thus, what resulted in the wake of the Bolshevik coup of 1917, in the Maoist >uprising of 1948, and in the Cuban revolution of 1959 (and elsewhere) >followed >the party vanguard (or Marxist-Leninist) model of POLITICAL, and not SOCIAL, >revolution. The Marxist-Leninist model of political revolution was an >aberration, producing vanguardist, command-economy states, and NOT true >socialist communities. > >Rather than liberating the oppressed workers by dissolving the power >structure >of government, the vanguardists merely put themselves in charge of the same >power structure, confident that THEY would not succumb to the temptations of >power. > >So, when you compare the definitions of socialism and communism with >anarchism, >you see that far from being antithetical, they are complementary... > >*- For a society to be anarchistic (e.g., no rulers) would it have to > classless? YES. > >*- For a society to be anarchistic, would producers have to have common >control > of the means of production? YES. If means of production means property, then consider the following concept. I, joe farmer, have with my own two hands built a tractor. This tractor is now the product of my production, but by it's very nature, it's also the means of production. Who owns it? Do I benefit by my own labor? Or does society, for the greater good, "liberate" it from me as a means of production? If it's to be "liberated", what's the point of me even bothering to go to the trouble of producing a tractor when the next ten people, who used thier time wisely to manufacture guns, decides they need it more than I do? I, as joe farmer, have "reclaimed", (inaccurate, as the land was not previously claimed for this use, but the terminology seems current), a farm, on which I intend to grow grain. I get the grain up to about knee height and just producing a harvestible crop, when Brett Rancher, decides to use this common land for graising. Do I as the person who toiled on the land to make it produce get to keep the grain? Or is it mutual property that is fair game to all? If I'm not going to reap what I sow, what's the point of wasting a growing season carrying water, and weeding rows? Now I'm Joe Farmer Jr. My father built a tractor, scratched a farm out of the wilderness, and defended both against all comers because they were the product of his own two hands. He, wanting to pass on the heritage, bequethes, (yes, I know, the spelling isn't right), this produce to me. I didn't produce it myself, rather I was expected to work it until I reached majority, and have over the last 20 years assumed more and more responsibility as my father has lost the capacity to continue to work the land. I still went to him for guidance, but it was my own two hands that overhauled that old tractor, and without my labor, the farm would have reverted to wilderness. Are these products of my labor, or means to production? If means to production, what reason do I have to do more than absolutely necessary to keep the two running until my father passes away? Since I'm going to lose control of both at that time. Now I'm Joe Gentleman Farmer 3rd. I have built on the work of my father and his father, and now find that to adequately work with what I have requires more than my two hands, or those of my children and wife, to work. Using some of my surplus produce, I've taken on an additional pair of hands to facilitate the work. He's not worked this land since birth. He hasn't, nor have his ancestors, toiled to make the tractor or farm feed the family. Does he deserve an equal share to the output? I've invested 40 years of my life. My father invested 60+ of his, and his father 60+ of his, all with the assumption that this produce would stay in the family. This worker has yet to invest one hour. Does this make me a capitolist? >*- For a society to be anarchistic, would all people have to have political > power? YES. If people have unfettered political power, what is to prevent the mob from turning on the most productive to cough up their hard-earned gains for the "less fortunate"? Perhaps the less fortunate, who since all wages are equal anyway for all producers, since there is often no real way of guaging who did more, particulary when more than one stage of production exists, decided to underrepresent their talents so that they could get off lighter? When the many lead the few, you have the makings for a tyranny. When the few lead the many, you have the makings for a tyranny. If there is any chance of one man being more diligent than another, then one man will become more prosperous than another in the first generation. In the second generation, I'll grant you, the less prosperous man's son may be more diligent, but starting from a weaker position. >It is in this sense that the first part of GuÚrin's statement is, in fact, >accurate. It is also for this reason that some anarchists term themselves >"libertarian socialists" as a way of showing the obvious link between the >theories: libertarian polity, socialist economy. > >For, when you contrast what happened in the vanguardist regimes with the core >principles of socialism, you can see how socialism is, in fact, incompatible >with the desire to secure power for oneself or one's party. > > > *_"The anarchist is primarily a socialist whose aim is to abolish the > exploitation of man by man."_* > >This is the key statement to explore, for if someone doesn't have a >problem with >the exploitation of man by man, they are in no way an anarchist. It simply >isn't >ideologically consistent, and, as radicals, we put much importance on this. > >The anarchist rejection of rulers stems from our opposition to >exploitation. Why >do we oppose the government? Because the government's purpose is to >control the >populace: the only reason people "need" to be controlled is to allow their >exploitation to continue (and expand) unfettered. > >Government exists to protect property. That is the sole reason for its >existence. Without a government (of some sort, meaning a relative and >systematic >monopoly of influence in a given region) to enforce property rights, there is >simply NO WAY for capitalists to make their profits from others' labor. Except by taking that produced by anothers labor, but inadequately defended. Granted, that happens anyway. Only the methods of defense shift from most deadly and determined, to most litigous, (my apologies to the lawyers of this list, my spelling was never my strong suit,) and determined, both modified by resources at ones disposal to make good on threats. (Ammunition, friendly laws.) >The fiction of "natural law" establishes that property rights are a "natural >state" for mankind; however, this is simply not true: property rights can >only >be maintained through force. Once a given group "claims" X plot of land, they >have to defend that claim. If property rights were natural, they wouldn't >need >force to maintain them. If natural law does not exist, why does my dog urinate on my tire? Are you saying we are much evolved from beasts? I'd like to think so, but I find my own natural impulses too closely mirror those of "animals". Including the desires to breed, attract a good mate, (through demonstration of my ability to support her), keep others of my kind at arms reach, etc. >Anarchists have always opposed property for this reason; property is >claimed to >make the owner rich. That is why property exists. It's not unlike a >profit-generating battery, although it's important to note that the profit >comes >from the labor of the workers, rather than simply magically appearing...money >does not as yet grow on trees. > >Workers are routinely and systematically exploited by capitalism. After >all, if >workers were actually paid the value of their labor (represented by the goods >they produced), the owners wouldn't make a profit! Profit is, in its nature, >SURPLUS. This surplus comes from selling the manufactured goods at a >higher cost >than it did to make them (anywhere from a 30% to a 300% markup, even more, if >demand is high). Which means that no worker is ever paid the full value of >what >they produce. It is this con-game that allows the owner to grow rich atop the >backs of the workers. > >Because this is not an equal transaction between owner and worker, the >worker is >being exploited. Would the workers *voluntarily* accept this ripoff in the >absence of a government power to enforce this? Of course not. The government >(whatever that particular government is, e.g., whoever rules) protects the >owners from the consequences of their exploitation and allows them to profit >accordingly. > >It is for this reason that *_anarchists were among the most militant >opponents of >capitalism, and remain so today_*. Government and capitalism walk >hand-in-hand, >partners in crime, robbing the vast majority of the people for the private >gain >of an elite. > >Capitalists continue to underpay and overwork their workers (one California >sweatshop paid its workers $.60 an hour and forced them to work 70-80 hour >weeks), make use of child labor (this is on a comeback, sadly; anarchists >around >the turn of the century fought child labor vigorously, forcing reformists to >draft child labor laws--this has been largely circumvented by NAFTA, where >less-stringent restrictions on child labor can allow capitalists to make >use of >this cheap pool of labor now more than ever by relocating their factories in >Third and Fourth World nations). > >The exploitation will continue and will expand unabated, because >capitalism is, >in fact, synomyous with exploitation. The exploitation produces the profit by >which owners grow very, very rich. > >So, far from being hyperbole, GuÚrin's statement is an accurate one, as >has been >shown in history by the direct action and commitment to social revolution >that >characterizes true anarchism. Anarchists have uniformly risen against >exploitation wherever it has arisen, at the cost of many of their lives. >It is >why we oppose vanguardist state socialists as much as capitalists and their >fascist cronies. > >It is our dream to ultimately bring about a successful social revolution that >will put an end to the institutionalization of exploitation that is >characterized, practiced, and manifested by government and capitalism. > > >*- DO CAPITALISTS OPPOSE EXPLOITATION? > > *_Economists are agreed that there are four methods by which wealth is > acquired by > those who do not produce it. These are: interest, profit, rent and > taxes, each > of which is based uupon special privilege, and all are gross > violations of the > principle of equal liberty. --Charles T. Sprading, _Liberty and the > Great > Libertarians_* > >First, I'll define my terms: > > exploit: 1. To employ to the greatest possible advantage; utilize; 2. To > make use of selfishly or unethically. > > exploitation: 1. The act of exploiting; 2. The utilization of another > person > for selfish purposes. > > >The capitalist is one who profits from the labor of others by virtue of their >ownership of productive means, like a business, or factory, or even the tools >used by workers. The capitalist makes money by not paying the workers the >full >value of what they produce. If workers were paid the full value of a given >product they manufactured, there would simply be nothing "left over" for the >capitalist to steal. So, if I were a master craftsman of looms, but had about the textile manufacture talent of a rock, I would not be allowed to maintain my looms and live by their produce? Are you suggesting price protection for labor? Or that I be forced to sell my looms. Doesn't sound like I'm very free if I'm forced to liquidate that that I produced. >The justification for this theft is that, without the capitalist, the workers >would be unemployed, and therefore the capitalist is doing the workers a >favor >by even hiring them in the first place. However, this is a circular, >self-serving argument, viewing workers as simple drudges -- capital assets >waiting to be used. > >However, it _does_ illustrate the utility of unemployment to the >capitalist -- it >creates a labor pool of individuals suitably desperate enough to take >_any_ job >offered, no matter how demeaning. If the "choice" is homelessness and >starvation >to employment in a bad job, the rational worker "chooses" continued survival. > >So, this arrangement, erroneously termed "free agreement" (in which the >worker >is "free" to starve if they don't want to work for someone) is innately >exploitative, because it: > > 1. Allows a privileged owner, the capitalist, to profit from others' > labor > > 2. Eliminates the free choice of the worker -- in propertarian > society, you > cannot choose not to work and expect to thrive Are you saying that in a non-propertarian society, that I could simply choose not to work and still benefit the same as everyone else? Sounds good to me, sign me up. Of course, if there are too many of us, how are you going to feed us all and yourself too? If we're going to be forced to work, you're now talking about limiting freedom. How are you to guage that I'm doing my fair share? Perhaps I'm an economist, who's labors don't translate well on paper but still are key to the functioning of society as a whole. OR, perhaps I'm a valued leader of men, who can organize to better effeciency the labor of others. But, if I'm a manager, who can coax 10% extra result from the same effort of those who follow me, does that mean that I should have that 10%, or a fixed share of it, as my contribution? Sounds like a manager, or a boss, to me. >What is considered a "fair" wage is one that the worker will accept -- in >other >words, a wage that is better than the alternative of homelessness and >starvation, which is invariably the bludgeon used to control the worker in >capitalist society. > >Only capitalist apologists can deny the exploitative nature of their economic >system with a straight face. However, they do so only by ignoring the >realities >of the transaction involved. The worker will never, ever get rich; the >capitalist will, by virtue of the unequal, unjust distribution of profits >inherent in this system. I won't argue that there are abuses. Any system will have abuses. Capitalism has the abuse that those who have inherited the produce of thier forefathers, but none of their drive, will still flourish. While those who have not the gains of their ancestors, but the determination that the former lack, will not see all, or even most, of their value. The problem is, in a socialist system, the man without any skills or the desire to gain, or use, them, can be just as abusive. There are, in my opinion, far more lazy persons then there ever could be wealthy persons. And far more lazy persons in general, than there could ever be lazy wealthy persons. I seem to remember that "Utopia" literally meant "doesn't exist". >Thus, the definition _cannot_ read: > >*-The capitalist is one who opposes the exploitation of man by man. > >because exploitation is build directly into the system. A better >definition is: > >*_The capitalist is one who exploits the labor of others for personal >profit by > virtue of private ownership of productive means!_* I'd say a capitalist is one who strives to gain more than he had, by trading in a market, and in the process produce more, and better methods of production, since with better methods of production, more can be produced with the same effort. I'd hate to have to hoe a row by hand. Tractors are much more efficient. Can you honestly see any type of industrial revolution occuring from common labor? If I gain status by developing steam power, then I've just been elevated to a new class. If I gain profit from the licenses, same deal. >This is an accurate definition of what it means to be a _capitalist_. > >The libertarian socialist model of production revolves around the >collective or >the commune, where all workers within the given collective profit >_equally_ from >what they produce. *_The ones who actually do the work get the profit_*. >This is, in >essence, the core of our economic ideology. > > >Return to the Anarchy for Anybody Homepage. > This really is unfair, since the original author isn't on the list to refute. But I'm sure he, (or she), will find a worthy champion. Good luck, Sean Roach From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 4 20:05:18 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 23:05:18 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: References: <39D965B6.60E198EB@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001004091419.007cc8c0@pop.sprynet.com> At 09:26 AM 10/3/00 -0400, dmolnar wrote: >People will use your remailer to send spam and death threats. There may >even be people who will use your remailer to send spam and death threats >to themselves, simply because they hate remailers. The recipients will >contact you and your ISP. Repeatedly. You could set up a remailer which is never an exit point for mail, so that your ISP never gets the flak. This could still provide an entrance point (e.g., SSL'd webform to encourage use) and also participate in the randomly-store-and-forward mix-infrastructure. This of course regresses the problem to the exit nodes. But it encourages more anonymizing infrastructure. "The electron, in my judgment, is the ultimate precision-guided munition." -John Deutsch, CIA Director From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 4 23:12:34 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 23:12:34 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Is Judge Jackson backing away from Microsoft breakup? In-Reply-To: <002c01c02e64$b773c9c0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: <4.3.0.20001004132322.00a8fbf0@mail.well.com> <002c01c02e64$b773c9c0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: At 5:39 PM -0700 10/4/00, jim bell wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: Declan McCullagh >Subject: Is Judge Jackson backing away from Microsoft breakup? > >> Judge Jackson's comments from last week: >> http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/09/30/0150210 > >Quote from article above: >--- >Trying to undo his reputation as a ferocious supporter of high-tech >regulation, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson on Thursday revealed the real >reason for his ruling against Microsoft. It didn't have anything to do with >Microsoft's market share or Jackson's apparent disdain for Bill Gates. The >reason, according to Jackson, was "Microsoft's intransigence." Huh -- >Microsoft gets slammed in the stomach by the long arm of the law for being >stubborn? Since when were judges supposed to take things personally? At >least Jackson admitted that his decision may be far from reasonable. >"Virtually everything I did may be vulnerable on appeal," he told a >conference. Thank goodness for checks and balances. >================================= > >This case stank to high heaven: The "fast-tracking" it was put on made that >obvious. IBM's '69 case took 13+ years before it was killed. Interestingly, >the subsequent 10 years proved that far from being an >unassailable monopoly, IBM's hold on the market was fleeting. I think >we'll discover that the only purpose of the MS case was to twist a few arms >in order to get government leverage on the computer market. Didn't work. And to increase campaign contributions from high tech companies, including MS, to algore. This also didn't work. A handful of simp-wimp feminista techies contributed to the Dems. Oh, and Microsoft's market rivals...state capitalism at its best. But the tech heavyweights are only contributing token amounts to the Dems. Why should Cisco and Intel donate money to the inventor of the Internet? Now the Dems are seeing that a "breakup of Microsoft" will, if it goes through, be remembered as the act which destroyed a U.S. company for being too successful and handed the market to others. So now the Dems are back-pedalling. Janet Reno and algore will soon be reprising their Wen Ho Lee words: "We are very troubled by what our subordinates were doing. We shall begin an investigation. Pay no attention to your earlier comments. Those statements are no longer operative." --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From mjneer at bayoucity.net Wed Oct 4 23:38:16 2000 From: mjneer at bayoucity.net (Opt-In List) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 23:38:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Protect your Privacy Message-ID: <200010050638.XAA26112@cyberpass.net> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE The COMSEC C3I (Patented) Telecommunications security device protects Telephone, Fax and Computer Data communications "to a degree never before possible." (Houston, Texas - October 2000) COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY announces its (Patented) COMSEC C3I Telecommunications security device. The COMSEC C3I can detect legal and illegal remote extension drawn loop wiretaps anywhere on the local loop, including at the Telephone Company's Central Exchange. Detect wiretaps the Telephone Company cannot or will not acknowledge. Detect wiretapping professionals and the Telephone Company cannot detect or will not acknowledge. COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY's (Patented) COMSEC C3I Telecommunications security device is the first and only security device that can detect electronically isolated remote extension drawn loop wiretaps that previously had been undetectable. The C3I can detect monitoring units placed on the local loop as well as detecting when Computer Hackers, Government Agencies, Telephone Company employee's, etc. manipulate the switch at the Telephone Company's Central Exchange to monitor Telephone, Fax and Computer communications. Key Product Features: Protect Telephone, Fax and Computer Data communications "to a degree never before possible". Detect eavesdropping previously undetectable. Pricing: COMSEC C3I MSRP $475.00 Full background information and reviews available at: http://www.comsec-c3i.com COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY, based in Houston, Texas has been providing custom solutions since 1988. COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY, a privately held business, has been successful in providing custom solutions. CONTACT: COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY 5315D FM 1960 WEST #152 HOUSTON, TEXAS 77069 Phone: (281) 586-2034 Fax: (281) 754-4047 Email: sales at comsec-c3i.com Web: http://www.comsec-c3i.com This is not spam! Your address was purchased from a commercial email list provider who advertises that you have signed up and agreed to receive email. Every effort was taken to ensure list accuracy. You will not be contacted again from this list unless you reply with "More Info" in the Subject Line. This is a one time mailing, your address has been deleted. To remove your name from the commercial opt-in list you are on reply with "Contact Info" in the Subject Line and I will reply with the opt-in list contact information. PS Do not use the word "Spam" anywhere in your message or "Remove" in the Subject Line of your message or your reply will be automatically processed and permanently removed before I can respond with the list contact information. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message is sent in compliance of the new email bill: SECTION 301. Per Section 301, Paragraph (a) (2) (c) of S. 1618, Further transmissions to you by the sender of this email may be stopped at no cost to you by sending a reply to this email address with the word "remove" in the Subject Line. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu Wed Oct 4 20:49:29 2000 From: dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu (dmolnar) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 23:49:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001004091419.007cc8c0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: > > This of course regresses the problem to the exit nodes. But it encourages > more anonymizing infrastructure. Yes, running a middleman is a good idea. Unfortunately if an adversary knows you're running a middleman, it seems that he can make it seem as though you're sending spam and so on (or just claim it w/o proof, depending on ISP). My impression is that there are some people out there actively going after remailers, but it's a vague impression. -David From jamesd at echeque.com Thu Oct 5 01:11:23 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 01:11:23 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Fwd: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001003205354.00d3e520@flex.com> References: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001005004403.020441c8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- >This is a calumny. I have personally checked hundreds, and I do mean > hundreds--probably over 500--Chomsky citations to original texts and > documents, and have never found any error that was not an obvious > typographical error, a misprint or something like that. It would take you years to check five hundred Chomsky citations. His citations are at best obscure and hard to find, at worst impossible to find. Almost every Chomsky citation that I have checked was at best somewhat misleading, and at worst a lie. Chomsky's citations are usually false in one of three ways, sometimes false in all three ways at the same time. 1. Chomsky misrepresents the authority of the sources. For example in "Distortions at fourth hand" quoted in full in he represented Hildebrand and Porter as an independent review of evidence from impartial sources, whereas in fact they were merely mouthpieces of the Khmer Rouge. He represented Ponchaud as merely the mouthpiece of US imperialism, while in fact Ponchaud had interviewed hundreds of refugees, and collected hundreds of first hand accounts of Khmer Rouge terror. 2. Chomsky misrepresents the content of the sources: For example Chomsky represented the testimony of murder, torture,and terror collected by Ponchaud as second hand, when in fact it was first hand. 3. Chomsky claims sources that just cannot be found. In particular the article "Distortions at fourth hand" first leads up to the purported citation of "repeated discoveries that the massacre reports were false", and then proceeds to draw all sorts of conclusions from the alleged falsity of these massacre reports. Without this alleged citation, his article, appearing a few months after the photos of the massacres north of Aranyaprathet had horrified the world, would have sounded like the banal totalitarian propaganda that is, would have sounded no different from the vast pile of totalitarian propaganda that had become so painfully familiar throughout the twentieth century. This alleged citation is the very key and center of the whole article, and no one can find it. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG FPdykYK0P9Z3AdZh1bYxf6jZLGkO8dWr4JrqFPRz 4/zYVs4LADvz0S920cVAl2OSu3k/RRIrZM0+o3UFI From fsbmc at bellsouth.net Thu Oct 5 03:33:26 2000 From: fsbmc at bellsouth.net (fsbmc at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 03:33:26 Subject: CDR: Note Broker Programs Message-ID: <654.569547.744760@bellsouth.net> Our research indicates you have an interest in buying and selling mortgage loan notes FSBMC is a mortgage investor We purchase new and existing loans We allow simultaneous closings We permit investor flips We like unseasoned cash-out refinances Here is an example, which proves the competition can't come close to our programs A+ Credit or 650+ credit score with interest rate of 9% with LTV at 95% and CLTV at 95% is purchased at 95.0% A Credit or 600+ credit score with interest rate of 9.25% with LTV at 90% LTV and CLTV at 95% is purchased at 94.5% B Credit or 550 + credit score with interest rate of 9.99% with LTV at 85% and CLTV at 95% is purchased at 94.0% C Credit or 525+ credit score with interest rate of 10.00% with LTV at 80% LTV CLTV at 95% is purchased at 94. % We suggest you visit our web site for more information at: http://www.fsbmc.com This is a one time mailing. Your name has already been added to our removal list. From vin at shore.net Thu Oct 5 02:43:45 2000 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 05:43:45 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <00100406300501.00415@anubis> References: <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> > On Wed, 04 Oct 2000, Vin McLellan wrote: > > > Not to take anything from Rijndael, which is both popular and > > widely respected among many critical professionals, but I suspect that one > > of the more long-lasting (pseudo-conspiratorial) theories about the > > selection of Rijndael as the AES will be built around the fact that > > Rijndael's design apparently allowed it -- and it alone of the final five > > -- to escape the scope of a current US patent issued to Hitachi (which is > > said to cover the use of data rotation in encryption.) > > > > (Thus -- as the tale may be told -- did the "inadequacies" of the > > US Patent and Trademark Office define US and world crypto standards for > the > > 21st Century;-) > > Paulo S. L. M. Barreto replied: >I certainly noticed the fact that Rijndael was not mentioned in the Hitachi >claim. However, so did Bruce Schneier, and he pointed out that Rijndael's >ShiftRow operation is in fact a rotation, and so it should be also be >covered by Hitachi's claims. Therefore, all AES finalists were >seemingly equally endangered. I personally find Hitachi's claims absurd, and >I wanted to know whether NIST thought the same way as I did. I just found Schneier's 5/14 note: "AES Comment: the Hitachi patent," (on Sci.Crypt, via dejanews.) I was not aware that Rijndael's ShiftRow op was a rotation. That was a great letter. The TwoFish authors (among many others;-) obviously agree with your analysis. >However, I think you might use the 21st century US legal system to >manifest your concerns, if indeed you have any, that Hitachi's patent >hindered the choice of any other algorithm (as this was rumoured a few >days ago in this list -- I wonder who posted it, don't you, Vin?), against >NIST's own statement on the contrary, made in the final report available >from NIST's web site. Oh, come on! I do think the Hitachi claim should be challenged and disputed. I also don't think it is surprising -- particularly when the AES website's IP forum spins around the Hitachi patents and the relevance of the Hitachi claims is, in that forum, left unresolved -- that unaligned and wholly objective curious observers might bring up the question now. As the basis of an AES conspiracy theory, the two Hitachi patents strike me as pretty frail. (Rijndael is clearly a powerful and elegant algorithm, fully a peer if not the Obvious Choice among the five great cryptographic creations matched in the AES Finals.) OTOH, far more specious allegations have entangled millions in Byzantine mystery scenarios, on far less obtuse topics. My impression is that NIST covered itself with glory in its handling of the AES competition, but -- really! -- who in their right mind is gonna take the word of a US federal agency that the existence of issued US patents, and the scope of the patent-owner's claims, was irrelevant to their deliberations. (Even if it is true;-) >I'll bet most people that were committed (perhaps financially) to >any other of the finalists will show a reaction similar to yours. Well, this >reaction is not unexpected anyway -- just remember that saying about >Greeks and Trojans. My comment was simply that the Hitachi patent claims set the stage for rumors that may shadow the AES choice for years. I think that is unfortunate. Personally, I think it is embarrassing that the Hitachi patents were ever issued. My impression is that -- despite their vigorous competitive impulses -- the cryptographers who carried their work into the AES Finals all showed a great deal of respect for each other's work. They all shared the Pantheon of their Craft, and even the contenders were ennobled. In the aftermath of the NIST decision, I haven't heard sour grapes comments from any of them -- and I would be very surprised if I did. All the grumbling is just background noise from the wee folk, and I suspect it would be pretty much the same tenor, no matter which algorithm was chosen. Suerte, _Vin Vin McLellan The Privacy Guild Chelsea, MA USA From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 5 09:11:47 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:11:47 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> References: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> Message-ID: At 2:31 PM +0200 10/5/00, Tom Vogt wrote: >I'm currently looking for a way to get encrypted data via stego to >people who live in countries where crypto is illegal, and who may be >watched. so just sending them a large graphic would likely arouse >suspicion. > >the 2 best solutions I've come up with so far are porn and spam. both >are readily believable, even in large quantities. >the problem with porn is that it may be illegal in itself in the same >countries. the problem with spam is that ascii text just doesn't offer >much to hide stego in (whitespacing, etc. is both easy to find and can >store very little data). Music. CDs are rarely restricted...DATs are probably uncommon, though. A typical 700 MB CD carries 43 MB in the LSBs. The LSBs are at the microphone/cabe/preamp noise levels..probably even the 2nd least significant bits as well. This is, of course, vastly more storage space than nearly any user might need. (Folks may recall that audio stego was one of my main examples for crypto anarchy a decade or so ago, where I cited the example of the B-2 bomber blueprints packed into the LSB of a Michael Jackson DAT.) Audio editing programs are common, for mixing tracks, altering compressions, etc. Many of these are freeware or readily available, for Windows, etc. It should be feasible to write the glue stuff to insert and extract bitstrreams into the LSBs. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From sfurlong at acmenet.net Thu Oct 5 06:32:35 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:32:35 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored References: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <39DC82B1.21435D23@acmenet.net> Tom Vogt wrote: > > I'm currently looking for a way to get encrypted data via stego to > people who live in countries where crypto is illegal, and who may be > watched. so just sending them a large graphic would likely arouse > suspicion. > > the 2 best solutions I've come up with so far are porn and spam. both > are readily believable, even in large quantities. > the problem with porn is that it may be illegal in itself in the same > countries. the problem with spam is that ascii text just doesn't offer > much to hide stego in (whitespacing, etc. is both easy to find and can > store very little data). Spam seems the best best. Sometimes you get the same spam message multiple times, each message identical except for the munged return address. You can use that address to encode a few bytes per message. Send the same message ten times and you have enough of a channel for a short message. Maybe you could boost the information per message by doing the same trick with a header line. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Thu Oct 5 06:46:09 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:46:09 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001004091419.007cc8c0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: >This of course regresses the problem to the exit nodes. But it encourages >more anonymizing infrastructure. One variation of the original proposal would be to only allow egress to addresses known to lay in a jurisdiction different from the one in which the remailer resides. I know, the problem is nontrivial with all the dotcom addresses and such around. Does doing a DNS lookup and working on IP addresses help? Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 5 09:52:19 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 09:52:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001005095219.009b0c90@idiom.com> At 02:31 PM 10/5/00 +0200, Tom Vogt wrote: > >I'm currently looking for a way to get encrypted data via stego to >people who live in countries where crypto is illegal, and who may be >watched. so just sending them a large graphic would likely arouse >suspicion. > >the 2 best solutions I've come up with so far are porn and spam. both >are readily believable, even in large quantities. >the problem with porn is that it may be illegal in itself in the same >countries. the problem with spam is that ascii text just doesn't offer >much to hide stego in (whitespacing, etc. is both easy to find and can >store very little data). MP3s are probably a better approach, though somebody has to write a decent MP3 stego program. Live concert recordings are good cover, since they get around the problems of intellectual property (usually) and the problems of visible differences between widely available recordings with or without stego (and they have lots of background noise.) Peter Wayner did a paper a while back on "Mimic Functions" - ways of encoding data in material that matches cover text using whatever level of detailed grammar productions you want to use. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From weinmann at rbg.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de Thu Oct 5 07:19:47 2000 From: weinmann at rbg.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de (Ralf-Philipp Weinmann) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:19:47 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: > > >This of course regresses the problem to the exit nodes. But it encourages > >more anonymizing infrastructure. > > One variation of the original proposal would be to only allow egress to > addresses known to lay in a jurisdiction different from the one in which the > remailer resides. I know, the problem is nontrivial with all the dotcom > addresses and such around. Does doing a DNS lookup and working on IP > addresses help? Nope. Unfortunately it does not. Deriving the geographical location from an IP address and a DNS name is not always feasible. There are a couple of big ISPs (UUNet/Worldcom comes to mind) which have allocated huge chunks of IP space which then get re-allocated to their regional providers in different countries. Of course there is some scheme involved in this process which could be reversed to get to the geographical location, however it will not always be readily apparent how it works. What one could do however is have the remailer pass on every message which has a recipient address that is *known to be in a jurisdiction that is different from the remailers*. You will not be able to reach each and every target then, but at least it's better than nothing. On the other hand I remember that the Curch of Scientology was able to have an impact on anon.penet.fi despite the fact that this remailer was outside of US jurisdiction. Maybe we have to come up with a list of "incompatible" jurisdiction systems to avoid this sort of thing from happening again. Cheers, -Ralf -- Ralf-P. Weinmann PGP fingerprint: 2048/46C772078ACB58DEF6EBF8030CBF1724 From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Thu Oct 5 07:33:54 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:33:54 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk Message-ID: > ---------- > > Ralf-Philipp Weinmann[SMTP:weinmann at rbg.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de] wrote: > On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > > > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: > > One variation of the original proposal would be to only allow egress to > > addresses known to lay in a jurisdiction different from the one in which > the > > remailer resides. I know, the problem is nontrivial with all the dotcom > > addresses and such around. Does doing a DNS lookup and working on IP > > addresses help? [...] > What one could do however is have the remailer pass on every message which > has a recipient address that is *known to be in a jurisdiction that is > different > from the remailers*. You will not be able to reach each and every target > then, but at least it's better than nothing. > On the other hand I remember that the Curch of Scientology was able to > have an impact on anon.penet.fi despite the fact that this remailer was > outside > of US jurisdiction. Maybe we have to come up with a list of "incompatible" > jurisdiction systems to avoid this sort of thing from happening again. > > Cheers, > -Ralf > So when is the HavenCo remailer going up? Peter Trei From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 5 10:36:30 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:36:30 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Fwd: Re: anarchism = socialism In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.1.20001005115429.00c07350@mail.intplsrv.net> References: <4.3.2.7.1.20001005115429.00c07350@mail.intplsrv.net> Message-ID: At 11:57 AM -0500 10/5/00, Sean Roach wrote: >At 12:30 AM 10/5/2000, Tim May wrote: > >> That you would say "beautiful sentiment" to the overall article >>you quoted is...scary. > >Perhaps I misspoke. What I meant to get across was that the article >was compelling, but I didn't believe it was practicle. > 26 megabytes is a bit much, I should have pared the original down >to the parts I was actually attacking. Anyway, this was one of those >yes, but... responses. Still scary. Like saying "Socialism is a beautiful idea, but it won't work." Or, "We should sacrifice ourselves for the herd, but we're not moral enough to do the right thing." These sentiments are perniciously evil. (I won't launch into a rant on this. Others have said it better over the decades and centuries.) You need to think very carefully about why it is you think that the socialist sentiments, and the blather about profits belonging to the laborers, are "beautiful" or "compelling." They are not. They are flawed for many reasons, and not at all 'beautiful." --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From wmo at hq.pro-ns.net Thu Oct 5 08:46:20 2000 From: wmo at hq.pro-ns.net (Bill O'Hanlon) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 10:46:20 -0500 Subject: CDR: Disposable remailers Message-ID: <200010051546.KAA64010@hq.pro-ns.net> I've started a small project, and I'm curious to know if others think there's any long-term value to it. Dallas Semiconductor makes a small Java-based computer called the TINI. (Check out http://www.ibutton.com/TINI for details.) The unit itself is the size of a memory SIMM and costs $35. The card isn't too useful until you add their socket board which costs $30 or so and provides an Ethernet port, a serial port, and a connector for power. The OS for the TINI has a complete TCP/IP stack, and has a nice Java implementation. My idea was to make a throwaway remailer. For $80 worth of materials, you can have a unit that can remail messages in the Cyperpunks tradition. It could be easily hidden. Here's the pros and cons as I see them: Pros: small (easily hidden in a large corporate or university environment -- the TINI can even pick up its IP address via DHCP) doesn't have a disk drive so there's no room for logs. Inexpensive, so it can be sacrificed if discovered. Cons: It might not be able to have crypto. I'm not sure if something PGPish can be ported to it and still leave room for the incoming message. It comes with less than 300K of useable RAM. However, the TINI does have a socket on it for an Ibutton, so one of Dallas' Crypto or Java buttons might be able to take on the crypto load. That's more money per unit, however. Also, due to the small memory footprint, it doesn't look like a lot of messages can be stored locally, so there's not a lot of room for latency and message re-ordering. It would also be tough to harden these things against any kind of denial of service attack. Bombing it with mail or strange packets will probably lock it up. Currently, the TINI also requires that SOME email server take email from it, since the code that comes with it really isn't a complete mail service, but I think it could probably do it's own delivery eventually. I'm envisioning that the code would announce itself to some set of web servers so that people can know where to find a few of these transient remailers when they wanted to send some messages. I've already got a small chunk of code that can do some crude remailing, so the basic idea works. Does this seem useful to anyone? The TINI is fun to tinker with, so I'm not out anything if someone points out a hugely glaring hole in the idea, here. One hole that I've already noticed is that the code that runs on a TINI could just as easily run on a Windows machine and do the same job, and there's been very little interest in having a widespread network of little remailers for workstations. -Bill -- Bill O'Hanlon wmo at pro-ns.net Professional Network Services, Inc. 612-379-3958 From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 5 10:47:18 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:47:18 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Supreme Court denies reporter's kiddie porn appeal In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001005130706.00acbc70@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001005130706.00acbc70@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 1:07 PM -0400 10/5/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/05/1654245&mode=thread > > High Court Denies Reporter's Kiddie-Porn Appeal > posted by cicero on Thursday October 05, @11:52AM > from the so-much-for-a-fair-trial dept. > > The Supreme Court this week declined to hear an appeal from a > journalist convicted of trafficking in child porn, which means > veteran reporter Larry Matthews will be spending some 18 months in > prison. Brill's Content has an in-depth article on the case, including > how the judge barred Matthews from using the First Amendment as a > defense when arguing before the jury. That seems wrongheaded. No > matter whether Matthews downloaded nude images for a story or not -- > he had deleted them by the time the FBI raided his home -- he should > have the right to tell a jury his story. Also see an amicus brief > filed by a journalists' group, and a writeup in the Washington City > Paper. Journalists have no special rights. None. They are simply those who are (usually) paid for their words. This does not exempt them from any laws. The First Amendment does not confer special rights to writers; in fact, it says that government may not create such distinctions by "approving" certain journalists. A journalist who buys pot or coke for a story on drug abuse is as vulnerable to the drug laws as any other person (including cops, by the way) who buy drugs. A journalist who buys stolen material for a story or expose is as vulnerable to the laws as anyone else. A journalist called to testify in court is not immune from answering questions that any other person would be required to answer. We are all journalists. I am a journalist, my brother is a journalist, that girl over there is a journalist. Some of us get paid for our work, some are trying to get paid, some are donating their efforts, some use the Net to publish their works. The whole machinery of the "shield laws" is about trying to gain guild status, or official recognition, that certain journalists are exempt from laws affecting the rest of the proles. This is wrongheaded and violates the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. And, yes, a journalist who downloads or possesses certain images is just as vulnerable to laws as any of us is. As to whether he "has the right to tell his story to a jury," I think a judge can instruct a jury that a "reporter doing his research" line of reasoning is not legally permissable. (Judges are responsible for ensuring that bogus legal arguments are not given to juries with finite time to consider such arguments and finite knowledge of the law.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From jya at pipeline.com Thu Oct 5 07:51:35 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 10:51:35 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> References: <00100406300501.00415@anubis> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <200010051507.LAA22306@smtp6.mindspring.com> Has NIST provided other information on the Hitachi patent and the USG's evaluation of it other than Jim Foti's inscrutible comments on the discussion forum and similar inscrutibity in the R2 report? If this is all there is, it stinks of rancid red herring being called this year's never-you-mind perfume. Did Hitachi hold a gun to somebody's head, was a deal cut, is this an out held in reserve in case some fault is discovered in Rijndael, was means found to modify Rijndael to meet Hitachi's demand that has not been disclosed, is the patent claim a fiction, a mistake, a blowing of smoke. Have the authors of Rijndael commented on Hitachi's claim? A little people wants to know what the big people are hiding, or acting like they know we itty bittys don't have a clue about, about how crypto is far too important to tell the truth about, big gov and biz having their own claims on NDA, patent, copyright, personal cum national security, Ermil's cayenne, and stuff so hot if you knew you'd spin too and call it truth. The R2 report is so damn reasonable only a fool would cavil what's this fishy smell. From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 5 10:52:19 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:52:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.1.20001005121338.00c07bc0@mail.intplsrv.net> References: <4.3.2.7.1.20001005121338.00c07bc0@mail.intplsrv.net> Message-ID: At 12:19 PM -0500 10/5/00, Sean Roach wrote: >At 10:55 AM 10/5/2000, Marcel Popescu wrote: > >>There's no person called "market", therefore it has no "interest". It's a >>decision of the current resource owners - and when demand increases (as in >>the case of a major disaster), they *have to* increase their prices until >>the supply is equal to the demand (if they don't, the first buyers will sell >>what they bought on the "black market" to those who value it more). Basic >>economics, even US public schools must teach that much. >> >>The stores might have been "depleted", but the high prices would have made >>it profitable to sell food there, and someone would have done that. >>Furthermore, the expectation of high prices due to an impeding disaster >>would have created incentives for "hoarding" - that is, gathering as many >>resources as possible, which would have attracted imports BEFORE the >>disaster. Price fixing destroys any incentive for spending now in order to >>profit later. > >The public schools do teach this much, but it's an elective. I >didn't like Vo. Ag. "Vo. Ag." in a public school is certainly not where I would expect basic economics to be taught (more's the pity, but this is how things are). Your words here indicate you don't understand the economics of middlemen, lubrication of markets, risk arbitrage, etc. Suffice it to say that "speculators" perform an incredibly important function. See any non-socialist textbook. (Even Samuelson, for example, as opposed to Prof. Raisa Gorbachev's text on socialist economics.) >Yes, if you ONLY restrict inflation, those who come first can >purchase your full stock and resell it to a higher bidder later. >Simple supply and demand. From my perspective, this would only work >if the government also limited the buyers to a set amount, and then >included some element to restrict someone from hitting several >stores for the same quota. The three methods I can see to do the >latter are, stiff penalties for buying more than allowed, ration >tickets, and both. > >Did the government have such limits in place? See basic textbooks. Jeesh. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From reinhold at world.std.com Thu Oct 5 07:55:17 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:55:17 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> References: <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: At 5:43 AM -0400 10/5/2000, Vin McLellan wrote: >... > > As the basis of an AES conspiracy theory, the two Hitachi >patents strike me as pretty frail. (Rijndael is clearly a powerful >and elegant algorithm, fully a peer if not the Obvious Choice among >the five great cryptographic creations matched in the AES Finals.) >OTOH, far more specious allegations have entangled millions in >Byzantine mystery scenarios, on far less obtuse topics. > > My impression is that NIST covered itself with glory in its >handling of the AES competition, but -- really! -- who in their >right mind is gonna take the word of a US federal agency that the >existence of issued US patents, and the scope of the patent-owner's >claims, was irrelevant to their deliberations. (Even if it is true;-) ... > My comment was simply that the Hitachi patent claims set the >stage for rumors that may shadow the AES choice for years. I think >that is unfortunate. Personally, I think it is embarrassing that the >Hitachi patents were ever issued. Maybe I am missing something, but what would be the big deal if NIST did take patent claims into account? There were five excellent candidates. If NIST picked Rijndael in part because it least likely to be tied up in court for the next N years, does that diminish their glory? > My impression is that -- despite their vigorous competitive >impulses -- the cryptographers who carried their work into the AES >Finals all showed a great deal of respect for each other's work. >They all shared the Pantheon of their Craft, and even the contenders >were ennobled. In the aftermath of the NIST decision, I haven't >heard sour grapes comments from any of them -- and I would be very >surprised if I did. All the grumbling is just background noise from >the wee folk, and I suspect it would be pretty much the same tenor, >no matter which algorithm was chosen. Quite right. There is plenty of credit to go around. I was particularly pleased that NIST had the guts to pick a non-U.S. design. That's risky in Washington. Arnold Reinhold P.S. What is the licensing status of the other finalists? For example, I seem to recall reading that RC6 would be licensed to the public at no charge if it won the competition. What now? From mdpopescu at geocities.com Thu Oct 5 08:55:47 2000 From: mdpopescu at geocities.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 11:55:47 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... References: Message-ID: <006901c02ee4$a38d6df0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> From roach_s at intplsrv.net Thu Oct 5 09:57:52 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 11:57:52 -0500 Subject: CDR: Fwd: Re: anarchism = socialism Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001005115429.00c07350@mail.intplsrv.net> At 12:30 AM 10/5/2000, Tim May wrote: > That you would say "beautiful sentiment" to the overall article you quoted is...scary. Perhaps I misspoke. What I meant to get across was that the article was compelling, but I didn't believe it was practicle. 26 megabytes is a bit much, I should have pared the original down to the parts I was actually attacking. Anyway, this was one of those yes, but... responses. From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 5 12:05:29 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 12:05:29 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Fwd: Re: anarchism = socialism In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.1.20001005131130.00c19c90@mail.intplsrv.net> References: <4.3.2.7.1.20001005115429.00c07350@mail.intplsrv.net> <4.3.2.7.1.20001005115429.00c07350@mail.intplsrv.net> <4.3.2.7.1.20001005131130.00c19c90@mail.intplsrv.net> Message-ID: At 1:27 PM -0500 10/5/00, Sean Roach wrote: > > >That second quote about sacrificing for the herd was closer to the >mark. Substitute "could" for "should", "stupid" for "moral", and >"popular" for "right". > >And you have to admit, if tomorrow I gave all my worldly goods to >the community at large, they would hail me a "good man" for at least >the evening...while they snickered behind my back. The issue is not what others claim is moral, the issue is that some (you, in my view, based on your 'beautiful sentiment" comment) think it _is_ moral. My point was to disabuse you of the notion that socialism is somehow "beautiful, but impractical." There are many reasons--economic, psychological, cultural--why socialism is deeply flawed and not at all "beautiful." Look, we've discussed this many times over the years with people who show up here and repeat the blither about how socialism is a wonderful idea if only it can be made to work. It just ain't so. Read the archives for past arguments. Review the early history of the Jamestown Colony and what "to each according to his needs" did to them, practically and psychologically. Think deeply about the game-theoretic implications of having socialized reward systems. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From roach_s at intplsrv.net Thu Oct 5 10:19:03 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 12:19:03 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: <006901c02ee4$a38d6df0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001005121338.00c07bc0@mail.intplsrv.net> At 10:55 AM 10/5/2000, Marcel Popescu wrote: >There's no person called "market", therefore it has no "interest". It's a >decision of the current resource owners - and when demand increases (as in >the case of a major disaster), they *have to* increase their prices until >the supply is equal to the demand (if they don't, the first buyers will sell >what they bought on the "black market" to those who value it more). Basic >economics, even US public schools must teach that much. > >The stores might have been "depleted", but the high prices would have made >it profitable to sell food there, and someone would have done that. >Furthermore, the expectation of high prices due to an impeding disaster >would have created incentives for "hoarding" - that is, gathering as many >resources as possible, which would have attracted imports BEFORE the >disaster. Price fixing destroys any incentive for spending now in order to >profit later. The public schools do teach this much, but it's an elective. I didn't like Vo. Ag. Yes, if you ONLY restrict inflation, those who come first can purchase your full stock and resell it to a higher bidder later. Simple supply and demand. From my perspective, this would only work if the government also limited the buyers to a set amount, and then included some element to restrict someone from hitting several stores for the same quota. The three methods I can see to do the latter are, stiff penalties for buying more than allowed, ration tickets, and both. Did the government have such limits in place? Good luck, Sean From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 5 09:49:27 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 12:49:27 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001005094648.007d9760@pop.sprynet.com> At 08:36 AM 10/5/00 -0400, Tom Vogt wrote: >the problem with porn is that it may be illegal in itself in the same >countries. Baby pictures, if there's a plausible interest on the receiving side. MP3s of apolitical songs. From declan at well.com Thu Oct 5 10:07:11 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 13:07:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: Supreme Court denies reporter's kiddie porn appeal Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001005130706.00acbc70@mail.well.com> http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/05/1654245&mode=thread High Court Denies Reporter's Kiddie-Porn Appeal posted by cicero on Thursday October 05, @11:52AM from the so-much-for-a-fair-trial dept. The Supreme Court this week declined to hear an appeal from a journalist convicted of trafficking in child porn, which means veteran reporter Larry Matthews will be spending some 18 months in prison. Brill's Content has an in-depth article on the case, including how the judge barred Matthews from using the First Amendment as a defense when arguing before the jury. That seems wrongheaded. No matter whether Matthews downloaded nude images for a story or not -- he had deleted them by the time the FBI raided his home -- he should have the right to tell a jury his story. Also see an amicus brief filed by a journalists' group, and a writeup in the Washington City Paper. From jimdbell at home.com Thu Oct 5 13:12:26 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:12:26 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored References: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <003a01c02f08$94eedda0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Tim May To: Tom Vogt ; Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 9:11 AM Subject: Re: stego for the censored > At 2:31 PM +0200 10/5/00, Tom Vogt wrote: > >I'm currently looking for a way to get encrypted data via stego to > >people who live in countries where crypto is illegal, and who may be > >watched. so just sending them a large graphic would likely arouse > >suspicion. > > > >the 2 best solutions I've come up with so far are porn and spam. both > >are readily believable, even in large quantities. > >the problem with porn is that it may be illegal in itself in the same > >countries. the problem with spam is that ascii text just doesn't offer > >much to hide stego in (whitespacing, etc. is both easy to find and can > >store very little data). > > > Music. CDs are rarely restricted...DATs are probably uncommon, though. > > A typical 700 MB CD carries 43 MB in the LSBs. The LSBs are at the > microphone/cabe/preamp noise levels..probably even the 2nd least > significant bits as well. I can see an excellent application for all of our old long-out-of-print LP's: Digitize them (assuming we still have an operational turntable!) and the noise level will be comfortably high. And, there is no digital "reference" for this audio anywhere, so comparisons will be virtually impossible. (Just re-digitize the same LP for an dramatically-different dataset, at least in the 6-7 LSB's.) From tom at ricardo.de Thu Oct 5 04:12:33 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 13:12:33 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Spam free secure email accounts. References: Message-ID: <39DC6221.A22F8AB4@ricardo.de> Jim Choate wrote: > The function of an anonymous remailer should NOT be context/content > sensitive. in this case, it is MY (potential) remailer, and if you don't like its working, then just don't use it. From roach_s at intplsrv.net Thu Oct 5 11:27:55 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 13:27:55 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Fwd: Re: anarchism = socialism In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.1.20001005115429.00c07350@mail.intplsrv.net> <4.3.2.7.1.20001005115429.00c07350@mail.intplsrv.net> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001005131130.00c19c90@mail.intplsrv.net> At 12:36 PM 10/5/2000, Tim May wrote: >You need to think very carefully about why it is you think that the >socialist sentiments, and the blather about profits belonging to the >laborers, are "beautiful" or "compelling." They are not. They are flawed >for many reasons, and not at all 'beautiful." Actually, I'm still smarting over the twin facts that the Oklahoma highway department, for the greater good, leveled two gas stations, one I considered a landmark, to widen a highway turn. That Altus, the county seat here, "annexed" the surrounding area, and declared that only so many houses could be built per acre to appease the airbase, and regulate businesses outside thier borders by requiring a certain amount of the front of the buildings being bricked, without extending fire and police services to those controlled in either case. I think the labor of a person is his own to use or sell as he sees fit. If I agree to turn out wooden pencils for 6 dollars an hour, I have no arguement for demanding more if those pencils later sell for 10 bucks apiece. Besides, my comments in that still quoted post, were based on how socialism was at least, if not more, abusable than what we have now. I think you mis-read me. That second quote about sacrificing for the herd was closer to the mark. Substitute "could" for "should", "stupid" for "moral", and "popular" for "right". And you have to admit, if tomorrow I gave all my worldly goods to the community at large, they would hail me a "good man" for at least the evening...while they snickered behind my back. Good luck, Sean From anonymous at openpgp.net Thu Oct 5 11:30:59 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 14:30:59 -0400 Subject: CDR: Gores teens and drugs Message-ID: <9649aa4774f642fc143ee71e10b2b4e9@mixmaster.ceti.pl> >4:24 PM 10/3/95 > > >Tipper Gore says daughter knows she did wrong > >Tipper Gore said Tuesday her 16-year-old daughter, cited for underage >drinking last week, "knows she >made a very serious mistake." "She broke our rules and she broke the law. >Shes extremely miserable >and unhappy, I can tell you that," Mrs. Gore, wife of Vice President Al >Gore, said of daughter Sarah. >The teen-ager was cited Friday in suburban Montgomery County, Md., after a >police officer saw her >with an open beer outside a party. Now, Mrs. Gore said, "We are dealing >with it privately as a family >and talking to her like all families should to their teenagers about the >availability of alcohol and the fact >the temptations are out there." > > From tom at ricardo.de Thu Oct 5 05:31:59 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 14:31:59 +0200 Subject: CDR: stego for the censored Message-ID: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> I'm currently looking for a way to get encrypted data via stego to people who live in countries where crypto is illegal, and who may be watched. so just sending them a large graphic would likely arouse suspicion. the 2 best solutions I've come up with so far are porn and spam. both are readily believable, even in large quantities. the problem with porn is that it may be illegal in itself in the same countries. the problem with spam is that ascii text just doesn't offer much to hide stego in (whitespacing, etc. is both easy to find and can store very little data). From dsolomon at adnetwork.cc Thu Oct 5 14:37:22 2000 From: dsolomon at adnetwork.cc (Doug Solomon) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 14:37:22 -0700 Subject: CDR: ADV: Free Search Engine Placement Report - Get Yours Today Message-ID: <200010052137.e95LbMI01575@mako.adnetwork.cc> ****************************************************************************** Complete list REMOVAL instructions outlined below message. ****************************************************************************** F R E E R E P O R T Is your website at the top of the major search engines? It needs to be! If it is not, you are missing out on serious amounts of web traffic and business! Did you know that 85% of web traffic originates from search engines? AND did you know that 98.2% of searches do NOT go past the third page of search results? (from the GVU 10th WWW User survey, Oct-Dec 1999) As a means of introduction we are offering you FREE a one time, no obligation, report of your website`s rank on the major search engines. You must know whether or not your website is achieving top rank on the major search engines. If you are not within the first 30 results you loose a distinct advantage over your competition. Obviously the higher the better. Click the link below and find out immediately if your website has the ranking that will make you money. http://www.adnetwork.cc/search-engine-free-report.htm If you have any questions or comments either before or after you have received your free report, please don`t hesitate to write us at info at adnetwork.cc Thank you for your time Your search engine Placement Specialists http://www.adnetwork.cc Creating Positive Solutions for Your Internet Business We apologies if you are not interested in internet traffic building technologies. E-mail is the fastest method of distributing this type of timely business information. If you wish to have your e-mail address removed from our business information update data base simply click on the hyperlink below: http://www.adnetwork.cc/removal.htm This message is being sent to you in compliance with the Federal legislation for commercial e-mail (S.1618-SECTION 301) This letter is not considered spam as long as we include contact information and a remove link. Doug Solomon Inter-Networking Promotions Specialist ****************************************************************************** Removal Instructions To unsubscribe from the Ad Network (www.adnetwork.cc) emailing list, please browse to the following URL: https://marketing.adnetwork.cc/removal.htm This page is secured by a 40 bit SSL Encryption for your protection and email privacy. You may list as many emails you wish to be removed from this and all sequent messages. We keep an extensive and complete database of removes that is cross referenced before any new promotions are broadcast. You may also email with "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the Subject Line: removes at adnetwork.cc This email is in complete compliance to Opt-Out mailing practices as stated in the Rules under California Business & Professions Code Section 17538.45 ****************************************************************************** From announce at inbox.nytimes.com Thu Oct 5 11:38:18 2000 From: announce at inbox.nytimes.com (The New York Times on the Web) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 14:38:18 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Important Membership Information Message-ID: <200010051838.OAA14820@web79t.lga2.nytimes.com> Dear sciferpunk, Welcome to NYTimes.com! We are delighted that you have decided to become a member of our community. As a member you now have complete access to the Web's premier source for news and information -- free of charge. NYTimes.com not only provides you with in-depth coverage of events happening around the world but also with a wealth of additional features and services. The site is updated regularly throughout the day by New York Times reporters and editors to give you greater insight into events unfolding throughout the day. No matter what the hour, you can look to NYTimes.com for the most trustworthy coverage available and unique perspective you won't find anywhere else. Please feel free to explore the other areas of NYTimes.com. Here are some starting points you may find useful: ** Get NYTimes.com headlines e-mailed directly to you. Choose from the day's top stories, breaking news alerts and your favorite sections: http://email.nytimes.com/email/email.jsp?welcome ** Search and retrieve articles from The New York Times Archives back to 1996. Searches and summaries of articles are free, but there is a small fee for full text. http://archives.nytimes.com/archives?welcome ** Explore the Help Wanted and other classified listings on the Web: http://classifieds.nytimes.com/hw?welcome ** Get a free photo screensaver from The New York Times Photo Archives Choose from Vintage New York, Classic Sports, Americana and more: http://www.nytimes.com/partners/screensaver/index.html?welcome ** Search our archive of 50,000 book reviews, listen to author interviews or sign-up for an exclusive weekly newsletter from our Books Editor: http://www.nytimes.com/books/home?welcome Thank you again for becoming a member. We hope that you will make a point of visiting the site often. Sincerely, Rich Meislin, Editor in Chief New York Times Digital P.S. Your opinions are important to us. Share your thoughts about the site with us by sending an e-mail to feedback at nytimes.com ************************************************************* Your account information is listed below for future reference: Your Member ID is sciferpunk You selected your password at registration. Your e-mail address is cypherpunks at toad.com If you did not authorize this registration, someone has mistakenly registered using your e-mail address. We regret the inconvenience; please see http://www.nytimes.com/subscribe/help/cancel.html for instructions. From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 5 12:11:41 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:11:41 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gores teens and drugs In-Reply-To: <9649aa4774f642fc143ee71e10b2b4e9@mixmaster.ceti.pl> References: <9649aa4774f642fc143ee71e10b2b4e9@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: At 2:30 PM -0400 10/5/00, anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: > >4:24 PM 10/3/95 >> >> >>Tipper Gore says daughter knows she did wrong >> >>Tipper Gore said Tuesday her 16-year-old daughter, cited for underage >>drinking last week, "knows she >>made a very serious mistake." "She broke our rules and she broke the law. >>Shes extremely miserable >>and unhappy, I can tell you that," Mrs. Gore, wife of Vice President Al >>Gore, said of daughter Sarah. >>The teen-ager was cited Friday in suburban Montgomery County, Md., after a >>police officer saw her >>with an open beer outside a party. Now, Mrs. Gore said, "We are dealing >>with it privately as a family >>and talking to her like all families should to their teenagers about the > >availability of alcohol and the fact > >the temptations are out there." A friend of mine in Santa Cruz was a classmate (a couple of years behind) of algore at St. Alban's in Washington, D.C. A number of years ago he described in great detail the joyous summer evenings spent smoking dope on the "grassy" lawn of Senator Albert Gore's house on the Potomac River. Does algore say he "didn't inhale"? He preaches piously about "substance abuse" while seeking the title of Chief Drug Warrior. Scum. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From reeza at flex.com Thu Oct 5 18:31:38 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 15:31:38 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001005004403.020441c8@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001003205354.00d3e520@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005151158.00ccaa90@flex.com> At 01:11 AM 05/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > -- > >This is a calumny. I have personally checked hundreds, and I do mean > > hundreds--probably over 500--Chomsky citations to original texts and > > documents, and have never found any error that was not an obvious > > typographical error, a misprint or something like that. > >It would take you years to check five hundred Chomsky citations. His >citations are at best obscure and hard to find, at worst impossible to find. The timescale for checking these quotes was not specified, I think it's safe to assume that years did transpire. >Almost every Chomsky citation that I have checked was at best somewhat >misleading, and at worst a lie. We've already seen how you picked up an extra word in that massacre quote, is it safe to assume you've made other errors? >Chomsky's citations are usually false in one of three ways, sometimes false >in all three ways at the same time. > >1. Chomsky misrepresents the authority of the sources. For example >in "Distortions at fourth hand" quoted in full in > jim.com? jamesd? this is your personal website? O-kaaaaaaay,,, *there's nothing like citing an impartial source, is there?* Just the same, I'll take a look. If it's more than what, 200 words(?), I wonder if Chomsky would be interested, along with the calumnies et al.? *empty threat, I've no time and really don't care - but I wonder if the page will still be up, tomorrow, when I check* >2. Chomsky misrepresents the content of the sources: A-HEM,,, THE content of THE quote is highly contentious, is it not? ^^^ ^^^ >3. Chomsky claims sources that just cannot be found. In particular the >article "Distortions at fourth hand" first leads up to the purported >citation of "repeated discoveries that the massacre reports were false", News flash for ya goodbuddy - that quote of yours has already been repudiated. Got anything better? Something more recent, perhaps? Like, within the last decade or two? And hey? Rather than a generic "Chomsky quotes..." give us a specific one, like that other one we've sliced and diced and shoved back down your throat. 20 years old, or less. Reese From weinmann at rbg.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de Thu Oct 5 06:34:35 2000 From: weinmann at rbg.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de (Ralf-Philipp Weinmann) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:34:35 +0200 (MET DST) Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: > > I'm currently looking for a way to get encrypted data via stego to > people who live in countries where crypto is illegal, and who may be > watched. so just sending them a large graphic would likely arouse > suspicion. > > the 2 best solutions I've come up with so far are porn and spam. both > are readily believable, even in large quantities. > the problem with porn is that it may be illegal in itself in the same > countries. the problem with spam is that ascii text just doesn't offer > much to hide stego in (whitespacing, etc. is both easy to find and can > store very little data). There are at least two more ideas that come to mind here. The first would be to embed links in your spam messages which take you sites that you have previously set up which contain a high amount of graphics. You could then hide the data steganographically in those images. Of course an automated tool of retrieval for those sites would be handy then as well (say a browser plugin which scans images tries to extract data out of each image and only accepts the extracted information if it has been signed with a previously agreed on key -- i favour a browse plugin over a commandline tool cause it would maybe look a little bit suss if somebody mirrored a 'become-a-millionaire-in-two-weeks'-website with wget or similar tools). You might also want to have a look at MP3Stego, a tool which allows hiding of information in MP3 files. URL: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~fapp2/steganography/mp3stego/ Sending someone a couple of megs of non-copyrighted mp3s (say bolivian folklore) should not raise too much suspicion, or better yet, just mail him links to some geocities account where he can download them instead of sending them directly. Any method for data transfer can be used for steganography -- just be creative. Cheers, -Ralf -- Ralf-P. Weinmann PGP fingerprint: 2048/46C772078ACB58DEF6EBF8030CBF1724 From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 5 12:38:46 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:38:46 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gores teens and drugs In-Reply-To: References: <9649aa4774f642fc143ee71e10b2b4e9@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: At 3:11 PM -0400 10/5/00, Tim May wrote: > >A friend of mine in Santa Cruz was a classmate (a couple of years >behind) of algore at St. Alban's in Washington, D.C. > >A number of years ago he described in great detail the joyous summer >evenings spent smoking dope on the "grassy" lawn of Senator Albert >Gore's house on the Potomac River. BTW, I assumed folks would know that "Senator Albert Gore," and the St. Alban's time period, implied Albert Gore, Sr., the old man. But maybe some of you don't know that algore is the son of Albert Gore, Sr. Albert Gore, Jr. and his brother(s) were the participants in the dope-smoking. And yet algore and Tipper cluck about an open can of beer being held by a 16-yo at a party. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From Gabriela.Nicole at usa.alcatel.com Thu Oct 5 13:57:27 2000 From: Gabriela.Nicole at usa.alcatel.com (Gabby Nicole) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 15:57:27 -0500 Subject: CDR: mail list Message-ID: <39DCEB37.1AAC127D@usa.alcatel.com> put me on your mailing list, please Thanks Gabby Nicole From sunder at sunder.net Thu Oct 5 13:46:56 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 16:46:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Choate physics again References: <008501c02d3c$4ba3fd60$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Message-ID: <39DCE8C0.19EF54A0@sunder.net> Marcel Popescu wrote: > > Huh? The photons from my TV screen arrive all at different times, and yet > the picture is pretty good :) No they don't, they arrive in order of the scanline, from the left edge to the right, then down a line, etc. (ducking flames.) :) -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From rguerar at yahoo.com Thu Oct 5 14:20:46 2000 From: rguerar at yahoo.com (Robert Guerra) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 17:20:46 -0400 Subject: CDR: e-Privacy - your comments please... Message-ID: <103837104.970766446@MSH4906> Folks: The Canadian Broadcasting corporation is running a segment on the 10pm news tomorrow on e-privacy. To the public's comments and suggestions on the issue they have created a discussion forum on thier web page. Seeing that the folks on this list are familiar with the topics, I ask that you visit the site and enter a few words of your wisdom. Regards Robert http://interact.cbc.ca/cgi-bin/WebX?50 at 7.nLRXaJbgbeb^0 at .ee768e8 A study by Canada's privacy commissioner reports that almost half of Canadians are perfectly comfortable with retailers compiling personal data...if there's a reward paid to the consumer. (Such as a discount or free goodies). Tell us what you think about e-privacy and who should know what about you. From reeza at flex.com Thu Oct 5 20:24:06 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 17:24:06 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <39DCAD73.FF79ABB1@ricardo.de> References: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005171310.00cb1c60@flex.com> At 06:33 PM 05/10/00 +0200, Tom Vogt wrote: >Tim May wrote: >> Music. CDs are rarely restricted...DATs are probably uncommon, though. > >MP3 ? Lossy compression. balance snipped, we need lossless compression, eh? Reese From sunder at sunder.net Thu Oct 5 14:30:36 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 17:30:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: Carnivore sucks more than just email!!!! Message-ID: <39DCF2FC.8C6956E7@sunder.net> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13767.html Carnivore does more than previously thought By: Thomas C Greene in Washington Posted: 05/10/2000 at 14:49 GMT Heavily censored FBI documents obtained by US watchdog outfit the Electronic Privacy Information Centre (EPIC), under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, indicate that the FBI's electronic snoop known as Carnivore might be able to monitor a good deal more than just e-mail traffic. Among the capabilities that peek out from behind all the indelible black swaths in the documents is an ability to reconstruct an entire Web page as viewed by a subject. A planned, updated version may even be able to capture voice-over-Web communications. Presently the system can capture and record all packet traffic to and from a selected IP, while monitoring a subject's on-line movements. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From Somebody Thu Oct 5 10:10:08 2000 From: Somebody (Somebody) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 18:10:08 +0100 Subject: UK Companies free to snoop on staff Message-ID: http://news.ft.com/ft/gx.cgi/ftc?pagename=View&c=Article&cid=FT39YW11WDC&liv e=true&tagid=YYY9BSINKTM&useoverridetemplate=IXLZHNNP94C Companies free to snoop on staff By Jean Eaglesham, Legal Correspondent Published: October 3 2000 20:28GMT | Last Updated: October 4 2000 00:41GMT British companies will be able to snoop on employees' e-mails and phone calls following a government decision to grant industry greater freedom to monitor staff. Under rules announced on Tuesday, from October 24 companies will be permitted "routine access" to any business e-mail and phone call to check whether they are business-related. Patricia Hewitt, the minister for e-commerce and small business, said that proposals to force companies to obtain agreement for most monitoring from both the senders and recipients of e-mails and phone calls had been abandoned. Trade unions criticised the move, saying it gave companies carte blanche to snoop on virtually any workplace communication. Union officials vowed to use the Human Rights Act to challenge the snooping rules. Lucy Anderson, employment rights officer at the Trades Union Congress, said: "Employers should not be allowed to routinely screen e-mail and phone calls, and certainly not without consent". Ms Hewitt denied the rules would allow businesses a free hand to snoop. She said: "There are limits they must not go over, such as intercepting personal calls for unjustified scurrilous interest." The rules would give "any business following them comfort they are not in breach of the Human Rights Act or the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act [a new law on surveillance for law enforcement purposes]". It was complex balancing the needs of business with the rights of individuals in this area, Ms Hewitt said. "Because it's a complex issue, we have taken time to consult with business and I am confident the regulations will meet everybody's needs". Industry groups, which had condemned the earlier proposals as "totally impractical" and impossible to comply with, welcomed the government climbdown. Nigel Hickson, head of e-business at the Confederation of British Industry, said: "The changes are a big step forward. It is disappointing that the government did not consult business earlier as we would have liked to avoid unnecessary conflict". Lawyers pointed out that employers would have to contend with a mass of overlapping regulation on monitoring staff. The Data Protection Commissioner, a government regulator, will publish this week a draft code of practice on workplace surveillance, covering everything from e-mail monitoring to the use of CCTV cameras and drugs testing. Employers, particularly in the public sector, must also conform to the Human Rights Act. "Employers will have to juggle a lot of different provisions," said Eduardo Ustaran, a partner at Paisner & Co, a law firm. "All these changes have to be managed calmly and without panic - there's a lot of panic around." The TUC said an early union-backed legal challenge to the new rules was likely, on the basis that they breached employees' new right to privacy under the Human Rights Act. Some lawyers have predicted that the act, which came into force on Monday, would force companies that routinely screen calls to allow employees access to unmonitored phones and e-mail for private purposes. --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From tom at ricardo.de Thu Oct 5 09:33:55 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 18:33:55 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored References: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <39DCAD73.FF79ABB1@ricardo.de> Tim May wrote: > Music. CDs are rarely restricted...DATs are probably uncommon, though. MP3 ? let's mix that with an idea I've been discussing in private mail. here's a proposal: set up a service that you can subscribe to. say: www.dailymusic.com - fill out a profile and we select a random number of songs from our huge archive of free mp3s that we believe you will like (snippets actually, with links to the full-length version). there's a constantly changing webpage for you that shows a list of songs. if you heard one (by clicking on the link), it's removed, and sometime later (all random!) a new one will be added. set up a second service, say: www.cryptomail.com - where you can subscribe for an e-mail address. however, we don't forward the mails to you, we stego them into an mp3. you automatically get a subscription with the first service as well, except that the number of songs isn't random for you, it's the number of mails you got. to avoid checksum creation, the snippets are made randomly and/or all songs have a "watermark" (with timestamp) implemented by, guess what, steganographic means. comments? the dailymusic.com service serves as a deniability front. since there is NO hint on it's website to the other service, you can plausably deny that you know about that one. From info at bacalao.net Thu Oct 5 10:39:30 2000 From: info at bacalao.net (Bacalao.net) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 19:39:30 +0200 Subject: CDR: Newsletter from Bacalao.Net - new offerings Message-ID: <200010051735.TAA15865@odin.mimer.no> The traffic at http://bacalao.net have increased a lot over the last few days. Yesterday about 25 companies signed up an account. Thank you all. By supporting this site you might help yourself as well. Also a lot of new postings was done night at http://bacalao.net -------------- Offers of: -DRIED SALTED SAITHE -TURKISH PIKE- PERCH FILLETS -W/R NOTOTENIA -FRESH SALMON -YELLOW FINE SOLE -COD H+G SMALL SIZE H+G -And some equipment... Check it out, there might be something you are looking for!! For new users, register your company and be allowed to use your company logo and up to 5 product pictures while posting at http://bacalao.net Whitin some time you can also get offers by e-mail of the products you sign up for from the tradeboard. The easiest, fastest and cheapest (up to now - totally free of charge) tradeboard for seafood on the Internett. Please do not reply to this e-mail address. If you need to contact bacalao.net, please respond to office at bacalao.net Sincerely, b a c a l a o.net Office From reeza at flex.com Thu Oct 5 23:25:54 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:25:54 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001005204800.020770d0@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005151158.00ccaa90@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001005004403.020441c8@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001003205354.00d3e520@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005200236.00d3a8f0@flex.com> At 09:02 PM 05/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > -- >James A. Donald: > > > Almost every Chomsky citation that I have checked was at best somewhat >misleading, and at worst a lie. > >At 03:31 PM 10/5/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: > > We've already seen how you picked up an extra word in that massacre > > quote, is it safe to assume you've made other errors? > >Big deal. Chomsky tells the reader that somewhere there is some >underreported evidence that the reports of Khmer Rouge massacres were fake, WHERE? WHERE DOES HE SAY THIS? Exact source with quote, or shaddup. I'm not a Chomsky fan. I'm not a Chomsky hater. Prior to a few months ago, Chomsky was a name I'd heard only on this list, but not checked out. But what James here seems to be up to is something I'm very much familiar with, character assassination. Give me a quote Chomsky has offered up that is unverifiable, James, tell me where I can find this Chomsky quote myself, so I can verify the Chomsky quote you offer up. Verify that it does properly exist, and then I'll seek to verify or refute the accuracy of the Chomsky quote myself. As it is, I'm left to verify the accuracy of your quoting of Chomsky. If that is all you can offer up, just get the fuck out of my face. > > News flash for ya goodbuddy - that quote of yours has already been > > repudiated. > >Liar. Fucking illiterate slob with a political agenda. ;) >In his 1977 Nation article Chomsky claimed: *bzzzzzzzzzzzzt* 20 years or newer, remember? Within the last decade, or two? Remember? Learn how to read. Comprehend what you read. Get some lessons at your local community college. Idiot. Reese From reeza at flex.com Thu Oct 5 23:45:34 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:45:34 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001005211117.017746b0@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <5.0.0.25.2.20001005211742.022bdb40@mail.gte.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005151045.00d3d8d0@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005202616.00cb2860@flex.com> At 09:27 PM 05/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > -- >James A. Donald: > > > It would take you [Justin Schwartz] years to check five hundred > > > Chomsky citations. His citations are at best obscure and hard to > > > find, at worst impossible to find. already countered, Justin did not specify the time frame. So S2 already. >At 09:41 PM 10/5/2000 -0400, snit wrote: > > look, digslug, Justin Schwartz is an oxford-trained, yale-trained > > scholar, now a lawyer with the seventh circuit. he doesn't type > > things on a publicly accessible listserv where he can easily be > > quoted and humiliated for saying foolish things since the major new > > york papers monitor it for political gossip. the man who typed > > that, justin schwartz, has written and published more than you've > > typed on usenet so you ought to just STFU&STFD because your attempts > > to crawl out of the gutter where you seem to happily luxuriate in > > the scum, grime and waste are embarrassing. > >Yet I seem to hit false citations, citations that are misleading and >sometimes nonexistent, every few pages of Chomsky. An example? A prime example? Every few pages? What book? What page? What citation? >If Justin Schwartz has >a success rate is so strangely different from my own, perhaps he can find >the infamous citation "repeated discoveries that massacre reports were >false". Which massacre reports were these? Where did the "the" go? Try On the quote in question, I have a copy of Clive Ponting's Churchill book balanced on my knee right now, and I can confirm that the quote is word for word, except that the emphases have fallen off it with the loss of italics ('an innocent record and' 'altogether disproportionate' 'mainly acquired by violence, largely maintained by force'). Strike one to Chomsky. this, from the lbo-talk list, I welcome anyone to parse their publicly archived list and prove me wrong. I'd give a url, but fuck james, I want him to work for it. >And while he is at it, >And while he is at it, You are a broken record. Are you a former student of Chomsky? A failed student, perhaps? Reese From jamesd at echeque.com Thu Oct 5 21:02:25 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 21:02:25 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005151158.00ccaa90@flex.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001005004403.020441c8@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001003205354.00d3e520@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001005204800.020770d0@shell11.ba.best.com> -- James A. Donald: > > Almost every Chomsky citation that I have checked was at best somewhat misleading, and at worst a lie. At 03:31 PM 10/5/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: > We've already seen how you picked up an extra word in that massacre quote, > is it safe to assume you've made other errors? Big deal. Chomsky tells the reader that somewhere there is some underreported evidence that the reports of Khmer Rouge massacres were fake, implying that the photographs of murdered women and children that his readers had seen in the newspapers a few months previously were fraudulent. So where is this evidence that he so confidently cites? We are not talking about left out commas, or even omitted ellipses. We are talking about whole damned citations that just are not there. Chomsky complains bitterly because Shawcross' editors left out three ellipses when quoting Chomsky, and then fabricates stuff wholesale and attributes it to Shawcross. > News flash for ya goodbuddy - that quote of yours has already been repudiated. Liar. In his 1977 Nation article Chomsky claimed: : : such journals as the Far Eastern Economic Review , the : : London Economist , the Melbourne Journal of Politics , and : : others elsewhere, have provided analyses by highly : : qualified specialists who have studied the full range of : : evidence available, and who concluded that executions have : : numbered at most in the thousands; that these were : : localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge influence and : : unusual peasant discontent, where brutal revenge killings : : were aggravated by the threat of starvation resulting from : : the American destruction and killing. These reports also : : emphasize both the extraordinary brutality on both sides : : during the civil war (provoked by the American attack) and : : repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false. Pretty much every word in his claim is of course false in one way or another, a mixture of misleading half truths and outrageous blatant lies. I can go through it word by word if anyone cares. But let us take a different approach. Is there any phrase in that stream of lies and misdirections that you wish to defend? Is there anything in his claim that you are willing to defend as true? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG d7Zg1dd3YMbY+qe2HcnAuJ0KtJ/IFibx+iozE+x/ 4U/P6jjNfg+dLFSb0iUoOJsOI+z7rKS/Dd0dKWeRG From jamesd at echeque.com Thu Oct 5 21:27:04 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 21:27:04 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20001005211742.022bdb40@mail.gte.net> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005151045.00d3d8d0@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001005211117.017746b0@shell11.ba.best.com> -- James A. Donald: > > It would take you [Justin Schwartz] years to check five hundred > > Chomsky citations. His citations are at best obscure and hard to > > find, at worst impossible to find. At 09:41 PM 10/5/2000 -0400, snit wrote: > look, digslug, Justin Schwartz is an oxford-trained, yale-trained > scholar, now a lawyer with the seventh circuit. he doesn't type > things on a publicly accessible listserv where he can easily be > quoted and humiliated for saying foolish things since the major new > york papers monitor it for political gossip. the man who typed > that, justin schwartz, has written and published more than you've > typed on usenet so you ought to just STFU&STFD because your attempts > to crawl out of the gutter where you seem to happily luxuriate in > the scum, grime and waste are embarrassing. Yet I seem to hit false citations, citations that are misleading and sometimes nonexistent, every few pages of Chomsky. If Justin Schwartz has a success rate is so strangely different from my own, perhaps he can find the infamous citation "repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false". Which massacre reports were these? And while he is at it, can he explain how come the eyewitness reports of terror and intimidation taken by Ponchaud constitute third hand reports in Chomsky's cites of Ponchaud? And while he is at it, how come one of Chomsky's highly qualified experts who supposedly ridiculed the false reports of Khmer Rouge crimes later said that Phnom Penh was evacuated to smash resistance (a claim later confirmed by Pol Pot) and that perhaps ten percent of the population of Phnom Penh died as a result of the evactuation, an estimate he made before the famous left wing U turn on Cambodia, an estimate that contradicts the general tone of the letter Chomsky quoted, but does not contradict the substance of it or the facts reported. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG zpm0nF0PAslx5syXxOvx/fLisCaXVxVrcIoHJ31o 421EBABRmFfhBBXoKipKxu560aLyoq6DdhmY05cNo From rah at shipwright.com Thu Oct 5 13:28:38 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 21:28:38 +0100 Subject: CDR: UK Companies free to snoop on staff Message-ID: Obviously, if someone who uses company assets for personal business deserves all the snooping he gets, at least theoretically, though certainly not in actual practice. The tweak in the British RIP vs. Eurocrat case here is that, same as it ever was, the nation-state is again quite literally expropriating the resources of employers by making them subject to a human "right". ;-). "The 'Poor'?? Are there no prisons?" Cheers, RAH (Who believes we'll *all* be proprietors some day, and none of this garbage will matter anymore...) --- begin forwarded text From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 5 21:41:30 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 21:41:30 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Spam free secure email accounts. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001005214130.009b0c90@idiom.com> At 06:07 PM 10/4/00 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: >On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Ray Dillinger wrote: >> On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: >> > how do you find out whether or not a message is encrypted? >> >> Plaintext looks like plaintext. > > Yeah, if the only thing you right is simple English. > Most of the planet doesn't speak English and their plaintext > doesn't necessarily look like plaintext. This is a xenophobic view. 8-bit-alphabet plaintext looks like plaintext. It's easier to recognize popular languages - short bunches of letters separated by spaces. Less popular languages that use 8-bit alphabets still have easily detected statistics that are much different from uniformly-distributed cyphertext. Languages with N-byte characters are much harder - you have to decide whether to look at Unicode, (2-byte's bad enough; variable-byte is worse), otherwise you'll get totally hosed on your chi-squares. Things that start with popular magic numbers like gif89 also look like plaintext (though they may in fact be stego.) Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From snit at interpactinc.com Thu Oct 5 18:41:49 2000 From: snit at interpactinc.com (snit) Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 21:41:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005151045.00d3d8d0@flex.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20001005211742.022bdb40@mail.gte.net> >It would take you years to check five hundred Chomsky citations. His >citations are at best obscure and hard to find, at worst impossible to find. look, digslug, Justin Schwartz is an oxford-trained, yale-trained scholar, now a lawyer with the seventh circuit. he doesn't type things on a publicly accessible listserv where he can easily be quoted and humiliated for saying foolish things since the major new york papers monitor it for political gossip. the man who typed that, justin schwartz, has written and published more than you've typed on usenet so you ought to just STFU&STFD because your attempts to crawl out of the gutter where you seem to happily luxuriate in the scum, grime and waste are embarrassing. the examples you provide never come up with the goods--demonstrate that sources are untraceable, etc. your unpublished dissertation, i take it? it will remain unpublished. slop like that doesn't past the muster. unless you're enrolled in Sally Struther's University, of course. snit From septic-admin at nym.alias.net Thu Oct 5 14:47:37 2000 From: septic-admin at nym.alias.net (Septic Remailer Admin) Date: 5 Oct 2000 21:47:37 -0000 Subject: CDR: Detecting PGP encrypted messages Message-ID: <20001005214737.8671.qmail@nym.alias.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1589 bytes Desc: not available URL: From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 5 18:51:21 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 21:51:21 -0400 Subject: CDR: VP debate drinking game Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001005184753.007eb2e0@pop.sprynet.com> Every time a VP candidate during the debate says "weapons of mass destruction" you have to sip. From sfurlong at acmenet.net Thu Oct 5 19:02:23 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 22:02:23 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: VP debate drinking game References: <3.0.6.32.20001005184753.007eb2e0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <39DD3279.1774CC7C@acmenet.net> David Honig wrote: > > Every time a VP candidate during the debate > says "weapons of mass destruction" you have to sip. And if they say "for the children" you finish the bottle. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 5 20:34:04 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 23:34:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: VP debate drinking game In-Reply-To: <39DD3279.1774CC7C@acmenet.net> References: <3.0.6.32.20001005184753.007eb2e0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: At 10:02 PM -0400 10/5/00, Steve Furlong wrote: >David Honig wrote: >> >> Every time a VP candidate during the debate >> says "weapons of mass destruction" you have to sip. > >And if they say "for the children" you finish the bottle. > I hadn't planned to, but I watched most of the debate tonight. Though I won't in all likelihood vote for either the Reps or the Dems, I was much-impressed with the debate. Both candidates were thoughtful, had an easygoing command of the issues, and avoided simplistic cheap shots. The humor was welcome. No mention, that I caught, of either "weapons of mass destruction" or "for the children," at least not in codeword ways. (There was some blither about "Hollywood peddling smut," and both candidates seem willing to suspend the Constitution on this point.) I watched bits and pieces of the debate a few nights ago. It was jarring in its freneticism, especially where algore kept trying to squeeze in more points, kitchen-sink-style. Generally I'm avoiding the campaign. I read no articles about the campaign, I watched not a minute of either of the "conventions," and I switch the channel on the t.v. when the election is covered. Perhaps I'm watching the debates because I recently read a biography of Lincoln. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From jamesd at echeque.com Fri Oct 6 00:45:26 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 00:45:26 -0700 Subject: CDR: Niiice kitty.... Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001006004242.0202c708@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 09:02 PM 05/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > > Big deal. Chomsky tells the reader that somewhere there is some > > underreported evidence that the reports of Khmer Rouge massacres were fake, Reese wrote: > WHERE? WHERE DOES HE SAY THIS? > > Exact source with quote, or shaddup. I have given you the exact source with quote a dozen times, and each time you simply lie about my words. Here it is, yet again: Distortions at Fourth Hand Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman The Nation, June 25, 1977 : : such journals as the Far Eastern Economic Review , the : : London Economist , the Melbourne Journal of Politics , and : : others elsewhere, have provided analyses by highly : : qualified specialists who have studied the full range of : : evidence available, and who concluded that executions have : : numbered at most in the thousands; that these were : : localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge influence and : : unusual peasant discontent, where brutal revenge killings : : were aggravated by the threat of starvation resulting from : : the American destruction and killing. These reports also : : emphasize both the extraordinary brutality on both sides : : during the civil war (provoked by the American attack) and : : repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false So tell us, where were these discoveries that the massacre reports were false? Who discovered them to be false, and how? Nothing that Chomsky and Herman claim in the above is true, but the most important claim, and the most straightforward lie, is "repeated discoveries that the massacre reports were false." --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG aXL63PmuM9+NuXlKtpqNsr8BvaTgUn5Uywspdco4 4igRb+oqLkHsiouIlTTHIhWUkbGm3R1cE56Sjb/fo From jamesd at echeque.com Fri Oct 6 00:51:13 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 00:51:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005202616.00cb2860@flex.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001005211117.017746b0@shell11.ba.best.com> <5.0.0.25.2.20001005211742.022bdb40@mail.gte.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005151045.00d3d8d0@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001006004613.01ea87e0@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 09:41 PM 10/5/2000 -0400, snit wrote: > > > look, digslug, Justin Schwartz is an oxford-trained, > > > yale-trained scholar, now a lawyer with the seventh circuit. > > > he doesn't type things on a publicly accessible listserv where > > > he can easily be quoted and humiliated for saying foolish things > > > since the major new york papers monitor it for political gossip. > > > the man who typed that, justin schwartz, has written and > > > published more than you've typed on usenet so you ought to just > > > STFU&STFD because your attempts to crawl out of the gutter where > > > you seem to happily luxuriate in the scum, grime and waste are > > > embarrassing. James A. Donald: > > Yet I seem to hit false citations, citations that are misleading > > and sometimes nonexistent, every few pages of Chomsky. Snit: > An example? A prime example? Every few pages? What book? What > page? What citation? I have already given you numerous examples. James A. Donald: > > If Justin Schwartz has a success rate is so strangely different > > from my own, perhaps he can find the infamous citation "repeated > > discoveries that massacre reports were >false". Which massacre > > reports were these? Snit: > Where did the "the" go? You remind me of Chomsky making a big deal because Shawcross' printers dropped some ellipses, as if finding a typo in Shawcross was an answer to the evidence that Shawcross presented. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Og3I1Mi3csitJ/tWi++uA6emkiQduhntInm/143y 4geOlRow4tTCnidBamRUDcjarFf6DvZGD/QK4jPPM From bill.stewart at pobox.com Fri Oct 6 00:16:44 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:16:44 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: At 10:33 AM 10/5/00 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: >So when is the HavenCo remailer going up? I'm not sure that there will be a HavenCo remailer; the alternative is a some-customer-of-HavenCo remailer, or a some-customer-of-a-HavenCo-hosting-customer remailer. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Fri Oct 6 00:16:48 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 03:16:48 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: At 09:46 AM 10/5/00 -0400, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >One variation of the original proposal would be to only allow egress to >addresses known to lay in a jurisdiction different from the one in which the >remailer resides. I know, the problem is nontrivial with all the dotcom >addresses and such around. Does doing a DNS lookup and working on IP >addresses help? That's not something the remailer should be doing - that's something that the user sending the message should be doing. If the remailer list shows what jurisdiction the remailer is in, that makes it easier for the user to determine, but it's the user's choice. Of course, if the remailer _always_ adds its own encrypt-and-mail hop, sending to another remailer in another jurisdiction, that's transparent to the user and a good thing (as long as it can avoid mail loops.) Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From directpower99 at netzero.com Fri Oct 6 05:34:12 2000 From: directpower99 at netzero.com (Income Opportunity) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 05:34:12 -0700 Subject: CDR: Home Workers Needed - Earn Weekly Paychecks At Home Message-ID: <200010061306.GAA03979@cyberpass.net> Top telecommute companies are looking for people that want to stay at home and earn an excellent side income. No MLM, no get-rich-quick programs. This is the opportunity you've been looking for. Get complete details today with no obligation. Email power2change at earthlink.net with "Work At Home" in the subject heading for immediate attention. Best Wishes Home Workers Directory From jamesd at echeque.com Fri Oct 6 07:42:47 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 07:42:47 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005200236.00d3a8f0@flex.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001005204800.020770d0@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005151158.00ccaa90@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001005004403.020441c8@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001003205354.00d3e520@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001006073602.01a1ac60@shell11.ba.best.com> -- James A. Donald: > > In his 1977 Nation article Chomsky claimed: 08:25 PM 10/5/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: > *bzzzzzzzzzzzzt* > > 20 years or newer, remember? Within the last decade, or two? Remember? So are you now admitting that Chomsky used to continually make fraudulent citations, but claiming he has since reformed? My reason for using Chomsky's twenty year old lies, lies from the time that the Soviet Union was at its greatest power, appeared to be winning, and appeared to be on the path to world domination, rather than his current lies, is that my purpose is to show that the most famous "anarcho" socialist intended not anarchy, but world domination by the Soviet Union, intended not some new and wonderful form of socialism, but socialism as we came to know it during twentieth century. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG h52T0Un6gQhVgJhl580c3gKk1EqSn+TI2d+5PTjH 4g9OJQcZodritVBctFraTYIG5PtJja8vYfcOIUPyi From bear at sonic.net Fri Oct 6 07:52:33 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 07:52:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <39DDB0C8.4CC414F2@ricardo.de> Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: >I'm currently thinking of whether or not it is feasable to put stego >data into EVERY .mp3 downloaded. just put random data into those not >intended to carry a message. For the sake of us audiophiles, please don't. MP3 is tinny and flat at best; it ticks me off that most folks seem to hear it as "good enough", because if most folks hear it as "good enough" it means we're not going to get a better sound format widely used. You're talking about making the audio channels a bit (more or less) thinner, but they're too thin already. Bear From jamesd at echeque.com Fri Oct 6 07:55:29 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 07:55:29 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005202616.00cb2860@flex.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001005211117.017746b0@shell11.ba.best.com> <5.0.0.25.2.20001005211742.022bdb40@mail.gte.net> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005151045.00d3d8d0@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001006074930.01a0eb40@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 08:45 PM 10/5/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: > You are a broken record. You keep demanding that I present evidence that I have already presented hundreds of times, that hundreds of people have already presented hundreds of times. The first exposure of Chomsky's deceptive citations was published in 1967, and they have been coming out every few months ever since. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG IFnJuIN8QPVynEtFyQ1/VFy1GaC6cR+7Bru3Ns/J 4cErcLzrhf3nFgccAi5ijORwhiItMC8WwAA+UvC1Y From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Fri Oct 6 05:19:35 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 08:19:35 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gores teens and drugs References: <9649aa4774f642fc143ee71e10b2b4e9@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <39DDC316.AB6F759@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Tim May wrote: > And yet algore and Tipper cluck about an open can of beer being held > by a 16-yo at a party. Just goes to show what a strange country you live in Tim! When the 16-year-old son of out Prime Minister over here was picked up by the police pissed out of his head lying in his own vomit in Leicester Square (USAns might think "Times Square"?) nobody seemed to mind much. It is the kind of thing kids get up to. In fact Blair's opinion poll ratings went up, prompting the leader of the opposition Conservative party to boast that he used to drink 14 pints a night when he was a teenager. But nobody believed him and journalists dug up old acquaintances to claim that he mostly drank fizzy pop. Which, for a Yorkshireman, rates as an insult. Anyone who remembers the old Monty Python "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch will know exactly the sort of thing the Mekon (I can't actually remember his name) was getting into. "When I were a lad..." (Oh yes I can, William Hague. Not the most memorable of politicians) Ken From baptista at proxy.pccf.net Fri Oct 6 06:17:03 2000 From: baptista at proxy.pccf.net (Joe Baptista) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:17:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gores teens and drugs In-Reply-To: <39DDC316.AB6F759@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Ken Brown wrote: > Tim May wrote: > > > And yet algore and Tipper cluck about an open can of beer being held > > by a 16-yo at a party. > > Just goes to show what a strange country you live in Tim! When the > 16-year-old son of out Prime Minister over here was picked up by the The same happened in Canada - our current prime minister - chrietien - adopted an indian child when he was minister of indian affairs (all show - and no mustard). Anyway - this child is now fully grown and is the biggest drugs fiend and womanizer we have in canada. No one cares and rightly so. dot.GOD Hostmaster http://www.dot-god.com/ hostmaster at pccf.net From announce at inbox.nytimes.com Fri Oct 6 08:23:51 2000 From: announce at inbox.nytimes.com (The New York Times on the Web) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 11:23:51 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Important Membership Information Message-ID: <200010061523.LAA29700@web80t.lga2.nytimes.com> Dear cypherpunks2002, Welcome to NYTimes.com! We are delighted that you have decided to become a member of our community. As a member you now have complete access to the Web's premier source for news and information -- free of charge. NYTimes.com not only provides you with in-depth coverage of events happening around the world but also with a wealth of additional features and services. The site is updated regularly throughout the day by New York Times reporters and editors to give you greater insight into events unfolding throughout the day. No matter what the hour, you can look to NYTimes.com for the most trustworthy coverage available and unique perspective you won't find anywhere else. Please feel free to explore the other areas of NYTimes.com. Here are some starting points you may find useful: ** Get NYTimes.com headlines e-mailed directly to you. Choose from the day's top stories, breaking news alerts and your favorite sections: http://email.nytimes.com/email/email.jsp?welcome ** Search and retrieve articles from The New York Times Archives back to 1996. Searches and summaries of articles are free, but there is a small fee for full text. http://archives.nytimes.com/archives?welcome ** Explore the Help Wanted and other classified listings on the Web: http://classifieds.nytimes.com/hw?welcome ** Get a free photo screensaver from The New York Times Photo Archives Choose from Vintage New York, Classic Sports, Americana and more: http://www.nytimes.com/partners/screensaver/index.html?welcome ** Search our archive of 50,000 book reviews, listen to author interviews or sign-up for an exclusive weekly newsletter from our Books Editor: http://www.nytimes.com/books/home?welcome Thank you again for becoming a member. We hope that you will make a point of visiting the site often. Sincerely, Rich Meislin, Editor in Chief New York Times Digital P.S. Your opinions are important to us. Share your thoughts about the site with us by sending an e-mail to feedback at nytimes.com ************************************************************* Your account information is listed below for future reference: Your Member ID is cypherpunks2002 You selected your password at registration. Your e-mail address is cypherpunks at toad.com If you did not authorize this registration, someone has mistakenly registered using your e-mail address. We regret the inconvenience; please see http://www.nytimes.com/subscribe/help/cancel.html for instructions. From honig at sprynet.com Fri Oct 6 09:35:30 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:35:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <39DDB0C8.4CC414F2@ricardo.de> References: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001006093322.007ee100@pop.sprynet.com> At 07:05 AM 10/6/00 -0400, Tom Vogt wrote: >I'm currently thinking of whether or not it is feasable to put stego >data into EVERY .mp3 downloaded. just put random data into those not >intended to carry a message. Problem is that repeatedly decoding an .mp3 into a .wav, then feeding the .wav and the stegobits into a stego-mp3-compressor[1], will lose quality with each iteration. But if you're just taking 'first generation' simple rips off a CD or LP or Napster :-) you can do it easily. [1] http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~fapp2/steganography/mp3stego/ From honig at sprynet.com Fri Oct 6 09:35:35 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:35:35 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gores teens and drugs In-Reply-To: References: <39DDC316.AB6F759@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001006092532.007dab10@pop.sprynet.com> At 09:17 AM 10/6/00 -0400, Joe Baptista wrote: >Anyway - this child is now fully grown and is the biggest drugs fiend and >womanizer we have in canada. No one cares and rightly so. Well we have the Kennedys... From honig at sprynet.com Fri Oct 6 09:35:35 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:35:35 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: References: <39DDB0C8.4CC414F2@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001006093026.007e0a30@pop.sprynet.com> At 10:52 AM 10/6/00 -0400, Ray Dillinger wrote: >For the sake of us audiophiles, please don't. MP3 is tinny and flat >at best; Then why are you 'audiophiles' traumatizing yourselves by listening to it? it ticks me off that most folks seem to hear it as "good >enough", because if most folks hear it as "good enough" it means we're >not going to get a better sound format widely used. First 'good enough' depends on environment, e.g., ambient noise ---how about that computer fan, much less the noise in a car? Second, why did we evolve CDs if LPs were 'good enough' for most? [Besides portability] You're talking >about making the audio channels a bit (more or less) thinner, but >they're too thin already. > > Bear We're talking about covertext, not rec.audio.cypherpunks.audiophile From tom at ricardo.de Fri Oct 6 04:00:24 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 13:00:24 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored References: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> <003a01c02f08$94eedda0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <39DDB0C8.4CC414F2@ricardo.de> jim bell wrote: > I can see an excellent application for all of our old long-out-of-print > LP's: Digitize them (assuming we still have an operational turntable!) and > the noise level will be comfortably high. And, there is no digital > "reference" for this audio anywhere, so comparisons will be virtually > impossible. (Just re-digitize the same LP for an dramatically-different > dataset, at least in the 6-7 LSB's.) that would be a good and unique source of data, with the added advantage of strengthening the cover. I'm currently thinking of whether or not it is feasable to put stego data into EVERY .mp3 downloaded. just put random data into those not intended to carry a message. From tom at ricardo.de Fri Oct 6 04:03:04 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 13:03:04 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored References: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005171310.00cb1c60@flex.com> Message-ID: <39DDB168.EC998081@ricardo.de> Reese wrote: > >MP3 ? > > Lossy compression. > > balance snipped, we need lossless compression, eh? nope we don't. remember that everyone said that .jpeg couldn't be used for stego for that same reason? then the first .jpeg-stego tools arrived. From declan at well.com Fri Oct 6 10:05:01 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 13:05:01 -0400 Subject: CDR: Democrats on "hate crimes" in Defense Department bill Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001006130445.00aef070@mail.well.com> NEWS FROM THE HOUSE DEMOCRATIC LEADER FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE House Democratic Leader Richard A. Gephardt October 6, 2000 H-204, U.S. Capitol http://democraticleader.gov/ Gephardt Statement on Hate Crimes and Other Pending Legislation "In the last 24 hours, we've had three pieces of evidence that the Republican leadership is not interested in acting on the priorities of the American people. In a flurry of legislative maneuvering, Republicans have taken strong, sensible, bipartisan bills and they have tried to kill those bills by putting forward weak, watered-down versions that do nothing for the American people. "Last night, Republican conferees took a bipartisan, sensible hate crimes bill and they eliminated it from the Department of Defense Authorization bill. Republicans seem determined to file a DOD bill that is stripped of hate crimes, and their actions in the last 24 hours are an affront not only to the American people, but to a clear majority in the Congress. "Republicans defied the will of both Houses of Congress, denied the American people a strong, sensible bill that would have given law enforcement officers the enhanced tools they need to deal with horrible hate crimes, and they prevented the country from sending a strong signal that we as a society will not tolerate crimes committed against people simply because of who they are. "This is a bipartisan bill. The President has supported it for years, the American people support it in overwhelming numbers, and both the House and the Senate have voted in bipartisan fashion to include hate crimes in the Department of Defense Authorization bill. "I will continue to fight with Senator Daschle, President Clinton, and with my colleagues and all Americans who support this common-sense law, and I still hope that we can pass this bill this year and accomplish something meaningful for the American people. "Now, we've also had two other pieces of news in the last 24 hours that points to a pattern; and, sadly, the story with re-importation and with a Patients' Bill of Rights is similar to hate crimes. First, I am deeply disappointed that the Republican leadership has decided to defy the will of the American people and short-circuit a bipartisan effort to craft effective re-importation legislation that might have lowered drug prices for millions of Americans. Instead, Republicans went behind closed doors and came up with an ineffective, partisan half-measure that serves the needs of the pharmaceutical companies at the expense of the American people. "The Republican measure is full of loopholes that will allow pharmaceutical companies to get around the new law. It also sunsets after 5 years, so even if seniors did begin to see lower drug prices as a result of this bill, that benefit will not last. Republicans have once again chosen the side of special interests over the people. Democrats believe that all seniors should have permanent, reliable help with the high costs of prescription drugs, and we support effective, permanent re-importation legislation as a step in that direction. But the most important way to give seniors the help they need is to enact an affordable, reliable, universal Medicare prescription benefit. Republicans have blocked that measure, refusing, even, to let us bring it up on the floor for a vote. Their action on re-importation seems designed to distract us from the much larger issues at hand. "I am just as troubled by a last-minute effort on a Patients' Bill of Rights. Here, once again, they have decided to abandon a bipartisan bill and to seek political cover instead. Today, Republicans proposed a weak Patients' Bill of Rights that fails to give patients the protections they need from their HMO companies. The real Patients' Bill of Rights passed the House one year ago tomorrow by a strong bipartisan margin, and it remains the only bill that will actually do something meaningful for millions of Americans. "Democrats will continue to fight for good, common-sense, bipartisan bills that the American people want and that bipartisan majorities in Congress support: hate crimes--a strong Patients Bill of Rights-permanent re-importation legislation-and a Medicare prescription benefit that will be always be there for seniors. We will continue to work with all our colleagues to accomplish something meaningful in the few short days we have left." ##### Contact: Laura Nichols/Sue Harvey (202) 225-0100 From anonymous at openpgp.net Fri Oct 6 10:10:41 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:10:41 -0400 Subject: CDR: delete this judge Message-ID: <563e2a8e13439fc58519252879b8d3b0@mixmaster.ceti.pl> from /. "According to The New York Times (free registration required, for those who care about such things), a prominent judge recently wrote an article saying that the delete key should actually delete things, not just hide them away where lawyers and skilled computer geeks can get at them years later. Specifically, he proposes that a statute of limitations be imposed upon electronic messages--that, for example, an obnoxious email you send today could be held against you for six months and six months only." ... The judges original paper is http://www.greenbag.org/ linked off of The Green Bag. From anonymous at openpgp.net Fri Oct 6 11:25:51 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 14:25:51 -0400 Subject: CDR: delete this judge Message-ID: from /. "According to The New York Times (free registration required, for those who care about such things), a prominent judge recently wrote an article saying that the delete key should actually delete things, not just hide them away where lawyers and skilled computer geeks can get at them years later. Specifically, he proposes that a statute of limitations be imposed upon electronic messages--that, for example, an obnoxious email you send today could be held against you for six months and six months only." ... The judges original paper is http://www.greenbag.org/Rosenbaum/rosenbaum.pdf linked off of The Green Bag. From declan at well.com Fri Oct 6 12:31:38 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 15:31:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Guys, I need help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001006153048.02df6240@mail.well.com> Guy, What do you suggest? This is cypherpunks, be a capitalist: Offer cash for setting up another anonymizer-type service that is not blocked. :) -Declan At 19:08 10/6/2000 -0700, M. Emad Ul Hasan wrote: >Your anonymizer.com is blocked in Saudi Arabia via proxy. Can you tell me >a way I can see this site From reeza at flex.com Fri Oct 6 18:39:38 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 15:39:38 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001006004242.0202c708@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005223340.00cc9410@flex.com> At 12:45 AM 06/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > -- >At 09:02 PM 05/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > > > Big deal. Chomsky tells the reader that somewhere there is some > > > underreported evidence that the reports of Khmer Rouge massacres > > > were fake, > > >Reese wrote: > > WHERE? WHERE DOES HE SAY THIS? > > > > Exact source with quote, or shaddup. > >I have given you the exact source with quote a dozen times, Liar. >and each time you simply lie about my words. > >Here it is, yet again: The below, is more like it. >Distortions at Fourth Hand >Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman >The Nation, June 25, 1977 > >: : such journals as the Far Eastern Economic Review , the >: : London Economist , the Melbourne Journal of Politics , and >: : others elsewhere, have provided analyses by highly >: : qualified specialists who have studied the full range of >: : evidence available, and who concluded that executions have >: : numbered at most in the thousands; that these were >: : localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge influence and >: : unusual peasant discontent, where brutal revenge killings >: : were aggravated by the threat of starvation resulting from >: : the American destruction and killing. These reports also >: : emphasize both the extraordinary brutality on both sides >: : during the civil war (provoked by the American attack) and >: : repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false > Now I have something to work with, I'll get back to you on this. >So tell us, where were these discoveries that the massacre reports were >false? Who discovered them to be false, and how? > >Nothing that Chomsky and Herman claim in the above is true, but the most >important claim, and the most straightforward lie, is "repeated discoveries >that the massacre reports were false." You inserted a "the" again. In quotes, that's a no-no, so slap the back of your hand for me. Reese From netad at srv.netad.ch Fri Oct 6 08:45:05 2000 From: netad at srv.netad.ch (netad at srv.netad.ch) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 15:45:05 +0000 (GMT) Subject: CDR: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=96lscheichs_oder_Schr=C3=B6der_=3F?= Message-ID: <1851089.970847105383.JavaMail.root@yahoo.com> Wer treibt den Benzinpreis immer höher? Bei http://www.wetellyou.de , dem internationalen Treffpunkt für Experten und Ratsuchende, finden Sie Antwort auf diese und weitere Fragen. Ihr Wissen ist gefragt - Werden Sie Experte und teilen Sie es mit Anderen http://www.wetellyou.de . Abmelden: http://srv.netad.ch/servlet/exp_spam.Servlet1?dir=unsubscribe&Email=cypherpunks at toad.com From mmotyka at lsil.com Fri Oct 6 16:09:23 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (Michael Motyka) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 16:09:23 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored Message-ID: <39DE5BA3.DA39C6C4@lsil.com> > > I'm currently looking for a way to get encrypted data via stego to > people who live in countries where crypto is illegal, and who may be > watched. so just sending them a large graphic would likely arouse > suspicion. > > the 2 best solutions I've come up with so far are porn and spam. both > are readily believable, even in large quantities. > the problem with porn is that it may be illegal in itself in the same > countries. the problem with spam is that ascii text just doesn't offer > much to hide stego in (whitespacing, etc. is both easy to find and can > store very little data). > Since the amount of information you need to send and the channel/event capacity for stego'd information are unspecified maybe you're looking for a general solution. Part of a general solution might be a scatter-gather mechanism. XMIT The information you need to send is broken up into multiple pieces and an index. The simplest method would be a flat structure but a tree is acceptable. Redundancy via overlapping segments could be introduced. Redundancy/error correction might be useful if Mallet is inclined for example to mess with whitespace in your e-mail. Anyway, the pieces are stego'd into multiple carriers that are made available via any and all protocols. RCV Once a recipient has the top-level index they can gather the pieces and reconstruct the original. Notes Scattering the information over multiple sites and accessing it via valid sets of linked pages for example might help in disguising the act of retrieving any particular carrier. A typical browse sequence might include many unused files and only one carrier. A single carrier might serve various fragments from multiple original input documents intended for different recipients. If a single carrier is safe and acceptable a webcam might be a nice broadcast for a few channels of text. It does simplify the task of identifying the sender and making a list of possibly recipients. A shifting set of sources would probably be safer. Message fragments could be transmitted over any period of time with the top-level index being the final step. That would help the sender avoid detection of the actual transmission since it could be interleaved with other activities. Likewise reception could be over an arbitrary period of time and interleaved with other activities. *** There's a high bandwidth cost associated with the scatter-gather process but it does allow arbitrarily sized messages and I'm assuming the cost of getting caught is extremely high as is the desire of authorities to view content, locate the sender or other recipients and suppress the information if it is detected. Mike From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 6 16:30:27 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 16:30:27 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <39DE5BA3.DA39C6C4@lsil.com> References: <39DE5BA3.DA39C6C4@lsil.com> Message-ID: At 4:09 PM -0700 10/6/00, Michael Motyka wrote: > > >> I'm currently looking for a way to get encrypted data via stego to >> people who live in countries where crypto is illegal, and who may be >> watched. so just sending them a large graphic would likely arouse > > suspicion. >> >... > > >Since the amount of information you need to send and the channel/event >capacity for stego'd information are unspecified maybe you're looking >for a general solution. Part of a general solution might be a >scatter-gather mechanism. > >XMIT > >The information you need to send is broken up into multiple pieces and >an index. The simplest method would be a flat structure but a tree is >acceptable. Redundancy via overlapping segments could be introduced. >Redundancy/error correction might be useful if Mallet is inclined for >example to mess with whitespace in your e-mail. Anyway, the pieces are >stego'd into multiple carriers that are made available via any and all >protocols. In places where crypto is illegal, this approach would also likely be illegal. "But, Obergruppenfuhrer Mueller, I am not actually using crypto. These hundreds of broken up files I have received are merely unwanted messages sent to me. " BTW, the issue is a lot more than just "plausible deniability." This may work in the U.S., until the Constitution is further shredded. But "plausibility deniability" is not enough when dealing with the Staasi, or SAVAK, or Shin Bet, or the Ayotollahs. Mere suspicion is enough. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 6 16:38:42 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 16:38:42 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Comments on and about e-privacy in Canada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 7:13 PM -0400 10/6/00, Robert Guerra wrote: > >Here's a message I really like... Again you show yourself to be uncritical of these claims. You don't "get it." > >http://interact.cbc.ca/cgi-bin/WebX?14 at 119.UM22aQsobAM^4 at .ee768e0 > > >I attended a recent lecture at UBC that was given by Dr. William J. >Raduchel, the Chief Strategy Officer of Sun Microsystems, and he >said that Sun and many other companies are hard at work putting the >finishing touches on the technology that will make it possible for >your fridge to recognize that you are running out of milk, and >automatically add it to your shopping list, and automatically shop >for it if you want - but here is the really freaky part: In the near >future, Dr. Raduchel said that all advertising will be targeted >based on your 'electronic behavior'. Picture this: You come home >from work and your house sees you coming and the door opens and the >net-enabled television in your livingroom comes on, and there is a >commercial for Cheerios that says, "Did you know that the box of >Cheerios in your cupboard is almost empty?" - and a coupon for >Cheerios will print out of your net-enabled refrigerator, and the >General Foods corporation will be able to run a report that tells >them exactly how many boxes of Cheerios there are sitting in >cupboards in wired homes across Canada, and how full each one is. The solution is not a regimen of data privacy laws but tecnologies to enable consumers to remain private. Those who "give permission" for their refrigerator to contact some outside party have made their choice. (They can block in many ways: don't buy the refrigerator, don't hook it up to phone lines or the Internet, insert a firewall product which others are likely to provide, hack the system to not provide this information, and so on.) Anyone who complains about this net-enabled fridge has only themself to blame. What we don't need are "data privacy laws.' There are deeper principles here, discussed many times. If Alice observes something Bill has said, or done, or whatever, it is not _Bill_ who owns these observations. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From bear at sonic.net Fri Oct 6 13:40:12 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 16:40:12 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001006093026.007e0a30@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: >At 10:52 AM 10/6/00 -0400, Ray Dillinger wrote: >>For the sake of us audiophiles, please don't. MP3 is tinny and flat >>at best; > >Then why are you 'audiophiles' traumatizing yourselves by listening >to it? For the most part, I'm not. I had just hoped to have a better music format available on the web, and it looks like MP3 is blocking it from happening. >We're talking about covertext, not rec.audio.cypherpunks.audiophile To your message recipient, it's covertext. To everybody else who downloads tunes, (since you're talking about putting stego in *all* MP3s downloaded from your site) it's degraded sound quality. Understand, it's your site and you do what you want: I'm just saying MP3 is already too thin. My crypto-relevant warning to you is that if you stego it at all heavily, the difference will be audible to some people. Even if you can't hear the difference, somebody (maybe a lot of somebodys) will be able to, and this could tip snoops off to the existence of the stegogram. Bear From bill.stewart at pobox.com Fri Oct 6 17:20:16 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 17:20:16 -0700 Subject: Rijndael & NTRU In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> References: <00100219183902.00394@anubis> <4.2.2.20001002163127.00bd8b50@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002163127.00bd8b50@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001006172016.00a631b0@idiom.com> At 11:36 PM 10/2/00 -0400, Vin McLellan wrote: > Paulo Barreto quipped: > >Or it might not have occurred to everyone to prepare just-in-case > >releases for each of the finalists and wait for NIST's verdict ;-) > > Yeah, I thought of that too;-) The NTRU folk, however, didn't wait >for today's announcement to place their bet. While I'm not aware of many companies doing anything about it, it's not really that tough - all of the algorithms had relatively similar parameters and sizes and calling requirements, and they were required to provide reference editions. So you should be able to write a couple of routines like aes_keyschedule(parm1, parm2...) aes_encrypt(*key, data) aes_decrypt(*key, data) and plug in the reference editions with some format-munger glue. Tuning the algorithms for your hardware and software environment is more work, and maybe you want to wait till there's a winner, but you get to claim you were way ahead of the curve by announcing support the day of the announcement... Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From reeza at flex.com Fri Oct 6 20:50:07 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 17:50:07 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001006073602.01a1ac60@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005200236.00d3a8f0@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001005204800.020770d0@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005151158.00ccaa90@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001005004403.020441c8@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001003205354.00d3e520@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001006174737.00cdb9f0@flex.com> At 07:42 AM 06/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > -- >James A. Donald: > > > In his 1977 Nation article Chomsky claimed: > >08:25 PM 10/5/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: > > *bzzzzzzzzzzzzt* > > > > 20 years or newer, remember? Within the last decade, or two? Remember? > > >So are you now admitting that Chomsky used to continually make fraudulent >citations, but claiming he has since reformed? That furtive leap must parse as sound logic in your alcohol-addled brain, it isn't. >My reason for using Chomsky's twenty year old lies, lies from the time that >the Soviet Union was at its greatest power, appeared to be winning, and >appeared to be on the path to world domination, rather than his current >lies, is that my purpose is to show that the most famous "anarcho" >socialist intended not anarchy, but world domination by the Soviet Union, >intended not some new and wonderful form of socialism, but socialism as we >came to know it during twentieth century. My reason for asking for something more recent, more current, is to give you an opportunity to demonstrate once and for all, that Chomsky is as crooked now as you claim he was then, but I guess that's too much for you. Reese From Somebody Fri Oct 6 18:01:33 2000 From: Somebody (Somebody) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 18:01:33 -0700 Subject: http://www.rfdata.net/ATM-POS/ Message-ID: will wonders never cease? wanna put an atm machine at an Anguillan hot-spot? really. why do you think they're registered in the BVI? Wireless ATM machines have been deployed by FirStar Bank (USBancorp now) in the midwest. makes a lot of sense, but I hope their encryption is really good. --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From emad_16 at hotmail.com Fri Oct 6 19:08:24 2000 From: emad_16 at hotmail.com (M. Emad Ul Hasan) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 19:08:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Guys, I need help Message-ID: Your anonymizer.com is blocked in Saudi Arabia via proxy. Can you tell me a way I can see this site -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 398 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rguerra at yahoo.com Fri Oct 6 16:13:45 2000 From: rguerra at yahoo.com (Robert Guerra) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 19:13:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Comments on and about e-privacy in Canada Message-ID: Folks: I thank some of you for posting your comments on the e-privacy bulletin board that the CBC has set-up. I'm not sure how long the discussion group will last, so please feel free to continue to share your thoughts on the crypto-canada mailing list Regards Robert Here's a message I really like... http://interact.cbc.ca/cgi-bin/WebX?14 at 119.UM22aQsobAM^4 at .ee768e0 (see e-prvacy discussion section) I think that it should be written into Canada's constitution that ANY information about any Candadian citizen belongs to that citizen. That any agency who wants to store, retrieve, review, transfer or in any way duplicate that information must obtain formal consent from the citizen involved. That every citizen has the right to know what information an agency is storing about them, and who they have shared this information with. I think treating personal information with the same rules as private property would solve our privacy fears. The really scary scenario is that with the proliferation of public video cameras and wireless technologies, our every move may someday be recorded in a database somewhere. Even cars are now being equipped with technologies that track where we are and how we are driving at all times. That is really Orwellian, in my opinion. Cell phones do the same thing by continuously traingulating your position, in fact, if cell nodes didn't do this, cell phones wouldn't work. The next big wave that is coming, with the convergence of television, telephony, broadband internet and wireless networked home electronics is that everything - even your box of Cheerios will have an IP address. I attended a recent lecture at UBC that was given by Dr. William J. Raduchel, the Chief Strategy Officer of Sun Microsystems, and he said that Sun and many other companies are hard at work putting the finishing touches on the technology that will make it possible for your fridge to recognize that you are running out of milk, and automatically add it to your shopping list, and automatically shop for it if you want - but here is the really freaky part: In the near future, Dr. Raduchel said that all advertising will be targeted based on your 'electronic behavior'. Picture this: You come home from work and your house sees you coming and the door opens and the net-enabled television in your livingroom comes on, and there is a commercial for Cheerios that says, "Did you know that the box of Cheerios in your cupboard is almost empty?" - and a coupon for Cheerios will print out of your net-enabled refrigerator, and the General Foods corporation will be able to run a report that tells them exactly how many boxes of Cheerios there are sitting in cupboards in wired homes across Canada, and how full each one is. This is not science fiction - this is reality, and it is coming to a net-enabled home near you. If you think your privacy is an issue now, just wait until your TV set knows what you had for breakfast, and your toilet knows the blood-sugar levels in your urine, which is automatically appended to your medical records. Big brother is here, and he is about to become far more powerful that Orwell could have ever imagined. I encourage you to look this up for yourself, look at the Sun Microsystems website and review the white papers on Jini technology and how companies like Whirlpool are building it into new appliances. Sun is just one example, of course, there are hundreds of companies who enthusiastically embrace these new technologies. Ken MacAllister Vancouver, BC -- "...as we transfer our whole being to the data bank, privacy will become a ghost or echo of its former self and what remains of community will disappear"...Marshal McLuhan -- Robert Guerra , Fax: +1(303) 484-0302 WWW Page , ICQ # 10266626 PGPKeys From HOTSTOCKS at takeone.com Fri Oct 6 19:34:02 2000 From: HOTSTOCKS at takeone.com (HOTSTOCKS at takeone.com) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 19:34:02 Subject: CDR: DNAP - EMERGING BIOTHECH COMPANY - NEWS TODAY!! Message-ID: <200010062331.HAA10699@baosoft.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/plain, charset="iso-8859-1" Size: 2245 bytes Desc: not available URL: From reeza at flex.com Fri Oct 6 22:56:23 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 19:56:23 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005223340.00cc9410@flex.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001006004242.0202c708@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001006193606.00ce33b0@flex.com> At 03:39 PM 06/10/00 -1000, Reese wrote: >At 12:45 AM 06/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > >Distortions at Fourth Hand > >Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman > >The Nation, June 25, 1977 > > > >: : such journals as the Far Eastern Economic Review , the > >: : London Economist , the Melbourne Journal of Politics , and > >: : others elsewhere, have provided analyses by highly > >: : qualified specialists who have studied the full range of > >: : evidence available, and who concluded that executions have > >: : numbered at most in the thousands; that these were > >: : localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge influence and > >: : unusual peasant discontent, where brutal revenge killings > >: : were aggravated by the threat of starvation resulting from > >: : the American destruction and killing. These reports also > >: : emphasize both the extraordinary brutality on both sides > >: : during the civil war (provoked by the American attack) and > >: : repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false > > > >Now I have something to work with, I'll get back to you on this. I posted this quote, along with your comments, at another list. I received this, in reply: http://abbc.com/aaargh/fran/chomsky/cassandra.html --a 1985 essay by Christopher Hitchens defending Chomsky against such charges. As I've said, I'm not a Chomsky hater, nor am I a Chomsky admirer. I've heard the name on this list, but have not yet investigated him. I've read the page the url above leads to and must say, it makes more sense to me than do your philippics. It gives better attributions at first blush. It dissects whines such as yours and sends them to the oven, where they can be properly roasted with flesh-searing heat, the better to reduce the fatty content. I shall not bother to read your paranoid posts from this day, forward. Go away. Reese From rah at shipwright.com Fri Oct 6 12:00:52 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 20:00:52 +0100 Subject: CDR: Update: Zero-Knowledge Freedom for Mac Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 11:06:43 -0400 Subject: Update: Zero-Knowledge Freedom for Mac From: Mark Scott To: Sender: Hello mac-crypto list, The following is a message I sent to our Freedom beta and "notify of release" list. It provides updated information on the development of Freedom for the Mac. Thanks for your support. ---- First of all thank you for your patience. If you are following Internet privacy in the news you have probably been reading a lot about us lately. We have been getting five star reviews in the PC world/Mag publications, as well as rave reviews from main stream media, including the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, ABC News and many others. In the coming 5-10 days we will release our Freedom 2.0 beta for Windows 95/98/2000/ME and Linux. The reason that the Linux version of Freedom is available before the Mac version is because of the amount of common code between the two platforms. Regrettably this was not the case for the Mac version. This does not mean that we are in anyway less committed, it just means that the Mac version is a greater challenge to develop from the ground up. Having just completed meetings with our Mac development team I can tell you the following: We expect to have a Mac version of Freedom for MacWorld Expo January 2001. At this time we expect this version will support OS 8.6 - 9. We expect the OS X support to follow shortly after, at this point I can't define how quickly. Because of the inherent complexities of writing code for the first release of a product in a different platform, I cannot at this point say if this will be a technology demonstration, alpha, or beta. You may rest assured however, that we are putting all our efforts in developing the Mac version as quickly as we possibly can. I am planning at participating at Macworld in January, and I look forward to meeting any of you who wish to drop by and say hello, and of course see Freedom! I will keep you informed on details as we approach Macworld. I will continue to keep you up to date, and I appreciate all the feedback I have received from Mac users from around the world. We continue to collect beta tester names, and feel free to send this link to your friends and encourage them to sign up. http://www.freedom.net/download/mac.html#betatesters If any of you have further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best regards -- Mark Scott Product Manager/Evangelist, Macintosh & Linux Solutions Zero-Knowledge Systems Inc. 888 Blvd. de Maisonneuve East. 6th Floor Montreal, Quebec H2L 4S8 514-286-2636 ext. 2075 mark at zeroknowledge.com http://www.zeroknowledge.com PGP Fingerprint: B7D6 B1E7 92A1 022F 89DE 7CCF 4CA0 5329 41D4 235B --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From despot at crosswinds.net Fri Oct 6 21:34:33 2000 From: despot at crosswinds.net (despot) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 21:34:33 Subject: CDR: Re: Disposable remailers Message-ID: <200010070136.VAA17307@glitch.crosswinds.net> On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Bill O'Hanlon wrote: > It might not be able to have crypto. I'm not sure if > something PGPish can be ported to it and still leave room > for the incoming message. It comes with less than 300K of > useable RAM. However, the TINI does have a socket on it > for an Ibutton, so one of Dallas' Crypto or Java buttons > might be able to take on the crypto load. That's more > money per unit, however. Perhaps this idea would work on low volume remailers. An iButton could be loaded with an applet to perform public key crypto, and thus, a sort of mixmaster remailer could be constructed. But, the memory constraints on iButtons (I believe 134K is the max currently available) and their slow speed may even rule this out for a low-volume remailer. And, as Bill mentioned, latency and reordering would not be feasible. Without those features, the amount of anonymity is reduced. > I'm envisioning that the code would announce itself to some set of > web servers so that people can know where to find a few of these > transient remailers when they wanted to send some messages. Problems occur if the locations of these tini remailers are spread through such means. If the addresses are posted to a web site, tracking down such remailers would be simple, quick, and as thorough as the list of the remailers. > Also, due to the small memory footprint, it doesn't look > like a lot of messages can be stored locally, so there's > not a lot of room for latency and message re-ordering. Use of these tini remailers should really only be done in a remailer-chained message. Of course, the chain would need to include one or more non-tini remailers. This way, even if all tini remailers are monitored, you still have a remailer that provides some level of obfuscation through latency and reordering. But, this disposable remailer idea is solid. As a quick example scheme, if there were some sort of remailer protocol that functioned like routing protocols, as disposable remailers came online, they could announce themselves to other remailers. Pseudorandom hopping from one disposable remailer to another could occur in a remailer-chained message, instead of manually encrypting a message for a chain of remailers. The sender could encrypt the message for the gateway and final non-disposable remailers and then specify a hop count. The first non-disposable remailer would decrypt one layer of encryption, decrement the hop count, pick pseudorandomly a disposable remailer to pass this message to, encrypt this message and pass it on. When the hop count hits one, the message is just forwarded to the final non-disposable remailer in the chain, which would then decrypt the final layer of encryption and passes it on to the recipient. Of course, this example is just something I pulled out of my ass...read up on more advance schemes if interested. The dynamic property of such a scheme would be ideal for disposable remailers. As they are discovered and removed, the system would compensate. With cheap cost, simple set up, and ease of hiding, disposable remailers could be brought online faster than they are taken down. And, if placed anonymously, there will no one to be held responsible for the devices. So, are small devices like tini's the ideal form of the future remailer? Is some sort of distributed, dynamic remailer scheme based on small devices the way to go? The stable remailer running on a box is subject to all sorts of legal issues, isp problems, etc. These covert, anonymous remailers have a great deal more freedom. On a side note, what other throw-away internet-ready devices would be of interest? Motion detectors? Access control devices? Door locks? -andrew From dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu Fri Oct 6 19:03:46 2000 From: dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu (dmolnar) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 22:03:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Disposable remailers In-Reply-To: <200010070136.VAA17307@glitch.crosswinds.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, despot wrote: > But, this disposable remailer idea is solid. As a quick example > scheme, if there were some sort of remailer protocol that > functioned like routing protocols, as disposable remailers came > online, they could announce themselves to other remailers. > Pseudorandom hopping from one disposable remailer to another could > occur in a remailer-chained message, instead of manually > encrypting a message for a chain of remailers. The sender could This reminds me of something I was looking at this spring. Markus Jakobsson has two papers on "A Practical Mix" and "Flash Mixing" which look at mix-nets in a different way than we see in remailers. There, instead of a message being successively encrypted for a particular path through a series of remailers, the remailers pass a prepared encrypted message around and perform a distributed computation on it. At the end of the computation, the decrypted name of the recipient automagically pops out. These kinds of remailers are not original to Jakobsson - but previous efforts that I know about are ridiculously inefficient. The number I remember for one of them is 1600 modexps per message per server. Jakobsson's "Practical Mix" proposal is more like 160. The "Flash Mixing" paper investigates ways to use precomputation to get this to 160 multiplications. I should mention here that Yvo Desmedt and Karou Kurosawa showed in Eurocrypt 2K that the original "Practical Mix" paper has a flaw -- an evil node can cause one of the distributed computations to abort without being caught. They noted that their results didn't extend to the "Flash Mixing" paper; it's been a back-burner project of mine to look at this for...well...too long. Anyway, both papers deal with a collection of mix servers fixed in advance. It seems that disposable remailers would work well with extensions of these protocols modified to deal with dynamic leave and joins of servers. Add this to wireless and you have mobile disposable remailers. Slightly related would be the idea of using commodity computation to do remailing -- just tell people to "go to this page, download this applet, become a remailer!" (or have your HD erased, but...) There are massive issues with trusting new remailer nodes, unfortunately. Imagine what happens when your adversary decides to show up with polynomially many of her closest friends. So a further question would be whether we can design a mix protocol which can a) take advantage of all these cheap, (hopefully) distinct devices and their computation power but b) doesn't give the commodity devices enough power to break the mix, even if many (almost all??) of them act in concert. > On a side note, what other throw-away internet-ready devices would > be of interest? Motion detectors? Access control devices? Door > locks? Pretty much everything, if you believe some people. The Oxygen project at MIT has a vision of computation in absolutely everything. Desmedt has an intriguing article about just what might happen then.. -David From geer at world.std.com Fri Oct 6 20:06:16 2000 From: geer at world.std.com (Dan Geer) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 23:06:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Internet bearer cryptography patent trusts (was Re: Chaumian cash redux) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:40:29 EDT." Message-ID: <200010070306.XAA22763@world.std.com> > This idea below of a "patent pool" is similar to the bearer > cryptography patent trust idea... Bob, An actual discussion of the value of patents would be, at once, fascinating, maddening, and pointless. However, I will risk an anecdote. I attended one of Guy Kawasaki's "Boot Camp for Startups" and registered as "inventor." Guy's events are two days and almost entirely panel discussions, with some motivational speakers thrown in. Guy is superb, I should say, at stocking the panels with people who know something. Wearing my "inventor" badge, I asked nearly every member of nearly every panel what they they had to say about intellectual property protection. This means that I asked the same question to samples of size 4 of each of lawyers, accountants, entrepreneurs, noveau riche cash-outs, venture capitalists, business strategy folk and assorted greybeards. Unanimously, the answer was "Intellectual property protection is vital. Do it right, do it early, don't scrimp. In a dog eat dog world, it is all you've really got." With one exception. Every single one of the VCs there, and similarly every single one of the VCs I've talked to corroboratingly since, said that IP protection is so pointless they don't even value it when sizing a deal. Why? Because in the Internet sector, it is winner take all. Win it all, and your IP position does not matter. Die quick or slow, you're still dead and your IP position does not matter. Go for patents and you'll get something in 24-36 months that is (1) almost surely overlapping somebody else's patent, the USPTO being what it is, and (2) totally irrelevant because the live or die, the win it all or lose it all, point is circa 18 months. The game is over before your pizza boy comes. Unconvinced? Cost out patenting something on a global basis... --dan From bill.stewart at pobox.com Fri Oct 6 20:26:01 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 23:26:01 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: VP debate drinking game In-Reply-To: References: <39DD3279.1774CC7C@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001006180823.00a631e0@idiom.com> At 11:34 PM 10/5/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: ... >Perhaps I'm watching the debates because I recently read a biography >of Lincoln. Ahh - for when you tired of the *lesser* of two evils :-) Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From reeza at flex.com Sat Oct 7 02:28:36 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 23:28:36 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <39DDB168.EC998081@ricardo.de> References: <39DC74BF.8AE3A851@ricardo.de> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005171310.00cb1c60@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001006232528.00cddd40@flex.com> At 01:03 PM 06/10/00 +0200, Tom Vogt wrote: >Reese wrote: >> >MP3 ? >> >> Lossy compression. >> >> balance snipped, we need lossless compression, eh? > >nope we don't. remember that everyone said that .jpeg couldn't be used >for stego for that same reason? then the first .jpeg-stego tools >arrived. hmmm. Introduce the stego, after the .mp3 conversion has been performed, so that new data is introduced to the new .mp3, same as was done with the .jpg files. ok, we are parsing at the same bit rate, I read you loud and clear on this,,, Reese From nymsirio at terra.es Fri Oct 6 15:53:29 2000 From: nymsirio at terra.es (Marcos Calero Armas) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 23:53:29 +0100 Subject: CDR: ignore Message-ID: <000801c02ffe$11405000$aaa7aad4@a3r7r9> información -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 316 bytes Desc: not available URL: From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 7 02:11:16 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 02:11:16 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: > > >>I'm currently thinking of whether or not it is feasable to put stego >>data into EVERY .mp3 downloaded. just put random data into those not >>intended to carry a message. > >For the sake of us audiophiles, please don't. MP3 is tinny and flat >at best; it ticks me off that most folks seem to hear it as "good >enough", because if most folks hear it as "good enough" it means we're >not going to get a better sound format widely used. You're talking >about making the audio channels a bit (more or less) thinner, but >they're too thin already. But if you make them a little "thinner" (and I'll admit to having a tin ear, and preferring the kind of music that doesn't suffer much in that kind of compression), won't that mean that it will sound worse to more people, thus making the push for a better format? -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 7 02:15:41 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 02:15:41 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001006093026.007e0a30@pop.sprynet.com> References: <39DDB0C8.4CC414F2@ricardo.de> <3.0.6.32.20001006093026.007e0a30@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: >At 10:52 AM 10/6/00 -0400, Ray Dillinger wrote: >>For the sake of us audiophiles, please don't. MP3 is tinny and flat >>at best; > >Then why are you 'audiophiles' traumatizing yourselves by listening >to it? > > it ticks me off that most folks seem to hear it as "good >>enough", because if most folks hear it as "good enough" it means we're >>not going to get a better sound format widely used. > >First 'good enough' depends on environment, e.g., ambient noise ---how >about that computer fan, much less the noise in a car? > >Second, why did we evolve CDs if LPs were 'good enough' for most? [Besides >portability] Portability, and durability were primary concerns, plus it's cheaper to make a "decent" sounding CD system than a *decent* sounding analog system. LPs (Well, *properly cared for LPS from early in the production run) (even to my Tin Ear) sound *better* than CDs when played on high end equipment, and when playing music where absolute fidelity matters. CDs are just cheaper to produce, easier to carry around, subject to less degradation when *mildly* abused etc. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sat Oct 7 01:16:56 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 04:16:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Ralf-Philipp Weinmann wrote: >> One variation of the original proposal would be to only allow egress to >> addresses known to lay in a jurisdiction different from the one in which the >> remailer resides. I know, the problem is nontrivial with all the dotcom >> addresses and such around. Does doing a DNS lookup and working on IP >> addresses help? > >Nope. Unfortunately it does not. Deriving the geographical location from >an IP address and a DNS name is not always feasible. But actually the problem, here, is less one of pinpointing the location than of trying to ensure that the location is far enough away. I think some careful thinking in terms of the current BGP aggregation scheme should help at least a little. >which could be reversed to get to the geographical location, however it will >not always be readily apparent how it works. How about trying to automate this process? Using the remailer IPs and possibly some others as well known geographical 'beacons' and utilizing routing aggregation to get parts of the address space that are sure to be close to the remailer and hence 'dangerous'. I think geographical information at the level of nations is at least somewhat reflected in the allocation of IP addresses - it wouldn't seem sensible to allocate IP addresses for two different countries from a single pool. >What one could do however is have the remailer pass on every message which >has a recipient address that is *known to be in a jurisdiction that is different >from the remailers*. And pass those that are known to be in the same. >You will not be able to reach each and every target then, but at least it's >better than nothing. If this sort of egress filtering (or any variant of the original scheme proposed) seems useful, why not develop some protocol/uniform data format to acknowledge the limitations of a given remailer. Type 2 remailers even have the necessary public key infrastructure in place to sign such extra data. >On the other hand I remember that the Curch of Scientology was able to >have an impact on anon.penet.fi despite the fact that this remailer was outside >of US jurisdiction. Maybe we have to come up with a list of "incompatible" >jurisdiction systems to avoid this sort of thing from happening again. The anon case was perhaps a bit different - provided that a remailer is well maintained, cpunk remailer maintainers can display that no data is retained on where different messages originated or were posted to. I do not think even CoS could have shut anon.penet.fi down. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sat Oct 7 01:50:39 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 04:50:39 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001005085753.009b0d80@idiom.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Bill Stewart wrote: >>One variation of the original proposal would be to only allow egress to >>addresses known to lay in a jurisdiction different from the one in which the >>remailer resides. I know, the problem is nontrivial with all the dotcom >>addresses and such around. Does doing a DNS lookup and working on IP >>addresses help? > >That's not something the remailer should be doing - that's something >that the user sending the message should be doing The thread originated from a concern of someone planning to put up a remailer over legal responsibility and related costs. If in fact reducing this cost is a prerequisite to a growing infrastructure of remailers, I would say the remailers should definitely be doing just that. It's not so very different from running a middleman. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 7 07:58:55 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 07:58:55 -0700 Subject: CDR: Government again enters Somalia Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001007075122.025e5da0@shell11.ba.best.com> Some time ago, the president of Somalia returned from his exile to Mogadishu, the former capital of Somalia, which was going to be the new capital of Somalia. Lots of people gave lots of speeches about how popular and successful the new government was, and CNN gave a glowing account of how pleased the Somalis were to have a government again. Approximately twenty four hours later, the new government did a moonlight flit out of Somalia back into exile. Recently the new government announced it was returning from its exile to Baidoa, which is to be the new government of Somalia. Lots of notables gave lots of speeches about how popular and successful the new government was, and CNN gave a glowing account of how pleased the Somalis were to have a government again. Unfortunately neither the president or any senior members of the new government were able to make it Baidoa in time for the press conference. From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 7 08:27:44 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 08:27:44 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001006193606.00ce33b0@flex.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005223340.00cc9410@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001006004242.0202c708@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001007081030.025dbd50@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 03:39 PM 06/10/00 -1000, Reese wrote: James A.. Donald wrote: > > Distortions at Fourth Hand > > Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman > >The Nation, June 25, 1977 > > > >: : such journals as the Far Eastern Economic Review , the > >: : London Economist , the Melbourne Journal of Politics , and > >: : others elsewhere, have provided analyses by highly > >: : qualified specialists who have studied the full range of > >: : evidence available, and who concluded that executions have > >: : numbered at most in the thousands; that these were > >: : localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge influence and > >: : unusual peasant discontent, where brutal revenge killings > >: : were aggravated by the threat of starvation resulting from > >: : the American destruction and killing. These reports also > >: : emphasize both the extraordinary brutality on both sides > >: : during the civil war (provoked by the American attack) and > >: : repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false At 07:56 PM 10/6/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: > http://abbc.com/aaargh/fran/chomsky/cassandra.html > --a 1985 essay by Christopher Hitchens defending > Chomsky against such charges. Merely a denial, not a rebuttal: This essay does not actually claim that the people cited by Chomsky said the things that Chomsky attributes to them. In particular it presents no actual examples of massacre reports that were discovered to be false. It answers none of the criticisms that I or other people have made of Chomsky. Instead it takes fragments of those criticisms out of context, without the specifics of that criticism, and simply denies the charges, without acknowledging or rebutting any of the evidence that Chomsky's accusers present. It does not rebut a single charge, or address a single piece of evidence. It does not rebut, or even address, the charges I made, or indeed any of the charges that any critic made. Most flagrantly, it ignores the fact that Chomsky's position, and the radical left position, on Cambodia changed abruptly and radically when Soviet foriegn policy changed in January 1979, quoting statements that Chomsky made after 1979 as evidence that he did not mean the things he said before 1979. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG a1/b9+joFgSrGbYhfddJ31t3e/FAHktWAG4etk89 4mEy3ZBLFNtOmlUy/IYvzGQ5asmemEJK3EFHcohBT From drt at un.bewaff.net Sat Oct 7 05:30:03 2000 From: drt at un.bewaff.net (Doobee R. Tzeck) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 08:30:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Announcing: cypherpunks@koeln.ccc.de Message-ID: The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to cbone.ml.cypherpunks as well. ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) writes: > What happened to the new node that was supposed to go online at the las= t > meeting? >=20 > Cold feet? No, just a cold staying in bed for a week. So here is the anouncemant: A new CDR Node has opened at koeln.ccc.de. The machine is Located in NRW, Germany and keeps logs. To quote http://koeln.ccc.de/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks About Cypherpunks This is a european node of the cypherpunks distributed remailer (CDR). Other Nodes can be reached at majordomo at ssz.com, majordomo at cyberpass.net, majordomo at minder.net, majordomo at algebra.com and listproc at openpgp.net. There is also the classical cypherpunks at toad.com node which is in an undetermined state. The koeln.ccc.de node feeds minder.net and ssz.com. It recives feeds from minder.net, cyberpass.net, algebra.com ano openpgp.net. This specific node drops messages bigger than 32k and every message with more than 17 recipients or just a line containing "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the subject. This node is also available read-only by nntp. There is some Information how Jim Choate sees CDR history at szz.com. Older archives can be found at inet-one, at venona.com and lanesbry.com. If you interested in physical meetings visit meetingpunks. To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the Cypherpunks Archives.=20 I'm still not really happy with the software but it seems to work without hickups. The nntp-part is still unstable but this shouldn't affect the mail-part. One nice Feature is that you can get a digest. Anonymous UUCP over TCP/ISDN/V.90 for cypherpunks is planned but will take some time. I still didn't get contact with algebra.com, openpgp.net and cyberpass.net administrators to exchange backbone traffic. drt --=20 Aber la=DF mich dich gleich mal vor der Zeitverschwendung deines Lebens bewahren: wenn du mit diesem Problem schon =FCberfordert bist, ist Assembler nichts f=FCr dich. Denn da mu=DF man logisch denken und Proble= me selbst=E4ndig l=F6sen, die sonst ein Compiler f=FCr einen l=F6st. ---Felix von Leitner http://koeln.ccc.de/~drt/ From retire at websu.com Sat Oct 7 08:41:48 2000 From: retire at websu.com (retire at websu.com) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 08:41:48 Subject: CDR: Read Only If Serious About Retiring In 2-4 Years Message-ID: <46.219092.568161@signal> If you are someone who is driven, motivated, and serious about earning a Multiple Six Figure Income, we would like to speak with you. If you have reached the point in your life where you are ready for Financial Freedom and a Real Opportunity to Retire in 2-4 years, calling the number below is your first step. This� is a serious business looking ONLY for those that want to make a MINIMUM of $10,000 per month and to truly be in a position to help others at the same time. **24 Hour Recorded Message:� 1-800-320-9895 Ext. 6579** Not MLM or Franchise Your background, age and debt level are not important. Just a strong desire for financial independence. "Whatever You Vividly Imagine, Ardently Desire, Sincerely Believe, And Enthusiastically Act Upon Must Inevitably Come To Pass." Napoleon Hill To be removed respond at� later1000 at yahoo.com From bear at sonic.net Sat Oct 7 08:45:09 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 08:45:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >>On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: >> >> >>>I'm currently thinking of whether or not it is feasable to put stego >>>data into EVERY .mp3 downloaded. just put random data into those not >>>intended to carry a message. > On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Ray Dillinger wrote: >>You're talking >>about making the audio channels a bit (more or less) thinner, but >>they're too thin already. On Sat, 7 Oct 2000, petro wrote: > > But if you make them a little "thinner" won't that mean that it >will sound worse to more people, thus making the push for a better >format? Um, possibly if *all* MP3's were made with stegodata. If there is *one* source of MP3's that's stego'd and a bunch of other people trying to make them sound as good as possible, the one supplier with consistently poor sound quality will stand out when someone goes looking for stegograms. One thing, which you pointed out in a comment I snipped above, is that some music adapts better to MP3 compression than other music. There is plenty of room for stegodata in synthesizer- pop bands like "Yes" and "The Eurythmics", but almost none in layered atmospheric music like "Enya". If you pick and choose which plaintexts to stego, you can probably be less obtrusive about it. Bear From otd2 at email.com Sat Oct 7 08:59:05 2000 From: otd2 at email.com (otd2 at email.com) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 08:59:05 Subject: CDR: Research this Tech Stock Message-ID: <200010071255.FAA24323@cyberpass.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 824 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 7 09:21:28 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 09:21:28 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001006193606.00ce33b0@flex.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001005223340.00cc9410@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001006004242.0202c708@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001007091916.0175ad98@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 07:56 PM 10/6/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: > It > dissects whines such as yours and sends them to the oven, where they can > be properly roasted with flesh-searing heat, the better to reduce the > fatty content. I have often remarked on how Chomsky's board treats inconvenient facts and unwanted views in the same way that the totalitarian states that Chomsky so admired treated people who noticed inconvenient facts and people who held unwanted views. I see that you are of the same view. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 7n60wR0kTV6gQqeFXHWLyxEyO9UDF1wyR0MfsSQ5 4zy2tyd5+lYSNmN1fVFiyRB7HOhmgCch66Vwq+fva From bear at sonic.net Sat Oct 7 10:14:27 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 10:14:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001007091916.0175ad98@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: Hi everybody; I have no interest in Chomsky flames and wish they would die. In fact, I'm going to *MAKE* them die, for me at least, by filtering posts on chomsky's name. (yes, this post right here is going into the bitbucket when it gets back to me from the list). I'm just dropping this note to remind everyone who's tired of this argument that you also have the power to make your machine ignore it for you, thus saving you the trouble and bother of filtering through it to find actual relevant content. If enough people ignore it, it *will* die. Bear From rah at shipwright.com Sat Oct 7 02:19:15 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 10:19:15 +0100 Subject: CDR: http://www.rfdata.net/ATM-POS/ Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From reeza at flex.com Sat Oct 7 13:53:52 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 10:53:52 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001007081030.025dbd50@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001006193606.00ce33b0@flex.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005223340.00cc9410@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001006004242.0202c708@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007103628.00d96830@flex.com> At 08:27 AM 07/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >Merely a denial, not a rebuttal: Now who is splitting hairs? >This essay does not actually claim that the people cited by Chomsky said >the things that Chomsky attributes to them. In particular it presents no >actual examples of massacre reports that were discovered to be false. In particular, it presents that those now-infamous paragraphs you've finger-wagged, were actually cobbled together from the summary and intro- duction to Volume 1 of "The Political Economy of Human Rights", without ellipses to denote their true origin. >It answers none of the criticisms that I or other people have made of >Chomsky. Then you don't know how to read, and are beginning to be a bore. >Most flagrantly, it ignores the fact that Chomsky's position, and the >radical left position, on Cambodia changed abruptly and radically when >Soviet foriegn policy changed in January 1979, quoting statements that >Chomsky made after 1979 as evidence that he did not mean the things he said >before 1979. You've yet to present anything he has said (with proper source), from post 1979, for comparison with proper quote and attribution, from pre- 1979. Last chance. Reese From reeza at flex.com Sat Oct 7 13:59:38 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 10:59:38 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001007091916.0175ad98@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001006193606.00ce33b0@flex.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005223340.00cc9410@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001006004242.0202c708@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007104511.00cdded0@flex.com> At 09:21 AM 07/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >I have often remarked on how Chomsky's board treats inconvenient facts and >unwanted views in the same way that the totalitarian states that Chomsky so >admired treated people who noticed inconvenient facts and people who held >unwanted views. > >I see that you are of the same view. I'm not on Chomsky's board. You've yet to make a coherent argument that will stand on its own, I'm telling you a third time now: I am not a Chomsky hater, nor am I a Chomsky admirer; his is a name I've heard on this list, but I've not investigated him. I've engaged only in a campaign to verify what you've said, I've not attempted to defend him against your accusations. As yet, you've not presented compelling, irrefutable evidence. After what I've seen the past couple days, Occam's Razor tells me it is because such evidence does not exist, but I'm giving you one last chance to convince me. Give me a valid, pre-79 quote, give me a valid, conflicting, post-79 quote, and tell me what is damning about the two quotes, if you can. The clock is ticking. Reese From egerck at nma.com Sat Oct 7 12:12:29 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 12:12:29 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> "Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > In public-key cryptography "Non-Repudiation" means that that the > probability that a particular result could have been produced without > access to the secret key is vanishingly small, subject to the > assumption that the underlying public-key problem is difficult. If > that property had be called "the key binding property" or "condition > Z," or some other matheze name, we would all be able to look at this > notion more objectively. "Non-repudiation," has too powerful a > association with the real world. Your definition is not standard. The Cryptography Handbook by Menezes defines non-repudiation as a service that prevents the denial of an act. The same is the current definition in PKIX, as well as in X.509. This does not mean, however as some may suppose, that the act cannot be denied -- for example, it can be denied by a counter authentication that presents an accepted proof. Thus, non-repudiation is not a stronger authentication -- neither a long lived authentication. Authentication is an assertion that something is true. Non- repudiation is a negation that something is false. Neither are absolute. And they are quite different when non-boolean variables (ie, real-world variables) are used. They are complementary concepts and *both* need to be used or we lose expressive power in protocols, contracts, etc.. Cheers, Ed Gerck > > > To transfer the cryptographic meaning of "non-repudiation" to a legal > presumption against repudiation requires legislative acceptance four > things: > > 1. the mathematically unproven assumptions in public key cryptography > > 2. the binding of a particular public key to a person > > 3. the ability of an ordinary individual to keep a private key secret > > 4. holding the individual responsible for failure to do so. > > As for 1, note that at the moment there is not even consensus as to > the long term security of , say, a 1024-bit RSA key. As to 2., read > the Verisign certification practice statement. As to 4. not that in > the US we do not presently hold individuals responsible for loss of a > credit card. > > The most problematic assumption is 3. McCullagh lists a couple of > attacks, but there are many more. Here is my incomplete list: > > 1. Planting a program on the user's computer to capture their keyring > and passphrase. > > 2. Replacing the users copy of the cryptographic program with a > doctored version > > 3. Planting a bug in their keyboard to capture key strokes > > 4.* Using a microTV camera to capture passwords and PIN numbers > > 5.* Substituting documents. (You think you are buying a pizza but you > are actually signing a deed to your house. > > 6. Public/private key pairs generated by a third party who's security > is less than perfect > > 7. Poor or deliberately weak random number generation at key creation > > 8.* Algorithm substitution (e.g. multiprime) that weakens security to > reduce computation times > > 9. Guessable passphrases and PINs > > 10.* Allowing someone else to use your key (does the president of > World Wide Widget really hold the key token, or does he give it to > his secretary?) > > 11.* Con artist techniques ("I'm an field agent from CyberSec -- > here's my ID card -- and we'd like your help in tracking down child > pornography dealers on the Internet. We'll need your key token and > PIN. ") > > 12.* Finding ways to penetrate "tamper proof" mechanisms, e.g. power > fluctuation attacks. > > McCullagh believes that "trusted systems," which he defines as "at > least Bl (TCSEC)/E3(ITSEC)/ or even possibly B2(TCSEC)/E4( ITSEC)" > can provide a basis for non-repudiation in the legal sense. He is > under the apprehension that "A trusted computing system performs in > accordance with its documented specification and will prevent any > unauthorised activity." Since Mr. McCullagh background is in law, > let me provide an equivalent statement: "Laws reflect the public's > consensus of what is right and wrong and the judicial system fairly > and accurately enforces those laws." Both are statements of a lofty > goal, not a reality that anyone has been able to achieve. > > Well designed cryptographic tokens can counter some of the attacks I > listed, but not all. The ones I marked with an asterisk are still > applicable and there is still the problem of verifying and auditing > the token manufacturer, a lucrative target for organized crime. > > I can't address the legal arguments he makes since he is in > Australia, but my understanding of the recently enacted electronic > signature law in the US is that it attempts to put electronic > signatures on exactly the same legal footing as paper signatures. It > has no special status for PKC signatures. Clicking an http "I Accept" > button is just as valid, as I understand the law. > > The term "non-repudiation" should be retired. The best that one can > say about public key signature systems for use by the general public > is that they can make forgery much more difficult. That difficulty > should result in reduced rates of attempted fraud, but should never > be a valid pretext for changing the legal burden of proof. > > Arnold Reinhold From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sat Oct 7 02:17:18 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 12:17:18 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <39DDB168.EC998081@ricardo.de> Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Tom Vogt wrote: >> Lossy compression. >> >> balance snipped, we need lossless compression, eh? > >nope we don't. remember that everyone said that .jpeg couldn't be used >for stego for that same reason? then the first .jpeg-stego tools >arrived. The only problem with lossy compression is that it severely limits the capacity of the covert channel. On the other hand, embedding a maximum amount of data into a data stream and losslessly coding the result will certainly show in the compression ratio. Some recent work in audio watermarking has achieved speeds of a couple of hundreds of bits per second. Of course most of those do not get through mp3 but the good thing is that these methods are for all practical purposes inaudible. Built for realtime use with e.g. shoutcast such methods should be capacious enough even after error correction. There's certain irony in using copyright protection research this way, as well... Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From roach_s at intplsrv.net Sat Oct 7 10:24:45 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 12:24:45 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Disposable remailers In-Reply-To: <200010070136.VAA17307@glitch.crosswinds.net> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001007115252.00c0d760@mail.intplsrv.net> At 04:34 PM 10/6/2000, despot wrote: >Perhaps this idea would work on low volume remailers. An iButton >could be loaded with an applet to perform public key crypto, and >thus, a sort of mixmaster remailer could be constructed. But, the >memory constraints on iButtons (I believe 134K is the max >currently available) and their slow speed may even rule this out >for a low-volume remailer. And, as Bill mentioned, latency and >reordering would not be feasible. Without those features, the >amount of anonymity is reduced. If the net is sufficiently large, then the remailers can be considered to be registers, each holding one message for a random length of time, and allow reordering just by that alone. Of course, for this to work, traffic analysis has to be defeated in another way. Probably in ZKS's planned, but last I checked, not implemented, constant activity among nodes. Of course, the more traffic, the easier it will be for the intranets where these things are set up to locate them, and take them down. > > I'm envisioning that the code would announce itself to some set >of > > web servers so that people can know where to find a few of these > > transient remailers when they wanted to send some messages. > >Problems occur if the locations of these tini remailers are spread >through such means. If the addresses are posted to a web site, >tracking down such remailers would be simple, quick, and as >thorough as the list of the remailers. An alternative might be the method that gnutella uses. Each remailer connects one time to a web page put up by the installer. That web page has a limited number of URL's, mostly of other remailers also put up by that same installer, or that installers gang, (substitute cell, orginazition, liberation front, family, user's group, etc). A few are shared by mundane means among cells probably through alt.anonymous.messages, or similar. This allows the remailers to be linked across parties. Each remailer keeps as many remailers in memory as it can, not to exceed a set number, for the safety of the others, and not to drop below another number, set based on practical use of the remailer. (As an example, if a node only remembers 1 other, it no longer is useful for anything but an input or output node. If it only remembers 2, all it can do is pass a message from one to the next.) All this is kept in volatile memory. The nodes ping each other on a regular basis, if a node fails to respond to a ping, that node is written off. Perhaps the next general cover traffic includes information that such-n-such node appears to be compromised. If a node receives NO pings, then it might also write itself off, and blank memory. If extra nodes are occasionally inserted into the system by hailing known nodes and "topping off" their "neighbor list", then well hidden nodes can continue to be used, even after all the original neighboring nodes have been revealed and deactivated. This could even be done through the node network. If a minimum of 3 neighbors is set, and a maximum of 7, and if each URL requires 8+8+8+8+16 bits to store an address, then each remailer needs 18-42 bytes extra in which to store addresses. The URL for the web page can fill this memory for the first run, and would allow for, beyond the URL, 12-36 characters in the address. Actually, message space could also be used to store this boot address, and therefore, shouldn't be a problem at all. It could even be stored as a standard non-ip-number URL. (Say www.geocities.com/hollywood/rodeo/1324/weblist, please note that if this url is functional, I don't know it.) After setup, the node should forget everyone but it's neighbors, to protect them, anyway. > > Also, due to the small memory footprint, it doesn't look > > like a lot of messages can be stored locally, so there's > > not a lot of room for latency and message re-ordering. As I said above, if the latency is random, and the traffic suficient, re-ordering will just be a matter of one message taking a different, and longer, route than another, but by artifically increasing traffic, or even traffic increasing on it's own, you reduce the expected lifespan of the node. >Use of these tini remailers should really only be done in a >remailer-chained message. Of course, the chain would need to >include one or more non-tini remailers. This way, even if all tini >remailers are monitored, you still have a remailer that provides >some level of obfuscation through latency and reordering. > >But, this disposable remailer idea is solid. As a quick example >scheme, if there were some sort of remailer protocol that >functioned like routing protocols, as disposable remailers came >online, they could announce themselves to other remailers. >Pseudorandom hopping from one disposable remailer to another could >occur in a remailer-chained message, instead of manually >encrypting a message for a chain of remailers. The sender could >encrypt the message for the gateway and final non-disposable >remailers and then specify a hop count. The first non-disposable >remailer would decrypt one layer of encryption, decrement the hop >count, pick pseudorandomly a disposable remailer to pass this >message to, encrypt this message and pass it on. When the hop >count hits one, the message is just forwarded to the final >non-disposable remailer in the chain, which would then decrypt the >final layer of encryption and passes it on to the recipient. Of >course, this example is just something I pulled out of my >ass...read up on more advance schemes if interested. > >The dynamic property of such a scheme would be ideal for >disposable remailers. As they are discovered and removed, the >system would compensate. With cheap cost, simple set up, and ease >of hiding, disposable remailers could be brought online faster >than they are taken down. And, if placed anonymously, there will >no one to be held responsible for the devices. > >So, are small devices like tini's the ideal form of the future >remailer? Is some sort of distributed, dynamic remailer scheme >based on small devices the way to go? The stable remailer running >on a box is subject to all sorts of legal issues, isp problems, >etc. These covert, anonymous remailers have a great deal more >freedom. > >On a side note, what other throw-away internet-ready devices would >be of interest? Motion detectors? Access control devices? Door >locks? ... All of the above. Take home that I-coffee pot, add a tini, take it back to the store and apologize that you already had one that you're new inlaws gave you. Same with the door lock, then apologize that your apartment super won't let you install it after all. An extra level of obfuscation is thus created in that dupes install the very remailers that you rigged. They are far less likely, as homeowners living in an electronic age, to realize there is more traffic going over thier connection than they bargained for. Big brother becomes unwitting courier for the underground. Or did you mean in addition to disposible remailers, instead of ways to hide, distribute them? Good luck, Sean Roach From bill.stewart at pobox.com Sat Oct 7 13:12:10 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 13:12:10 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.20001006093026.007e0a30@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001007131210.00a9dcd0@idiom.com> There are better compression mechanisms available - AT&T's a2bmusic compression system claimed to use about half the bandwidth for equivalent audio quality, by using better models of human hearing in their algorithms, and I think SDMI and one of Sony's formats also do something like that. The catch is that most of them also include copy protection systems, with the attempted tradeoff of "better compression for copy protection" and they haven't been able to overcome the popularity of MP3 (as much because of Napster as because of copy protection, I suspect.) There are two ways to hide stego text in MP3 or JPEG. One is before the compression - figure out the kind of sound/picture data that will survive the compression mechanism, which is very hard, but more useful for watermarking. The other is after the compression - where you have to find methods that won't mess up the decompressed version, which may be hard, but either you might not care about the decompressed quality (depends on your threat model) or there might be ways to encode stuff that's either comment-like, so not decompressed at all, or only affects very small parts of the decompressed. At 04:40 PM 10/6/00 -0400, Ray Dillinger wrote: >On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: >>At 10:52 AM 10/6/00 -0400, Ray Dillinger wrote: >>>For the sake of us audiophiles, please don't. MP3 is tinny and flat >>>at best; >> >>Then why are you 'audiophiles' traumatizing yourselves by listening >>to it? > >For the most part, I'm not. I had just hoped to have a better >music format available on the web, and it looks like MP3 is blocking >it from happening. >>We're talking about covertext, not rec.audio.cypherpunks.audiophile >To your message recipient, it's covertext. To everybody else >who downloads tunes, (since you're talking about putting stego >in *all* MP3s downloaded from your site) it's degraded sound >quality. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Sat Oct 7 13:30:40 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 13:30:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: References: <39DE5BA3.DA39C6C4@lsil.com> <39DE5BA3.DA39C6C4@lsil.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001007133040.00a51910@idiom.com> At 04:30 PM 10/6/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: > > The information you need to send is broken up into multiple pieces > > and an index. The simplest method would be ... > >In places where crypto is illegal, this approach would also likely be illegal. >"But, Obergruppenfuhrer Mueller, I am not actually using crypto. >These hundreds of broken up files I have received are merely unwanted >messages sent to me. " > >BTW, the issue is a lot more than just "plausible deniability." This >may work in the U.S., until the Constitution is further shredded. But >"plausibility deniability" is not enough when dealing with the >Staasi, or SAVAK, or Shin Bet, or the Ayotollahs. Mere suspicion is >enough. The point is that each message doesn't have decryptable cyphertext. It only has a secret-share that no recipient can decode until they have enough shares of the same message, even if the KGB rubber-hoses them, and the KGB cryptanalysts won't be able to find anything more than random noise in the message because with Message-ID: <39DF604C.61882A36@acmenet.net> Ray Dillinger wrote: > > Hi everybody; > > I have no interest in Chomsky flames and wish they would die. > In fact, I'm going to *MAKE* them die, for me at least, by > filtering posts on chomsky's name. (yes, this post right here > is going into the bitbucket when it gets back to me from the > list). > > I'm just dropping this note to remind everyone who's tired of > this argument that you also have the power to make your machine > ignore it for you, thus saving you the trouble and bother of > filtering through it to find actual relevant content. > > If enough people ignore it, it *will* die. No, no, no. To judge by the list traffic, Cypherpunks don't write code. Cypherpunks don't make maximal use of the tools they have. Cypherpunks complain endlessly and engage in flamewars. I'm afraid your post was off-charter. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From drt at un.bewaff.net Sat Oct 7 05:09:38 2000 From: drt at un.bewaff.net (Doobee R. Tzeck) Date: 07 Oct 2000 14:09:38 +0200 Subject: CDR: Announcing: cypherpunks@koeln.ccc.de In-Reply-To: ravage@ssz.com's message of "30 Sep 2000 15:21:45 +0200" References: Message-ID: <87r95ssvhj.fsf@c0re.bewaff.net> The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to cbone.ml.cypherpunks as well. ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) writes: > What happened to the new node that was supposed to go online at the last > meeting? > > Cold feet? No, just a cold staying in bed for a week. So here is the anouncemant: A new CDR Node has opened at koeln.ccc.de. The machine is Located in NRW, Germany and keeps logs. To quote http://koeln.ccc.de/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks About Cypherpunks This is a european node of the cypherpunks distributed remailer (CDR). Other Nodes can be reached at majordomo at ssz.com, majordomo at cyberpass.net, majordomo at minder.net, majordomo at algebra.com and listproc at openpgp.net. There is also the classical cypherpunks at toad.com node which is in an undetermined state. The koeln.ccc.de node feeds minder.net and ssz.com. It recives feeds from minder.net, cyberpass.net, algebra.com ano openpgp.net. This specific node drops messages bigger than 32k and every message with more than 17 recipients or just a line containing "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the subject. This node is also available read-only by nntp. There is some Information how Jim Choate sees CDR history at szz.com. Older archives can be found at inet-one, at venona.com and lanesbry.com. If you interested in physical meetings visit meetingpunks. To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the Cypherpunks Archives. I'm still not really happy with the software but it seems to work without hickups. The nntp-part is still unstable but this shouldn't affect the mail-part. One nice Feature is that you can get a digest. Anonymous UUCP over TCP/ISDN/V.90 for cypherpunks is planned but will take some time. I still didn't get contact with algebra.com, openpgp.net and cyberpass.net administrators to exchange backbone traffic. drt -- Aber laß mich dich gleich mal vor der Zeitverschwendung deines Lebens bewahren: wenn du mit diesem Problem schon überfordert bist, ist Assembler nichts für dich. Denn da muß man logisch denken und Probleme selbständig lösen, die sonst ein Compiler für einen löst. ---Felix von Leitner http://koeln.ccc.de/~drt/ From tcmay at got.net Sat Oct 7 11:12:31 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 14:12:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <39DF604C.61882A36@acmenet.net> References: Message-ID: At 1:42 PM -0400 10/7/00, Steve Furlong wrote: >Ray Dillinger wrote: >> >> Hi everybody; >> >> I have no interest in Chomsky flames and wish they would die. >> In fact, I'm going to *MAKE* them die, for me at least, by >> filtering posts on chomsky's name. (yes, this post right here >> is going into the bitbucket when it gets back to me from the >> list). >> >> I'm just dropping this note to remind everyone who's tired of >> this argument that you also have the power to make your machine >> ignore it for you, thus saving you the trouble and bother of >> filtering through it to find actual relevant content. >> >> If enough people ignore it, it *will* die. > >No, no, no. To judge by the list traffic, Cypherpunks don't write code. >Cypherpunks don't make maximal use of the tools they have. Cypherpunks >complain endlessly and engage in flamewars. I'm afraid your post was >off-charter. A cheap shot, as James Donald has written more crypto code than most here, by a wide margin. Cf. his "Kong" program. As for "list traffic," it has been very low by historical standards for the past year or so. Only a handful of names--perhaps a dozen--account for 80% or more of all posts. There are many possible reasons for this, but this is another subject. The point being that most keyboards have a "Delete" key, but very few have a "Create" key: it is always much easier to delete unwanted traffic than to cause new traffic to be created. "Cypherpunks write code" has a certain meaning, often misinterpreted by newbies and other careless types as a statement that words are not important, only C or Java code matters. In fact, it has meaning more along the lines of what Lessig was writing about in his "Code" book (regardless of what one thinks of his conclusions). Many who have been posting here in the past year have apparently _missed_ the core ideas, hence their blathering about the need for privacy laws, about calls for collective action, about legitimate needs of law enforcement. Which tells me we need words more than we need some chunk of C code. (Not that 97% of the subscribers of this or any other similar list have ever written a single program with any conceivable crypto significance.) As for Chomsky, I've been deleting all of the recent posts arguing pro- or con-Chomsky. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From sfurlong at acmenet.net Sat Oct 7 11:41:35 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 14:41:35 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... References: Message-ID: <39DF6E1A.E6743A0D@acmenet.net> Tim May wrote: > > At 1:42 PM -0400 10/7/00, Steve Furlong wrote: > >Ray Dillinger wrote: <> > >No, no, no. To judge by the list traffic, Cypherpunks don't write code. > >Cypherpunks don't make maximal use of the tools they have. Cypherpunks > >complain endlessly and engage in flamewars. I'm afraid your post was > >off-charter. > > A cheap shot, as James Donald has written more crypto code than most > here, by a wide margin. Cf. his "Kong" program. I meant it as a joke, not really a cheap shot. The paucity of emotive grammatical structures in English obscured that. (Let's hear it for Lojban, the clear choice for a universal human language!) > As for "list traffic," it has been very low by historical standards > for the past year or so. Oog. c-punks is the major filler of my inbox. Maybe I just need to subscribe to more mailing lists to lower the percentage . > Only a handful of names--perhaps a > dozen--account for 80% or more of all posts. That's clear enough. I don't think the 80% is right, though if you disregard the obvious trolls and spam you probably nailed it. A lot of the posts aren't especially related to the technology, use, or politics of crypto, but are of interest to people of a c-punkish mindset. No objection to those. My only real objection to the list traffic is the inconsistency of some of the regular posters. If Joe Smegface posts nothing but garbage, he's easy to filter. If he posts about 85% garbage but 15% really good stuff, I don't want to filter him because the 15% is worth it. The problem is the time and aggrevation involved in identifying and discarding the 85%. > Many who have been posting here in the past year have apparently > _missed_ the core ideas, hence their blathering about the need for > privacy laws, about calls for collective action, about legitimate > needs of law enforcement. > > Which tells me we need words more than we need some chunk of C code. Agreed. Coderpunks is good for the code aspect, cypherpunks for all-round issues. Ta, SRF -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From announce at estreetjournal.net Sat Oct 7 14:43:45 2000 From: announce at estreetjournal.net (announce at estreetjournal.net) Date: Sat Oct 7 14:43:45 2000 Subject: CDR: E Street Journal Emerging stock alert Message-ID: <200010071943.OAA76677@estreetjournal.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 893 bytes Desc: not available URL: From no.user at anon.xg.nu Sat Oct 7 12:44:18 2000 From: no.user at anon.xg.nu (No User) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 15:44:18 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk Message-ID: <559dfefc2ca2c94f26eba6385d0292c8@anon.xg.nu> >This subthread came along >because some people have noticed that anonymous remailers are used for >an awful lot of spam. They are? I don't think I have ever received spam sent through a remailer or seen remailed spam in a newsgroup. Where am I most likely to encounter remailed spam? Anonymous From netcenter-reg at netscape.com Sat Oct 7 16:06:15 2000 From: netcenter-reg at netscape.com (Netcenter Registration) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 16:06:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: NETCENTER uid=Bob276Bob key=KJE3P6J9DTen CONFIRM! Message-ID: <200010072306.QAA18200@ureg10.netscape.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 1122 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sfurlong at acmenet.net Sat Oct 7 13:54:05 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 16:54:05 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored References: <39DE5BA3.DA39C6C4@lsil.com> <3.0.5.32.20001007133040.00a51910@idiom.com> Message-ID: <39DF8D2C.19344FE1@acmenet.net> Bill Stewart wrote: > > At 04:30 PM 10/6/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: > >In places where crypto is illegal, this approach would also likely be > illegal. > ... > >BTW, the issue is a lot more than just "plausible deniability." This > >may work in the U.S., until the Constitution is further shredded. But > >"plausibility deniability" is not enough when dealing with the > >Staasi, or SAVAK, or Shin Bet, or the Ayotollahs. Mere suspicion is > >enough. > > The point is that each message doesn't have decryptable cyphertext. > It only has a secret-share that no recipient can decode > until they have enough shares of the same message, > even if the KGB rubber-hoses them, and the KGB cryptanalysts > won't be able to find anything more than random noise in the message > because with Now random noise may also be suspicious, but it's less suspicious > than something that's got more structure to it. > Even if they do suspect the recipient and seize his computer, > they'll only get old messages, not the new partially-received ones. Not good enough, I'm afraid. As Tim said, if the authorities in an authoritarian regime _suspect_ secrets are being passed they have "probable cause" to break out the jumper cables. Unless the holder of an incomplete secret is willing to spill his guts literally rather than figuratively, his group doesn't benefit from a secret which can be detected but not read. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From billp at nmol.com Sat Oct 7 16:28:36 2000 From: billp at nmol.com (billp at nmol.com) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 17:28:36 -0600 Subject: CDR: wild things Message-ID: <39DFB1A3.6344BF73@nmol.com> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/load1.html From johnmuller at earthlink.net Sat Oct 7 18:20:33 2000 From: johnmuller at earthlink.net (John Muller) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 18:20:33 -0700 Subject: FinCEN report on e-cash Message-ID: The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network has posted on its Web site a report on regulatory and law enforcement issues presented by E-cash, E-banking and Internet gaming. This appears to be the document that was leaked to Declan McCullagh and previewed in a WIRED News article a few weeks ago, http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38955,00.html John Muller johnmuller at earthlink.net jmuller at brobeck.com "The humorless power of the state, the iron-fisted control demanded by the corporation, the sexless desire insinuated by broadcast advertising -- all are falling to networked imagination" Christopher Locke --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 7 16:24:31 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 19:24:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: References: <39DF604C.61882A36@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001007153242.025f2008@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 02:12 PM 10/7/2000 -0400, Tim May wrote: > As for Chomsky, I've been deleting all of the recent posts arguing > pro- or con-Chomsky. You did not miss much. In the most recent Chomsky thread, all the same things were said, as have been said so many times before. Indeed, I have traced the canonical Chomsky thread back to 1967. The canonical thread goes as follows: Chomsky critic: "Chomsky distorts and misrepresents the sources he cites, and attributes arguments, evidence, and statements to people that they did not make. Do { Chomsky defender: "No he does not. Produce examples. No one has ever given any examples of Chomsky doing such a thing." Chomsky critic produces his favorite examples again. } while (patience remains); --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG BAnB6UM20wXOg3nqf2/f5M+g0eEq+ETNu3QkxQDR 48hVyE3jP0JHqB9vRs1ecJRcj6KWCgU/wxEAQHdzU From adam at cypherspace.org Sat Oct 7 16:50:10 2000 From: adam at cypherspace.org (Adam Back) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 19:50:10 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored Message-ID: <200010080052.TAA01029@cypherspace.org> Steve Furlong wrote: > Not good enough, I'm afraid. As Tim said, if the authorities in an > authoritarian regime _suspect_ secrets are being passed they have > "probable cause" to break out the jumper cables. So what you need is wide scale deployment of the stego decoder in some otherwise popular software. Eg. talk ID Games into putting a stego subliminal channel in doom computer generated character movements so network doom players can talk to each other steganographically by playing a game and typing in some "cheat mode" to switch the mode on. (The stego channel is the RNG). Adam From mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl Sat Oct 7 11:00:02 2000 From: mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl (Anonymous Remailer) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 20:00:02 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: encryption obsoleted Message-ID: <78fd413dac293870d07545a757ccbde7@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Well, they are original. I do not recall any other instance when a government said "we will not snoop." --- "Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic has no longer any influence on the police and army force in the country, and all phone taps, both fixed and mobile in Serbia have stopped, stated Zoran Djindjic, one of the leaders of the Democratic Opposition of Serbia (DOS), in an interview for B2-92." "Djindjic also said that the first step toward change is that all telephone tapping has been stopped in Serbia." From tcmay at got.net Sat Oct 7 17:07:42 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 20:07:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored In-Reply-To: <200010080052.TAA01029@cypherspace.org> References: <200010080052.TAA01029@cypherspace.org> Message-ID: At 7:50 PM -0400 10/7/00, Adam Back wrote: >Steve Furlong wrote: >> Not good enough, I'm afraid. As Tim said, if the authorities in an >> authoritarian regime _suspect_ secrets are being passed they have >> "probable cause" to break out the jumper cables. > >So what you need is wide scale deployment of the stego decoder in some >otherwise popular software. Eg. talk ID Games into putting a stego >subliminal channel in doom computer generated character movements so >network doom players can talk to each other steganographically by >playing a game and typing in some "cheat mode" to switch the mode on. > >(The stego channel is the RNG). Needless to say, but I will say it anyway, no game company or software company or music provider or anyone else will ever put in something so arcane as a "stego channel." We have to "get real" on these issues. Fortunately, it isn't needed at all. There is so much bandwidth available that no such special channels or provisions are needed. The average "Kill the son of the Scientology dog in Edmonton, Canada on Friday, October 6" crypto message can easily be stegoed in oh so many ways. Possibly even in messages to a.r.s. And the real use of stego is not in sending Usenet- or Napster-like messages. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From leif779 at home.com Sat Oct 7 13:23:19 2000 From: leif779 at home.com (Leif Ericksen) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 20:23:19 +0000 Subject: CDR: Re: Guys, I need help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20001008011434.NRGP4311.mail.rdc2.pa.home.com@shadrach> At 07:08 PM 10/6/00 -0700, you wrote: > > Your anonymizer.com is blocked in Saudi Arabia via proxy. Can you tell me a > way I can see this site DEFECT and move to a country that allows access to the server! From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 7 20:36:40 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 20:36:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007104511.00cdded0@flex.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001007091916.0175ad98@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001006193606.00ce33b0@flex.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005223340.00cc9410@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001006004242.0202c708@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001007192305.01a29478@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 10:59 AM 10/7/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: > You've yet to make a coherent argument that will stand on its own I have presented examples of Chomsky citing vaguely specified sources that supposedly provide evidence for all sorts of astonishing things, supposedly provide evidence for the then Soviet line, yet strange to report, no one is able to produce this alleged evidence. When the Soviet line changed, no one continued to claim these things were true. In particular, no one continued to claim the existence of "repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false" I have looked for this alleged evidence, and not found it. It does not appear to exist. It is the job of Chomsky's fans, not my job, to find these "repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false", and the rest. That was an example of evidence that Chomsky claimed existed, but which does not exist. > Give me a valid, pre-79 quote, give me a valid, conflicting, post-79 > quote, and tell me what is damning about the two quotes, if you can. Chomsky before 1979: (falsely purporting to be quoting "highly qualified specialists") : : executions have numbered at most in the thousands; that : : these were localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge : : influence and unusual peasant discontent, where brutal : : revenge killings were aggravated by the threat of : : starvation resulting from the American destruction and : : killing Chomsky after 1979, in the documentary film "Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media" called the Khmer Rouge the perpetrators of the : : worst atrocity of the modern era. Of course a film citation is almost impossible to check. I could be making up that citation in the same way that Chomsky makes up most of his citations, locating the bogus citations in hard to check places. In fact I have never seen the movie and do not intend to see it, but fans of Chomsky endlessly cite those above words as evidence that Chomsky is not a supporter of the Khmer Rouge. Just do a search for "worst atrocity of the modern era" in Deja News. And indeed, what they claim is true: Once Soviet policy changed, Chomsky was no longer a supporter of the Khmer Rouge. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG xqYRAjMOSnaZ+jIobjTAWT2jqUFDEhppFxi1B4H0 4zhCSxvpXJfiyFBN7bgdDJM1ghMMrZqMV9Va6jPaj From mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl Sat Oct 7 11:45:01 2000 From: mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl (Anonymous Remailer) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 20:45:01 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: encryption obsoleted Message-ID: <0ba288f7f87e320cb345287e6d5dedfe@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Well, they are original. I do not recall any other instance when a government said "we will not snoop." --- "Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic has no longer any influence on the police and army force in the country, and all phone taps, both fixed and mobile in Serbia have stopped, stated Zoran Djindjic, one of the leaders of the Democratic Opposition of Serbia (DOS), in an interview for B2-92." "Djindjic also said that the first step toward change is that all telephone tapping has been stopped in Serbia." From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 7 21:05:41 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 21:05:41 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001007192305.01a29478@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007104511.00cdded0@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001007091916.0175ad98@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001006193606.00ce33b0@flex.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005223340.00cc9410@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001006004242.0202c708@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001007205202.01a2dca8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 08:36 PM 10/7/2000 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: Chomsky before 1979: (falsely purporting to be quoting "highly qualified specialists") : : executions have numbered at most in the thousands; that : : these were localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge : : influence and unusual peasant discontent, where brutal : : revenge killings were aggravated by the threat of : : starvation resulting from the American destruction and : : killing I am guilty of oversimplification here: Chomsky and Herman 's claim to be quoting highly qualified specialists is true in the sense that one journalist who specialized in covering asia did offer opinions (opinions, not the promised evidence) somewhat similar to those that Chomsky described, but false in that the opinions of the cited "highly qualifed specialists" were considerably more cautious and less extreme than those attributed to them by Chomsky and Herman. When Chomsky talks of "analyses by highly qualified experts" he is referring to the same people that Shawcross depicts as inexperienced stringers: Shawcross tells us: : : Through 1974, however, as more and more reports of Khmer : : Rouge brutality began to seep out of the growing areas : : that they controlled, some journalists began to wonder : : whether postwar reconciliation would be as easy as they : : had hoped. In March 1974, the Baltimore Sun correspondent : : wrote of "the incomprehensible brutality of the Khmer : : Rouge communists"; the Washington Post reported on how the : : Khmer Rouge were "restructuring people." Sydney Schanberg : : of The New York Times wrote about the joy with which : : refugees escaped Khmer Rouge control at Kompong Thom. : : James Fenton wrote in the New Statesman of the fear with : : which some Khmers were beginning to talk of the other : : side. In the fall of 1974, journalists learned of Sar : : Sarsdam, a village near Slem Reap, which had been burned : : by the Khmer Rouge and in which, according to Catholic : : Relief Services workers, over sixty peasants had been : : brutally killed. Old women were reported to have been : : nailed to the walls of their homes before being burned : : alive. Children had been torn apart by hand. : : : : Even so, there were few journalists in Phnom Penh who : : wanted to believe the blood-bath theory. It had been : : invoked so often by United States officials in defense of : : a policy with which most of those same journalists : : disagreed, that there was a tendency in the final days of : : the war to dismiss the United States Ambassador John : : Gunther Dean and other officials who harped on Sar Sarsdam : : as hawks who wished to prolong the war. Martin Woollacott : : of the Guardian later recalled with pain that some : : journalists sang a little song to the tune of "She Was : : Poor but She Was Honest": : : : : Oh will there be a dreadful bloodbath : : When the Khmer Rouge come to town? : : Aye, there'll be a dreadful bloodbath : : When the Khmer Rouge come to town. : : : : When the Khmer Rouge did come to town, in April 1975, only : : a few foreigners remained in Phnom Penh. Closeted in the : : French Embassy they watched, at first more astonished than : : appalled, as the victorious young army began to empty the : : entire city at gunpoint. Hospital patients, refugees, : : schoolchildren, all had to take one of the main roads out : : of the city. Most of the Cambodians in the Embassy were : : ordered to leave its supposed sanctuary and to trek into : : the countryside as well. The foreigners were then trucked : : to the Thai border. From then on, the Khmer Rouge closed : : Cambodia almost completely from the outside world and : : embarked upon one of the most radical and bloody : : revolutions in history. : : : : For the next three and a half years the few thousand : : refugees who managed to escape to Thailand were the : : principal source of news about the country. They told from : : the start a consistent story of deaths from starvation and : : exhaustion during the evacuation of Phnom Penh; of forced : : evacuation of almost all the towns after Phnom Penh; of : : relocation into new villages or work zones; of inadequate : : food supplies and nonexistent medical care; of a rule of : : terror conducted by young boys with AK-47s on behalf of a : : shadowy, all-powerful organization known as Angka. : : Refugees spoke of people being shot, clubbed to death or : : buried alive for disobeying orders, asking questions or in : : some other way infringing the rules that Angka laid down. : : Among the dreadful tales they told were those of babies : : being beaten to death against trees. : : : : Accounts of such atrocities began to appear in the Western : : press in the summer of 1975. In London, early reports were : : by Bruce Loudoun and John McBeth in the conservative Daily : : Telegraph, the paper which had reported German atrocities : : wrongly in World War I and correctly in World War 11. In : : July, Henry Kamm wrote a long article in The New York : : Times, and the paper ran an editorial cornparing the Khmer : : Rouge policies with "Soviet extermination of kulaks or : : with the Gulag Archipelago." Kamm was one of the few : : journalists on a major newspaper to cover the Cambodian : : story throughout. : : : : Clearly, Cambodia was not ignored. Its travails received : : far more attention than those of, say, East Timor, Burundi : : or the Central African Republic, to mention just three : : other contemporary disasters. Nonetheless, it was some : : time before many reporters came to accept that terrible : : events were taking place in Cambodia. just as few people : : had wished to believe in the elimination of the Jews until : : the evidence was thrust before them, so many people wished : : not to believe that atrocities were taking place in : : Cambodia after the Khmer Rouge takeover. This was : : especially true among reporters who had reported the war : : negatively from the Lon Nol side, hoping for the victory : : of the others. Far from eagerly seeking, let alone : : fabricating, evidence of Khmer Rouge atrocities, they : : shrank from it. Others believed, at least for a short : : time, that the refugees were unreliable, that the CIA was : : cooking up a blood bath to say, "We told you so." --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 37WRF9Dxu4BQA95/Aau0TADk3uxHakiwls/x/2hO 43h9eP3yiKs/5DZgro5iNVIJXgutdxyHoBBMFjBxz From reeza at flex.com Sat Oct 7 18:55:34 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 21:55:34 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001007153242.025f2008@shell11.ba.best.com> References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007155141.00cf2800@flex.com> At 07:24 PM 07/10/00 -0400, James A.. Donald wrote: >At 02:12 PM 10/7/2000 -0400, Tim May wrote: > > As for Chomsky, I've been deleting all of the recent posts arguing > > pro- or con-Chomsky. > >You did not miss much. > >In the most recent Chomsky thread, all the same things were said, as have >been said so many times before. Indeed, I have traced the canonical >Chomsky thread back to 1967. > >The canonical thread goes as follows: You are the entity making the allegations, yet Chomsky remains as accredited in some circles as he ever was. Yours is to provide conclusive, irrefutable proof, not make wild accusations. If you've done this as many times as you've said, one would think you had all the requested arguments, proofs and critiques readily at hand. Time is running out, for your credibility on this issue. Reese From regsupport at netscape.com Sat Oct 7 22:04:08 2000 From: regsupport at netscape.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 22:04:08 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Guys, I need help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001007220408.00ad29c0@idiom.com> At 07:08 PM 10/6/00 -0700, M. Emad Ul Hasan wrote: > Your anonymizer.com is blocked in Saudi Arabia via proxy. >Can you tell me a way I can see this site There are lots of open proxy servers, which will let you access other sites by setting your web proxy to use them. I don't have a list handy, but most search engines will make it easy to look for them. Also, does the proxy block the IP address, or only the domain name? If it blocks by name, use the IP address. If it blocks by IP address, write the administrators of anonymizer.com to see if they've got alternative IP addresses. Also, see if your proxy blocks spaceproxy.com. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From reeza at flex.com Sun Oct 8 01:41:05 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 22:41:05 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001007192305.01a29478@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007104511.00cdded0@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001007091916.0175ad98@shell11.ba.best.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001006193606.00ce33b0@flex.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001005223340.00cc9410@flex.com> <4.3.1.2.20001006004242.0202c708@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007222618.00ce89c0@flex.com> At 08:36 PM 07/10/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >I have presented examples of Chomsky citing vaguely specified sources that >supposedly provide evidence for all sorts of astonishing things, supposedly >provide evidence for the then Soviet line, yet strange to report, no one is >able to produce this alleged evidence. When the Soviet line changed, no one >continued to claim these things were true. In particular, no one continued >to claim the existence of "repeated discoveries that massacre reports were >false" To be addressed in my next, which, likely, will be my last, to you. >I have looked for this alleged evidence, and not found it. Considering how you've read things into my posts, I am, shall I say, dumbfounded. >It is the job of Chomsky's fans, not my job, to find >these "repeated discoveries that massacre reports were false", and the rest. I am not a Chomsky fan, for the fourth time. Get a clue, ok? I'm critiquing you and your allegations, not defending Chomsky. >Chomsky after 1979, in the documentary film "Manufacturing Consent: Noam >Of course a film citation is almost impossible to check. This is where I sign off. By my way of calculation, I owe you one more reply. Barring some epiphany resultant from a coronary or other life-changing event, I expect it will be the last time I reply to you, on this topic. Reese From ben at algroup.co.uk Sat Oct 7 15:10:53 2000 From: ben at algroup.co.uk (Ben Laurie) Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 23:10:53 +0100 Subject: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> Message-ID: <39DF9F6D.438436C5@algroup.co.uk> Ed Gerck wrote: > > "Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > > > In public-key cryptography "Non-Repudiation" means that that the > > probability that a particular result could have been produced without > > access to the secret key is vanishingly small, subject to the > > assumption that the underlying public-key problem is difficult. If > > that property had be called "the key binding property" or "condition > > Z," or some other matheze name, we would all be able to look at this > > notion more objectively. "Non-repudiation," has too powerful a > > association with the real world. > > Your definition is not standard. The Cryptography Handbook by Menezes > defines non-repudiation as a service that prevents the denial of an act. The > same is the current definition in PKIX, as well as in X.509. This does not mean, however as some may suppose, that the act cannot be denied -- for example, > it can be denied by a counter authentication that presents an accepted proof. > > Thus, non-repudiation is not a stronger authentication -- neither a long lived > authentication. Authentication is an assertion that something is true. Non- > repudiation is a negation that something is false. Neither are absolute. And > they are quite different when non-boolean variables (ie, real-world variables) > are used. They are complementary concepts and *both* need to be used or > we lose expressive power in protocols, contracts, etc.. Since we're in hair-splitting mode, I should point out that "prevents the denial of an act" is not equivalent to a "negation that something is false". Of course, logically, it comes to the same thing, but then, so does "assertion that something is true". Assuming you believe in excluded middles, that is (which, of course, you don't, as you have said). But the important point is that the mechanism could be (and usually is) entirely different. Blimey. I appear to be agreeing with Ed. Cheers, Ben. -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html Coming to ApacheCon Europe 2000? http://apachecon.com/ From tcmay at got.net Sat Oct 7 23:48:40 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 23:48:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Comments on and about e-privacy in Canada In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001008014147.00ae7f00@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001008014147.00ae7f00@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 1:55 AM -0400 10/8/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >I do hope Robert thinks through this. Or maybe this is another >example of cypherpunk thinking not meshing well with Canada. Austin >of ZKS spoke Wednesday here in DC, and his comments are relayed to >me from another speaker who is sympathetic to his position: > >>Austin H. made an interesting point this morning >>at the WSJ Tech Summit. He pointed out that for >>all the grumbling about government rules, no >>hi-tech CEO would seriously recommend abolishing >>the SEC. > >Perhaps. But some cypherpunks might argue for it, in the stronger >case, or in the weaker, simply argue that the SEC will become less >and less relevant. "O'Brien pointed out that for all the grumbling about the rules for writers imposed by the Ministry of Truth, not one of the accredited writers and publishers would seriously recommend abolishing MiniTru." He went on to say, "To do so would be to bring on "literary anarchy," with no control over top-down reputations, no recourse for incorrect thoughts, and the spread of peer-to-peer, aka prole-to-prole, communications." Back to our reality... The SEC has valid _contractual enforcement_ roles. I haven't worked out all the details, but I'm sure a free market rating/credentially agency could handle most of the chores, with various forms of private law (polymorphic law, a la Benson's "The Enterprise of Law, circa 1990-91). Caveat emptor...it's not as though we're not flooded with plenty of information on which to base decisions. Most of what the SEC does is not too terribly unlibertarian, though some of the recent moves to make "financial advisors" more "accountable" is disturbing. Even opinions expressed on bulletin boards and chat rooms and newsgroups may soon come under their control...so much for the First Amendment. "("It's for the investors!") However, I don't get the thrust of Austin's comments. Perhaps he'll read this and add some detail. Certainly the practical effect of a _real_ 2-way anonymous communication system will be to basically _gut_ the core of the SEC. Proles will be able to talk up stocks, spread rumors, all the usual stuff expected in a free society. (The recent case of the LA-based young man who shorted Emulex and then faked a press release has been discussed many times. In a free society, his communications could better be protected against traceability. On the other hand, digital signatures from a company would be expected. Trust the laws of mathematics, not the laws of men.) If Austin is drawing conclusions that we _need_ an SEC, then perhaps the flaws and delays people are reporting for ZKS are indicative of a deeper issue. Maybe ZKS plans to make their system "meet the legitimate needs of law enforcement." The Thought Police will be thrilled. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 7 21:19:42 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 00:19:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007155141.00cf2800@flex.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001007153242.025f2008@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001007211003.01857dd8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 09:55 PM 10/7/2000 -0400, Reese wrote: > You are the entity making the allegations, yet Chomsky remains as > accredited in some circles as he ever was. Chomsky made some remarkable claims, which I have quoted, for the existence of some remarkable evidence. So are you claiming that this alleged evidence seemingly cited by Chomsky exists, or are you denying that Chomsky claimed the existence of this evidence? Choose one story and stick to it. If you claim the evidence cited by Chomsky exists, where is it? If you deny that Chomsky cited this very remarkable evidence, then let us once again go over his words. Commit yourself to one excuse or the other excuse. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 5fUvqkQv7jG0Klmp29kCBYrlIHn5dCXZ5GTGduqj 4kTN3SFbxObY8otmB/uYKSwW/pI2lprFHgj9rKSc6 From notify at egroups.com Sat Oct 7 17:28:24 2000 From: notify at egroups.com (eGroups) Date: 8 Oct 2000 00:28:24 -0000 Subject: CDR: Confirm your request to register for eGroups Message-ID: <970964904.7054@egroups.com> Hello, You are receiving this because someone has requested to register the email address cypherpunks at toad.com with eGroups, a free email group service. To complete your registration, we need to verify that your email address is valid and that you do wish to register with our service. To continue with registration, please follow the confirmation steps below: 1. Go to the Web site: http://www.egroups.com/register?confirm&email=cypherpunks at toad.com 2. Enter the following authorization number: 53555 To access the eGroups Web site, please visit: http://www.egroups.com If you did not request, or do not want, an eGroups account, please accept our apologies and ignore this message. Regards, eGroups Customer Support IMPORTANT NOTE: If you believe your email address has been registered with eGroups without your consent, please forward a copy of this message to abuse at egroups.com From notify at egroups.com Sat Oct 7 17:49:34 2000 From: notify at egroups.com (eGroups) Date: 8 Oct 2000 00:49:34 -0000 Subject: CDR: Confirm your request to register for eGroups Message-ID: <970966174.17362@egroups.com> Hello, You are receiving this because someone has requested to register the email address cypherpunks at toad.com with eGroups, a free email group service. To complete your registration, we need to verify that your email address is valid and that you do wish to register with our service. To continue with registration, please follow the confirmation steps below: 1. Go to the Web site: http://www.egroups.com/register?confirm&email=cypherpunks at toad.com 2. Enter the following authorization number: 53555 To access the eGroups Web site, please visit: http://www.egroups.com If you did not request, or do not want, an eGroups account, please accept our apologies and ignore this message. Regards, eGroups Customer Support IMPORTANT NOTE: If you believe your email address has been registered with eGroups without your consent, please forward a copy of this message to abuse at egroups.com From reeza at flex.com Sat Oct 7 21:51:18 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 00:51:18 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001007211003.01857dd8@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007155141.00cf2800@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007184411.00cff930@flex.com> At 12:19 AM 08/10/00 -0400, James A.. Donald wrote: >Chomsky made some remarkable claims, which I have quoted, for the >existence of some remarkable evidence. > >So are you claiming that this alleged evidence seemingly cited by Chomsky >exists, or are you denying that Chomsky claimed the existence of this >evidence? Learn how to read - and comprehend - what I type. Stop trying to put words in my mouth. >Choose one story and stick to it. I try not to emulate broken records on a Victrola that plays too slow. >If you claim the evidence cited by Chomsky exists, where is it? If >you deny that Chomsky cited this very remarkable evidence, then let us >once again go over his words. > >Commit yourself to one excuse or the other excuse. Commit myself to one prepared excuse or another? Natch on that, I've told you three times my position on all of this, I'll not repeat myself now. You have provided new info, I'll be looking into it - even though a part of it is checking to see whether you've quoted your own webpage accurately. Reese From declan at well.com Sat Oct 7 22:55:16 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 01:55:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Comments on and about e-privacy in Canada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001008014147.00ae7f00@mail.well.com> At 16:38 10/6/2000 -0700, Tim May wrote, in response to Robert Guerra: >Again you show yourself to be uncritical of these claims. You don't "get it." >[...] >The solution is not a regimen of data privacy laws but tecnologies to >enable consumers to remain private. Those who "give permission" for their >refrigerator to contact some outside party have made their choice. Right. There are solid principled reasons to oppose government regulations on what people can and can't do with information. Let them make up their own minds instead. There are also economic arguments, as Richard Epstein recently spoke about (http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38893,00.html). But there are even better, IMHO, technological reasons to oppose such government rules. As technology advances and more data become available for sale or exchange, it will be very difficult for a Canadian/European regulatory framework to reasonably exist. Cypherpunkish technology will create underground markets, anonymous distribution methods, and so on, and the only way to enforce such regulations will be for the Feds/Mounties to take drastic steps. (For instance, strong anonymity is an emergent property of a distributed network combined with strong encryption. Restricting strong anonymity means key escrow.) I do hope Robert thinks through this. Or maybe this is another example of cypherpunk thinking not meshing well with Canada. Austin of ZKS spoke Wednesday here in DC, and his comments are relayed to me from another speaker who is sympathetic to his position: >Austin H. made an interesting point this morning >at the WSJ Tech Summit. He pointed out that for >all the grumbling about government rules, no >hi-tech CEO would seriously recommend abolishing >the SEC. Perhaps. But some cypherpunks might argue for it, in the stronger case, or in the weaker, simply argue that the SEC will become less and less relevant. -Declan From declan at well.com Sat Oct 7 23:03:16 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 02:03:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001008015656.00a9ead0@mail.well.com> I wrote in another thread: >framework to reasonably exist. Cypherpunkish technology will create >underground markets, anonymous distribution methods, and so on, and the >only way to enforce such regulations will be for the Feds/Mounties to take >drastic steps. (For instance, strong anonymity is an emergent property of >a distributed network combined with strong encryption. Restricting strong >anonymity means key escrow.) Perhaps I overstated my argument above. It seems to me that if the Feds want to restrict strong anonymity, they have some choices: * Make it a felony (death penalty may have some deterrent effect) to take advantage of it. * Require key escrow/key recovery/message recovery/Clipper * Require that anonymous remailers or similar devices implement identity escrow/keep logs * Ban Internet service providers/backbone providers from accepting traffic from an anonymous remailer node (a tricky tactic, this, since end-of-chain remailers are relatively few compared to the middle-of-chain ones, at least today). * Do the same thing with outgoing traffic directed to the first remailer node * Ban the operation or hosting of remailers, and work internationally to do the same thing, through G8, Council of Europe, UN Anything else? -Declan From sfurlong at acmenet.net Sat Oct 7 23:39:36 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 02:39:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity References: <4.3.0.20001008015656.00a9ead0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <39E01658.9E9C3610@acmenet.net> Declan McCullagh wrote: > > >... Restricting strong > >anonymity means key escrow.) > > Perhaps I overstated my argument above. It seems to me that if the Feds > want to restrict strong anonymity, they have some choices: <> > Anything else? Routinely monitor communications lines. Allow unlimited data collection for traffic analysis. Allow monitoring of content. Make the use of crypto prima facie evidence of criminal intent. (Begin a public awareness campaign comparing having crypto on your computer to walking around a parking lot with a slim-jim.) Allow seizure of hardware or black bag bugging. To show we're tough on cyber-criminals, we'll allow it without a judge's signature. This hits a lot more than anonymity, of course, but it's for the chiiiildren. Require ISPs to get a license to operate. Terms can be set arbitrarily high. (Bonus points if you make them pay for the monitoring hardware, software, and governmental labor.) Require (though allowing might be enough) telcos to place limits on the kind of traffic that may pass over their wires. If a block doesn't have full headers identifying source and destination (both of which must be registered with some, uh, registry) it can't pass. Mandate IPv6, with the embedded MAC address or whatever they were going to put in it. Processor IDs, a la P-III, which must be encoded in all sorts of traffic. Don't allow unsigned email; require that all internet users get a signing certificate from the Post Office, which of course can tie certs to computer IDs, TrueNames, and land address. In general, look at what China is doing. Britain and Russia, too. About a year ago I put some work into a book, _Crashing the Web_ (working title, of course). It focused on governmental or corporate options to kill the Wild Wild West. I abandoned the book around December when someone, I forgot who, came out with a book covering much of the same ground. I might be able to resurrect some of my notes and early drafts, but they were probably lost to my boneheaded drive wipe six months ago. (Yes, I make backups. Yes, I encrypt my backups. No, I don't necessarily remember the passwords. Yes, I'm a retard.) Drop me a line if you'd like me to rummage around. Thanks a lot. I was about to go to bed, and now I'll have Big Brotherish dreams. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From notify at egroups.com Sat Oct 7 20:25:42 2000 From: notify at egroups.com (eGroups) Date: 8 Oct 2000 03:25:42 -0000 Subject: CDR: Confirm your request to register for eGroups Message-ID: <970975542.7818@egroups.com> Hello, You are receiving this because someone has requested to register the email address cypherpunks at toad.com with eGroups, a free email group service. To complete your registration, we need to verify that your email address is valid and that you do wish to register with our service. To continue with registration, please follow the confirmation steps below: 1. Go to the Web site: http://www.egroups.com/register?confirm&email=cypherpunks at toad.com 2. Enter the following authorization number: 53555 To access the eGroups Web site, please visit: http://www.egroups.com If you did not request, or do not want, an eGroups account, please accept our apologies and ignore this message. Regards, eGroups Customer Support IMPORTANT NOTE: If you believe your email address has been registered with eGroups without your consent, please forward a copy of this message to abuse at egroups.com From vin at shore.net Sun Oct 8 00:39:59 2000 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 03:39:59 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001005185951.00cf51b0@shell1.shore.net> Vin McLellan wrote: >> My comment was simply that the Hitachi patent claims set the >> stage for rumors that may shadow the AES choice for years. I think that >> is unfortunate. Personally, I think it is embarrassing that the Hitachi >> patents were ever issued. Arnold G. Reinhold replied: >Maybe I am missing something, but what would be the big deal if NIST did >take patent claims into account? There were five excellent candidates. If >NIST picked Rijndael in part because it least likely to be tied up in >court for the next N years, does that diminish their glory? Myself, I wouldn't blame NIST if they factored, as you suggest, avoidance of endless legal hassles into their decision-making process. (Nor, when you come down to it, would I be shocked to discover that NIST subsequently lied, or issued misleading comments, about whether the Hitachi patent claims were a factor in their decision... just to keep the AES Process out of the Courts.) The Hitachi patents become an inevitable issue -- for conspiracy buffs, if no one else -- only because the winner was the single AES Finalist that Hitachi did not claim was infringing upon its "data rotation" crypto patents.(See ) (This, in turn, becomes a little more complicated because, as Schneier et al argue, Rijndael -- despite *not* being mentioned in the Hitachi letter than tagged the other four Finalist -- seems to be as vulnerable, or not, to the Hitachi patents as the named four: MARS, RC6, TwoFish, and Serpent.) I don't think anything that (might have) happened in NIST's private AES deliberations can lessen the accomplishment of this historically open process of soliciting, evaluating, and choosing (to the extent that any final selection can be open;-) Rijndael as the AES, from among the five great cryptosystems that were AES Finalists. While I appreciate how difficult it is for many -- Yanks and non-Yanks (indeed, anyone who knows anything about US Crypto Politics and the historic subservience of NIST to the NSA) -- to dismiss the influence of the US signals intelligence agencies upon the AES process as negligible, I think we lucked out. In the aftermath of the flawed Clipper Chip fiasco -- the Fortezza disaster; the pro-crypto rebellion of the EC; with the steady deterioration of the NSA's stature mystique in Congress and among American businessmen, and the common presumption that electronic commerce is the economic engine for the first decade of the 21st Century -- I think we got an open AES review, and a reasonable final choice among the best cryptosystems that could be solicited from the most capable (non-governmental) cryptographers available. Hosanna! Skeptics may quibble on relative weight put on various stated criteria, but no one familiar with the professional stature, respective egos, and personal independence of the "AES cryptographers," as a group, is going to suggest that these development teams were tame, tainted with some spooky impulses to offer only so much crypto strength and no more. That a Belgian cryptosystem was eventually selected as the American AES may make it easier to dismiss those fears overseas, and may hasten the adoption of AES internationally. Full AES standardization and interoperability, a good thing, should come more quickly. Given the integrity of the larger AES process -- and the universal respect Rijndael seemed to win among all the cryptographers involved -- I think it is clear that the relative weight of the Hitachi patent claims in NIST's AES selection process was minor. Whether, minor or not, that impact might have shifted the balance from another contender to Rijndael is impossible to say. Unless, of course, you accept NIST's simple declaration in its Report on the Development of the AES: , pg. 79. Noting that NISt had solicited, collected, and analyzed IP claims relevant to the AES candidates, the report baldly states: "...IP was not a factor in NIST's selection of the proposed AES algorithm." That says, I think, that no IP claims against the AES Finalists were substantive enough to influence the final selection. (As an American, of course, I believe that skepticism about the truthfulness of any governmental declarations is an inalienable right, as well as common sense.) NIST's bureaucratic language is also just cryptic enough to support alternative interpretations. How "not a factor?" A recent C'punk tirade about NIST, AES, and HItachi from the irrepressible John Young, patron and editor of the Cryptome website, beats this drum; Mr. Young seeks deep secrets, undocumented considerations, tell-all revelations. (My own feeling is that it may be a bit much to expect NIST to publicly piss all over valid US patents and the US PTO. Maybe a terse declaration like that in the AES Report is about all cynics should expect at this time.) Mind you, NIST's AES Report also explained that the AES (Rijndael) will be published as a FIPS with a pro forma warning that existing patents might lead to claims against users of the AES standard. In truth, I'm not sure how big a deal it would be if the Hitachi patents -- and inadequacies of the US PTO and its recent history of issuing unlikely and bizarre patents in IT -- were found to have been, despite current denials, a factor in the eventual selection of Rijndael over the other contenders. Politically, I suspect that hanging a "deciding factor" in the AES decision on the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) would not be a prudent thing for NIST executives to do, particularly in the heat of a Gore/Bush Presidential race. It might focus a lot of querulous public attention on the less than glorious track record of the US Patent Office under the Clinton/Gore Administration. I figure there are always a lot of things unspoken, certainly unreported, in any big policy decision like this. Who can doubt it? (Even the AES timetable -- with the decision dropped in the middle of a Presidential race -- seems to a cynic like me designed to give NIST its best chance for keeping the AES Selection Process open and above board.) Given the quality of all the Final Five, others might make as good a case for an (unacknowledged by NIST) pro-Rijndael bias by noting that only Rijndael and Serpent were "non-corporate" entries. Or that Rijndael and Serpent were the only non-American AES Finalists -- and that Rijndael's designers (unlike Serpent's team of Ross Anderson et al) seem to be comparatively unpolitical or apolitical. [I chuckle to think of the consternation at GCHQ and several British Ministries if Prof. Anderson -- long an articulate and effective critic of the UK's slide toward a "Surveillance Society" -- picked up the additional stature of being co-author of the AES.] One can blither through endless permutations. And some will. Cryptographic standards like the proposed AES will inevitably attract doubtful critics and conspiratorial rumors. I trust that the ongoing validation of Rijndael over the next few years will settle them. Suerte, _Vin From jdd at vbc.net Sun Oct 8 02:16:13 2000 From: jdd at vbc.net (Jim Dixon) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 05:16:13 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity In-Reply-To: <39E01658.9E9C3610@acmenet.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 8 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > In general, look at what China is doing. Britain and Russia, too. Britain is doing a lot less than you seem to think. The RIP act has been passed, but to a rising chorus of protests from all sides, including industry. Actual implementation of the bill will not occur for some time (1-2 years). In the meantime opponents of the bill are preparing their legal cases, arguing that the act is in violation of various European Union directives. At the practical level, UK ISPs have seen no change at all. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015 From HotStock at masterone.com Sun Oct 8 06:24:32 2000 From: HotStock at masterone.com (HotStock at masterone.com) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 06:24:32 Subject: CDR: DNAP - EMERGING BIOTHECH COMPANY - 2 NEWS RELEASES! Message-ID: <200010081026.SAA03501@baosoft.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/plain, charset="iso-8859-1" Size: 852 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emc at chao.insync.net Sun Oct 8 09:03:17 2000 From: emc at chao.insync.net (Eric Cordian) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 09:03:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Supreme Court denies reporter's kiddie porn appeal Message-ID: <200010081603.LAA17224@chao.insync.net> Tim May writes: > Journalists have no special rights. None. They are simply those who > are (usually) paid for their words. This does not exempt them from > any laws. The First Amendment does not confer special rights to > writers; in fact, it says that government may not create such > distinctions by "approving" certain journalists. > A journalist who buys pot or coke for a story on drug abuse is as > vulnerable to the drug laws as any other person (including cops, by > the way) who buy drugs. ... Yes, of course this is true. However, child porn laws, with the exception of those very few laws whose goal it is to prevent specifically identifiable children from experiencing the harm of the porn-producing workplace, are clearly unconstitutional. The courts simply ignore this fact, and pander to the moral witch hunt driven by the political and religious right wing. The entire doctrine that non-obscene material depicting the sexuality of minors can be made illegal rests on a single Supreme Court case, that of Ferber. Ferber revolves entirely around the notion that identifiable minors featured in porn are harmed by exposure to the workplace in which the porn is produced. So - laws criminalizing material featuring only social and recreational nudity on the part of consenting minors are unconstitutional, as no one is harmed in its production. Laws criminalizing the possession of old porn made before child porn laws were passed are unconstitutional. Laws criminalizing the production and possession of simulations of the sexuality of minors, involving no actual humans, are CLEARLY unconstitutional. Laws criminalizing the possession of material in which the models, now adults, have no objection to its distribution, are unconstitutional. Laws criminalizing the possession of material legally produced outside the US are unconstitutional. Laws criminalizing the importation of such material are equally illegal. Futhermore, Ferber suggests that the link between porn possession and harm to minors in an unhealthy work environment only exists when the people producing the porn sell it for money to the people who possess it. Clearly a reporter downloading images for free to write a story doesn't cause any further "exploitation" of the underage models, any more than possession of footage of 12 year old Palestinians being deliberately shot by Zionist Entity snipers makes one an accessory or participant in such behavior. Child porn laws are about the elimination of counterexamples to a certain segment of the population's ideas about morality. They are not about protecting children, real or virtual. They are about the public being forced to listen to only the government's description of certain material, with anyone else being locked up instantly for looking at it, including legitimate scientists and journalists. Once this doctrine is rubber-stamped by the judicial system, and the Sheeple are used to it, it is highly unlilkely that sexual pictures of minors are the only material it is going to be appplied to. Hakim Bey suggests that plastering large full-color pictures of naked children around ones community is an excellent form of political protest. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" From gbroiles at netbox.com Sun Oct 8 09:27:19 2000 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 09:27:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: RC4 - To license or not? In-Reply-To: <20001008031220.B11404@keyser.soze.com>; from stefan.arentz@soze.com on Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 03:12:20AM +0200 References: <20001008031220.B11404@keyser.soze.com> Message-ID: <20001008092718.A6227@ideath.parrhesia.com> On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 03:12:20AM +0200, Stefan Arentz wrote: > Real-To: Stefan Arentz > > Applied Crypto says this about RC4. > > So what's the deal with RC4? It's no longer a trade secret, > so presumably anyone can use it. However, RSA DSI will almost > certainly sue anyone who uses unlicensed RC4 in a commercial > product. THey probably won't win, but they will certainly make it > cheaper make it cheaper for a company to license than fight. > > This was in '96. I do not want to buy a complete BSAFE license. > It is too expensive and I only need RC4. > > Anyone experienced with this? Will they sue? No, they almost certainly won't. Over the past few years they've moved away from their former pugilistic stance and their marketing/sales strategy seems to focus more on code quality and diversity of platform support rather than fear. -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com PO Box 897 Oakland CA 94604 From cpp4 at usa.net Sun Oct 8 08:06:00 2000 From: cpp4 at usa.net (steve lan) Date: 8 Oct 00 11:06:00 EDT Subject: No subject Message-ID: <20001008150600.12341.qmail@nwcst294.netaddress.usa.net> ubsubscribe cpp4 at usa.net ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 From gerrarduffy at hotmail.com Sun Oct 8 11:09:28 2000 From: gerrarduffy at hotmail.com (gerry) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 11:09:28 Subject: CDR: Make a Solid Income on the Web Message-ID: <200010081007.DAA15574@toad.com> Dear Friend You'll love this Imagine your website having thousands... even million of visitors every week. Would that help you earn more money? Then get the latest tactics to pull in visitors to your website like a giant magnet. Download Superior Marketing Tools & Tactics Software... It's 100% FREE! You will discover how to reach 10 Million people for just ten dollars per million. A step-by-step, easy to follow, directions on how to pull over 1000 people per day to your website FREE... (you won't spend a dime in advertising costs). You'll learn how to backdoor your way into the 3 best search engines... these search engines are responsible for 89% of all search engine traffic. You'll get a tool to determine what keywords you should use BEFORE you submit your website so you'll get the most visitors to your website once your listing appears. You'll get an instant Meta-tag tool to get a higher ranking in the search engines. Our secret to maximize your profits... something most people would never know about. What Ezine's are best to advertise in to get the most from your advertising dollars. Viral advertising tactics that most people never thought of. How to use free incentives as a lead generator. $195.00 worth of secret reports and how to use them to attract visitors to your website by the truckloads. And More! For the Web address, mailto: mailto:gerrard at oorhame.worldonline.co.uk I will send the Web Address by return and you can enjoy the free software! Sincerely, Gerry mailto:gerrard at oorhame.worldonline.co.uk This is a one time e-mail transmission. No request for removal is necessary. From bram at gawth.com Sun Oct 8 11:56:01 2000 From: bram at gawth.com (Bram Cohen) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 11:56:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39DF9F6D.438436C5@algroup.co.uk> Message-ID: On Sat, 7 Oct 2000, Ben Laurie wrote: > > Since we're in hair-splitting mode, I should point out that "prevents > the denial of an act" is not equivalent to a "negation that something is > false". Of course, logically, it comes to the same thing, but then, so > does "assertion that something is true". Of course, the idea that you could 'prevent the denial of an act' is completely wrong. The explanation "All this fancy-schmancy crypto stuff is bullshit" is pretty much universally applicable. -Bram Cohen From rah at shipwright.com Sun Oct 8 04:04:26 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 12:04:26 +0100 Subject: CDR: FinCEN report on e-cash Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From egerck at nma.com Sun Oct 8 12:16:07 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 12:16:07 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: Message-ID: <39E0C7F7.370CA16E@nma.com> The idea that you could prevent the denial of an act is neither an absolute truth nor provided only by cryptography. As I wrote before, " This does not mean, however as some may suppose, that the act cannot be denied -- for example, it can be denied by a counter authentication that presents an accepted proof." One way to do it is by policy or by contract, as banks do routinely in accepting checks -- and which is making its way into protocols by means of digital signatures as an extension of handwritten signatures. Further, it is clear that preventing the denial of an act is not equivalent to the "denial of a falsity" -- so, Ben's comment may help clarify this and I am thankful that he did so. However, understanding non-repudiation as a service that provides for the denial of a falsity is IMO a very general model that includes other notions of non-repudiation. Like authentication, non-repudiation comes in different flavors and it is IMO not a correct question to ask which one is correct -- it depends on the trust and threat models being used. Cheers, Ed Gerck Bram Cohen wrote: > On Sat, 7 Oct 2000, Ben Laurie wrote: > > > > Since we're in hair-splitting mode, I should point out that "prevents > > the denial of an act" is not equivalent to a "negation that something is > > false". Of course, logically, it comes to the same thing, but then, so > > does "assertion that something is true". > > Of course, the idea that you could 'prevent the denial of an act' is > completely wrong. The explanation "All this fancy-schmancy crypto stuff is > bullshit" is pretty much universally applicable. > > -Bram Cohen From adam at homeport.org Sun Oct 8 09:28:01 2000 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 12:28:01 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Comments on and about e-privacy in Canada In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001008014147.00ae7f00@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20001008122800.A11836@weathership.homeport.org> On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 11:48:40PM -0700, Tim May wrote: | If Austin is drawing conclusions that we _need_ an SEC, then perhaps | the flaws and delays people are reporting for ZKS are indicative of a | deeper issue. Maybe ZKS plans to make their system "meet the | legitimate needs of law enforcement." I think the Freedom system meets the "legitimate needs of law enforcement" today. They disagree, and would like some back doors added, which isn't going to happen. We've met with, and reported on, our meetings with Canadian law enforcement here. They understand our position that what we're doing is protecting the privacy of a great many people, and that adding back doors reduces the security and privacy to a degree we don't consider acceptable. Under current Canadian law, they can't compel us to change the system, and, to the best of my knowledge, haven't gone beyond asking us politely to change. Adam PS for the sarcasm impared: This is a disagreement over what are the "legitimate needs of law enforcement." We don't have any backdoors in the system. Like any system of the magnitude of Freedom, there are security flaws, which are covered in the "security issues" paper which Ian and I wrote. We aren't aware of any flaws worse than the ones enumerated, and a newer paper will be coming out soonish to add the results of our research into how to attack the system over the last year. (Mostly variations on the first-last system, plus some improvements in v2, which as Bob mentioned, will be entering beta soon.) -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From bram at gawth.com Sun Oct 8 12:28:24 2000 From: bram at gawth.com (Bram Cohen) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 12:28:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001005185951.00cf51b0@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 8 Oct 2000, Vin McLellan wrote: > > Myself, I wouldn't blame NIST if they factored, as you suggest, > avoidance of endless legal hassles into their decision-making process. With the current state of patents, it is literally impossible to do anything with a computer without violating a whole slew of patents whose validity is rather dubious. The only thing you can really do is politely tell anyone who bothers you about 'violating their patents' that you'll let them know if you decide you want to pay them off to avoid litigation, then forget about the matter unless you're actually forced to show up in court. NIST threatening a big scary anti-trust lawsuit against anyone who tries to pull something with the AES is quite laudable and more than I'd have expected them to do. -Bram Cohen From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 8 10:19:00 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 13:19:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007184411.00cff930@flex.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001007211003.01857dd8@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001008101005.01a2dca8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 12:19 AM 08/10/00 -0400, James A.. Donald wrote: > > So are you claiming that this alleged evidence seemingly cited by > > Chomsky exists, or are you denying that Chomsky claimed the > > existence of this evidence? 06:51 PM 10/7/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: > Learn how to read - and comprehend - what I type. Stop trying to > put words in my mouth. So which is it? Why is it that Chomsky's fans employ the same ass-covering evasive ambiguity as Chomsky himself? James A.. Donald: > > If you claim the evidence cited by Chomsky exists, where is it? > > If you deny that Chomsky cited this very remarkable evidence, then > > let us once again go over his words. > > > > Commit yourself to one excuse or the other excuse. Reese: > Commit myself to one prepared excuse or another? Natch on that, > I've told you three times my position on all of this, Liar Like Chomsky himself, you hint at a cloud of vague and mutually inconsistent claims, and refuse to commit yourself to any one of them. I am, as always, entertained by the fact that those who claim that Chomsky is truthful, imitate his methods of lying. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG d2mKR+gxorFV/J9nBZz7zoT4IxrV/6CP0YsiM/PS 4iJWQFyj6amNeDlf2/xV1sSd4FKwyDQ1gvBpa0glG From alan at clueserver.org Sun Oct 8 13:32:06 2000 From: alan at clueserver.org (Alan Olsen) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 13:32:06 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: RC4 - To license or not? In-Reply-To: <20001008092718.A6227@ideath.parrhesia.com> References: <20001008031220.B11404@keyser.soze.com> <20001008031220.B11404@keyser.soze.com> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001008132607.00df9220@clueserver.org> At 09:27 AM 10/8/00 -0700, Greg Broiles wrote: >On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 03:12:20AM +0200, Stefan Arentz wrote: > > Real-To: Stefan Arentz > > > > Applied Crypto says this about RC4. > > > > So what's the deal with RC4? It's no longer a trade secret, > > so presumably anyone can use it. However, RSA DSI will almost > > certainly sue anyone who uses unlicensed RC4 in a commercial > > product. THey probably won't win, but they will certainly make it > > cheaper make it cheaper for a company to license than fight. > > > > This was in '96. I do not want to buy a complete BSAFE license. > > It is too expensive and I only need RC4. > > > > Anyone experienced with this? Will they sue? > >No, they almost certainly won't. Over the past few years they've moved away >from their former pugilistic stance and their marketing/sales strategy seems >to focus more on code quality and diversity of platform support rather than >fear. Redhat 7 Deluxe contains an offer for a "free" BSafe SDK for Linux. (Redhat 7 contains a number of crypto tools, including OpenSSL, Kerberos 5 (real, not the damaged version MS ships), OpenSSH, GnuPG, and a bunch of other stuff. A good sign, if they did not ship with a beta version of GCC.) As for RSA marketing... i think they have some serious personal issues they need to seek counselling for. (What is it with the psycho-chick in their ads anyways? Ex-girlfriend? A stab at Dourthy Denning? Some latent BSDi fetish?) --- | Terrorists - The Boogiemen for a new Millennium. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | | | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From jimdbell at home.com Sun Oct 8 14:05:54 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 14:05:54 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Comments on and about e-privacy in Canada References: <4.3.0.20001008014147.00ae7f00@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <007001c0316b$8c470460$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Declan McCullagh To: Tim May ; Canadian Cryptography Mailing List Cc: Cypherpunks Mailing List Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2000 22:55 PM Subject: Re: Comments on and about e-privacy in Canada > At 16:38 10/6/2000 -0700, Tim May wrote, in response to Robert Guerra: > >Again you show yourself to be uncritical of these claims. You don't "get it." > >[...] > >The solution is not a regimen of data privacy laws but tecnologies to > >enable consumers to remain private. Those who "give permission" for their > >refrigerator to contact some outside party have made their choice. > > Right. There are solid principled reasons to oppose government regulations > on what people can and can't do with information. Let them make up their > own minds instead. There are also economic arguments, as Richard Epstein > recently spoke about (http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38893,00.html). And there's the fact that laws against such things usually either explicitly except government ("legitimate law-enforcement needs", ) actions, or are basically ignored when a cop (term used generically) violates them. Such laws lead to a false sense of security among the sheeple who aren't aware that the biggest fox around has a gate-key. It also deters manufacturers of secure hardware and software because their target audience is falsely placated. Why, for example, do secure, encrypted telephones not yet exist in an EASILY useable form? ("Go to Radio Snack, buy the box, take it home, plug it in.") Technically, it's quite possible: 1 Gigaflop DSP's are available and should be far more than necessary, 28K bidirectional modems are dirt-cheap, etc. Jim Bell From honig at sprynet.com Sun Oct 8 12:33:00 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 15:33:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity In-Reply-To: <39E01658.9E9C3610@acmenet.net> References: <4.3.0.20001008015656.00a9ead0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001008123056.00795b90@pop.sprynet.com> At 02:39 AM 10/8/00 -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: >Require ISPs to get a license to operate. Terms can be set arbitrarily >high. (Bonus points if you make them pay for the monitoring hardware, >software, and governmental labor.) Wasn't a "license to drive" on the "info superhighway" bandied about when the latter term was sickeningly popular? From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 8 13:30:39 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 16:30:39 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001008123056.00795b90@pop.sprynet.com> References: <39E01658.9E9C3610@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001008130857.019452b8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 03:33 PM 10/8/2000 -0400, David Honig wrote: > Wasn't a "license to drive" on the "info superhighway" bandied about > when the latter term was sickeningly popular? Everything on the internet is a packet with a destination address and a return address. To create a police state on the internet, all that is necessary is to ensure a one to one correspondence between an internet address, and a human face that can be beaten to pulp. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG pD3OD3dQvezWFoEs0LDHKlTbvPLK6g9Kimvf8sCw 4a2OWl4LDCwch1uxN5RhKE2WcXiypgOUzDXrva9l7 From alan at clueserver.org Sun Oct 8 13:40:43 2000 From: alan at clueserver.org (Alan Olsen) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 16:40:43 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001008130857.019452b8@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001008123056.00795b90@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001008134139.0409bac0@clueserver.org> At 04:30 PM 10/8/00 -0400, you wrote: > -- >At 03:33 PM 10/8/2000 -0400, David Honig wrote: > > Wasn't a "license to drive" on the "info superhighway" bandied about > > when the latter term was sickeningly popular? > >Everything on the internet is a packet with a destination address and a >return address. To create a police state on the internet, all that is >necessary is to ensure a one to one correspondence between an internet >address, and a human face that can be beaten to pulp. Maybe that is why IPSec seems to have never considered DHCP or PPP IP pools in its design. --- | Terrorists - The Boogiemen for a new Millennium. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | | | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From alan at clueserver.org Sun Oct 8 13:43:14 2000 From: alan at clueserver.org (Alan Olsen) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 16:43:14 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: How the Feds will try to ban strong anonymity In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001008123056.00795b90@pop.sprynet.com> References: <39E01658.9E9C3610@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001008134317.046b89c0@clueserver.org> At 03:33 PM 10/8/00 -0400, you wrote: >At 02:39 AM 10/8/00 -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: > >Require ISPs to get a license to operate. Terms can be set arbitrarily > >high. (Bonus points if you make them pay for the monitoring hardware, > >software, and governmental labor.) > >Wasn't a "license to drive" on the "info superhighway" bandied about >when the latter term was sickeningly popular? That used to be called "Unix". --- | Terrorists - The Boogiemen for a new Millennium. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | | | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From bear at sonic.net Sun Oct 8 17:57:28 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 17:57:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Musings on AES and DES In-Reply-To: <200010082242.SAA43307@glitch.crosswinds.net> Message-ID: Reflections on AES and DES.... DES was developed by a team that wanted to call it "Dataseal" at IBM. Some IBM flacks renamed it Demon (for "demonstration cipher"), a name the original developers didn't like. So they agitated against the new name, and eventually someone decided to rename it Lucifer, which the original developers liked even less. One gets the impression that the flacks were just toying with the techies here, twisting the knife as it were. But then it was adopted (in a slightly different form) as the Data Encryption Standard of the US government, and everybody gave up on the "demonic" naming conventions and just started calling it DES. Now, Dataseal/Demon/Lucifer was pretty good. It may not have been the *most* secure algorithm of its time, but neither was it a transparent and useless "cipher" with obvious flaws other than the 56-bit keyspace. However, the important part of building up trust (or lack thereof) in the cipher came after it was chosen as the DES. That choice focused every cryptanalyst in the world on it, for a while, and sparked a fair amount of hard research in mathematics. Eventually someone found an attack better than brute force on it -- but the attack requires a very very large number of plaintext/ciphertext pairs to carry out, and seems unlikely in practice. The important thing though, is that people did the math, did the research, did the hard thinking -- and did it for a long time. When someone uses DES or 3DES today, she knows EXACTLY how much protection her data is getting, and knows that hundreds, possibly thousands, of brilliant people have focused many man-years on proving that that amount of protection *is* exactly how much she's getting. It may be that some other ciphers that were around at that time are more secure -- hell, no doubt about it really. But none of those ciphers have attracted the attention of as many really bright people making *sure* it's secure that being the DES has gotten for this cipher. Now, the newly minted AES is standing in place to receive the same attention from the worldwide community -- indeed, has already started to. Even if it's not technically as secure as Twofish and Serpent, the coming years of attention are going to reduce the likelihood of an attack that we just didn't know about on AES -- but not as much on Twofish and Serpent. So whatever its respective strength, our *knowledge* of its strength will become stronger and stronger as more and more time goes by with attention focused on it. Anyway, from the POV of confidence in a cipher, it's not really as important which cipher they picked. It's important that they picked one -- and now cryptanalytic attention is focused on it. Every day no flaw is found raises our confidence that there is none, making the security of this cipher more trustworthy. Regardless of its strength relative to the other candidates (which in reality we may never know except by the continued failure to find obvious breaks in anything) the trustworthiness of the cipher, deriving from the amount of effort and testing that have gone into it, will quickly eclipse the trustworthiness of all other candidates. It would have been the same whichever cipher they picked. Bear From despot at crosswinds.net Sun Oct 8 18:35:03 2000 From: despot at crosswinds.net (despot) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 18:35:03 Subject: CDR: Re: Disposable remailers Message-ID: <200010082242.SAA43241@glitch.crosswinds.net> On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, dmolnar wrote: > On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, despot wrote: > > > But, this disposable remailer idea is solid. As a quick example > > scheme, if there were some sort of remailer protocol that > > functioned like routing protocols, as disposable remailers came > > online, they could announce themselves to other remailers. > > Pseudorandom hopping from one disposable remailer to another could > > occur in a remailer-chained message, instead of manually > > encrypting a message for a chain of remailers. The sender could I will inject one missing piece of my example, the final remailer address (and perhaps even the whole message) should be obfuscated by the hop count. This way only the last disposable remailer before the final remailer has this information. > This reminds me of something I was looking at this spring. Markus > Jakobsson has two papers on "A Practical Mix" and "Flash Mixing" which > look at mix-nets in a different way than we see in remailers. There, > instead of a message being successively encrypted for a particular > path through a series of remailers, the remailers pass a prepared > encrypted message around and perform a distributed computation on it. At > the end of the computation, the decrypted name of the recipient > automagically pops out. > Anyway, both papers deal with a collection of mix servers fixed in > advance. It seems that disposable remailers would work well with > extensions of these protocols modified to deal with dynamic leave and > joins of servers. Add this to wireless and you have mobile disposable > remailers. Ok, I am stretching my memory here, but... I read about mix-nets and the "Flash Mixing" paper months ago, so I may be a bit off. If I remember correctly, you have network of mix servers. Any set of these mix servers can be used to perform the mix, and as long as one is "honest," the result will be private. These servers communicate over some sort of broadcast channel. Lets say C is a list of the ciphertexts (c0...ci) after encrypting messages M (m0...mi) with a public key. C flows through the mix-net where it is re-encrypted, permuted, sorted, etc by each mix server (so each mix server has a modified copy of the list) and out pops C'. C' is a list of ciphertexts corresponding to M. For the Flash Mix, the mix servers can confirm to a high probability that C' was computed correctly. As long as one of the mix servers is honest and an attacker does not know, I think it is, 2 plaintexts corresponding to input ciphertexts, then there is a high probability of privacy. More so, I believe there are even dummy inputs in the list C to help strengthen this scheme against attacks. So, off the top of my head, issues with extending this scheme to disposable remailers... Well, the list size immediately comes to mind for memory-constrained devices. The resistance to attack is dependent on the list size and the number of lists (which corresponds to the number of mix servers used). Adding nodes should have no impact as they would not be part of the current mixes. Dropping nodes not used in any mixes would be fine, but what happens when a node being used in a mix fails? The mix could start over, using pseudorandomly selected nodes perhaps. The system also seems to fall prey to malicious remailers. For the flash mix, I believe, it is assumed that nodes will perform properly more often than not, but this seems to be the rarer case in a disposable remailer structure. The means of communication would need to be looked at, especially with this dynamic environment. How to eliminate nodes that are found to be malfunctioning from being used by other nodes? A few trusted, "honest" nodes should be available to the mixes in order to ensure privacy. And so on... :) > So a further question would be whether we can design a mix protocol > which can > a) take advantage of all these cheap, (hopefully) distinct > devices and their computation power > but > b) doesn't give the commodity devices enough power to > break the mix, even if many (almost all??) of them act in > concert. Indeed... -andrew From billp at nmol.com Sun Oct 8 17:39:01 2000 From: billp at nmol.com (billp at nmol.com) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 18:39:01 -0600 Subject: CDR: cypherpunks Message-ID: <39E113A4.F003095A@nmol.com> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/ http://members.tripod.com/bill_3_2/ http://www.nmol.com/users/billp/ From despot at crosswinds.net Sun Oct 8 18:41:05 2000 From: despot at crosswinds.net (despot) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 18:41:05 Subject: CDR: Re: Disposable remailers Message-ID: <200010082242.SAA43307@glitch.crosswinds.net> It is interesting to note the two sides of the same coin...mix protocols in theory vs the realities of implementation on these devices. On Sat, 7 Oct 2000, Sean Roach wrote: > If the net is sufficiently large, then the remailers can be considered to > be registers, each holding one message for a random length of time, and > allow reordering just by that alone. Of course, for this to work, traffic > analysis has to be defeated in another way. Probably in ZKS's planned, but > last I checked, not implemented, constant activity among nodes. This scheme is extremely open to attack, especially when you take into account that many of the nodes will be hostile. Even if the underlying mix protocol were robust enough to protect the sender over hostile nodes, traffic analysis, as you mentioned, is a major weakness (for example, messages could be traced throught the network). The idea and papers brought forth in David's post might be of use here. Instead of passing one message at a time through nodes, a list of messages could filter through the nodes. But, those damned memory constraints... > Of course, the more traffic, the easier it will be for the intranets where > these things are set up to locate them, and take them down. If the devices' communication piggy-backed on common protocols like http, it would be easier to mask, especially in high traffic areas. But, the communication would need to permuted in some way that a generic pattern match would not detect it. Otherwise, IDS vendors and the like will add rules to detect such traffic. > The nodes ping each other on a regular basis, if a node fails to respond to > a ping, that node is written off. Perhaps the next general cover traffic > includes information that such-n-such node appears to be compromised. If a > node receives NO pings, then it might also write itself off, and blank memory. Who do you trust becomes an issue if nodes pass information around. > Or did you mean in addition to disposible remailers, instead of ways to > hide, distribute them? I meant in addition to, but that is an interesting distribution scheme. As the world becomes more and more connected and devices get smaller and more powerful, the opportunity to plant and exploit rogue, networked modules becomes far greater. A person could have a great deal of fun with this stuff. The government already does. -andrew From proff at suburbia.net Sun Oct 8 01:03:16 2000 From: proff at suburbia.net (Julian Assange) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 19:03:16 +1100 (EST) Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001005185951.00cf51b0@shell1.shore.net> "from Vin McLellan at Oct 8, 2000 03:39:59 am" Message-ID: <20001008080316.225BD6C4C3@suburbia.net> > That a Belgian cryptosystem was eventually selected as the > American AES may make it easier to dismiss those fears overseas, and may > hasten the adoption of AES internationally. Full AES standardization and > interoperability, a good thing, should come more quickly. Not so, inprepid Vin. A Belgian cipher was chosen simply because the NSA was able to operate with relative impunity in that region, in which it has huge per-capita deployment, compared to a similar actions on its own soil. Cheers, Julian. From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Sun Oct 8 16:44:39 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 19:44:39 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Rijndael & Hitachi Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: cypherpunks at openpgp.net [mailto:cypherpunks at openpgp.net]On Behalf > Of Julian Assange > Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 01:04 > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi > Not so, inprepid Vin. A Belgian cipher was chosen simply because > the NSA was able to operate with relative impunity in that region, > in which it has huge per-capita deployment, compared to a similar > actions on its own soil. You /are/ joking ... right? The AES contest was held in the open, which should alleviate any concerns about NSA involvement in the desing of Rijndael. --Lucky Green "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 From mati99 at interklub.pl Sun Oct 8 12:37:56 2000 From: mati99 at interklub.pl (mati99) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 21:37:56 +0200 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <006901c0315f$423caa20$19a619d5@w.interklub.pl> ubsubscribe mati99 at interklub.pl -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 304 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ben at algroup.co.uk Sun Oct 8 13:41:55 2000 From: ben at algroup.co.uk (Ben Laurie) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 21:41:55 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: Message-ID: <39E0DC13.66D1D5A8@algroup.co.uk> Bram Cohen wrote: > > On Sat, 7 Oct 2000, Ben Laurie wrote: > > > > Since we're in hair-splitting mode, I should point out that "prevents > > the denial of an act" is not equivalent to a "negation that something is > > false". Of course, logically, it comes to the same thing, but then, so > > does "assertion that something is true". > > Of course, the idea that you could 'prevent the denial of an act' is > completely wrong. The explanation "All this fancy-schmancy crypto stuff is > bullshit" is pretty much universally applicable. I have to agree that actually doing stuff with crypto is substantially more useful (and interesting) than trying to prove things with it. Cheers, Ben. -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html Coming to ApacheCon Europe 2000? http://apachecon.com/ From Slyng69 at aol.com Sun Oct 8 18:48:38 2000 From: Slyng69 at aol.com (Slyng69 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 21:48:38 EDT Subject: CDR: proggies Message-ID: <62.7da51e3.27127df6@aol.com> please send me prggies thanks From petro at bounty.org Sun Oct 8 21:52:04 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 21:52:04 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007155141.00cf2800@flex.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007155141.00cf2800@flex.com> Message-ID: >At 07:24 PM 07/10/00 -0400, James A.. Donald wrote: >>At 02:12 PM 10/7/2000 -0400, Tim May wrote: >> > As for Chomsky, I've been deleting all of the recent posts arguing >> > pro- or con-Chomsky. >> >>You did not miss much. >> >>In the most recent Chomsky thread, all the same things were said, as have >>been said so many times before. Indeed, I have traced the canonical >>Chomsky thread back to 1967. >> >>The canonical thread goes as follows: > >You are the entity making the allegations, yet Chomsky remains as >accredited in some circles as he ever was. So does Clinton. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net Sun Oct 8 19:00:13 2000 From: anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net (An Metet) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 22:00:13 -0400 Subject: CDR: re: Shunning, lesbians and liberty Message-ID: <90725250b6034787fd83a4eade7e7ab8@mixmaster.shinn.net> k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk wrote: >I hope whenever you Americans see on the news what is going on in >Afghanistan you remember that your government paid for their weapons and >their training, that those guys were educated in US-run schools and >guerilla warfare training camps - all because Reagan and Bush came out >with this shit about "totalitarian" being the only bad thing & >non-communists couldn't possibly be "totalitarian". Whatever the Taliban >were, they certainly weren't communists. So in goes the CIA, and the >money, and the guns, and look what came out. I hope when you Brits realize you're not speaking German or Russian to your *elected* masters, you get down on your seldom used knees and kiss America's red, white, & blue ass. From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 8 22:01:50 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 22:01:50 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: In-Reply-To: <006901c0315f$423caa20$19a619d5@w.interklub.pl> References: <006901c0315f$423caa20$19a619d5@w.interklub.pl> Message-ID: At 9:37 PM +0200 10/8/00, mati99 wrote: >ubsubscribe mati99 at interklub.pl Congratulations, you are now "ubsubscribed." --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 8 22:03:41 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 22:03:41 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: In-Reply-To: <20001008150600.12341.qmail@nwcst294.netaddress.usa.net> References: <20001008150600.12341.qmail@nwcst294.netaddress.usa.net> Message-ID: At 11:06 AM -0400 10/8/00, steve lan wrote: >ubsubscribe cpp4 at usa.net > You, too, are now "ubsubscribed." Hope you enjoy it. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From marshall at athena.net.dhis.org Sun Oct 8 19:14:45 2000 From: marshall at athena.net.dhis.org (David Marshall) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 22:14:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: proggies In-Reply-To: Slyng69@aol.com's message of "Sun, 8 Oct 2000 21:54:11 -0400" References: <62.7da51e3.27127df6@aol.com> Message-ID: <8466n2222p.fsf@athena.dhis.org> Slyng69 at aol.com writes: > please send me prggies thanks Cypherpunks Industries would be happy to ship you pregnant laboratory rats, transgenically altered to produce delta-tetrahydrocannabinol. These pregnant rats have been nicknamed "preggies" by our staff, in a combination of "pregnant" and "eeeeee," the sound they make when they're high which, of course, is all the time. We would also like to offer you a special, one-time discount offer on "hosers," rats which have been transgenically modified to produce a patented cocktail of ethanol, delta-tetrahydrocannabinol, LSD, ketamine, and extacy in their urine. Because drug delivery is, of course, a primary concern when you've got "the bad shakes," the drug dispenser port, nicknamed "schlong," has also been genetically enlarged to approximately 20 times its normal size. Ask about our great deals on transgenic THC-producing citrus fruit! We at Cypherpunks Industries are committed to doing our part in protest against the War on (Some) Drugs. Please reply to cypherpunks at openpgp.net with your name, address, daytime and work telephone numbers, credit card information, a signed statement declaring that you are not in the employ of or affiliated with any law enforcement or governmental agency which we can later wave at a jury in court to no avail, and a list of the products you wish to purchase. Thank you for your interest in Cypherpunks Industries. From reeza at flex.com Sun Oct 8 20:15:23 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 23:15:23 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Niiice kitty.... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001008101005.01a2dca8@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001007184411.00cff930@flex.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001008171211.00d59100@flex.com> At 01:19 PM 08/10/00 -0400, James A.. Donald wrote: > -- >At 12:19 AM 08/10/00 -0400, James A.. Donald wrote: > > > So are you claiming that this alleged evidence seemingly cited by > > > Chomsky exists, or are you denying that Chomsky claimed the > > > existence of this evidence? > >06:51 PM 10/7/2000 -1000, Reese wrote: > > Learn how to read - and comprehend - what I type. Stop trying to > > put words in my mouth. > > So which is it? > >Why is it that Chomsky's fans Fucking idiot. For the last time, I'm not a fan or his, I was critiquing you. You are too fucking stupid to understand plain English. Good bye. Reese From kurk0 at yahoo.com Sun Oct 8 23:22:46 2000 From: kurk0 at yahoo.com (kurko kurko) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 23:22:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: No subject Message-ID: <20001009062246.67945.qmail@web219.mail.yahoo.com> ubsubscribe kurk0 at yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free! http://photos.yahoo.com/ From Ebow0 at aol.com Sun Oct 8 20:27:05 2000 From: Ebow0 at aol.com (Ebow0 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 23:27:05 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: proggies Message-ID: marshall at athena.net.dhis.org (David Marshall) writes: >Cypherpunks Industries would be happy to ship you pregnant laboratory >rats, transgenically altered to produce >delta-tetrahydrocannabinol. These pregnant rats have been nicknamed >"preggies" by our staff, in a combination of "pregnant" and "eeeeee," >the sound they make when they're high which, of course, is all the >time. > >We would also like to offer you a special, one-time discount offer on >"hosers," rats which have been transgenically modified to produce a >patented cocktail of ethanol, delta-tetrahydrocannabinol, LSD, >ketamine, and extacy in their urine. Because drug delivery is, of >course, a primary concern when you've got "the bad shakes," the drug >dispenser port, nicknamed "schlong," has also been genetically >enlarged to approximately 20 times its normal size. > >Ask about our great deals on transgenic THC-producing citrus fruit! > >We at Cypherpunks Industries are committed to doing our part in >protest against the War on (Some) Drugs. > >Please reply to cypherpunks at openpgp.net with your name, address, >daytime and work telephone numbers, credit card information, a signed >statement declaring that you are not in the employ of or affiliated >with any law enforcement or governmental agency which we can later >wave at a jury in court to no avail, and a list of the products you >wish to purchase. > >Thank you for your interest in Cypherpunks Ind i would just like to say marshall at athena.net.dhis.org's response to that loser asking for proggies is one of the funniest damn things i have read in a long time. From regsupport at netscape.com Sun Oct 8 23:44:08 2000 From: regsupport at netscape.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 23:44:08 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: In-Reply-To: References: <20001008150600.12341.qmail@nwcst294.netaddress.usa.net> <20001008150600.12341.qmail@nwcst294.netaddress.usa.net> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001008234408.00af8640@idiom.com> Yes, folks, U B Subscribed now. Should you want not to be subscribed, try cypherpunks-request at toad.com where there's a bot, rather then sending misspelled mail to the entire list where you'll receive replies of random usefulness. At 10:03 PM 10/8/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: >At 11:06 AM -0400 10/8/00, steve lan wrote: >>ubsubscribe cpp4 at usa.net >> > >You, too, are now "ubsubscribed." > >Hope you enjoy it. > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 8 23:54:44 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 23:54:44 -0700 Subject: CDR: ubsubscribe vs. unsuscrive vs. unscribe vs. unimbibe In-Reply-To: <20001009062246.67945.qmail@web219.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20001009062246.67945.qmail@web219.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: At 11:22 PM -0700 10/8/00, kurko kurko wrote: >ubsubscribe kurk0 at yahoo.com > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free! >http://photos.yahoo.com/ This is the third such "ubsubscribe" message tonight! It must be catching. Sort of like the "unsuscrive" and "unscribe" viruses of a few years ago. "Unimbibe me" is more like it. Fortunately, their fate is to remain "suscrived" to the toad list. Please, don't anyone remind them that their welcome message gave them instructions on how to ubsuscrive. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From elstondl at flash.net Sun Oct 8 23:02:45 2000 From: elstondl at flash.net (David & Linda) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 01:02:45 -0500 Subject: ip: Congress on verge of approving warrantless secret searches [Free Republic]] Message-ID: From alan at clueserver.org Mon Oct 9 01:08:34 2000 From: alan at clueserver.org (Alan Olsen) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 01:08:34 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: ubsubscribe vs. unsuscrive vs. unscribe vs. unimbibe In-Reply-To: References: <20001009062246.67945.qmail@web219.mail.yahoo.com> <20001009062246.67945.qmail@web219.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001009010147.04cf8f00@clueserver.org> At 11:54 PM 10/8/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: >At 11:22 PM -0700 10/8/00, kurko kurko wrote: >>ubsubscribe kurk0 at yahoo.com >> >>__________________________________________________ >>Do You Yahoo!? >>Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free! >>http://photos.yahoo.com/ > > >This is the third such "ubsubscribe" message tonight! It must be catching. >Sort of like the "unsuscrive" and "unscribe" viruses of a few years ago. >"Unimbibe me" is more like it. Think of it as "cargo cult list management". People want off the list, but they are unwilling to figure out how before hand or read anything. They see someone posting a "remove" or "unsubscrive" to the mail list and figure "that must be the way that you do it" and do likewise. I used to see rashes of similar behavior on perl5-porters a number of years back. You would think people on technical lists would know better. I have long since learned that this is not the case. >Fortunately, their fate is to remain "suscrived" to the toad list. Please, >don't anyone remind them that their welcome message gave them instructions >on how to ubsuscrive. For some of us, that message was received many years ago and was lost in the mists of hard drive failures. For others, their brains were wiped to secure the information against discovery by the enemy. (Or discovery by the Discovery channel, whichever comes first.) --- | Terrorists - The Boogiemen for a new Millennium. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | | | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From vin at shore.net Mon Oct 9 00:22:01 2000 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 03:22:01 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Musings on AES and DES In-Reply-To: References: <200010082242.SAA43307@glitch.crosswinds.net> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001008235637.00c848f0@shell1.shore.net> Ray Dillinger wrote: > >[As the DES,] Dataseal/Demon/Lucifer was pretty good. It may not >have been the *most* secure algorithm of its time, but neither was it a >transparent and useless "cipher" with obvious flaws other than the 56-bit >keyspace. However, the important part of building up trust (or lack >thereof) in the cipher came after it was chosen as the DES. I suggest that you give insufficient weight to the importance of the NSA imprimatur on the DES. The DES became the standard we know today -- for years, universally accepted in US commerce, banking, and trade -- largely because the US National Security Agency (NSA) issued, upon the designation of the DES by NIST, a statement that the NSA's cryptanalysts knew of no attack on the DES algorithm more effective than a brute force search of all possible 56-bit keys. That -- and perhaps NIST's projections of the work and time required to break a 56-bit key -- provided the "due diligence" groundwork that allowed US bankers and businessmen to label crypto a solved problem. No liability could accrue to a CTO or CEO or product manager who chose to use the DES (and, conversely, no one but a fool would use an alternative cipher --whatever the key length -- in a commercial environment.) The 1976 designation of the DES -- unlike most traditional standardization efforts -- was not about interoperability. It was not even about relative cryptographic strength (although there must have been some fascinating charts at Fort Meade which projected the life-span of a 56-bit key against the successive five-year certifications built into the DES selection.) The broad acceptance of the DES in US industry and finance was, in large part, simply a function of the way a NSA-blessed cipher contained and limited potential liability. In the real world, the technical review that you celebrate -- among academic mathematicians and the(relatively few) unencumbered cryptographers in academia and private industry -- was all but irrelevant. (Only negative results would make a difference, and those were scant and slow in coming.) I would argue that, at least in the US, that research had virtually no impact on those who made the relevant purchase and policy decisions (who were seldom crypto-savvy, let alone crypto-literate.) Until well into the 1990s, there was no significant non-governmental crypto community to offer alternative judgements until fairly recently... and it must be said that the widespread trust, among American civilians, in the NSA's judgement in this matter was not misplaced. DES was pretty much what they said it was (even down to that tweak in the S-boxes to block differential analysis, which the academic crypto researchers didn't discover for many years.) The NSA was/is really very good at what they did, and -- particularly in the US computer industry (which until 1960 had been pretty much guided by NSA R&D contracts) -- their cryptanalytic expertise was wholly unchallenged. >That choice focused every cryptanalyst in the world on it, >for a while, and sparked a fair amount of hard research in >mathematics. Eventually someone found an attack better than >brute force on it -- but the attack requires a very very >large number of plaintext/ciphertext pairs to carry out, and >seems unlikely in practice. The important thing though, is >that people did the math, did the research, did the hard >thinking -- and did it for a long time. When someone uses >DES or 3DES today, she knows EXACTLY how much protection her >data is getting, and knows that hundreds, possibly thousands, >of brilliant people have focused many man-years on proving >that that amount of protection *is* exactly how much she's >getting. > >It may be that some other ciphers that were around at that >time are more secure -- hell, no doubt about it really. >But none of those ciphers have attracted the attention of >as many really bright people making *sure* it's secure that >being the DES has gotten for this cipher. > >Now, the newly minted AES is standing in place to receive >the same attention from the worldwide community -- indeed, >has already started to. I presume that the AES selection process was open, to the degree that it was, largely to permit the large contemporary private-sector and the academic crypto community an opportunity to participate in, and endorse, the final AES selection. I suspect, however, that the formal adoption of the AES FIPS -- when Rijndael is designated the approved mechanism for securing sensitive but unclassified government data -- will involve some similar NSA endorsement, implicit or explicit. It will be interesting to see how explicit it is, and what sort of demand for an overt stamp of approval from the NSA still exists in the marketplace. From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 9 02:54:40 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 05:54:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored References: <200010080052.TAA01029@cypherspace.org> Message-ID: <39E194B2.234468D3@ricardo.de> Tim May wrote: > Needless to say, but I will say it anyway, no game company or > software company or music provider or anyone else will ever put in > something so arcane as a "stego channel." We have to "get real" on > these issues. > not a "big" company, but maybe a small one. there are these examples of very simple games that suddenly are everywhere. if you're living in or near germany, you might have heard about the "sumpfhuhn" game. From jya at pipeline.com Mon Oct 9 02:55:03 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 05:55:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Musings on AES and DES In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001008235637.00c848f0@shell1.shore.net> References: <200010082242.SAA43307@glitch.crosswinds.net> Message-ID: <200010091006.GAA10775@smtp6.mindspring.com> Vin wrote: > It will be interesting to see how explicit it is, and what sort of >demand for an overt stamp of approval from the NSA still exists in the >marketplace. NIST has stated that the maximum endorsement will be to use AES for non-classified government information. So the question will remain of what is better than AES, or to put it another way, what is not good enough about AES for its use on classified information. To be sure it would be too much to expect that the USG would promote a program that it could not penetrate, or to put it another way, to openly disclose a technology it believes to provide maximum data protection. If NSA/NIST went that far the agencies would be shut by DC for national security reasons. Still, one can dream of NIST/NSA slipping through a technology stronger than the ordinary officeholding paranoid, secrecy-loving power mongering goofus can prevent by way of elastic oversight technology. David Alvarez writes of the intel agencies withholding most secret information from the president in the 30s and 40s on the belief that that office could not be trusted to put the nation's interest above its own urgencies to endure. What a wonder it would be to read in say, 25 years, that NIST/NSA raced a fast one past their watchers and advanced the public's interest over the government's. Lots of those folks are looking forward to becoming well-paid ex-govs, having seen what lucrative benefits have come the way of those who jumped ship. Is it conceivable that the USG's need for maximum protection of its information would take second place to the need of the public's protection from government? That depends on what government workers -- especially the defense establishment defined by Eisenhower -- believe their future to be. The burgeoning market for dual use technologies is surely going to change the way globalism gets implemented, now that so many of those who fostered those technologies are coming into the marketplace as hungry players, not merely underwriters and regulators. This applies not only to the the former Soviet Union and the US best minds who are fed up with their bosses' maximum perk protection. Davidge's expose of Tennant is instructive of how the unders apply payback to the uppers who cannot believe NDA's and third-class pensions no longer control intellects once with no where else to thrive than as national servants. From mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl Sun Oct 8 21:50:02 2000 From: mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl (Anonymous Remailer) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 06:50:02 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: RE: Rijndael Hitachi Message-ID: >You /are/ joking ... right? The AES contest was held in the open, which >should alleviate any concerns about NSA involvement in the desing of >Rijndael. NSA penetrated Crypto AG with ease. Penetrating an open university and its bodyguardless staff is much simpler. Oh, I forgot, authors said this didnt happen ! From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 9 05:47:28 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:47:28 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Austin Cypherpunks: 10-9-00 Physical Meeting Message-ID: HEB Central Market Cafe 38th and N. Lamar 7-9pm. http://einstein.ssz.com/cdr/index.html Look for the red covered 'Applied Cryptography' book to identify the table. We normaly meet outside unless the weather is bad. We are expecting continued cool and rainy so we'll likely meet under the outside covered area. Please see the homepage URL for information on joining the mailing lists. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 9 05:57:46 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:57:46 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Austin Cypherpunks: 10-10-00 Physical Meeting (Tue.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Apologies, I seem to have put todays date in this announcement when I meant tomorrow, Tuesday, the 10'th. The physical meets are always the 2nd. Tuesday of each month. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Jim Choate wrote: > > HEB Central Market Cafe > 38th and N. Lamar > 7-9pm. > http://einstein.ssz.com/cdr/index.html > > Look for the red covered 'Applied Cryptography' book to identify the > table. We normaly meet outside unless the weather is bad. We are expecting > continued cool and rainy so we'll likely meet under the outside covered > area. Please see the homepage URL for information on joining the mailing > lists. From Gabriela.Nicole at usa.alcatel.com Mon Oct 9 06:15:21 2000 From: Gabriela.Nicole at usa.alcatel.com (Gabby Nicole) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 08:15:21 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Guys, I need help References: <3.0.5.32.20001007220408.00ad29c0@idiom.com> Message-ID: <39E1C4E9.19CAB5F5@usa.alcatel.com> I know another place you can go to for a web proxy. Go to Cyberarmy.com and look for "lists". There's about 100 web proxies there. Follow the directions on the page to make sure the proxy is still up and working properly. Bill Stewart wrote: > At 07:08 PM 10/6/00 -0700, M. Emad Ul Hasan wrote: > > Your anonymizer.com is blocked in Saudi Arabia via proxy. > >Can you tell me a way I can see this site > > There are lots of open proxy servers, which will let you access > other sites by setting your web proxy to use them. > I don't have a list handy, but most search engines will make it easy > to look for them. > > Also, does the proxy block the IP address, or only the domain name? > If it blocks by name, use the IP address. If it blocks by IP address, > write the administrators of anonymizer.com to see if they've > got alternative IP addresses. > > Also, see if your proxy blocks spaceproxy.com. > Thanks! > Bill > Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com > PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From Somebody Mon Oct 9 09:22:50 2000 From: Somebody (Somebody) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 09:22:50 -0700 Subject: oh, sh__ Message-ID: Bob, Please be careful about the forwarding of this epistle in it's entirety. The contents might be considered inflamatory. [moi? *I*'m not saying anything here, *you* are... :-) --RAH] But I recommend your synthesizing an opinion about it, and communicating to the usual suspects. See my "bottom line", at the end Well, 1st Data Corp has made their move, and it's a doozy: eONE Global, a new e-payments company capitalized with $600 million ($360 in assets transferred from First Data, $135 in equity investment from iFormation -- a GoldmanSachs, BCG, Genl Atlantic Partners creature -- and a commitment from the parties to kick in another $100 in cash). The headquarters are in Napa (Rutherford). Remember Rutherford Partners? With principals Robert W. Greer, Scott J. Loftesness, Garen K. Staglin? eOne Global has a Garen Staglin, President and CEO, located in Rutherford, CA. eONE Global has a Menlo Park office with a Managing Director by the name of Loftesness. Greer is also involved. Brochure at: http://www.eoneglobal.com Includes a slightly amusing and very gushy whitepaper http://www.eoneglobal.com/whtpaper.html (by Garen) News at: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1007-200-3141623.html?tag=st.ne.1002.thed.ni Oh, yes...and by the way: "eONE Global welcomes inquiries from emerging payment technology companies with a business plan they are prepared to execute against. We require that a prospective strategic partner have proprietary rights to the technology it is presenting." See: http://www.eoneglobal.com/started.html I guess this means Scott has money now. Among the assets they own, or have and equity interest in are SurePay, CashTax, Yclip, MeetChina.com, Reciprocal, PassLogix, Achex, RRE Ventures (?1?) and others. In reality it's mostly the 1stData/EnTrust payment initiative SurePay. Bottom Line: This is a significant event, well capitalized, and an "instant company" because of the the transfer of some FirstData assets. However, their major challenges will be (a) they are already an operational company with a bunch of realworld operating challenges for the management team (who seem more venture, finance oriented), and (b) they don't yet have any breakthrough exciting technologies or products and need to acquire same. I actually wouldn't be too surprised to see them buy back eCashTechnologies, or do a JV with something like Spectrum or Wells/eBay. I'm afraid, though, that (in spite of their brave words about the need for innovation and new models) this venture is going to be inevitably tied to the current banking structure with which FirstData is so deeply in bed. I suspect that Rutherford Partners put up a bunch of half- baked intellectual property (as well as their bodies and a great spiel) to take over management of 1stData's total e-payment strategy. Quite a coup. --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From webmaster at lanesbry.com Mon Oct 9 06:54:12 2000 From: webmaster at lanesbry.com (Ralph Seberry) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:54:12 -0400 Subject: CDR: CDA - cypherpunks distributed archive Message-ID: <20001010005046.A56150@lanesbry.com> We offer: reformatted cypherpunks archives at http://www.lanesbry.com/cypherpunks/ some time ago it was noted that the ftp links from the CDA (cypherpunks archives 92-early 94) at http://www.lanesbry.com/cypherpunks/ were unreliable (at least under lynx). ftp access via ftp://ftp.lanesbry.com/pub/cypherpunks was confirmed as a workaround. I've (belatedly?) changed this to use http file links. (and added a robots.txt file to suggest that search engines not index the whole text.) Please advise any problems with this update. [Links to this archive should not need to change.] thanks, Ralph From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Mon Oct 9 02:15:40 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 10:15:40 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Internet bearer cryptography patent trusts (was Re: Chaumian cashredux) References: <200010070306.XAA22763@world.std.com> Message-ID: <39E18CBC.F7A4B5F2@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Dan Geer wrote: > Wearing my "inventor" badge, I asked nearly every member of nearly > every panel what they they had to say about intellectual property > protection. This means that I asked the same question to samples > of size 4 of each of lawyers, accountants, entrepreneurs, noveau > riche cash-outs, venture capitalists, business strategy folk and > assorted greybeards. Unanimously, the answer was "Intellectual > property protection is vital. Do it right, do it early, don't > scrimp. In a dog eat dog world, it is all you've really got." > > With one exception. > > Every single one of the VCs there, and similarly every single one > of the VCs I've talked to corroboratingly since, said that IP > protection is so pointless they don't even value it when sizing > a deal. Why? Because in the Internet sector, it is winner > take all. Win it all, and your IP position does not matter. Might that not just be because the VCs have a different interest than the inventors? Also, for the VC, the inventors & patent holders are (in a sense) sitting tenants. They would prefer to get hold of the property unencumbered. OTOH, the inventor (who may well be distrustful or ignorant of business) wants to be sure that whoever ends up running the show remembers to pay them Of course the lawyers will go for patenting because they get paid more the more paperwork there is. Ken From vincent.williams at scientist.com Mon Oct 9 08:14:08 2000 From: vincent.williams at scientist.com (Vincent Williams) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 11:14:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Guys, I need help Message-ID: <381254756.971104448757.JavaMail.root@web489-mc> Hi, Here are some proxies. Do some testing and see if they work. Check out if the following url takes you to this site at cyberarmy as well http://www.winsqueeze.com/nppp2/pppplus.cgi/http/www.cyberarmy.com/lists/proxy/ You shold also consider joining proxy methods and proxy elites lists at egroups. Just search for these names. Regards proxy2.telecom.com.co port 8080 [latency: 10/09/00 10:06:42 EDT] dalnet.bakudapa.web.id port 8080 [latency: 10/09/00 08:35:09 EDT by JeffryWinata] 212.43.196.10 port 1080 [latency: 10/09/00 08:24:06 EDT by devil] 194.65.3.170 port 8080 [latency: 10/09/00 06:26:21 EDT] 195.31.227.14 port 8080 [latency: 10/09/00 02:41:27 EDT by JeffryWinata] 216.36.24.225 port 1080 [latency: 10/08/00 23:58:17 EDT by nothing] willia10.lnk.telstra.net port 1080 [latency: 10/08/00 23:56:36 EDT by nothing] proxy.sonet.pt port 8080 [latency: 10/08/00 18:37:12 EDT] proxy.suhuf.net.sa port 8080 [latency: 10/08/00 17:09:47 EDT] proxy.brunet.bn port 8080 [latency: 10/08/00 16:58:33 EDT] 194.65.52.252 port 8080 [latency: 10/08/00 16:55:29 EDT by 203.23.72.6808] proxy.idn.co.th port 8080 [latency: 10/08/00 16:52:16 EDT] tinfo1.space.ad.jp port 8000 [latency: 10/08/00 16:49:52 EDT by hoho] proxy.spnet.net port 3128 [latency: 10/08/00 16:47:04 EDT] 202.76.128.22 port 8080 [latency: 10/08/00 16:46:15 EDT] smf1-wc2.atlas.icix.net port 8080 [latency: 10/07/00 13:36:51 EDT by RaYmAn^] news.ane.ru port 8081 [latency: 10/07/00 04:15:27 EDT by JeffryWinata] dnssrv.prx.it port 8080 [latency: 10/07/00 04:12:35 EDT by JeffryWinata] ikeaperm.vianet.net.au port 8081 [latency: 10/07/00 04:01:50 EDT by JeffryWinata] 203.26.237.87 port 8081 [latency: 10/07/00 04:01:19 EDT by JeffryWinata] proxy02.sysin.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 10/07/00 03:51:04 EDT by JeffryWinata] proxy.netwave.or.jp port 8080 [latency: 10/07/00 02:32:42 EDT] ns.infnet.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 10/07/00 02:28:51 EDT] 237-67-194.tr.cgocable.ca port 1080 [latency: 10/06/00 22:10:07 EDT] mail.cns-net.cz port 1080 [latency: 10/06/00 22:09:15 EDT] 195.146.96.178 port 1080 [latency: 10/06/00 18:52:41 EDT by JeffryWinata] 199.97.48.2 port 1080 [latency: 10/06/00 18:48:55 EDT by JeffryWinata] 212.5.134.2 port 8080 [latency: 10/06/00 18:47:38 EDT by CBuHCKO] 216.77.56.90 port 1080 [latency: 10/06/00 18:41:07 EDT by JeffryWinata] yrh.com port 1080 [latency: 10/06/00 17:28:17 EDT by JeffryWinata] socks.wasantara.net.id port 1080 [latency: 10/06/00 17:25:56 EDT by JeffryWinata] proxy.wasantara.net.id port 8080 [latency: 10/06/00 17:22:24 EDT by JeffryWinata] 193.231.232.81 port 1080 [latency: 10/06/00 16:28:48 EDT by Alberto] 164.230.99.2 port 8001 [latency: 10/06/00 02:29:23 EDT by Rewter] 206.55.133.6 port 8001 [latency: 10/05/00 17:11:34 EDT] 208.7.68.194 port 1080 [latency: 10/05/00 05:33:15 EDT] 206.86.247.11 port 8000 [latency: 10/05/00 04:34:32 EDT] cache.infopro.spb.su port 3128 [latency: 10/04/00 22:07:01 EDT] jidar.capinfo.co.ma port 8080 [latency: 10/04/00 16:20:04 EDT] jung.ti.telenor.net port 8080 [latency: 10/04/00 10:46:05 EDT] 216.244.220.3 port 1080 [latency: 10/03/00 14:19:55 EDT by pds-ch35py] 202.76.128.22 port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 12:06:50 EDT by sisyfos] 212.20.114.4 port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 11:49:52 EDT by moi] 24.216.110.15 port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 11:00:53 EDT] 202.160.8.61 port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 09:19:36 EDT] proxy6-fxp0.netspace.net.au port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 04:13:52 EDT by jaca] 213.25.221.132 port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 03:52:42 EDT by brunet] proxy.brunet.bn port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 03:12:25 EDT by Rewter_is_ghey] shkmail.tonichi-kokusai-u.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 03:00:57 EDT by 2ndLtDarksoul] robot.imp.mx port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 02:59:44 EDT by 2ndLtDarksoul] r1m102.cybercable.tm.fr port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 02:59:17 EDT by 2ndLtDarksoul] proxy.suhuf.net.sa port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 02:58:56 EDT by 2ndLtDarksoul] proxy.yaroslavl.ru port 8080 [latency: 10/03/00 02:55:23 EDT by So,Viet!] chaotic.wonderingraven.net port 1080 [latency: 10/02/00 21:26:07 EDT] 203.23.72.6 port 8080 [latency: 10/02/00 21:24:47 EDT by PhrackMan] teleserver2.pipemedia.net port 8080 [latency: 10/02/00 21:23:51 EDT by PhrackMan] dragons.dal.net port 8080 [latency: 10/02/00 19:42:09 EDT by poetic-killer] sunsite.icm.edu.pl port 8080 [latency: 10/02/00 17:58:56 EDT by 2ndLt.Darksoul] proxy.coqui.net port 8081 [latency: 10/02/00 17:57:42 EDT by 2ndLt.Darksoul] 203.26.230.254 port 3128 [latency: 10/02/00 17:56:30 EDT by 2ndLt.Darksoul] proxy.africaonline.co.zw port 8080 [latency: 10/02/00 17:54:30 EDT by 2ndLt.Darksoul] proxy.cybergate.co.zw port 8080 [latency: 10/02/00 17:54:09 EDT by 2ndLt.Darksoul] 194.162.75.23 port 1080 [latency: 10/02/00 17:53:17 EDT by 2ndLt.Darksoul] cache.global.co.za port 3128 [latency: 10/02/00 17:50:18 EDT by 2ndLt.Darksoul] 138.25.8.1 port 3128 [latency: 10/02/00 17:46:40 EDT by 2ndLt.Darksoul] 130.225.40.20 port 3128 [latency: 10/02/00 17:43:46 EDT by 2ndLt.darksoul] dns.som.com port 8080 [latency: 10/02/00 17:33:25 EDT by DaRK_CLuSTeR] inktomi.efortress.com port 8080 [latency: 10/02/00 17:31:04 EDT by 2ndLt.darksoul] proxy.magusnet.com port 8081 [latency: 10/02/00 17:28:21 EDT] proxy.spnet.net port 3128 [latency: 10/02/00 16:45:11 EDT] tornado.wp.prodigy.com port 8080 [latency: 10/02/00 14:41:11 EDT by RaYmAn^] 212.187.37.2 port 8080 [latency: 10/02/00 11:27:37 EDT by 8080] Linux.xitami.net port 1080 [latency: 10/02/00 03:30:31 EDT by Wizard] 206.99.218.240 port 8081 [latency: 10/01/00 23:51:24 EDT] gatekeeper.ci.slc.ut.us port 8080 [latency: 10/01/00 20:51:08 EDT] 210.154.59.162 port 1080 [latency: 10/01/00 19:39:48 EDT] dns.sunquest.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 10/01/00 18:39:29 EDT] 210.160.96.146 port 8080 [latency: 10/01/00 18:34:36 EDT] dfw2-wc1.atlas.icix.net port 8080 [latency: 10/01/00 16:39:50 EDT by me] sp-5.sto.telegate.se port 8000 [latency: 10/01/00 16:23:26 EDT by h.k] proxy.psc.co.jp port 8081 [latency: 10/01/00 15:51:55 EDT] jidar.capinfo.co.ma port 8080 [latency: 10/01/00 15:08:38 EDT by khalid] 195.6.197.1 port 8080 [latency: 10/01/00 14:20:47 EDT by frisp] bluerobin.mke.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 10/01/00 12:31:28 EDT] msv.jmsis.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 10/01/00 12:29:13 EDT] ns.mobtel.com port 1080 [latency: 10/01/00 08:57:06 EDT by ChainReactor] 207.65.46.21 port 3128 [latency: 10/01/00 08:36:52 EDT by gOdFeLLa] 212.42.224.133 port 3128 [latency: 10/01/00 04:14:37 EDT] firewall.unicom-am.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 10/01/00 01:44:11 EDT by Rey] 208.160.62.30 port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 19:40:26 EDT by Unknown3d] 195.199.69.193 port 1080 [latency: 09/30/00 19:39:52 EDT by Unknown3d] 210.228.160.20 port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 19:39:28 EDT by Unknown3d] 64.19.3.2 port 1080 [latency: 09/30/00 17:38:12 EDT] 209.187.13.18 port 1080 [latency: 09/30/00 16:39:43 EDT by |^ZigFred^|] edtn016755.hs.telusplanet.net port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 11:28:56 EDT by captainVeGa] proxy.planetinternet.be port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 11:12:07 EDT by skorpio00] proxy.aon.at port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 11:01:50 EDT by sascha] 210.161.234.195 port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 10:44:22 EDT] ns0.syscre.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 10:43:06 EDT] solomon.stic.net port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 05:08:36 EDT by moo] inh1ts20-qfe0.ims.bt.net port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 00:10:19 EDT by RaYmAn^] cnclaaasrv.council.net port 1080 [latency: 09/30/00 00:09:51 EDT by RaYmAn^] 200.255.198.247 port 8000 [latency: 09/30/00 00:08:26 EDT by RaYmAn^] dfw2-wc1.atlas.icix.net port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 00:07:50 EDT by RaYmAn^] isu-cache2.isu.edu port 3128 [latency: 09/30/00 00:07:29 EDT by RaYmAn^] bess-proxy1.ousd.k12.ca.us port 8080 [latency: 09/30/00 00:06:48 EDT by RaYmAn^] proxy.rdc1.ab.home.com port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 20:39:35 EDT] proxy.telepac.pt port 8081 [latency: 09/29/00 20:25:29 EDT] proxy7-fxp0.netspace.net.au port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 18:51:35 EDT] 199.44.53.3 port 8081 [latency: 09/29/00 18:21:36 EDT by aBNoRMaLLy] 210.154.59.162 port 1080 [latency: 09/29/00 17:43:17 EDT by bibanu] wonderingraven.net port 1080 [latency: 09/29/00 16:40:31 EDT by Rewter] chaotic.wonderingraven.net port 1080 [latency: 09/29/00 16:39:00 EDT by Rewter] proxy.lcnet.it port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 15:17:52 EDT] 194.65.38.131 port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 09:31:52 EDT] proxy.brunet.bn port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 08:31:38 EDT] 195.211.211.37 port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:27:13 EDT by inTERbairros] svcmp12.holoson.co.jp port 3128 [latency: 09/29/00 05:21:11 EDT by inTERbairros] bertie.shiga-med.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:17:05 EDT by inTERbairros] dns.sunquest.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:15:53 EDT by inTERbairros] bluerobin.mke.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:14:51 EDT by inTERbairros] bata.cc.titech.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:14:32 EDT by inTERbairros] 210.161.234.195 port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:14:19 EDT by inTERbairros] pi.adelphia.net port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:11:54 EDT by inTERbairros] kiku.asahi-u.ac.jp port 10080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:10:35 EDT by inTERbairros] 196.3.167.135 port 3128 [latency: 09/29/00 05:10:15 EDT by inTERbairros] zeus.doruk.net.tr port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:09:30 EDT by inTERbairros] krunk1.xmission.com port 8000 [latency: 09/29/00 04:57:17 EDT by inTERbairros] ns0.apecs.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:06:11 EDT by inTERbairros] ns.rcedu.kyushu-u.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:05:59 EDT by inTERbairros] gate-omega.pbc.adelphia.net port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 05:02:41 EDT by inTERbairros] speth08.wu-wien.ac.at port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:59:21 EDT by inTERbairros] sfk-nga.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:59:09 EDT by inTERbairros] ns.relaim.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:58:57 EDT by inTERbairros] 210.145.163.18 port 1080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:57:00 EDT by inTERbairros] mail.condor.de port 3128 [latency: 09/29/00 04:55:11 EDT by inTERbairros] infosun-fd.rus.uni-stuttgart.de port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:54:55 EDT by inTERbairros] front3.cpl.org port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:49:54 EDT by inTERbairros] ns.kss.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:41:09 EDT by inTERbairros] 194.133.122.44 port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:40:01 EDT by inTERbairros] svc.nues.k12.ut.us port 8001 [latency: 09/29/00 04:39:06 EDT by inTERbairros] elpxy01.ce.mediaone.net port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:38:19 EDT by inTERbairros] elpxy02.ce.mediaone.net port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:37:51 EDT by inTERbairros] bcom.jtnet.ad.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:33:46 EDT by inTERbairros] ns0.syscre.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:32:12 EDT by inTERbairros] qt-ce.singnet.com.sg port 8001 [latency: 09/29/00 04:25:23 EDT by inTERbairros] bryant2-ha.bryant.edu port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:22:02 EDT by inTERbairros] misawa01.misawa.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:16:03 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.ebisu.ad.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:12:49 EDT by inTERbairros] firewall.unicom-am.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:09:38 EDT by inTERbairros] cache.ican.net port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:09:06 EDT by inTERbairros] mercury.lngs.infn.it port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:08:23 EDT by inTERbairros] 210.160.40.6 port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 04:06:01 EDT by inTERbairros] 203.244.128.55 port 8081 [latency: 09/29/00 04:00:38 EDT by inTERbairros] ns1.mitsubishi-seibi.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:59:43 EDT by inTERbairros] solaris.dvz.fh-aachen.de port 1080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:49:29 EDT by inTERbairros] ns1.bryant.edu port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:47:59 EDT by inTERbairros] ars2.arsnet.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:45:54 EDT by inTERbairros] hickory.fernuni-hagen.de port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:44:12 EDT by inTERbairros] teleserver2.pipemedia.net port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:40:18 EDT by inTERbairros] sunsite.icm.edu.pl port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:39:22 EDT by inTERbairros] robin2.ise.chuo-u.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:37:35 EDT by inTERbairros] risk0a.ris.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:37:23 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy-fuessen.online-service.de port 1080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:36:23 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.lcnet.it port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:35:34 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.idn.co.th port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:35:05 EDT by inTERbairros] mail1.epdc.co.jp port 8081 [latency: 09/29/00 03:31:00 EDT by inTERbairros] ndpxy01.ne.mediaone.net port 1080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:33:04 EDT by inTERbairros] meteora.amadagp.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:31:45 EDT by inTERbairros] kinka.gifu-kyoiku.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:29:55 EDT by inTERbairros] hitp-gw.hitp.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:25:14 EDT by inTERbairros] hal.calc.k12.la.us port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:24:19 EDT by inTERbairros] gatekeeper.ci.slc.ut.us port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:24:03 EDT by inTERbairros] fw.yoshida-g.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:23:05 EDT by inTERbairros] dns.jicnet.or.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:22:34 EDT by inTERbairros] kinka.ha.shotoku.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:19:57 EDT by inTERbairros] ose.numazu-ct.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:16:00 EDT by inTERbairros] gemini.chall.ne.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:15:46 EDT by inTERbairros] nexus-1.flash.net port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:15:24 EDT by inTERbairros] squid.mutugoro.or.jp port 3128 [latency: 09/29/00 03:08:42 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.cslouis-hemon.qc.ca port 1080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:08:29 EDT by inTERbairros] msv.jmsis.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:08:13 EDT by inTERbairros] lilac1.hmjc.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:05:48 EDT by inTERbairros] 157.193.40.5 port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:02:32 EDT by inTERbairros] gossamer.ksu.ksu.edu port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 03:00:40 EDT by inTERbairros] abchost.abc.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:57:02 EDT by inTERbairros] linux.kcg.gov.tw port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:55:14 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.pipemedia.net port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:53:43 EDT by inTERbairros] gatekeeper.nissuicon.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:49:02 EDT by inTERbairros] dufay.nichigai.co.jp port 8000 [latency: 09/29/00 02:48:32 EDT by inTERbairros] webcache.dial.pipex.com port 3128 [latency: 09/29/00 02:44:26 EDT by inTERbairros] tokyo01.nemic.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:42:16 EDT by inTERbairros] tinfo1.space.ad.jp port 8000 [latency: 09/29/00 02:41:35 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.taegu.ac.kr port 8081 [latency: 09/29/00 02:37:27 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.psc.co.jp port 8081 [latency: 09/29/00 02:36:45 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.mcmail.com port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:35:25 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.iprolink.ch port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:34:07 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.internord.dk port 3128 [latency: 09/29/00 02:33:54 EDT by inTERbairros] panoramix.accessnet.es port 8000 [latency: 09/29/00 02:32:42 EDT by inTERbairros] nebura2.tech.nebuta.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:28:39 EDT by inTERbairros] charlotte.it.wsu.edu port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:24:20 EDT by inTERbairros] dcs.dexter.k12.mi.us port 3128 [latency: 09/29/00 02:22:17 EDT by inTERbairros] gatekeeper.shimane-med.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:17:55 EDT by inTERbairros] bme.ahs.kitasato-u.ac.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:16:55 EDT by inTERbairros] alpha.barentsnett.no port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:15:49 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.canaan.co.il port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 02:14:06 EDT by inTERbairros] 165.21.83.136 port 8001 [latency: 09/29/00 02:12:50 EDT by inTERbairros] localmachine.mob.ntc.co.jp port 8081 [latency: 09/29/00 02:06:10 EDT by inTERbairros] 24-216-136-15.hsacorp.net port 8081 [latency: 09/29/00 02:01:25 EDT by inTERbairros] proxy.imp.ch port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 01:50:41 EDT by inTERbairros] inktomi.efortress.com port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 01:49:09 EDT by o666z] dfw2-wc1.atlas.digex.net port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 01:46:36 EDT by inTERbairros] willia10.lnk.telstra.net port 1080 [latency: 09/29/00 01:44:02 EDT by inTERbairros] 195.211.211.37 port 8080 [latency: 09/29/00 01:40:05 EDT by inTERbairros] andromaca.polito.it port 8080 [latency: 09/28/00 14:20:00 EDT by kiru] proxy.codec.ro port 8080 [latency: 09/28/00 13:30:19 EDT] cache-utr2.casema.net port 3128 [latency: 09/28/00 13:22:59 EDT] proxy.netangola.com port 8080 [latency: 09/28/00 13:22:00 EDT] proxy.nownuri.net port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 23:06:48 EDT by Biarticulado] 195.24.110.15 port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 22:22:13 EDT by Charles] proxy3-fxp0.netspace.net.au port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 20:05:00 EDT by inTERbairros] isu-cache1.isu.edu port 3128 [latency: 09/27/00 20:03:34 EDT by inTERbairros] bess-proxy.integrityonline15.com port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 20:02:22 EDT by inTERbairros] bess-proxy.inficad.com port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 20:01:27 EDT by inTERbairros] jatoronto.org port 1080 [latency: 09/27/00 19:59:47 EDT by inTERbairros] 203.23.72.6 port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 14:11:43 EDT by legsee] 165.117.55.216 port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 14:08:08 EDT by legsee] proxy.telepac.pt port 8081 [latency: 09/27/00 08:54:42 EDT by DJKA0S] proxy.rinet.ru port 3128 [latency: 09/27/00 08:50:53 EDT by DJKA0S] ipshome.mightycard.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 06:24:27 EDT] spider.claritas.com port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 05:59:33 EDT by gOdFeLLa] inh1ts09-qfe0.ims.bt.net port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 05:57:16 EDT by gOdFeLLa] inetserv.fh-wuerzburg.de port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 05:51:26 EDT by gOdFeLLa] solomon.stic.net port 8080 [latency: 09/27/00 05:49:31 EDT by gOdFeLLa] 210.154.59.162 port 1080 [latency: 09/27/00 05:44:08 EDT by gOdFeLLa] 210.146.35.196 port 10080 [latency: 09/27/00 02:47:37 EDT] 209.187.13.18 port 1080 [latency: 09/27/00 02:05:12 EDT by hatOFF] 24.200.145.150 port 1080 [latency: 09/27/00 02:04:02 EDT by hatOFF] 216.36.24.225 port 1080 [latency: 09/27/00 02:03:42 EDT by hatOFF] 213.46.1.77 port 1080 [latency: 09/27/00 02:03:22 EDT by hatOFF] proxy.hpisd.org port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 23:55:06 EDT] 194.65.79.31 port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 21:26:34 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.71.10 port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 21:25:24 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.66.66 port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 21:24:45 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.66.3 port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 21:24:13 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.62.74 port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 21:22:50 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.52.252 port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 21:22:24 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.52.31 port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 21:21:49 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.45.17 port 1080 [latency: 09/26/00 21:18:31 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.38.131 port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 21:17:07 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.15.41 port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 21:04:16 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.14.69 port 8081 [latency: 09/26/00 21:02:55 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.14.68 port 8081 [latency: 09/26/00 21:02:23 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.14.67 port 8081 [latency: 09/26/00 20:42:42 EDT by DJKA0S] 194.65.3.170 port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 20:34:39 EDT by DJKA0S] proxy.netangola.com port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 20:19:11 EDT by DJKA0S] proxy2.telecom.com.co port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 18:27:09 EDT by DaRKneSS] proxy.spaceproxy.com port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 16:53:27 EDT] hail.pipex.net port 3128 [latency: 09/26/00 16:46:23 EDT] proxy.kn.bia-bg.com port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 15:46:33 EDT] cf1.lnoca.org port 8080 [latency: 09/26/00 15:46:00 EDT] proxy.cityline.ru port 3128 [latency: 09/26/00 08:03:36 EDT by hieu] 64.19.3.2 port 1080 [latency: 09/25/00 23:04:34 EDT by NNastty] willia10.lnk.telstra.net port 1080 [latency: 09/25/00 22:39:39 EDT by NNastty] dns.hokuto.ed.jp port 1080 [latency: 09/25/00 22:36:54 EDT by NNastty] xmaspt.lnk.telstra.net port 1080 [latency: 09/25/00 22:34:55 EDT by NNastty] 195.94.0.36 port 1080 [latency: 09/25/00 22:33:29 EDT by NNastty] 210.229.194.18 port 1080 [latency: 09/25/00 22:30:43 EDT by NNastty] 194.245.99.30 port 3128 [latency: 09/25/00 13:33:09 EDT by CraigTM] 24.200.24.151 port 1080 [latency: 09/25/00 09:32:25 EDT by NNastty] droopy.allnet.fr port 1080 [latency: 09/25/00 09:26:05 EDT by NNastty] rochcache1.roch.uswest.net port 8080 [latency: 09/25/00 08:10:55 EDT by gOdFeLLa] squid.acib.com.br port 3128 [latency: 09/25/00 01:58:36 EDT] 207.211.58.248 port 8080 [latency: 09/24/00 18:51:50 EDT by cyberboy] cache-utr2.casema.net port 3128 [latency: 09/24/00 16:21:12 EDT by alfred] pr1-ts.telepac.pt port 8081 [latency: 09/24/00 16:19:20 EDT by morgan] proxy.iloilo.fapenet.org port 3128 [latency: 09/24/00 16:16:37 EDT by morgan] 202.149.251.5 port 8080 [latency: 09/24/00 13:23:53 EDT by BudiLewiyanto] proxy.free.fr port 3128 [latency: 09/24/00 05:46:12 EDT] mail.mastec-ei-ga.com port 1080 [latency: 09/24/00 04:47:43 EDT by hacker] manwebproxy.nola.navy.mil port 1080 [latency: 09/23/00 22:41:08 EDT by Rewter] enterprise.hale.wa.edu.au port 8080 [latency: 09/23/00 17:20:53 EDT by Boggie] proxy.spaceproxy.com port 8080 [latency: 09/23/00 13:58:34 EDT] proxy.yzu.edu.tw port 8080 [latency: 09/23/00 12:05:03 EDT] proxy.nefonline.de port 8080 [latency: 09/23/00 09:10:01 EDT by basketci_] 195.24.55.245 port 1080 [latency: 09/23/00 05:59:49 EDT by MARIAN17] 216.234.161.83 port 8080 [latency: 09/23/00 05:58:58 EDT by MARIAN17] channels.undernet.org port 8080 [latency: 09/23/00 03:53:03 EDT by aerOwave] 216.77.56.106 port 1080 [latency: 09/22/00 18:16:28 EDT by voo] eu.xnet.org port 8080 [latency: 09/22/00 14:30:37 EDT] 206.131.118.240 port 8080 [latency: 09/22/00 13:42:29 EDT] server.ucatolica.edu.co port 3128 [latency: 09/22/00 06:08:57 EDT] proxy.sat.net.pk port 8080 [latency: 09/21/00 03:57:41 EDT] proxy.netwave.or.jp port 8080 [latency: 09/20/00 19:22:30 EDT] proxy.qatar.net.qa port 8080 [latency: 09/20/00 18:56:49 EDT] solomon.stic.net port 8080 [latency: 09/20/00 18:49:57 EDT] proxy.x-treme.gr port 3128 [latency: 09/20/00 14:52:05 EDT by PearlJam] proxy.netsys.it port 8080 [latency: 09/20/00 10:59:45 EDT by pevio] 194.20.0.13 port 8080 [latency: 09/20/00 01:37:35 EDT] 202.54.31.1 port 8081 [latency: 09/19/00 22:02:31 EDT] pax02f.mipool.uni-jena.de port 3128 [latency: 03/28/00 20:41:38 EST by FreddyG.] cache1.cc.interlog.com port 3128 [latency: 02/13/00 17:43:45 EST] master-proxy.europeonline.net port 8081 [latency: 02/13/00 17:29:21 EST by FreddyG.] mail.bsn.or.id port 1080 [latency: 02/13/00 12:35:50 EST by FreddyG.] proxy.nefonline.de port 8080 [latency: 02/13/00 01:41:09 EST] c111.h202052116.is.net.tw port 1080 [latency: 02/12/00 14:52:20 EST by FreddyG.] billymchales.com port 8080 [latency: 02/12/00 13:58:12 EST by FreddyG.] overloaded.org port 8000 [latency: 02/12/00 13:46:58 EST by FreddyG.] irc.gammaforce.org port 8080 [latency: 02/12/00 13:45:46 EST by FreddyG.] netstar.nwarks-hinckley.ac.uk port 8080 [latency: 02/12/00 13:20:21 EST by FreddyG.] webcacheW10b.cache.pol.co.uk port 8080 [latency: 02/12/00 12:26:08 EST by FreddyG.] cr277137-a.nmkt1.on.wave.home.com port 8080 [latency: 02/12/00 12:01:40 EST by FreddyG.] proxyserv.citra-abadi.co.id port 1080 [latency: 02/12/00 00:50:06 EST] atlas1.gateway.com port 8080 [latency: 02/11/00 15:52:10 EST by KoRn_Klown�] proxy.p-ol.com port 3128 [latency: 01/07/00 00:38:11 EST by GuMyBaRe] ftp.yvrls.lib.wa.us port 3128 [latency: 12/12/99 16:11:37 EST] apache.com port port 80 [latency: 12/10/99 16:53:39 EST] i.am.31337.nu port port 31337 [latency: 12/10/99 16:51:21 EST] 138.25.8.9 port 80 [latency: 12/10/99 16:48:36 EST by lubna] 203.23.72.6 port 8080 [latency: 12/10/99 16:46:54 EST by lubna] proxy.spnet.net port 3128 [latency: 12/10/99 09:17:42 EST by Sliver] ns.infnet.co.jp port 8080 [latency: 12/09/99 23:39:59 EST by AiseJuK] 212.43.196.10 port 8080 [latency: 12/09/99 17:44:25 EST by THE STORMDRINKER] proxy3.brunet.bn port 8080 [latency: 12/09/99 17:36:40 EST by THE STORMDRINKER] 202.160.12.35 port 8080 [latency: 12/09/99 17:32:40 EST by THE STORMDRINKER] ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup From Amy_Amber2 at excite.com Mon Oct 9 12:42:39 2000 From: Amy_Amber2 at excite.com (Amy_Amber2 at excite.com) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 12:42:39 Subject: #1 INTERNET MARKETING SOLUTION 0438 Message-ID: <590.493218.618452@excite.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4293 bytes Desc: not available URL: From apoio at giganetstore.com Mon Oct 9 06:24:21 2000 From: apoio at giganetstore.com (apoio at giganetstore.com) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 14:24:21 +0100 Subject: CDR: Just Imagine... Message-ID: <0591343251309a0WWWNETSTORE@wwwnetstore> Bem Vindo ao Mundo da LEGO Onde a imaginação não tem limites... A Locomotiva Motorbike O Jardim do Puppy Camião A-Wing Fighter 4 WD Vehicle c/ Motor Entre em www.giganetstore.com , veja estes e muitos mais brinquedos em 3 dimensões. Inspire-se e participe no nosso Passatempo. Saiba o que pode ganhar... Para mais informações contacte o nosso Serviço de Apoio a Clientes 808 210 808, apoio at giganetstore.com Para retirar o seu email desta mailing list deverá entrar no nosso site http://www.giganetstore.com , ir à edição do seu registo e retirar a opção de receber informação acerca das nossas promoções e novos serviços. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4368 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mmotyka at lsil.com Mon Oct 9 11:29:31 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (Michael Motyka) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 14:29:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: stego for the censored Message-ID: <39E20F36.E623E2AE@lsil.com> > Bill Stewart wrote: > > > > At 04:30 PM 10/6/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: > > >In places where crypto is illegal, this approach would also likely be > > illegal. > > ... > > >BTW, the issue is a lot more than just "plausible deniability." This > > >may work in the U.S., until the Constitution is further shredded. But > > >"plausibility deniability" is not enough when dealing with the > > >Staasi, or SAVAK, or Shin Bet, or the Ayotollahs. Mere suspicion is > > >enough. > > > > The point is that each message doesn't have decryptable cyphertext. > > It only has a secret-share that no recipient can decode > > until they have enough shares of the same message, > > even if the KGB rubber-hoses them, and the KGB cryptanalysts > > won't be able to find anything more than random noise in the message > > because with > Now random noise may also be suspicious, but it's less suspicious > > than something that's got more structure to it. > > Even if they do suspect the recipient and seize his computer, > > they'll only get old messages, not the new partially-received ones. > > Not good enough, I'm afraid. As Tim said, if the authorities in an > authoritarian regime _suspect_ secrets are being passed they have > "probable cause" to break out the jumper cables. Unless the holder of an > incomplete secret is willing to spill his guts literally rather than > figuratively, his group doesn't benefit from a secret which can be > detected but not read. > > -- > Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel > These regimes are likely to suspect conspiracies whether or not they are actually occurring. Look at our McCarthy era. Assume the jumper cables will be applied whether there are secret messages or not. If you want to actually communicate then you have to risk SOMETHING. Scatter-gather is just a mechanism to handle arbitrary sizes of messages and add some potential cover traffic. It is no less safe than any single exchange of stego data. Possibly it is more safe since the data density in the carriers can be made very low and an observer cannot easily isolate a complete carrier set from the cover traffic. Mike From anonymous at openpgp.net Mon Oct 9 11:45:46 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 14:45:46 -0400 Subject: CDR: pigs use Inet for domestic intelligence at Phish Message-ID: <5f63245f48459fff9b32751daf2a744a@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Friday September 22 06:47 PM EDT Undercover Police Go Online To Bust Phish Fans By Contributing Editor Richard B. Simon reports After using the Internet to investigate the reputation and the lingo of Phish fans, undercover law-enforcement agents arrested as many as 90 concertgoers on substance-related charges at the jam bands show Monday in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio. Sgt. Larry Wagner of the Cuyahoga Falls Police Departments narcotics division said officers made arrests for 12 felonies and 10 misdemeanors outside the Blossom Music Center. Charges ranged from underage possession of alcohol to felony possession and trafficking in LSD, psychedelic mushrooms and Ecstasy. In the days before the Vermont band arrived in town, Capt. Barry Milich of the Sheriffs Department compared notes with police from other towns Phish had visited, while Wagner went online to research the Phish subculture for tips on how his undercover officers could fit in and understand the lingo. "Our guys will go up and say, Hey, you got any Molly (Ecstasy) or anything like that? " Wagner said. "They dont just sell grilled-cheese sandwiches out there." Wagner estimated that 70 to 80 officers from three agencies the Cuyahoga Falls Police Department, the Summit County Sheriffs Department and the Ohio Department of Public Safety were at the show, mostly in plainclothes, policing about 20,000 concertgoers. But the Phish fans picked up on the police presence quickly and would surround officers making arrests. "We knew when we were being made," Wagner said. "After the first arrest, they stated six up, meaning ... theyre here and theyre making an arrest, and for the mounted unit, it was six up, giddy up. So we were able to figure that out early on. ... Maybe I should have checked the Internet a little bit better before they came. Im back from the old school. I was waiting to hear pig and stuff like that, but I didnt hear any of that." Wagner admitted that some of the undercover officers blended in better than others. "I think Phish fans can tell the difference between Kmart tie-dyes and the ones they get at the concert." Most of the arrests were made before and during the show, Wagner said, while thousands of ticketless fans remained in the parking lot. Agent Rita Raimer of the Ohio Department of Public Safety said the department made 18 arrests in connection with underage possession of alcohol. Ohio penalties for drug possession range from likely probation for first-time offenders to possible jail time for those who have extensive criminal records or were caught selling large amounts. Wagner said all the felony arrests his department made were for "low-grade" offenses, for which the state has no mandatory minimum jail time. A Phish spokesperson declined to comment on the arrests. Many Phish fans follow the band from venue to venue, in the tradition of the Grateful Dead, so the band plays a different setlist each night, playing a mix of earlier tunes such as "Prince Caspian" ( RealAudio excerpt) and newer material such as "The Inlaw Josie Wales" ( RealAudio excerpt), from this years Farmhouse. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/so/20000922/en/undercover_police_go_online_to_bust_phish_fans_1.html From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Mon Oct 9 07:23:43 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 15:23:43 +0100 Subject: CDR: Two UK news articles on censorship References: <200010070306.XAA22763@world.std.com> <39E18CBC.F7A4B5F2@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Message-ID: <39E1D4EF.6A74DE1@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Crossposted without permission from cyber-rights-UK at mail.cyber-rights.org (originally posted by Yaman Akdeniz) Web inventor denounces net censorship The Observer, John Arlidge, media correspondent Sunday October 8, 2000 On the tenth anniversary of the creation of the internet, the British scientist who invented the world wide web has called for the abolition of censorship online. As parents' groups and politicians press for new ways to police websites, Tim Berners-Lee rejects censorship as 'horrific'. In an exclusive interview with The Observer , Berners-Lee dismisses the recent outcry over paedophiles targeting youngsters in web chatrooms, child pornography and fraud, and rejects calls for a 'net regulator'. 'I know there are some very strong feelings but you can not banish technology or regulate content. 'Regulation is censorship - one grown-up telling another what they can and cannot do or see. For me, the idea is horrific. Universality is the key. You must be able to represent anything on the web.' Illegal material - child pornography, 'video nasties' - should remain illegal, but he insists 'the world is a diverse place and we should trust people, not try to police them... There are many cultures and they are continually changing. What somebody in Tennessee might think of as reasonable when it comes to nudity is very different from what someone in Finland might think. 'Two neighbours next door to each-other might have very different ideas. So any attempt to make a global centralised standard is going to be unbelievably contentious. You can't do that.' Instead of regulation it is up to parents to 'catch up' with the new e- generation and teach youngsters how to use the web safely. Children are at risk because they are 'technologically ahead of most grown-ups, who have to ask the younger generation how to turn the thing on and get it working. Adults are slower than children. They need to catch up so they can teach their children what to see and what to avoid.' Ten years ago Berners-Lee wrote the electronic code that enables computers across the world to 'talk' to each-other down a telephone line. The internet was born and has grown from a single website to more than 800,000,000 , with e-commerce, chatrooms and email transforming the way we work, shop, do business, socialise and relax. The Manchester-born scientist has been hailed as 'the man who invented the future'. A decade on he says we are still 'just scratching the surface' of what the internet can do. 'The web is far from done. Just imagine you were back in the Middle Ages and somebody asked "Given the full impact that paper is going to have, where will we be?" That's where we are.' He describes the future as 'the semantic web... a new, more powerful interactive network that will really enable e-commerce and industry to hum. But I don't want to say more or everyone will jump on the bandwagon and that will wreck it.' He says his creation is 'progressing remarkably well... it's neat. It is an achievement of a group of people who had a twinkle in their eye about a possible future. We should celebrate the fact that we can change the world by creating a new social tool. It gives a great feeling of hope that we can do it again.' Patrolling the internet Alan Travis, 18 September, 2000, The Guardian Extract from Bound and Gagged, published by Profile The British government is preparing a legal framework to control what is available on the web. In an exclusive extract from his new book Bound and Gagged, the Guardian's home affairs editor Alan Travis argues that the trend is towards censorship rather than a libertarian approach. Britain is on the verge of a new censorship debate, this time over how to regulate the content of the web. A communications white paper will be published this autumn which will set the legal framework for delivery of net to every home in Britain within the next four years through the domestic digital television as well as the home computer. Tony Blair has already said he worries about the kind of information that his three 'very computer-literate' children, Euan, Nicky and Kathryn, can find on the net. "We try to keep a careful watch on what our children are getting access to on the internet. There are organisations that give advice to people, but it's very difficult if the parents aren't around watching what is going on. There are dangers. In the end I think it is more a matter for parents than for governments. We can do what we can, but it is down to parents," Blair has said. For a politician this represents a very liberal stance compared with America and Australia where attempts to impose state regulation of the net have criminalised not only porn sites but also those which talk about safe sex and abortion as they curb offensive as well as obscene sites. The Home Office insists that it is possible to enforce the current obscenity laws and ensure that "what is illegal offline is illegal online". So far ministers have been content to leave it to the British internet industry to develop its own self-regulation through the Internet Watch Foundation - a body similar to the British Board of Film Classification. The IWF is at the centre of a government-backed effort to make sure that what is illegal is not available through the main servers, such as AOL, Demon, BT internet and the others, and that includes race hate material as well as hardcore porn. Those who back the development of the rating and filtering systems that are used argue that for the first time it will give each family - rather than the state - the power to decide what kind of material should enter their home. But critics fear that the "wish of the lazy parent to allow unsupervised access to their children will reduce adult browsing to the level of suitability of a five year old." So far American and Australian politicians have not been able to resist the temptation. Will British ministers be any different? From declan at well.com Mon Oct 9 12:38:16 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 15:38:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001009153805.01c448b0@mail.well.com> http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/09/1933206&mode=nested Nader Sends Privacy Quiz to Bush and Gore posted by cicero on Monday October 09, @02:22PM from the never-liked-those-safeway-discount-cards-anyway dept. Vergil Bushnell of Ralph Nader's presidential campaign just sent us news about a privacy survey. Turns out the Green Party hopeful wants to nail down where rivals George W. Bush and Al Gore stand on things like supermarket videocameras and marketing by Internet service providers. Unfortunately, Ralph doesn't include any questions exclusively on the topic of government surveillance, such as wiretapping, Echelon, or Carnivore -- which are precisely the areas the next Oval Office occupant can do the most to reform. Nader is, typically, focused only on corporate wrongdoing. His privacy survey is attached below. The survey: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/09/1933206&mode=nested From rah at shipwright.com Mon Oct 9 07:38:37 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 15:38:37 +0100 Subject: CDR: ip: Congress on verge of approving warrantless secret searches [Free Republic]] Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 9 16:11:57 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 16:11:57 -0700 Subject: CDR: FBI: We Need Cyber Ethics Education Message-ID: Monday October 9 4:45 PM ET FBI: We Need Cyber Ethics Education By DIANE HOPHEAD, Routers Press Agency WASHINGTON (AP) - FBI: We Need Cyber Ethics Education. Thou shalt snoop on other children. Thou shalt not hide cybercrimes by using encryption. FBI agents are spreading a new gospel to parents and teachers, hoping they'll better educate youths that privacy in cyberspace can be economically costly and just as criminal as refusing to narc out fellow students. The Justice Department (news - web sites) and the Information Technology Association of America, a trade group, has launched the Cybercitizen Partnership to encourage educators and parents to talk to children in ways that equate privacy and encryption with old-fashioned wrongdoing. The nascent effort includes a series of seminars around the country for teachers, classroom materials and guides and a Web site to help parents talk to children. The FBI is distributing copies of "MyPersonalCarnivore" to allow children to set up their own Carnivore-enabled local sites. ``In a democracy in general, we can't have the police everywhere,'' said Michael Vacuous, director of the FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center, which guards against computer attacks by terrorists, foreign agents and teen hackers. ``One of the most important ways of reducing crime is trying to teach ethics and morality to our kids. That same principle needs to apply to the cyber world,'' he said. "We are willing to drop the antitrust action against Microsoft if and when they meet the legitimate needs of law enforcement," he added. Asked if he was referring to the proposed "WindowsMe (and Big Brother)," he added that he could not comment on sensitive programs. From marcel at aiurea.com Mon Oct 9 14:15:10 2000 From: marcel at aiurea.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 17:15:10 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Comments on and about e-privacy in Canada References: Message-ID: <01ed01c03235$ddf32990$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> From roach_s at intplsrv.net Mon Oct 9 17:14:13 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 19:14:13 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Market Your Business To The World! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001009191229.00ab5dc0@mail.intplsrv.net> Okay, it's bad enough when the list gets spam. It's worse when the list gets spam on sending spam. Good luck, Sean At 12:56 AM 10/9/2000, you wrote: > Take Advantage Of Your Resources Online Now > Consider this: > More People turn to email marketing then any other advertising > median online WHY Its Simple.!! > IT WORKS!! ... From roach_s at intplsrv.net Mon Oct 9 17:36:19 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 19:36:19 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: In-Reply-To: <001601c0322d$6ea50700$52fc0ed4@m9b8c3> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001009193459.00aba3a0@mail.intplsrv.net> At 03:13 PM 10/9/2000, ziad salim wrote: > > Are the infiltrators getting this desparate for a bust? Good luck, Sean From freedom at cvzoom.ne Mon Oct 9 19:38:11 2000 From: freedom at cvzoom.ne (freedom at cvzoom.ne) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 19:38:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: PRE-QUALIFIED LEADS ...... Message-ID: <200010100238.TAA16733@cyberpass.net> PRE-QUALIFIED LEADS IN YOUR E-MAIL DAILY... WWW.SEIZEYOURFUTURE.COM WILL HELP YOU TO CREATE INSANE INCOMES IN THE NETWORK MARKETING REVOLUTION WITH PRE-QUALIFIED PROSPECTS DELIVERED DIRECTLY TO YOUR EMAIL.THIS IS A GREAT TOOL FOR ANY SERIOUS NETWORKER. From wayne at nym.alias.net Mon Oct 9 14:53:37 2000 From: wayne at nym.alias.net (wayne) Date: 9 Oct 2000 21:53:37 -0000 Subject: CDR: Re: Guys, I need help Message-ID: <20001009215337.32280.qmail@nym.alias.net> cypherpunks at toad.com M. Emad Ul Hasan wrote: Subject: Guys, I need help > Your anonymizer.com is blocked in Saudi Arabia via proxy. Can you tell me a way I can see this site 1. go to my site at: http://www.angelfire.com/wy/1waynes/ 2. look in the 'list of proxies' 3. click on the 'clickable' ones - these are CGI proxies and the first few you come across are working for KSA people at the moment. That may be enough for you. If you want more ... At the same site you might download my findProxyNew.pl which (at least) contains many URLs for lists of proxies. If you decide to test them, install Perl (URL is on my downloads page), run findProxyNew with $country set to 'KSA' and it will find any you can use from whatever list you feed it. Expect to find maybe one in 1,000 of the proxies to be any use to you. If you want even more... Get a shell account in a free country and run a redirector there, or your own proxy. For the others who responded, these proxies are blocked in the Middle East countries by IP address range (the whole noproxy.com range, for example, including the name server!), by port number (standard ports like 80, 3128, 8080) are blocked and (within the country-wide proxy arrays) by censoring databases of URL strings (for the 'unwanted' URLs, including CGI proxy URLS). My site details all this. For those cypherpunks who actively believe in freedom of information, the biggest single thing you could do break down this censorship would be to offer a non-dial shell account, on the understanding that it would be used to run redirectors/relays/bouncers and maybe a proxy (junkbuster, say). I solicited about 10 promising looking ISPs in the USA once, for those who were willing to sell shells under these conditions. I had a response rate of about 20%, and finally only one ISP came through - panix.com. It was just too hard for the rest to bother with; obviously my approach was too honest :-) regards, wayne wayne at nym.alias.net http://www.angelfire.com/wy/1waynes/ From ziad at falasteen.net Mon Oct 9 13:13:33 2000 From: ziad at falasteen.net (ziad salim) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 22:13:33 +0200 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <001601c0322d$6ea50700$52fc0ed4@m9b8c3> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 272 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: vin-middle.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31101 bytes Desc: not available URL: From regsupport at netscape.com Mon Oct 9 23:38:22 2000 From: regsupport at netscape.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 23:38:22 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001009151837.01c536b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001009233822.0090aa10@idiom.com> Meanwhile, the Bush and Gore campaigns are doing their own discussion on privacy policies, led by Markey, who thinks that the Feds have a right to control what goes on Cable TV because lots of people watch Public Television on cable, (Goldsmith I don't know... Robbin, do you know him?) and moderated by Etzioni, who doesn't believe your right to privacy includes keeping the Feds from eavesdropping, and invented "Fair Cryptography" to make it easier for them. I seem to remember Etzioni being tied into the Communitarian movement as well. Much as I think the Naderites are wrong in their idea that more government control can improve privacy, this seems like a setup for a debate on "Privacy - Threat or Menace".... >>ADVISORY >>GORE/BUSH FORUM ON PRIVACY TO BE HELD OCTOBER 16 >>10:30 AM, THE MONARCH HOTEL, WASHINGTON, DC >> >>Congressman Edward Markey (D-MA) will present the Gore campaign's views on >>privacy; Bush's senior domestic policy advisor and former mayor of >>Indianapolis, Stephen Goldsmith, will present the views of the Bush campaign. >> >>Amitai Etzioni, author of The Limits of Privacy will moderate. >> >>Open to the public and to the press: feel free to invite your students or >>colleagues. >>A Q&A will follow the presentations. >> >>Sponsored by the Institute for Communitarian Policy Studies at The George >>Washington University. >> >>For more information, contact: >>Joanna Cohn >>Outreach Coordinator >>202.994.8190 >>comnet at gwu.edu At 03:19 PM 10/9/00 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > >http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/09/1933206&mode=nested > > Nader Sends Privacy Quiz to Bush and Gore > posted by cicero on Monday October 09, @02:22PM > from the never-liked-those-safeway-discount-cards-anyway dept. > > Vergil Bushnell of Ralph Nader's presidential campaign just > sent us news about a privacy survey. Turns out the Green Party hopeful > wants to nail down where rivals George W. Bush and Al Gore stand on > things like supermarket videocameras and marketing by Internet service > providers. Unfortunately, Ralph doesn't include any questions > exclusively on the topic of government surveillance, such as > wiretapping, Echelon, or Carnivore -- which are precisely the areas > the next Oval Office occupant can do the most to reform. Nader is, > typically, focused only on corporate wrongdoing. His privacy survey is > is attached below. > >The survey: >http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/09/1933206&mode=nested > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology >You may redistribute this message freely if it remains intact. >To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html >This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ >------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From danman76 at home.com Mon Oct 9 23:57:37 2000 From: danman76 at home.com (Dan Bristow) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 01:57:37 -0500 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <000001c03302$54f3f840$f02eb218@roalok1.mi.home.com> ----------------------------------------------------- Click here for Free Video!! http://www.gohip.com/free_video/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 497 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danman76 at home.com Mon Oct 9 23:57:37 2000 From: danman76 at home.com (Dan Bristow) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 01:57:37 -0500 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <000d01c03287$60ab80c0$f02eb218@roalok1.mi.home.com> ----------------------------------------------------- Click here for Free Video!! http://www.gohip.com/free_video/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 497 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bobby36 at august-savings.com Tue Oct 10 02:16:06 2000 From: bobby36 at august-savings.com (bobby36 at august-savings.com) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 02:16:06 -0700 Subject: CDR: Do you need help with your credit cards Message-ID: $$ STOP $$ IS CREDIT CARD DEBT OVERWHELMING YOU? ARE YOU BEHIND, LET US HELP CALL LIBERTY FINANCIAL SERVICES 1-888-309-9865 From vin at shore.net Mon Oct 9 23:17:25 2000 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 02:17:25 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> Arnold G. Reinhold asked: > What is the licensing status of the other finalists? For example, I seem to >recall reading that RC6 would be licensed to the public at no charge if it won > the competition. What now? Since April, RC6 has being commercially licensed as part of RSA's BSAFE Crypto-C 5.0 and BSAFE Crypto-J 3.0 software developer toolkits. I don't expect that will change. (RSA said, however, that by the end of the year its regular support and maintenance procedures will add Rijndael to both of those SDKs. RSA also said it will adopt the AES as "a baseline encryption algorithm" for its Keon family of digital cert products.) Given RSA's market share, the eight BSAFE toolkits could be a major channel for distributing AES code to the developer community, particularly among OEMs. Of the other three who made the finals in this "Crypto Olympics." MARS, while patented, is available world-wide under a royalty-free license from Tivoli Systems, an IBM subsidiary. (See , although the Tivoli site doesn't seem to have anything but the press release.) Serpent is public domain, now under the GNU PUBLIC LICENSE (GPL), although Serpent website warns that "some comments in the code still say otherwise." Twofish is "unpatented, and the source code is uncopyrighted and license-free; it is free for all uses." Suerte, _Vin From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Tue Oct 10 00:08:53 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 03:08:53 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Musings on AES and DES Message-ID: John wrote: > NIST has stated that the maximum endorsement will be to use > AES for non-classified government information. So the question > will remain of what is better than AES, or to put it another way, > what is not good enough about AES for its use on classified > information. A more likely explanation of the NSA withholding endorsement of AES for use with classified traffic is that doing so would dejustify the continued existence of the code-making groups at NSA. --Lucky Green "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 From regsupport at netscape.com Tue Oct 10 01:32:57 2000 From: regsupport at netscape.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 04:32:57 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Musings on AES and DES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001010013152.00901d00@idiom.com> At 03:08 AM 10/10/00 -0400, Lucky Green wrote: >John wrote: >> NIST has stated that the maximum endorsement will be to use >> AES for non-classified government information. So the question >> will remain of what is better than AES, or to put it another way, >> what is not good enough about AES for its use on classified >> information. > >A more likely explanation of the NSA withholding endorsement of AES for use >with classified traffic is that doing so would dejustify the continued >existence of the code-making groups at NSA. That's certainly a big part of it. NSA has also always had the policy that they and only they will decide what's strong enough for military use, partly because they know what they (and possibly the KGB) can crack, and they know that everything the commmercial world offered before DES, and much of which it offered before PGP and before EFF's Deep Crack, was either Snake Oil or DES implementations of varying quality (e.g. some had inadequate random number generators for keys). They also had a policy of not letting their crypto tech out, because that would give the Commies technology as good as theirs, which they desparately didn't want, and while security by obscurity isn't real security, it still helps reduce attacks by less capable cryptanalysts and makes data collection harder for the KGB, or for other people they might want to hide stuff from, like the Brits or French or Israelis. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From jya at pipeline.com Tue Oct 10 02:46:23 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 05:46:23 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Musings on AES and DES In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001010013152.00901d00@idiom.com> References: Message-ID: <200010100957.FAA26969@tisch.mail.mindspring.net> It could be that AES will be used as part of an ensemble for protecting classified information. The few Type 1 systems that are publicly described never use only a single algorithm without supplementary programs for enhancing cryptanalytic protection. Belt and suspenders and probably additional support in hardware systems not spelled out. Presumably there are software and hardware add-ons which are easily not available and which could counter known cryptanalytic methods of cracking and of tampering, some of which have been mentioned here recently. This would conform to military doctrine which states that it must be assumed that the enemy knows everything you do, but lacks information on when, where and how you will apply what you know. Thus the need for multiple strategies, multiple weapons, multiple programs of disinformation, ploys, strategems, betrayals and theft of secrets. Recall the program NSA and CIA runs to break-in to get what cannot be electronically intercepted. Similarly, brute force to attack software is matched, indeed, amplified, by brute force to physically steal. As with the long-standing practice of the FBI and domestic law enforcement agencies. So AES could be seen as a consumer assurance technology, to deter the ordinary burglar and biz-bandit like yourself, but in no way impede a global intelligence cartel which believes it has a right to everybody's private affairs. Have a read of USSID 18 over at the National Security Archives which ostensibly prohibits the NSA from spying on Americans. Parts of it are remarkably similar to gov statements on AES, the parts that assure trustworthinesss of the authors. No military professional would believe any such fluff was anything more than artful deception. None of these remarks are directed at the AES competitors, but at the purpose of the public competition and disavowals that have accrued during it. The fine print, very fine, virtually invisible ploys. From ConnieFrancis at cheerful.com Tue Oct 10 07:22:54 2000 From: ConnieFrancis at cheerful.com (ConnieFrancis at cheerful.com) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 06:22:54 -0800 Subject: CDR: Commercial Financing for Small/Large Business Message-ID: Our Commercial Loans Division is the place to call for all of your commercial lending needs. Whether you need an acquisition, business loan, refinance or construction loan, we handle all types of commercial loans, including raw land. We also provide construction and/or term financing for multi-family, retail, industrial, office, mobile homecparks, churches, and more. For companies seeking a business loan or corporate financing, please call our office at 570-947-0970 for more information. *********************************************************************************** If you wish to be REMOVED for our mail list, Please reply to this message, You will be REMOVED. Thank You! *********************************************************************************** From emc at chao.insync.net Tue Oct 10 07:57:03 2000 From: emc at chao.insync.net (Eric Cordian) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Polynomial Time Minimum Clique Partition? Message-ID: <200010101457.JAA38369@chao.insync.net> Someone at the following URL is claiming NP=P based on an alleged polynomial time solution to the minimum clique partition problem. http://www.busygin.dp.ua/clipat.html Code is provided, and I am downloading it at the moment. More later. ----- An Efficient Algorithm for the Minimum Clique Partition Problem by Anatoly Plotnikov _________________________________________________________________ Foreword by Stas Busygin Publishing this paper claiming P=NP result in my Repository for Hard Problems Solving, I completely realize my huge responsibility for this decision. As you perhaps know, this paper has a predecessor -- Polynomial-Time Partition of a Graph into Cliques published in SWJPAM -- and I was its first firm opponent. Fortunately, Anatoly Plotnikov has written a new revised and expanded description of his proposal and agreed to present it here. I am very grateful to him for this. Partly because of a modification of the algorithm and partly because of made clarifications, I should say that my previous arguments are not relevant for the proposed matter so I have removed them from here. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 10 08:25:52 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:25:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: RE: Musings on AES and DES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Trei, Peter wrote: >If you read the ostensible charter of the NSA, its duties include assisting >in >the securing of US civilian communications. While I expect this mainly means >making sure that Boris & Natasha aren't tapping US internal comm links >without permission, it can also be interpreted to make sure we aren't >using snakeoil ciphers. Making DES not suck seems well within the NSA >charter. True enough. I have little trust for them though; they have been very irritating to american companies who want to make stuff with strong ciphers, at least for export. >In 1986, when the second recertification came up, I remember considerable >consternation over the key-length reduction to 56 bits, and the unexplained >tweaking of the S-boxes. There was serious discussion at the time that one >or both of these changes were done to introduce backdoors. You'd probably >have to find a usenet archive from the period to confirm this. No, I wouldn't. I remember it too, and in fact I was one of the conspiracy theorists at that time. As time went on, though, and nobody *outside* the NSA worked out the supposed backdoor, I became more and more convinced that the inadequate key length was really the only problem. Switch to independently keyed 3DES, preferably with a half-block shift between encryptions for more diffusion, and that problem goes away. >In the end, we now know that the tweaking prevented differential >cryptanalysis, >but not linear cryptanalysis. DCA had apparently been discovered internally >at IBM (and presumably at NSA). LCA was not then known within IBM >(whether it was known inside NSA is an interesting question :-) Hardly matters. The NSA couldn't realistically have expected to exploit linear cryptanalysis on the DES, because it requires them to capture something like (IIRC) 2^48 unique plaintext/ciphertext pairs. While that could happen on a high-speed link if they monitored it (and the target didn't change keys) for a long time, it doesn't seem too likely for the relatively small bandwidths employed by terrorist, rebel, and other "fringe" organizations. If that's a backdoor, it's a backdoor that takes a bulldozer to open. I'm thinking now that they just didn't know about it. >I would not be suprised if 30 or 50 years down the road, we find out that >NSA >did its level best to ensure that the AES selection process picked the best >candidate. Equally, I would not be suprised to find that they already have >some black cryptanalytic technique which can defeat it. The NSA was very badly burned in public opinion and by conspiracy theorists for their involvement with the DES selection; having learned their lesson, I note that they have definitely taken a much more hands-off role with AES. Of course, this is also consistent with civilian cryptographic know-how having gotten sufficiently better that they no longer have to tell us what a secure cipher is. >On the balance >I favor the former: the NSA is as aware as the rest of us of the huge cost >(both financial and security) of embedding a broken cipher in the >infrastructure of the nation. Hm. Our opinions differ. The NSA has a stated agenda to embed broken ciphers in the infrastructure of the world, in order to preserve their sources of sigint. In the past, they have been perfectly willing to embed broken ciphers in the infrastructure of the United states (especially US-produced software) in order to further this agenda. I don't think I'm a full-out NSA-conspiracy theorist any more, but judging strictly from their record, that is evidently where they are coming from. They have been acting according to the idea that the sigint from broken ciphers furthers US interests more effectively than having strong ciphers in place. In the light of Echelon and the Crypto AG fiasco, they may even be right about that. But I don't think it's reasonable for the entire world to suffer the pain that broken ciphers in the infrastructure costs, for a transitory advantage to one nation. The best thing the US could do, for its allies, for the world at large, and for global trust right now would be to just plain quit trying to put broken ciphers into the infrastructure of this planet. This is a direct attack on infrastructure, and ought to be treated in world courts just as seriously as mining shipping lanes or poisoning water supplies. I hope somebody has realized this. It would be nice to think that the AES process represents a step in that direction. Bear From reinhold at world.std.com Tue Oct 10 06:44:59 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:44:59 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> Message-ID: At 12:12 PM -0700 10/7/2000, Ed Gerck wrote: >"Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > >> In public-key cryptography "Non-Repudiation" means that that the >> probability that a particular result could have been produced without >> access to the secret key is vanishingly small, subject to the >> assumption that the underlying public-key problem is difficult. If >> that property had be called "the key binding property" or "condition >> Z," or some other matheze name, we would all be able to look at this >> notion more objectively. "Non-repudiation," has too powerful a >> association with the real world. > >Your definition is not standard. The Cryptography Handbook by Menezes >defines non-repudiation as a service that prevents the denial of an act. The >same is the current definition in PKIX, as well as in X.509. This >does not mean, however as some may suppose, that the act cannot be >denied -- for example, >it can be denied by a counter authentication that presents an accepted proof. > >Thus, non-repudiation is not a stronger authentication -- neither a >long lived >authentication. Authentication is an assertion that something is true. Non- >repudiation is a negation that something is false. Neither are absolute. And >they are quite different when non-boolean variables (ie, real-world variables) >are used. They are complementary concepts and *both* need to be used or >we lose expressive power in protocols, contracts, etc.. > >Cheers, > >Ed Gerck You may well be right about the accepted definition of non-repudiation, but if you are then I would amend my remarks to say that known cryptographic technology cannot provide non-repudiation service unless we are willing to create a new legal duty for individuals and corporations to protect their secret key or accept what ever consequences ensue. I don't think that is acceptable. I find the rest of your comment a tad too opaque. Could you give some examples of what you have in mind? Arnold Reinhold From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 10 07:46:48 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:46:48 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Musings on AES and DES Message-ID: > ---------- > From: Vin McLellan[SMTP:vin at shore.net] > Reply To: Vin McLellan > Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 3:22 AM > To: Ray Dillinger; cypherpunks at cyberpass.net > Subject: Re: Musings on AES and DES > > Ray Dillinger wrote: > > > > >[As the DES,] Dataseal/Demon/Lucifer was pretty good. It may not > >have been the *most* secure algorithm of its time, but neither was it a > >transparent and useless "cipher" with obvious flaws other than the > 56-bit > >keyspace. However, the important part of building up trust (or lack > >thereof) in the cipher came after it was chosen as the DES. > > I suggest that you give insufficient weight to the importance of > the NSA imprimatur on the DES. > > The DES became the standard we know today -- for years, > universally accepted in US commerce, banking, and trade -- largely because > > the US National Security Agency (NSA) issued, upon the designation of the > DES by NIST, a statement that the NSA's cryptanalysts knew of no attack on > > the DES algorithm more effective than a brute force search of all possible > 56-bit keys. [...] > DES was pretty much what they said it was (even down to that > tweak > in the S-boxes to block differential analysis, which the academic crypto > researchers didn't discover for many years.) The NSA was/is really very > good at what they did, and -- particularly in the US computer industry > (which until 1960 had been pretty much guided by NSA R&D contracts) -- > their cryptanalytic expertise was wholly unchallenged. > > If you read the ostensible charter of the NSA, its duties include assisting in the securing of US civilian communications. While I expect this mainly means making sure that Boris & Natasha aren't tapping US internal comm links without permission, it can also be interpreted to make sure we aren't using snakeoil ciphers. Making DES not suck seems well within the NSA charter. In 1986, when the second recertification came up, I remember considerable consternation over the key-length reduction to 56 bits, and the unexplained tweaking of the S-boxes. There was serious discussion at the time that one or both of these changes were done to introduce backdoors. You'd probably have to find a usenet archive from the period to confirm this. I seem to recall reading somewhere that the extra (8?) bits in the original were shown not to add to the security of the cipher. Clearly 56 was too short - Diffie & Hellman published a paper to that effect in 1977. In the end, we now know that the tweaking prevented differential cryptanalysis, but not linear cryptanalysis. DCA had apparently been discovered internally at IBM (and presumably at NSA). LCA was not then known within IBM (whether it was known inside NSA is an interesting question :-) I would not be suprised if 30 or 50 years down the road, we find out that NSA did its level best to ensure that the AES selection process picked the best candidate. Equally, I would not be suprised to find that they already have some black cryptanalytic technique which can defeat it. On the balance I favor the former: the NSA is as aware as the rest of us of the huge cost (both financial and security) of embedding a broken cipher in the infrastructure of the nation. Peter Trei From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 10 07:56:17 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:56:17 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: FBI: We Need Cyber Ethics Education Message-ID: Funny, reading the Subject line of this, I immediately assumed that the FBI was belatedly admitting that it: the *FBI* needed some 'cyber ethics education'. This is On another note, my Microsoft Exchange (spit) mail client chopped off the 'FBI:' prefix on the subject line of the reply - Any alphanumeric (unspaced) string terminated with ': " gets dropped. Sigh..... [Yes, I know the article is a spoof] Peter Trei > ---------- > From: Tim May[SMTP:tcmay at got.net] > Reply To: Tim May > Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 7:11 PM > To: cypherpunks at algebra.com > Subject: FBI: We Need Cyber Ethics Education > > > > > Monday October 9 4:45 PM ET > > FBI: We Need Cyber Ethics Education > > > By DIANE HOPHEAD, Routers Press Agency > > WASHINGTON (AP) - FBI: We Need Cyber Ethics Education. > > Thou shalt snoop on other children. > > Thou shalt not hide cybercrimes by using encryption. > > FBI agents are spreading a new gospel to parents and teachers, hoping > they'll better educate youths that privacy in cyberspace can be > economically costly and just as criminal as refusing to narc out > fellow students. > > The Justice Department (news - web sites) and the Information > Technology Association of America, a trade group, has launched the > Cybercitizen Partnership to encourage educators and parents to talk > to children in ways that equate privacy and encryption with > old-fashioned wrongdoing. > > The nascent effort includes a series of seminars around the country > for teachers, classroom materials and guides and a Web site to help > parents talk to children. The FBI is distributing copies of > "MyPersonalCarnivore" to allow children to set up their own > Carnivore-enabled local sites. > > ``In a democracy in general, we can't have the police everywhere,'' > said Michael Vacuous, director of the FBI's National Infrastructure > Protection Center, which guards against computer attacks by > terrorists, foreign agents and teen hackers. > > ``One of the most important ways of reducing crime is trying to teach > ethics and morality to our kids. That same principle needs to apply > to the cyber world,'' he said. > > "We are willing to drop the antitrust action against Microsoft if and > when they meet the legitimate needs of law enforcement," he added. > Asked if he was referring to the proposed "WindowsMe (and Big > Brother)," he added that he could not comment on sensitive programs. > From followup at cesinc.com Tue Oct 10 09:03:09 2000 From: followup at cesinc.com (Cutting Edge Software) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:03:09 -0500 Subject: CDR: PALM USER: Get QUICKSHEET for only $24.95! Message-ID: <831A918EBD8AD111935D006008BF04D60100D5BE@sprite.cesinc.com> Dear cypherpunks, We're celebrating two prestigious awards by offering you a special way to save $15.00 on Quicksheet. >From now until October 31, 2000, you can purchase the award winning Quicksheet spreadsheet for only $24.95 by going to this special INTERNET ONLY promotion web page: CLICK HERE TO BUY QUICKSHEET FOR ONLY $24.95 (save $15.00!) https://sprite.cesinc.com/secure/buyonline2promo.asp That's right, save $15.00 today and only online. Don't call, because our operators don't even know about this special way to save. Join the legions of satisfied users around the world who have made Quicksheet one of the most popular Palm software programs. With this release, you get: - LOWEST PRICE EVER: JUST $24.95. You save $15.00 from our regular price (only until October 31, 2000). - FREE UPGRADES FOR LIFE. Quicksheet gets better with every iteration and you never have to pay us again - FREE QUICKCHART CHARTING MODULE. Take your rows and columns of data and analyze them - FREE TECHNICAL SUPPORT. We have real people, who answer calls and emails promptly and solve problems - 30 DAY MONEY BACK GUARANTEE - NO QUESTIONS ASKED. We don't have to give refunds much, but if you ask, we'll do it. - MANY NEW FEATURES & FUNCTIONS, INCLUDING SORT: Organize and find your data the way you want - LINK DIRECTLY TO EXCEL FILES: Saves time during synchronization, making Quicksheet even easier to use - ENTERPRISE FEATURES: Quicksheet's great for a single user AND now it also allows you to implement many great ideas for an entire workgroup or even a whole company Again, to place an order and save $15.00, click on: https://sprite.cesinc.com/secure/buyonline2promo.asp If you haven't looked at Quicksheet in a while, you really owe it to yourself to re-visit our new web site http://www.cesinc.com/quicksheet/quicksheet.html Read reviews of the product, see what real customers have to say, look at screenshots, check out our awards, examine the manual. You'll be impressed, we promise. Ross Weems Sales Manager Cutting Edge Software, Inc. 214.956.9806 x2 www.cesinc.com From mmotyka at lsil.com Tue Oct 10 11:24:24 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (Michael Motyka) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:24:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Warrantless Searches, S.2516 Message-ID: <39E35ED8.50D5980B@lsil.com> Get with the program Bob, they're not "warrantless searches", they're searches (AKA fishing expeditions) conducted pursuant to an "Administrative Subpoena." http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00408.htm Which seems to be very common in child support legislation, EPA, Financial Institution's production of records, OSHA, SEC, IRS etc... It looks to me like a weakening of the Constitution in the sense that it effectively lowers the standard for conducting a search of someone's effects to the level of an agency rather than a court. Not that courts are tough to convince. It's truly evil but it addresses many agency's concerns of getting what they want in a timely manner. I say make them go through a judge for any and all searches but hey, they have the black hellicopters don't they? Here's an excerpt with some familiar equestrians : /* Lastly, H.R. 3048 also grants Secret Service the ability to obtain administrative subpoenas for use in their investigations. The only agency currently allowed to issue administrative (limited subpoenas issued by the Attorney General for information), is the Justice Department. These subpoenas can only be issued by the Justice Department in relation to crimes involving drugs, federal health care investigations or the sexual exploitation or abuse of children. The measure allows the Treasury Secretary to issue an administrative subpoena for investigations of threats: · against the President, Vice President, and their spouses or immediate families; · against former presidents and their spouses, · against candidates for President or Vice President, their spouses and immediate families; · against visiting foreign heads of state or other distinguished foreign visitors protected by the Secret Service. */ http://hillsource.house.gov/LegislativeDigest/Digest/Digest2000/Wk18pt1.htm We're right back to the same old issue of forced disclosure of keys. "Here are the records you asked for but I don't think you'll be able to make much use of them"...RIP-USA can't be too far away. It's probably here already since my guess is that should you offer records in encrypted form any Administrator or Judge would say that you are in contempt since you effectively have the records in your possession and refused to produce them. So much for technology. Mike From declan at well.com Tue Oct 10 08:46:04 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:46:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001009233822.0090aa10@idiom.com> References: <4.3.0.20001009151837.01c536b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> At 23:38 10/9/2000 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: >I seem to remember Etzioni being tied into the Communitarian >movement as well. Right. In fact, that's an understatement. He's essentially the anti-cypherpunk: Regulate corporations' data collection practices strictly, but don't regulate the governments' practices. -Declan From dialpad.54576.300.0 at reply.dialpad.com Tue Oct 10 11:48:33 2000 From: dialpad.54576.300.0 at reply.dialpad.com (Your Friends at Dialpad) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:48:33 -0700 Subject: CDR: Apology from the Dialpad Team Message-ID: <971203716781.dialpad.54576.300.0@reply.dialpad.com> Dear Joe, Thank you for your interest in Dialpad.com. We want to extend our sincerest apology for sending you our newsletter without permission. When you signed up for our service, you indicated that you wish not to receive promotional email from Dialpad or any of its partners. We sent our new company newsletter to all of our users thinking it was more of an informative piece on our services rather than a promotional advertisement from a third party. We now understand this was not in the best interest of all of our users. Again, we apologize for this inconvenience and will make sure you no longer receive any emails from Dialpad. We encourage you to visit our site and sample the many new products we have recently launched. We hope you continue to use Dialpad to make long distance calls from anywhere in the world to the United States. Regards, Linda Crockett Manager, Customer Care From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 10 11:59:54 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:59:54 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001010132053.00b37770@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001009151837.01c536b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010132053.00b37770@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 1:22 PM -0400 10/10/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >I think communism has too many negative connotations to be used >nowadays... So communitarian is a new word for the old philosophy. >Kinda like progressive as a replacement for statist or whatnot. > >-Declan Why give them a term which, at least to some, sounds noble? Communitarian, indeed! I favor the more descriptive term: simp-wimps. As for Nader and the Green Party, fuck 'em. There's nothing even remotely tolerable about them. The Green Party, for example, calls for a 100% income tax on all income above some level. I expect most of them need to be liquidated in the purge. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 10 12:08:24 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:08:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: request for info about DU In-Reply-To: <5490A5070B3DD411B0FD00508B60C6450145AEB8@exch-student.livjm.ac.uk> References: <5490A5070B3DD411B0FD00508B60C6450145AEB8@exch-student.livjm.ac.uk> Message-ID: At 6:27 PM +0100 10/10/00, Hansen Linn wrote: >I am a journalist student who need some basic info about Depleted Uranium. >Why and how has it depleted???? Do u have any usefull links were I can find >this info?? > There will be vast numbers of Web pages available. Use search engines. I worked a lot with depleted uranium in a past career. It's natural uranium from which the U-235 isotope has been removed, leaving the U-238 isotope. Inasmuch as U-238 is the bulk of naturally occurring uranium, DU is not very different from ordinary uranium as mined and processed into the metallic form. Though mildly radioactive (half-life of billions of years...4.5 billion, IIRC), its very high density makes it ideal for sailboat keels, cores of anti-tank and anti-ship shells, etc. (When used in a weapon, the DU adds to the penetration, and also ignites and burns...this has nothing whatsoever to do with its radioactivity, though.) Again, consult online sources, or encyclopedias. And if you asked on the Cypherpunks list because you thought it would be cute to implicate us in nuclear weapons chatter, get a clue. If not, it was still the wrong place to ask such a question. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From jburnes at savvis.net Tue Oct 10 10:20:33 2000 From: jburnes at savvis.net (Jim Burnes) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:20:33 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001009151837.01c536b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <00101012203302.06977@reality.eng.savvis.net> On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: > At 23:38 10/9/2000 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: > >I seem to remember Etzioni being tied into the Communitarian > >movement as well. > > Right. In fact, that's an understatement. > > He's essentially the anti-cypherpunk: Regulate corporations' data > collection practices strictly, but don't regulate the governments' > practices. > > -Declan Could someone cogently explain the difference between communitarians and communists? I get the impression that communitarians were sort of a communist/fascist hybrid, but I'm sure someone has a more elegant explanation. jim -- "...his mind is not for rent, by any god or government." rush, tom sawyer From jburnes at savvis.net Tue Oct 10 10:35:18 2000 From: jburnes at savvis.net (Jim Burnes) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:35:18 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001010132053.00b37770@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010132053.00b37770@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <00101012351803.06977@reality.eng.savvis.net> On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: > I think communism has too many negative connotations to be used nowadays... > So communitarian is a new word for the old philosophy. Kinda like > progressive as a replacement for statist or whatnot. > > -Declan > > At 12:20 10/10/2000 -0500, Jim Burnes wrote: > >Could someone cogently explain the difference between communitarians > >and communists? > > > >I get the impression that communitarians were sort of a communist/fascist > >hybrid, but I'm sure someone has a more elegant explanation. Yeah. In the dim, dusty recesses of my memory I seem to recall the Communitarian zeal with something the NWO types are calling 'The Third Way'. A way of involving business and government together to create social change. Last time I checked thats called Fascism. But it has a fuzzy "community" flavor to it that smaks of the communist meme. A memetic psychologist would have a field day with it. "The iron hand in a velvet glove" jim -- Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From declan at well.com Tue Oct 10 10:22:02 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:22:02 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: <00101012203302.06977@reality.eng.savvis.net> References: <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001009151837.01c536b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001010132053.00b37770@mail.well.com> I think communism has too many negative connotations to be used nowadays... So communitarian is a new word for the old philosophy. Kinda like progressive as a replacement for statist or whatnot. -Declan At 12:20 10/10/2000 -0500, Jim Burnes wrote: >Could someone cogently explain the difference between communitarians >and communists? > >I get the impression that communitarians were sort of a communist/fascist >hybrid, but I'm sure someone has a more elegant explanation. From anonymous at openpgp.net Tue Oct 10 10:35:51 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:35:51 -0400 Subject: CDR: fingerprinting homeless Message-ID: Looking forward to chip-implants in homeless people... California county plans to fingerprint homeless October 10, 2000 Web posted at: 9:32 AM EDT (1332 GMT) RIVERSIDE, California (AP) -- County officials are planning a voluntary fingerprint program for the homeless as part of an effort they say will provide better services. "This is strictly for the purpose of identifying an individual so we can track their services more effectively and better plan for their needs," Kevin Gaines, spokesman for the Riverside Countys Department of Public Social Services, said Monday. But some of the homeless and their advocates say the move is too intrusive. "Im not hiding anything but I think its just getting into my business a little bit," Gary Cervantes said. "It feels a little bit like they are tagging an animal." Attorney Dan Tokaji of the American Civil Liberties Union said homeless people would be intimidated into taking part in the program. "When you have someone in position of power requesting information from a needy person, there is inherent coercion," he said. Officials say fingerprinting will provide a more reliable count of the homeless and access to more federal grants to help them. They are planning to visit shelters beginning next month. Some transients see the benefits of the program. Angel Monroy recalled that doctors had troubled identifying him after he lapsed into a coma in 1992. "When you live on the streets anything could happen where you would need to be identified," he said. From gbnewby at ils.unc.edu Tue Oct 10 10:37:10 2000 From: gbnewby at ils.unc.edu (Greg Newby) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:37:10 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: request for info about DU In-Reply-To: <5490A5070B3DD411B0FD00508B60C6450145AEB8@exch-student.livjm.ac.uk>; from MCCLHANS@livjm.ac.uk on Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 06:27:33PM +0100 References: <5490A5070B3DD411B0FD00508B60C6450145AEB8@exch-student.livjm.ac.uk> Message-ID: <20001010133710.A28641@ils.unc.edu> On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 06:27:33PM +0100, Hansen Linn wrote: > > I am a journalist student who need some basic info about Depleted Uranium. > Why and how has it depleted???? Do u have any usefull links were I can find > this info?? > > yours sincerely > Linn-Cecilie Hansen "man du" at any Unix prompt will give full usage information. Note that Unix is case sensitive. -- Greg From reinhold at world.std.com Tue Oct 10 10:44:13 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:44:13 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> References: <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: Thanks for the summary. My only problem with Rijndael is that it is still rather young. I recall reading that NSA takes seven years to qualify a new cipher. It took at least that long for the open cryptographic community to trust DES. If someone asked me what cipher to use today in a new, very high value application, I would have a hard time choosing between Rijndael and 3DES. Rijndael appears to be a far superior design, but 3DES has enjoyed a lot more scrutiny. I was thinking it might be useful to define a "Paranoid Encryption Standard (PES)" that is a concatenation of all five AES finalists, applied in alphabetical order, all with the same key (128-bit or 256-bit). If in fact RC6 is the only finalist still subject to licensing by its developer, it could be replaced by DEAL (alphabetized under "D"). Since DEAL is based on DES, it brings the decades of testing and analysis DES has received to the party. DEAL was dinged in the first round because "it is claimed that DEAL-192 is no more secure than DEAL-128" and "equivalent keys are claimed for a fraction (2**­64) of the 192-bit and 256-bit key spaces." http://csrc.nist.gov/encryption/aes/round1/r1report.htm#sec2.3.1 I don't think either issues is reason to exclude DEAL in this role, though if there were tweaks to DEAL that resolved them, they might be worth including. PES would be intended for encrypting material of the highest value while AES undergoes additional years of scrutiny. Given Rijndael's outstanding performance, PES could prove 10-20 times slower than AES, but that should not be a problem on modern PCs. User's of PES could still face third-party patent claims, such as Hitachi's, whatever validity they may have. To the extent that my ideas in this posting are patentable, I would happily place them in the public domain. Arnold Reinhold At 2:17 AM -0400 10/10/2000, Vin McLellan wrote: > Arnold G. Reinhold asked: > >> What is the licensing status of the other finalists? For example, >>I seem to >recall reading that RC6 would be licensed to the public >>at no charge if it won >> the competition. What now? > > Since April, RC6 has being commercially licensed as part of >RSA's BSAFE Crypto-C 5.0 and BSAFE Crypto-J 3.0 software developer >toolkits. I don't expect that will change. > > (RSA said, however, that by the end of the year its regular >support and maintenance procedures will add Rijndael to both of >those SDKs. RSA also said it will adopt the AES as "a baseline >encryption algorithm" for its Keon family of digital cert products.) > > Given RSA's market share, the eight BSAFE toolkits could be >a major channel for distributing AES code to the developer >community, particularly among OEMs. > > > Of the other three who made the finals in this "Crypto Olympics." > >MARS, while patented, is available world-wide under a royalty-free >license from Tivoli Systems, an IBM subsidiary. (See >, although the Tivoli site doesn't seem to >have anything but the press release.) > >Serpent is public domain, now under the GNU PUBLIC LICENSE (GPL), >although Serpent website warns that "some comments in the code still >say otherwise." > >Twofish is "unpatented, and the source code is uncopyrighted and >license-free; it is free for all uses." > > > Suerte, > _Vin From sunder at sunder.net Tue Oct 10 10:55:13 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:55:13 -0400 Subject: CDR: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regions Message-ID: <39E35801.5F0B9257@sunder.net> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13863.html And, just in case you were wondering how on earth they'll know you're watching the news online, Mr Hardwell adds, "Finally our detection equipment is capable of picking up television reception via computer. And no, the BBC do not look at IP addresses for licence fee evasion." It's my understanding that TV detector vans work by picking up the radiation emitted by cathode ray tube TVs - which should mean that, if you're rich enough to run an LCD monitor they'll never know you're a secret Paxman admirer. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13875.html Burglar.com is illegal, coppers claim By: Lucy Sherriff Posted: 10/10/2000 at 13:19 GMT A web site that connects the victims of a burglary with the people who have their property is illegal, according to the police. Theburglar.com bills itself as a "link to the underground". There are three ways to register. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13834.html Time Warner's home video division has changed DVD's region coding scheme to make it even harder to play movies sold in one territory in another. Other DVD distributors are expected to follow suit. Sony subsidiary Columbia Tristar has already agreed to do so. According to a leaked internal Warner Home Video document posted on Web site DVD Debate, the company began shipping discs with an "enhanced" region code at the start of this month. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From anonymous at openpgp.net Tue Oct 10 11:11:04 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:11:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: gargoyling knockers Message-ID: <2f70ef3a3a61bf23476337e2ce1116ec@mixmaster.ceti.pl> New Penalties for Upskirt A videocamera can now be counted as a criminal tool Video Peeping Ohio Hikes Jail Time and Fine for High-Tech Toms Oct. 10, 2000 COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- Gina Bell was waiting for a carnival ride at a church festival with her baby daughter when she became spooked by the man behind her. When she shifted in line, he would move with her. "As I crouched down to put the baby in my stroller, I saw a video camera sticking out of his bag, taping up my dress," the 34-year-old former kindergarten teacher recalled Monday. "It rocked my whole sense of security." Ban secret taping in public Beginning today, Ohio law increases the penalties for secretly taking pictures up a womans skirt or down her shirt, called "upskirting" and "downblousing." Most states have laws that prohibit taking pictures of people in private places such as dressing rooms or restrooms, but only Ohio and California specifically ban the practice of secretly filming someone under their clothing in public places for sexual gratification, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Similar legislation is pending in New York. Web sites promote voyeurism The Internet has made the practice more common, with Web sites posting images, buying pictures from high-tech Peeping Toms and telling users where to buy hidden cameras, the laws supporters say. "These Web sites basically promote the practice and encourage people to go out and try to do this to as many women as possible -- kind of like a mission impossible challenge," said state Rep. Ed Jerse, who sponsored the Ohio legislation after hearing Bells story. The man who photographed Bell, David Bartolucci, pleaded no contest to voyeurism and possession of criminal tools and served 10 days in jail. He was also ordered to spend 30 days in home detention, serve 200 hours of community service and enroll in a therapy program. Suspect photographed himself Bartolucci had secretly photographed 13 women that day and had unknowingly filmed his own face, which police used to identify him, police said. Bartoluccis attorney, John Luskin, says his client was under the influence of alcohol. California lawmakers banned upskirting and downblousing after police discovered hidden cameras had filmed women at Disneyland, the Garden Grove Strawberry Festival and an Orange County, Calif., beach. Many of those images were transmitted on the Internet, but police couldnt file charges against the photographers because there was no specific law against the activity. The new Ohio law increases penalties to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine, from the current 30 days and $500 fine. California, where the law went into effect Jan. 1, has the same punishment. From egerck at nma.com Tue Oct 10 14:24:08 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:24:08 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> Message-ID: <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> "Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > You may well be right about the accepted definition of > non-repudiation, but if you are then I would amend my remarks to say > that known cryptographic technology cannot provide non-repudiation > service unless we are willing to create a new legal duty for > individuals and corporations to protect their secret key or accept > what ever consequences ensue. I don't think that is acceptable. Non-repudiation is, according to how myself and the PKIX WG consensus views it, a useful concept both in technical as well as in legal terms. Further, neither myself nor the specific discussion in the PKIX WG saw any need to require a specific legal framework to talk about technical applications of the non-repudiation concept. So, yes, technology can provide for non-repudiation services and the question whether or not these services are useful to provide evidences to a legal layer depends on many *other* considerations -- such as for example the legal regime (common law, civil law, statutes, contracts, etc.), which we do not control. What we can do on the technical side is provide protocols (with and without crypto -- for example, with timestamps that may be signed or made available in a tamperproof public record) that support non-repudiation as a service that prevents the denial of an act. This service is completely different from a service that proves an act, which is authentication. Neither of these services is absolute, though, and thus the notion of non-repudiation cannot be of an absolute answer. This is a common point between law and technology -- anything can be repudiated. > I find the rest of your comment a tad too opaque. Could you give > some examples of what you have in mind? You can check for example http://www.imc.org/draft-ietf-pkix-technr or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pkix-technr-01.txt Cheers, Ed Gerck From netad at srv.netad.ch Tue Oct 10 07:40:53 2000 From: netad at srv.netad.ch (netad at srv.netad.ch) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:40:53 +0000 (GMT) Subject: CDR: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=96lscheichs_oder_Schr=C3=B6der_=3F?= Message-ID: <319573.971188853892.JavaMail.root@yahoo.com> Wer treibt den Benzinpreis immer höher? Bei http://www.wetellyou.de , dem internationalen Treffpunkt für Experten und Ratsuchende, finden Sie Antwort auf diese und weitere Fragen. Ihr Wissen ist gefragt - Werden Sie Experte und teilen Sie es mit Anderen http://www.wetellyou.de . Abmelden: http://srv.netad.ch/servlet/exp_spam.Servlet1?dir=unsubscribe&Email=cypherpunks at cyberpass.net From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 10 11:55:45 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:55:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: fingerprinting homeless In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 1:35 PM -0400 10/10/00, anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: >Looking forward to chip-implants in >homeless people... > > >California county plans to > fingerprint homeless > > October 10, 2000 > Web posted at: 9:32 AM EDT (1332 GMT) > > RIVERSIDE, California (AP) -- County officials are planning > a voluntary fingerprint program for the homeless >as part of an > effort they say will provide better services. No mention of a fee for this "service." Ironically, owners of politically incorrect rifles in California are being required to provide thumbprints, with lists of approved print-making centers. $20 for the print, the local authorities are saying. As for California's so-called "homeless," they are bums, winos, tramps, drifters, addicts, whores (two dollar whores, rather), thieves, layabouts, and vagabonds. Unemployment is at a 35-year low...shops and restaurants are literally begging for applicants. Bums and winos would rather snooze their lives away. Decent persons will not give them a shred of help. And the State has no fucking business helping to feed and house (and fingerprint) those who have made their choices. The crypto relevance: crypto anarchy will eventually result in sea changes which cause these bums and winos to either straighten out or face the consequences of Darwinian law. Their choice. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From declan at well.com Tue Oct 10 12:49:28 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:49:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: <00101012351803.06977@reality.eng.savvis.net> References: <4.3.0.20001010132053.00b37770@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010132053.00b37770@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001010154819.02901780@mail.well.com> At 12:35 10/10/2000 -0500, Jim Burnes wrote: >Yeah. In the dim, dusty recesses of my memory I seem to recall the >Communitarian zeal with something the NWO types are calling 'The >Third Way'. A way of involving business and government together >to create social change. Last time I checked thats called Fascism. You don't even have to go as far left as the communitarians to find that. Check out the DLC, which Clinton headed and Lieberman now chairs: http://www.ndol.org/ The "third way" is their motto: http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=128 -Declan From HOTSTOCKS at aba.com Tue Oct 10 15:55:32 2000 From: HOTSTOCKS at aba.com (HOTSTOCKS at aba.com) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:55:32 Subject: CDR: HOT NEW BIOTECH STOCK - 2 NEWS RELEASES !! Message-ID: <200010101956.DAA09129@baosoft.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/plain, charset="iso-8859-1" Size: 847 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mpj at ebible.org Tue Oct 10 14:59:17 2000 From: mpj at ebible.org (Michael Paul Johnson) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:59:17 -0600 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20001010154833.03a01b80@ebible.org> At 01:44 PM 10/10/00 -0400, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: >Thanks for the summary. My only problem with Rijndael is that it is still rather young. I recall reading that NSA takes seven years to qualify a new cipher. It took at least that long for the open cryptographic community to trust DES. If someone asked me what cipher to use today in a new, very high value application, I would have a hard time choosing between Rijndael and 3DES. Rijndael appears to be a far superior design, but 3DES has enjoyed a lot more scrutiny. > >I was thinking it might be useful to define a "Paranoid Encryption Standard (PES)" that is a concatenation of all five AES finalists, applied in alphabetical order, all with the same key (128-bit or 256-bit). ... To be truly paranoid, shouldn't you use independent, unrelated keys? What if the "outermost" cipher falls to an attack that allows the key to be computed, thus allowing the same key to be plugged into all the "inner" ciphers? To put this suggestion into perspective, consider that in the real world, pure cipher strength is rarely the weakest link in the security chain, provided that a reasonable key length and cipher are chosen. Having done that, go for it if you still think you can afford the extra time, space, and key management with (probably) no measurable increase in overall system security. _______ Michael Paul Johnson mpj at eBible.org http://ebible.org/mpj From jan at learninginaction.com Tue Oct 10 16:38:30 2000 From: jan at learninginaction.com (Janet L Johnson) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:38:30 -0700 Subject: CDR: Upcoming Workshops for Professional and/or Personal Growth Message-ID: <200010102337.QAA27003@bigboy.learninginaction.com> Learning in Action Learning In Action Technologies, in collaboration with Antioch and Gonzaga Universities, is offering several workshops in the coming weeks and months that have consistently been called "insightful", immediately helpful at work", "personally powerful", "transformational", and "the best". Workshops are offered throughout the USA and Canada. Please check our website for the complete schedule: www.learninginaction.com. * Bring the Power of NOW to Important Relationships -- One day ( Seattle, Vancouver, Houston) * Executive Coaching -- One day ( Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Phoneix) * Learn In Relationship: In the Moment -- Two day ( Seattle, Ottawa, Montreal) * Emotional Intelligence at Work: Building Competence Real-time -- One day ( Phoenix, Houston, Spokane) Learning In Action Technologies is a consulting and training company that specializes in improving individual and organizational performance by building effective, powerful relationships at work. Thank you and have a great day! If you do not want to receive any further information from us, just reply to this and write UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line and you will be removed from our mailing list. From jan at learninginaction.com Tue Oct 10 16:46:12 2000 From: jan at learninginaction.com (Janet L Johnson) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:46:12 -0700 Subject: CDR: Upcoming Workshops for Professional and/or Personal Growth Message-ID: <200010102345.QAA03201@bigboy.learninginaction.com> Learning in Action Learning In Action Technologies, in collaboration with Antioch and Gonzaga Universities, is offering several workshops in the coming weeks and months that have consistently been called "insightful", immediately helpful at work", "personally powerful", "transformational", and "the best". Workshops are offered throughout the USA and Canada. Please check our website for the complete schedule: www.learninginaction.com. * Bring the Power of NOW to Important Relationships -- One day ( Seattle, Vancouver, Houston) * Executive Coaching -- One day ( Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Phoneix) * Learn In Relationship: In the Moment -- Two day ( Seattle, Ottawa, Montreal) * Emotional Intelligence at Work: Building Competence Real-time -- One day ( Phoenix, Houston, Spokane) Learning In Action Technologies is a consulting and training company that specializes in improving individual and organizational performance by building effective, powerful relationships at work. Thank you and have a great day! If you do not want to receive any further information from us, just reply to this and write UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line and you will be removed from our mailing list. From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 10 09:28:20 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:28:20 +0100 Subject: CDR: More fun with payment protocols (was Re: oh, sh__) Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From BestFriend at twcny.rr.com Tue Oct 10 17:36:38 2000 From: BestFriend at twcny.rr.com (BestFriend at twcny.rr.com) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:36:38 Subject: CDR: WHAT CAN YOU GET FOR $20??? Message-ID: <594.848709.527730@twcny.rr.com> What can you get for $20.00? A pizza A tank of gas A haircut Lunch with a friend A parking place How About FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE!!!! Looking for that extra something, to help your life have that little extra comfort? Do you work to cover the bills? Fed up with paying out and not receiving the rewards you wish for? Then have an open mind And read all of this, before you make a decision- it will be worth your while. _______________________________________________ Subject: MUST READ! ! ! ... TV Advertised! ! ! ... Fun-Lucrative Fellow Entrepreneur If you wish to learn about an exceptional opportunity in the Home Business arena...Read On. "Your living is determined not so much by what life brings to you as by the attitude you bring to life; not so much by what happens to you as by the way your mind looks at what happens." This is going to be a great New Year for you! Please read all of this! EARN $100,000 PER YEAR SENDING E-MAIL!!! **************************************************************** You can earn $50,000 or more in the next 90 days sending e-mail, seem impossible? Read on for details (no, there is no 'catch')... ---------------------------------------------------------------- "AS SEEN ON NATIONAL TV" Thank you for your time and Interest. This is the letter you've been hearing about in the news lately. Due to the popularity of this letter on the internet, a major nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of the program, described below, to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved once and for all that there are, absolutely no laws prohibiting the participation in the program. This has helped to show people that this is a simple, harmless and fun way to make some extra money at home. The results of this show have been truly remarkable. Since so many people are participating now, those involved are doing much better than ever before. Everyone makes more as more people try it out. It is very, very exciting to be a part of this plan. You will understand once you experience it. "HERE IT IS, BELOW" ================================================ ================================================ *** Print This Now For Future Reference *** The following income opportunity is one you may be interested in taking a look at. It can be started with VERY LITTLE investment and the income return is TREMENDOUS!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make at least $50,000 in less than 90 days! Please read the enclosed program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEYMAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come into contact with people, do any hard work and best of all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions, and your dreams will come true. This e-mail marketing program works perfectly...100%, EVERY TIME. E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this non- commercialized method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using e-mail. Get your piece of this program now! MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, both Stanford Research and the Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold through multi-level methods by the late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 500,000 millionaires in the U.S., 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last few years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45 people become millionaires everyday through Multi-Level Marketing. You may have heard this story before, but over the summer Donald Trump made an appearance on the David Letterman Show. Dave asked him what he would do if he lost everything and had to start over from scratch. Without hesitating, Trump said he would find a good network marketing company and get to work. The audience started to hoot and boo him. He looked out at the audience and dead-panned his response - "That's why I'm sitting up here and you are all sitting out there!" With network marketing you have two sources of income. Direct commissions from sales you make yourself and commissions from sales made by people you introduce to the business. Residual income is the secret of the wealthy. It means investing time or money once and getting paid again and again and again. In network marketing, it also means getting paid for the work of others. The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. My name is Ellie Gilbert. Two years ago, the corporation I worked for, the past twelve years, down-sized and my position was eliminated. After many unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over $40,000... I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life and I am writing to share the experience in hopes that this will change your life, FINANCIALLY, FOREVER!!! In mid December, I received this program via e-mail. Six month's prior to receiving this program I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they would work or not. One claimed that I would make a million dollars in one year...it didn't tell me I'd have to write a best selling book to make it! But, as I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to start, without putting me further into debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. But like most of you I was still a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161 24-hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal! After determining the program was LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT." Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. The great thing about e- mail is that I don't need any money for printing to send out the program, and because all of my orders are fulfilled via e-mail, the only expense is my time. I'm telling you as it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost me. In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. Your goal is to "RECEIVE at least 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. If you don't, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My first step in making $50,000 in 90 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. Your goal is to "RECEIVE AT LEAST 100+ ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL." Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 1, of my e- mailing of 10,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car. Please take time to read the attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER! Remember, it won't work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won't work, you'll lose out on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you must meet your goal of 20+ orders for REPORT #1, and 100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS! If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a business owner and in financial trouble, as I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a good luck sign. I DID! Sincerely, Ellie Gilbert P.S. Do you have any idea what $58,000 looks like piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME! A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports you should have concluded that such a program, one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate... because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich". You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over 4 MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e- mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be on every one of them! Remember though, the more you send out the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS NOW UP TO YOU! "THINK ABOUT IT" Before you delete this program from your mailbox, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS! Jody Jacobs, Richmond, VA HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS INSTRUCTIONS: This method of raising capital REALLY WORKS 100 %, EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use up to $50,000 or more in the next 90 days. Before you say "BULL... ", please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what you do: As with all multi- level businesses, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the GREATEST Multi-Level Mail Order Marketing anywhere: This is what you MUST do: 1. Order all 4 reports shown on the list below (you can't sell them if you don't order them). * For each report, send $5.00 (�5) CASH, the NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING, YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS, and YOUR NAME & RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a problem) to the person whose name appears on the list next to the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAIL PROBLEMS! * When you place your order, make sure you order each of the four reports. You will need all four reports so that you can save them on your computer and resell them. * Within a few days you will receive, via e-mail, each of the four reports. Save them on your computer so they will be accessible for you to send to the 1,000's of people who will order them from you. 2. IMPORTANT-- DO NOT alter the names of the people who are listed next to each report, or their sequence on the list, in any way other than is instructed below in steps "a" through "f" or you will lose out on the majority of your profits. Once you understand the way this works, you'll also see how it doesn't work if you change it. Remember, this method has been tested, and if you alter it, it will not work. a. Look below for the listing of available reports. b. After you've ordered the four reports, take this letter and remove the name and address under REPORT #4. This person has made it through the cycle and is no doubt counting their $50,000! c. Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down to REPORT #4. d. Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down to REPORT #3. e. Move the name and address under REPORT #1 down to REPORT #2. f. Insert your name/address in the REPORT #1 position. Please make sure you copy every name and address ACCURATELY! 3. Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names, and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to the instruction portion of this letter. 4. Now you're ready to start an advertising campaign on the WORLD WIDE WEB! SEND OUT THIS LETTER (with your name added) TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN, EVEN FRIENDS AND FAMILY. Advertising on the WEB can be very, very inexpensive, and there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Another avenue which you could use for advertising is e-mail lists. You can buy these lists for under $20/20,000 addresses or you can pay someone to take care of it for you. BE SURE TO START YOUR AD CAMPAIGN IMMEDIATELY! 5. For every $5.00(�5) you receive, all you must do is e-mail them the report they ordered. THAT'S IT! ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS! This will help guarantee that the e-mail THEY send out, with YOUR name and address on it, will be prompt because they can't advertise until they receive the report! To grow fast be prompt and courteous. ------------------------------------------ AVAILABLE REPORTS ------------------------------------------ ***Order Each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME*** Notes: * - ALWAYS SEND $5(�5) CASH FOR EACH REPORT * - ALWAYS SEND YOUR ORDER VIA THE QUICKEST DELIVERY * - Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in at least two sheets of paper * - On one of those sheets of paper, include: (a) the number & name of the report you are ordering, (b) your e-mail address, and (c) your postal address. ___________________________________________________________ REPORT #1 "HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: K. Winchell (will accept your currency) PO Box 283 Sandy Creek, NY USA 13145 _______________________________________________________ REPORT #2 "MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: E.Mills (will accept your currency) PO Box 2 Mowbray Heights Launceston,Tasmania Australia 7248 ________________________________________________ REPORT #3 "SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS" Jim Wright 38 Pentyla Baglan Rd Port Talbot West Glamorgan SA12 8AA Wales UK ________________________________________________ REPORT #4 "EVALUATING MULTI-LEVEL SALES PLANS" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: Conrad Fry 1 Avon Gardens West Bridgford Nottingham England NG2 6BP ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----- HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PLAN WILL MAKE YOU $MONEY$ ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Let's say you decide to start small just to see how well it works. Assume your goal is to get 10 people to participate on your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the Internet will EASILY get a larger response.) Also assume that everyone else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets ONLY 10 downline members. Follow this example to achieve the STAGGERING results below. 1st level--your 10 members with $5.......................$50 2nd level--10 members from those 10 ($5 x 100)........$500 3rd level--10 members from those 100 ($5 x 1,000)...$5,000 4th level--10 members from those 1,000 ($5x10,000).$50,000 THIS TOTALS ------ $55,550 Remember, this assumes that the people who participate only recruit 10 people each. Think for a moment what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Lots of people get 100s of participants! THINK ABOUT IT! Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing (surely you can afford $20). You obviously already have an Internet connection and e-mail is FREE! REPORT #3 shows you the most productive methods for bulk e-mailing and purchasing e-mail lists. Some list & bulk e-mail vendors even work on trade! Over 50,000, new people, get on the Internet EVERYDAY (CBS NEWS)! *******TIPS FOR SUCCESS******* * TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt, professional, and follow the directions accurately. * Send for the four reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have them when the orders start coming in because: When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the requested product (report) to comply with the U.S. Postal & Lottery Laws, Title 18, Sections 1302 and 1341 or Title 18, Section 3005 in the U.S. Code, also Code of Federal Regs. vol. 16, Sections 255 and 436, which state that "a product or service must be exchanged for money received." * ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THE ORDERS YOU RECEIVE. * Be patient and persistent with this program. If you follow the instructions exactly, the results WILL undoubtedly be SUCCESSFUL! * ABOVE ALL, HAVE FAITH IN YOURSELF AND KNOW YOU WILL SUCCEED! *******YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINE******* Follow these guidelines to help assure your success: If you don't receive 10 to 20 orders for REPORT #1 within two weeks, continue advertising until you do. Then, a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT #2. If you don't, continue advertising until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you, and the cash can continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. If you want to generate more income, send another batch of e- mails and start the whole process again! There is no limit to the income you will generate from this business! PLEASE NOTE: If you need help with starting a business, registering a business name, learning how income tax is handled, etc., contact your local office of the Small Business Administration (a Federal agency) 1-(800)827-5722 for free help and answers to questions. Also, the Internal Revenue Service offers free help via telephone and free seminars about business tax requirements. Your earnings and results are highly dependent on your activities and advertising. This letter constitutes no guarantees stated nor implied. In the event that it is determined that this letter constitutes a guarantee of any kind, that guarantee is now void. Any testimonials or amounts of earnings listed in this letter may be factual or fictitious. If you have any question of the legality of this letter contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Consumer Protection in Washington DC. *******T E S T I M O N I A L S******* This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rule of not trying to place your name in a different position, it won't work and you'll lose a lot of potential income. I'm living proof that it works. It really is a great opportunity to make relatively easy money, with little cost to you. If you do choose to participate, follow the program exactly, and you'll be on your way to financial security. Sean McLaughlin, Jackson, MS My name is Frank. My wife, Doris, and I live in Bel-Air, MD. I am a cost accountant with a major U.S. Corporation and I make pretty good money. When I received the program I grumbled to Doris about receiving "junk mail." I made fun of the whole thing, spouting my knowledge of the population and percentages involved. I "knew" it wouldn't work. Doris totally ignored my supposed intelligence and jumped in with both feet. I made merciless fun of her, and was ready to lay the old "I told you so" on her when the thing didn't work... well, the laugh was on me! Within two weeks she had received over 50 responses. Within 45 days she had received over $147,200 in $5 bills! I was shocked! I was sure that I had it all figured and that it wouldn't work. I AM a believer now. I have joined Doris in her "hobby." I did have seven more years until retirement, but I think of the "rat race" and it's not for me. We owe it all to MLM. Frank T., Bel-Air, MD I just want to pass along my best wishes and encouragement to you. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. I even checked with the U.S. Post Office to verify that the plan was legal. It definitely is! IT WORKS! Paul Johnson, Raleigh, NC The main reason for this letter is to convince you that this system is honest, lawful, extremely profitable, and is a way to get a large amount of money in a short time. I was approached several times before I checked this out. I joined just to see what one could expect in return for the minimal effort and money required. To my astonishment, I received $36,470.00 in the first 14 weeks, with money still coming in. Phillip A. Brown, Esq. Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my mind to participate in this plan. But conservative that I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that there was just no way that I wouldn't get enough orders to at least get my money back. Boy, was I surprised when I found my medium- size post office box crammed with orders! For a while, it got so overloaded that I had to start picking up my mail at the window. I'll make more money this year than any 10 years of my life before. The nice thing about this plan is that it doesn't matter where in the U.S. people live. There simply isn't a better investment with a faster return. Mary Rockland, Lansing, MI I had received this program before. I deleted it, but later I wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get another copy, so I had to wait until I was e-mailed another program...11 months passed then it came...I didn't delete this one!...I made more than $41,000 on the first try!! D. Wilburn, Muncie, IN This is my third time to participate in this plan. We have quit our jobs, and will soon buy a home on the beach and live off the interest on our money. The only way on earth that this plan will work for you is if you do it. For your sake, and for your family's sake don't pass up this golden opportunity. Good luck and happy spending! Charles Fairchild, Spokane, WA ORDER YOUR REPORTS TODAY AND GET STARTED ON YOUR ROAD TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM! NOW IS THE HOUR! DECISIVE ACTION YIELDS POWERFUL RESULTS ! ********************************************************* Your request to be removed will be processed within 24 hours. DISCLAIMER: Under Bill s.1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th US Congress this letter Cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender includes contact information & a method of removal.To be removed from future mailings just reply with REMOVE in the subject line.Thank you for your kind consideration. From honig at sprynet.com Tue Oct 10 17:49:58 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:49:58 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20001010154833.03a01b80@ebible.org> References: <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001010174958.009259d0@pop.sprynet.com> At 03:59 PM 10/10/00 -0600, Michael Paul Johnson wrote: >>I was thinking it might be useful to define a "Paranoid Encryption Standard (PES)" that is a concatenation of all five AES finalists, applied in alphabetical order, all with the same key (128-bit or 256-bit). ... > >To be truly paranoid, shouldn't you use independent, unrelated keys? What if the "outermost" cipher falls to an attack that allows the key to be computed, thus allowing the same key to be plugged into all the "inner" ciphers? > And the Ultra-Paranoid ES, which adds random salt to each stage between ciphers... From vin at shore.net Tue Oct 10 15:14:12 2000 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:14:12 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001010180308.00d34850@shell1.shore.net> Listing the Fab Four who were AES finalists with Rijndael, I wrote: >Serpent is public domain, now under the GNU PUBLIC LICENSE (GPL), although >Serpent website warns that "some comments in the code still say otherwise." <>http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/serpent.html> I should have been more careful. Serpent, per se, has been given over to the public domain. What has been released under the more restrictive GPL terms are the optimized Serpent implementations -- by a variety of talented folk, in a variety of useful languages -- which were in the AES submission package. They are now available from the Serpent website at: . As the website puts it: "Serpent is now completely in the public domain, and we impose no restrictions on its use. This was announced on the 21st August at the First AES Candidate Conference. The optimised implementations in the submission package are now under the GNU PUBLIC LICENSE (GPL), although some comments in the code still say otherwise. You are welcome to use Serpent for any application. If you do use it, we would appreciate it if you would let us know!" Sorry if I confused anyone. _Vin From sfurlong at acmenet.net Tue Oct 10 15:23:25 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:23:25 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi References: <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <5.0.0.25.2.20001010154833.03a01b80@ebible.org> Message-ID: <39E396A3.AEA02961@acmenet.net> Michael Paul Johnson wrote: > > At 01:44 PM 10/10/00 -0400, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: > >I was thinking it might be useful to define a "Paranoid Encryption Standard (PES)" > > To put this suggestion into perspective, consider that in the real world, pure cipher strength is rarely the weakest link in the security chain, provided that a reasonable key length and cipher are chosen.< I was thinking the same thing. The five most secure algorithms in the world don't do any good if the passwords are on a post-it on the monitor. I really like Sunder's .sig about passwords and underwear; too bad a lot of users don't follow that advice. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From AdamO at nedcor.com Tue Oct 10 09:25:56 2000 From: AdamO at nedcor.com (Oellermann, A. (Adam)) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:25:56 +0200 Subject: CDR: RE: STAINLESS STEEL PIPES & TUBES FOR FERTILIZER INDUSTRIES Message-ID: <0EC7CBF239F2D31181EA0008C75D617306F83C8D@triton.it.nednet.co.za> Hey, this is one to remember for all the guys who want to make pipe bombs. Cheers Adam > -----Original Message----- > From: Suraj [SMTP:surajs at ad1.vsnl.net.in] > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 5:05 PM > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: STAINLESS STEEL PIPES & TUBES FOR FERTILIZER INDUSTRIES > > STAINLESS STEEL PIPES & TUBES FOR FERTILIZER INDUSTRIES > > Kind Attn : Manager- Procurement / Purchase / Buyers Department > > Dear Sir, > > We are leading Producers/Manufacturers / Exporters of STAINLESS STEEL > PIPE / TUBE SEAMLESS/ WELDED,having our works near Ahmedabad-in INDIA. > > Our Size range 6mm OD to 168.3 mm OD, > Thickness 0.5mm to 6.00mm , > Grades AISI ,304 ,304L ,310 ,316 ,316L , 316TI , 321 and > Mfg.standards ASTM / ASME A-213,A312, A-249 ,A-268,A-269, > A-270,A-688, > A-554. > > Also We can supply Under DIN specification. > > We have facility to supply in extra long lengths upto 18 meters, U Bending > according to buyer's drawing can be done, Our Plant is Approved by All > National / International Inspection Agency & we can supply Under > Customers/ Third party Inspection Agency. > > We have specialisation in Tubings for equipments like Heat Exchangers, > Heating Elements, Surface condensers,Evaporators, Digestors, > instrumentation and Fluid Pipings. > > If you have any requirement of stainless steel Pipes/Tubes, Please send > detailed enquiry with Your Company name and Address. > > For more information please visit our Website > > please send your inquiries by E-mail surajs at ad1.vsnl.net.in > or Fax - 91- 79- 7437277 > > > Thank you, > > ASHOK SHAH - DIRECTOR > > SURAJ STAINLESS LIMITED > AN ISO 9002 COMPANY > 6th Floor, Kalpana Complex,Nr.Memnagar Fire Station, > Navrangpura, Ahmedabad Gujarat 380009 INDIA > Phone 0091-79-7411050 -51 -52 FAX 91-79-7437277 > E-mail. surajs at ad1.vsnl.net.in > > > ( MANUFACTURER & EXPORTER OF STAINLESS STEEL PIPES,TUBES & "U" TUBES > SEAMLESS/WELDED ) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4738 bytes Desc: not available URL: From MCCLHANS at livjm.ac.uk Tue Oct 10 10:27:33 2000 From: MCCLHANS at livjm.ac.uk (Hansen Linn) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:27:33 +0100 Subject: CDR: request for info about DU Message-ID: <5490A5070B3DD411B0FD00508B60C6450145AEB8@exch-student.livjm.ac.uk> I am a journalist student who need some basic info about Depleted Uranium. Why and how has it depleted???? Do u have any usefull links were I can find this info?? yours sincerely Linn-Cecilie Hansen From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 10 11:48:13 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 19:48:13 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Warrantless Searches, S.2516 In-Reply-To: <39E35ED8.50D5980B@lsil.com> References: <39E35ED8.50D5980B@lsil.com> Message-ID: At 11:24 AM -0700 on 10/10/00, Michael Motyka wrote: > Get with the program Bob, they're not "warrantless searches", they're > searches (AKA fishing expeditions) conducted pursuant to an > "Administrative Subpoena." Sorry. My mistake. :-). Freedom is Slavery, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From surajs at ad1.vsnl.net.in Tue Oct 10 08:05:15 2000 From: surajs at ad1.vsnl.net.in (Suraj) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 20:35:15 +0530 Subject: CDR: STAINLESS STEEL PIPES & TUBES FOR FERTILIZER INDUSTRIES Message-ID: <025d01c032cb$7f982080$050101a5@gty> STAINLESS STEEL PIPES & TUBES FOR FERTILIZER INDUSTRIES Kind Attn : Manager- Procurement / Purchase / Buyers Department Dear Sir, We are leading Producers/Manufacturers / Exporters of STAINLESS STEEL PIPE / TUBE SEAMLESS/ WELDED,having our works near Ahmedabad-in INDIA. Our Size range 6mm OD to 168.3 mm OD, Thickness 0.5mm to 6.00mm , Grades AISI ,304 ,304L ,310 ,316 ,316L , 316TI , 321 and Mfg.standards ASTM / ASME A-213,A312, A-249 ,A-268,A-269, A-270,A-688, A-554. Also We can supply Under DIN specification. We have facility to supply in extra long lengths upto 18 meters, U Bending according to buyer's drawing can be done, Our Plant is Approved by All National / International Inspection Agency & we can supply Under Customers/ Third party Inspection Agency. We have specialisation in Tubings for equipments like Heat Exchangers, Heating Elements, Surface condensers,Evaporators, Digestors, instrumentation and Fluid Pipings. If you have any requirement of stainless steel Pipes/Tubes, Please send detailed enquiry with Your Company name and Address. For more information please visit our Website http://www.surajgroup.com please send your inquiries by E-mail surajs at ad1.vsnl.net.in or Fax - 91- 79- 7437277 Thank you, ASHOK SHAH - DIRECTOR SURAJ STAINLESS LIMITED AN ISO 9002 COMPANY 6th Floor, Kalpana Complex,Nr.Memnagar Fire Station, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad Gujarat 380009 INDIA Phone 0091-79-7411050 -51 -52 FAX 91-79-7437277 E-mail. surajs at ad1.vsnl.net.in http://www.surajgroup.com ( MANUFACTURER & EXPORTER OF STAINLESS STEEL PIPES,TUBES & "U" TUBES SEAMLESS/WELDED ) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4349 bytes Desc: not available URL: From honig at sprynet.com Tue Oct 10 17:55:34 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 20:55:34 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: request for info about DU In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001010174604.0092c500@pop.sprynet.com> At 03:09 PM 10/10/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: >And if you asked on the Cypherpunks list because you thought it would >be cute to implicate us in nuclear weapons chatter, get a clue. If >not, it was still the wrong place to ask such a question. > > >--Tim May Lets see, radiation effects on matter... hmm, I bet TM knows something about that... U acts like Ca++, so watch your bones... anticipating that regular NM poster, stay upwind...blah blah.. Nukes are not cost or effort- effective, compared to CBWs... From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 10 18:44:45 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 21:44:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: request for info about DU In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001010174604.0092c500@pop.sprynet.com> References: <3.0.5.32.20001010174604.0092c500@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: At 8:55 PM -0400 10/10/00, David Honig wrote: >At 03:09 PM 10/10/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: >>And if you asked on the Cypherpunks list because you thought it would >>be cute to implicate us in nuclear weapons chatter, get a clue. If >>not, it was still the wrong place to ask such a question. >> >> >>--Tim May > >Lets see, radiation effects on matter... hmm, I bet TM knows something about >that... U acts like Ca++, so watch your bones... anticipating that regular >NM poster, >stay upwind...blah blah.. > >Nukes are not cost or effort- effective, compared to CBWs... "Or, how I learned to stop worrying and love uranium." I forgot to mention in my last message that another prime use of DU is for radiation shielding. No, not an example of Simpson's Paradox (not O.J.). Rather, DU absorbs very well, and only gives off very slight amounts of radiation. Uranium, either the ore, or the metal, or the depleted form, is remarkably harmless. I used to handle blocks of the stuff. One of my associates had some dice made out of DU...I always wanted a pair of these, but I never got my own set. Ah, the years of slaving away in the thorium mines... (A line out of a Heinlein juvenile, I vaguely recalled at the time. Something significant about learning about thorum, slide rules, and tensors from reading Heinlein novels in the 6th grade.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 10 21:48:06 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 21:48:06 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: <00101012203302.06977@reality.eng.savvis.net> References: <4.3.0.20001009151837.01c536b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> <00101012203302.06977@reality.eng.savvis.net> Message-ID: >On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: >> At 23:38 10/9/2000 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: >> >I seem to remember Etzioni being tied into the Communitarian >> >movement as well. >> >> Right. In fact, that's an understatement. >> >> He's essentially the anti-cypherpunk: Regulate corporations' data >> collection practices strictly, but don't regulate the governments' >> practices. >> >> -Declan > >Could someone cogently explain the difference between communitarians >and communists? Can anyone cogently explain the difference between the color violet and the color purple? (Or maybe one should say the color "rose" and "red"). > >I get the impression that communitarians were sort of a communist/fascist >hybrid, but I'm sure someone has a more elegant explanation. I get the same impression--They seem like National (as opposed to International) Socialists. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From bsecraw at execpc.com Tue Oct 10 19:48:50 2000 From: bsecraw at execpc.com (Bill Secraw) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 21:48:50 -0500 Subject: CDR: Recent Hunting Incident Message-ID: <00c901c0332d$cb896d20$7462cfa9@pavilion> October 9, 2000 This message is to alert United States citizens of targeting by Canada conservation officers threatening excessive penalties of alleged minor violations and exercising kangaroo court activities to achieve their goals. This message is also aimed at Canada citizens to urge their elected officials to monitor such activity and also urge them to repeal the current gun law registration regulations. These laws will not succeed in achieving the intended purpose, but only increase your taxes and insure the full employment of gun enforcement officers. I would like now to summarize an incident I had on a goose-hunting trip near Lake Lenore and Humboldt Saskatchewan. While driving down a road with my son and cousin, we noticed a flock of white geese out in the middle of a quarter section of land. I dropped my son and cousin off and my mission was to flush the birds and hopefully one would by chance fly over them and they could attempt to shoot it. Because they were quite a distant out in the field I attempted to drive my van closer to the flock to I could get out and flush the geese. Being more wary then expected the geese flushed before I could get very close to them so I turned around and exited the field. While driving down a public road after exiting the field conservation officer approached from the opposite direction and turned on his red lights and pulled me over. He accused me of chasing geese with a vehicle and proceeds to threaten me that the penalties could be very severe including confiscation of my vehicle, $50,000 fine, and arrest. He also asks to check my gun, which is in a case and in back of my van. He also attempts to confiscate my gun because he says I do not have a proper plug in it. I explain to him that the gun will only hold three 3 ½ inch shells, which was all that I was shooting. After checking with his office they determined that was ok. He then gives me an appearance notice to appear in provincial court and seizes one of our guns to assure that I will make an appearance and the penalty accessed will be determined by the judge. On the notice the section which contains the alleged crime is left blank so that I have no way of knowing what specific violation I will be charged with or what the penalties could really be. When court date arrives I drive to the office of the conservation officer where court is held. The judge is actually a justice of the peace who also operates an automobile body shop in town. The conservation officer tells me that court may be a little late as the owner of the body shop had some employees that did not come in so it would be a while before he could come over and act as judge. When the judge arrives, he comes in is auto body uniform and the conservation officer reads some prepared script that provincial court under the crown is now in session. Just to paint a clear picture the court consists of two people, one being the Justice of the Peace and the other being the conservation officer who is acting as chief witness, prosecuting attorney, court reporter, clerk and any other function that most courts have. My name is read and I am asked to come forward. The conservation officer asks me if I plead guilty. I said plead guilty to what, the appearance notice that I was given does not have any alleged violation on it. I than recounted my story of what actually happened. I was than shown an Information Denonciation form that said I unlawfully used a vehicle to drive migratory birds to hunters. Since I did not know what I was going to be charged with, I had no way to defend what actually happened. Since then I have looked up the word drive in Webster’s dictionary and the following is a definition. 1 a : to frighten or prod (as game or cattle) into moving in a desired direction b : to go through (a district) driving game animals. As you see the definition does not say birds. Now I would ask anyone to perform the following experiment. Drop two hunters off randomly on the perimeter of a quarter section of land. Drive your vehicle slowly, not more than 10 mph, toward a flock of birds in the middle of the field and see if there is any predictability where those birds will fly, much less come within shooting range of a hunter. I believe any attempt to flush birds consistently to a desired location at that distance will prove futile. Now for the statement that the judge made that we have to have these laws and penalty’s to protect our resource. These birds were white geese, which are rapidly becoming a nuisance bird. These birds are ruining their arctic breeding grounds, as vast areas are becoming barren as these birds pull the vegetation roots out of the fragile tundra. They also do considerable damage to the farmer’s crops near Humboldt as a flock of thousands of these geese can ruin a field in one day. The local farmers urge hunters to shoot as many as possible because of all the damage they do. The providence of Saskatchewan has also a very liberal bag limit of 20 a day and a possession limit of 60. Many states in the USA have no possession limit and urge the shooting of as many as possible of these birds with nearly any means possible. I really do not think the argument of protecting this resource is very valid. As far as pleading guilty or innocent to the charges, I would ask any rational human being to explore the options. The judge imposes a fine of $200 lowering the suggested fine of the conservation warden by $50. The conservation warden reminds the judge of some recently imposed surcharge of $30 and tells him to change the fine to $230. The options are either plead guilty and pay the $230 or plead not guilty and return the 1000 plus miles at a later date for a trial while $700 gun is confiscated until the trial. Local residents informed me that it is a common practice for conservation wardens to target USA residents to increase their tax coffers. While in Saskatchewan I was listening to a local radio station and they were discussing the brain drain of Saskatchewan residents to the USA with the main reason being taxes and bureaucracy. The new gun registration law is just another example of a law, which will only keep bureaucrats employed and do little to curb crime. Part of the new law will imposes a $50 tax on all guns brought across the border by USA citizens. I believe there is also about a $60 fee for all Canada citizens to register their guns. I can just envision the activity of the kangaroo courts to comply with this. I have made my decision that I will not come to Canada again for hunting or fishing because of their excessive tax and being targeted. The final straw was recent treatment I received and the recent tax on guns. This along with their excessive tax on liquor, beer, cigarettes, gas, gst, provincial tax, etc. will deter many from this country. Hopefully this message can be distributed over the world via the Internet and hopefully change can be made before it is too late. The actions of over zealous conservation officers need to be curtailed, a proper system of justice needs to be put in place, and the gun registration system needs to be abandoned. Only with adverse economic impact of tourists not coming and Canada citizens getting fed up with their government will this happen. Anyone receiving this message electronically or in paper form is urged to distribute it to as many as possible. Bsecraw at execpc.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 7906 bytes Desc: not available URL: From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 10 21:56:20 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 21:56:20 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001009151837.01c536b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010132053.00b37770@mail.well.com> Message-ID: >At 1:22 PM -0400 10/10/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >>I think communism has too many negative connotations to be used >>nowadays... So communitarian is a new word for the old philosophy. >>Kinda like progressive as a replacement for statist or whatnot. >> >>-Declan > >Why give them a term which, at least to some, sounds noble? > >Communitarian, indeed! No one gave them the term, the adopted it for themselves. >I favor the more descriptive term: simp-wimps. What is wrong with "Statist pricks"? -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 10 22:44:48 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 22:44:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, petro wrote: > I get the same impression--They seem like National (as >opposed to International) Socialists. Ah. I see that, in accordance with ancient usenet and mailing-list tradition, the discussion is now over. Bear From declan at well.com Tue Oct 10 19:59:36 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 22:59:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: <00101012351803.06977@reality.eng.savvis.net> References: <4.3.0.20001010132053.00b37770@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010132053.00b37770@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001010225920.00afa5c0@mail.well.com> there's some discussion of etzoni here: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/10/2031205&mode=nested Bush and Gore Campaigns Will Debate Privacy posted by cicero on Tuesday October 10, @03:22PM Representatives of the George W. Bush and Al Gore campaigns will debate privacy in Washington on October 16. Now, the candidates themselves aren't going to be there, but a privacy debate is still a first. A related one happened today at the Brookings Institution, when Sen. Robert Bennett (for Bush) and Robert Shapiro, Commerce Department undersecretary (for Gore) tangled over "technology and the global economy." There's one odd thing about the Bush-Gore privacy debate: It's being hosted by Amitai Etzioni of George Washington University, a "communitarian" who's deeply suspicious of proposals to limit government surveillance, and an unusual choice for a moderator. See below for details. Also see Gore and Bush and Ralph Nader on privacy. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 10 23:01:41 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 23:01:41 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 10:44 PM -0700 10/10/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: >On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, petro wrote: > >> I get the same impression--They seem like National (as >>opposed to International) Socialists. > > >Ah. I see that, in accordance with ancient usenet and >mailing-list tradition, the discussion is now over. > > Bear May's Corollary to Godwin's Law: At least 97% of all invocations of Godwin's Law are done so to squelch debate. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From declan at well.com Tue Oct 10 20:04:19 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 23:04:19 -0400 Subject: CDR: More cypherpunks photos now up at mccullagh.org Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001010230114.00b1d7d0@mail.well.com> I sent the below note to politech. The cypherpunks photos of note: Jim Bell: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/jim-bell-2.html http://www.mccullagh.org/cgi-bin/photosearch.cgi?name=jim+bell Blanc Weber: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/blanc-weber.html John Perry Barlow: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/john-perry-barlow.html David Friedman, anarcho-capitalist economist: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/david-friedman.html Other free market economists: http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/economists.html -Declan ********** I just got back from Microsoft's 25th holiday party at Les Halles on Pennsylvania Avenue. It was a tremendous change from what I remember about the '97 holiday party at the same place: Better food, much larger room, and, as you'd expect many more people. And no, Judge Jackson and Joel Klein weren't invited. As a service to you, dear readers, I've put some snapshots from the party up at: http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/microsoft-25th-party.html I've finally scanned in a subset of the slides I took over the summer. A list is at: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/ Broken down into categories, we have scenes from the Microsoft antitrust trial: http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/antitrust.html Highlights from Burning Man: http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/burning-man-highlights.html The Dazzle Dancers (a must-see): http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/dazzle-dancers.html John Perry Barlow: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/john-perry-barlow.html Doubleclick's lobbyist outside the Capitol building: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/josh-isay-doubleclick.html Jim Bell, convicted crypto-criminal and assassination politics popularizer: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/jim-bell-2.html Hiawatha Bray of the Boston Globe and Alan Davidson of CDT at the ICANN debate last week: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/950-15/hiawatha-bray-alan-davidson.html Union activists protesting in Boston: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/950-15/union-activists.html Some photos from a trip to Key West: http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/key-west.html Rep. Zoe Lofgren at Clinton event: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/zoe-lofgren.html Bennett Haselton of Peacefire: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/bennett-haselton-1.html David Friedman, anarcho-capitalist economist: http://www.mccullagh.org/image/9/david-friedman.html Other free market economists: http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/economists.html -Declan From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 10 23:12:52 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 23:12:52 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Ralph Nader sends privacy survey to Bush and Gore campaigns In-Reply-To: References: <00101012203302.06977@reality.eng.savvis.net> <4.3.0.20001009151837.01c536b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001010114452.00aee530@mail.well.com> <00101012203302.06977@reality.eng.savvis.net> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001010231252.009b7970@idiom.com> >>On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: >>> At 23:38 10/9/2000 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: >>> >I seem to remember Etzioni being tied into the Communitarian >>> >movement as well. >>> >>> Right. In fact, that's an understatement. >>> >>> He's essentially the anti-cypherpunk: Regulate corporations' data >>> collection practices strictly, but don't regulate the governments' >>> practices. >>> >>> -Declan >> >>Could someone cogently explain the difference between communitarians >>and communists? ... >>I get the impression that communitarians were sort of a communist/fascist >>hybrid, but I'm sure someone has a more elegant explanation. The Commies could always recognize the FBI plants in their groups because they were the ones who paid their organization dues.... Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 10 23:22:08 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 23:22:08 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: FBI: We Need Cyber Ethics Education In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001010232208.009e65c0@idiom.com> At 10:56 AM 10/10/00 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: >Funny, reading the Subject line of this, I immediately >assumed that the FBI was belatedly admitting that it: >the *FBI* needed some 'cyber ethics education'. This >is .... >[Yes, I know the article is a spoof] Tim's spoof got to me before the original did, and I'd read about halfway through before noticing that it was probably a spoof and then noticing it was from Tim :-) That's the problem with stuff that's too realistically written... Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 10 23:36:49 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 23:36:49 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Warrantless Searches, S.2516 In-Reply-To: References: <39E35ED8.50D5980B@lsil.com> <39E35ED8.50D5980B@lsil.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001010233649.00999710@idiom.com> At 07:48 PM 10/10/00 +0100, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >At 11:24 AM -0700 on 10/10/00, Michael Motyka wrote: >> Get with the program Bob, they're not "warrantless searches", they're >> searches (AKA fishing expeditions) conducted pursuant to an >> "Administrative Subpoena." > >Sorry. >My mistake. :-). Cops at Door: Open Up! Bang! Thud! Thud! Th... Person inside opens door Cops in Room: thud! Trip! *&)(!*&$#E)! Person inside: Let's see your warrant: Cops in Room: We don't need no stinkin' Warrants, we got ourselves an "Administrative Subpoena". In good faith, even! Person inside: OK, then. Let's see your fishing license..... Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Tue Oct 10 21:11:38 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 00:11:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regions Message-ID: Sunder wrote, quoting > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13863.html > > [...] > It's my understanding that TV detector vans work by picking up > the radiation emitted by cathode ray tube TVs - which should mean > that, if you're rich enough to run an LCD monitor they'll never > know you're a secret Paxman admirer. A popular, but false, myth. The video cards radiate more than the CRT's. Laptops tend to be the worst offenders. --Lucky Green "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Tue Oct 10 21:11:40 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 00:11:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: request for info about DU Message-ID: A more interesting question might be: where does one get depleted uranium. I looked, but found no useful information on the Net. Surely there can't be much restrictions on this stuff. [The even more interesting question of course is where to obtain enriched uranium}. --Lucky Green "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 > -----Original Message----- > From: cypherpunks at openpgp.net [mailto:cypherpunks at openpgp.net]On Behalf > Of Tim May > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 12:10 > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: request for info about DU > > > At 6:27 PM +0100 10/10/00, Hansen Linn wrote: > >I am a journalist student who need some basic info about > Depleted Uranium. > >Why and how has it depleted???? Do u have any usefull links were > I can find > >this info?? > > > > There will be vast numbers of Web pages available. Use search engines. > > I worked a lot with depleted uranium in a past career. It's natural > uranium from which the U-235 isotope has been removed, leaving the > U-238 isotope. Inasmuch as U-238 is the bulk of naturally occurring > uranium, DU is not very different from ordinary uranium as mined and > processed into the metallic form. > > Though mildly radioactive (half-life of billions of years...4.5 > billion, IIRC), its very high density makes it ideal for sailboat > keels, cores of anti-tank and anti-ship shells, etc. (When used in a > weapon, the DU adds to the penetration, and also ignites and > burns...this has nothing whatsoever to do with its radioactivity, > though.) > > Again, consult online sources, or encyclopedias. > > And if you asked on the Cypherpunks list because you thought it would > be cute to implicate us in nuclear weapons chatter, get a clue. If > not, it was still the wrong place to ask such a question. > > > --Tim May > -- > ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- > Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, > ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero > W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, > "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. > > > From sfurlong at acmenet.net Tue Oct 10 21:27:42 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 00:27:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regions References: Message-ID: <39E3EBFB.544BC930@acmenet.net> Lucky Green wrote: > > Sunder wrote, quoting > > It's my understanding that TV detector vans work by picking up > > the radiation emitted by cathode ray tube TVs - which should mean > > that, if you're rich enough to run an LCD monitor they'll never > > know you're a secret Paxman admirer. > > A popular, but false, myth. The video cards radiate more than the CRT's. > Laptops tend to be the worst offenders. Cables are a problem, too. Video signals from a fully-shielded computer connected to a fully-shielded monitor by a regular, unshielded cable can be read. Effective snooping distance goes down, though I don't remember by what factor. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From BestFriend at twcny.rr.com Wed Oct 11 02:47:44 2000 From: BestFriend at twcny.rr.com (BestFriend at twcny.rr.com) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 02:47:44 Subject: CDR: WHAT CAN YOU GET FOR $20??? Message-ID: <284.672514.172601@twcny.rr.com> What can you get for $20.00? A pizza A tank of gas A haircut Lunch with a friend A parking place How About FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE!!!! Looking for that extra something, to help your life have that little extra comfort? Do you work to cover the bills? Fed up with paying out and not receiving the rewards you wish for? Then have an open mind And read all of this, before you make a decision- it will be worth your while. _______________________________________________ Subject: MUST READ! ! ! ... TV Advertised! ! ! ... Fun-Lucrative Fellow Entrepreneur If you wish to learn about an exceptional opportunity in the Home Business arena...Read On. "Your living is determined not so much by what life brings to you as by the attitude you bring to life; not so much by what happens to you as by the way your mind looks at what happens." This is going to be a great New Year for you! Please read all of this! EARN $100,000 PER YEAR SENDING E-MAIL!!! **************************************************************** You can earn $50,000 or more in the next 90 days sending e-mail, seem impossible? Read on for details (no, there is no 'catch')... ---------------------------------------------------------------- "AS SEEN ON NATIONAL TV" Thank you for your time and Interest. This is the letter you've been hearing about in the news lately. Due to the popularity of this letter on the internet, a major nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of the program, described below, to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved once and for all that there are, absolutely no laws prohibiting the participation in the program. This has helped to show people that this is a simple, harmless and fun way to make some extra money at home. The results of this show have been truly remarkable. Since so many people are participating now, those involved are doing much better than ever before. Everyone makes more as more people try it out. It is very, very exciting to be a part of this plan. You will understand once you experience it. "HERE IT IS, BELOW" ================================================ ================================================ *** Print This Now For Future Reference *** The following income opportunity is one you may be interested in taking a look at. It can be started with VERY LITTLE investment and the income return is TREMENDOUS!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make at least $50,000 in less than 90 days! Please read the enclosed program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEYMAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come into contact with people, do any hard work and best of all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions, and your dreams will come true. This e-mail marketing program works perfectly...100%, EVERY TIME. E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this non- commercialized method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using e-mail. Get your piece of this program now! MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, both Stanford Research and the Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold through multi-level methods by the late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 500,000 millionaires in the U.S., 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last few years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45 people become millionaires everyday through Multi-Level Marketing. You may have heard this story before, but over the summer Donald Trump made an appearance on the David Letterman Show. Dave asked him what he would do if he lost everything and had to start over from scratch. Without hesitating, Trump said he would find a good network marketing company and get to work. The audience started to hoot and boo him. He looked out at the audience and dead-panned his response - "That's why I'm sitting up here and you are all sitting out there!" With network marketing you have two sources of income. Direct commissions from sales you make yourself and commissions from sales made by people you introduce to the business. Residual income is the secret of the wealthy. It means investing time or money once and getting paid again and again and again. In network marketing, it also means getting paid for the work of others. The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. My name is Ellie Gilbert. Two years ago, the corporation I worked for, the past twelve years, down-sized and my position was eliminated. After many unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over $40,000... I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life and I am writing to share the experience in hopes that this will change your life, FINANCIALLY, FOREVER!!! In mid December, I received this program via e-mail. Six month's prior to receiving this program I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they would work or not. One claimed that I would make a million dollars in one year...it didn't tell me I'd have to write a best selling book to make it! But, as I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to start, without putting me further into debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. But like most of you I was still a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161 24-hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal! After determining the program was LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT." Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. The great thing about e- mail is that I don't need any money for printing to send out the program, and because all of my orders are fulfilled via e-mail, the only expense is my time. I'm telling you as it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost me. In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. Your goal is to "RECEIVE at least 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. If you don't, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My first step in making $50,000 in 90 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. Your goal is to "RECEIVE AT LEAST 100+ ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL." Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 1, of my e- mailing of 10,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car. Please take time to read the attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER! Remember, it won't work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won't work, you'll lose out on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you must meet your goal of 20+ orders for REPORT #1, and 100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS! If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a business owner and in financial trouble, as I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a good luck sign. I DID! Sincerely, Ellie Gilbert P.S. Do you have any idea what $58,000 looks like piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME! A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports you should have concluded that such a program, one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate... because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich". You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over 4 MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e- mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be on every one of them! Remember though, the more you send out the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS NOW UP TO YOU! "THINK ABOUT IT" Before you delete this program from your mailbox, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS! Jody Jacobs, Richmond, VA HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS INSTRUCTIONS: This method of raising capital REALLY WORKS 100 %, EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use up to $50,000 or more in the next 90 days. Before you say "BULL... ", please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what you do: As with all multi- level businesses, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the GREATEST Multi-Level Mail Order Marketing anywhere: This is what you MUST do: 1. Order all 4 reports shown on the list below (you can't sell them if you don't order them). * For each report, send $5.00 (�5) CASH, the NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING, YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS, and YOUR NAME & RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a problem) to the person whose name appears on the list next to the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAIL PROBLEMS! * When you place your order, make sure you order each of the four reports. You will need all four reports so that you can save them on your computer and resell them. * Within a few days you will receive, via e-mail, each of the four reports. Save them on your computer so they will be accessible for you to send to the 1,000's of people who will order them from you. 2. IMPORTANT-- DO NOT alter the names of the people who are listed next to each report, or their sequence on the list, in any way other than is instructed below in steps "a" through "f" or you will lose out on the majority of your profits. Once you understand the way this works, you'll also see how it doesn't work if you change it. Remember, this method has been tested, and if you alter it, it will not work. a. Look below for the listing of available reports. b. After you've ordered the four reports, take this letter and remove the name and address under REPORT #4. This person has made it through the cycle and is no doubt counting their $50,000! c. Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down to REPORT #4. d. Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down to REPORT #3. e. Move the name and address under REPORT #1 down to REPORT #2. f. Insert your name/address in the REPORT #1 position. Please make sure you copy every name and address ACCURATELY! 3. Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names, and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to the instruction portion of this letter. 4. Now you're ready to start an advertising campaign on the WORLD WIDE WEB! SEND OUT THIS LETTER (with your name added) TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN, EVEN FRIENDS AND FAMILY. Advertising on the WEB can be very, very inexpensive, and there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Another avenue which you could use for advertising is e-mail lists. You can buy these lists for under $20/20,000 addresses or you can pay someone to take care of it for you. BE SURE TO START YOUR AD CAMPAIGN IMMEDIATELY! 5. For every $5.00(�5) you receive, all you must do is e-mail them the report they ordered. THAT'S IT! ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS! This will help guarantee that the e-mail THEY send out, with YOUR name and address on it, will be prompt because they can't advertise until they receive the report! To grow fast be prompt and courteous. ------------------------------------------ AVAILABLE REPORTS ------------------------------------------ ***Order Each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME*** Notes: * - ALWAYS SEND $5(�5) CASH FOR EACH REPORT * - ALWAYS SEND YOUR ORDER VIA THE QUICKEST DELIVERY * - Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in at least two sheets of paper * - On one of those sheets of paper, include: (a) the number & name of the report you are ordering, (b) your e-mail address, and (c) your postal address. ___________________________________________________________ REPORT #1 "HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: K. Winchell (will accept your currency) PO Box 283 Sandy Creek, NY USA 13145 _______________________________________________________ REPORT #2 "MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: E.Mills (will accept your currency) PO Box 2 Mowbray Heights Launceston,Tasmania Australia 7248 ________________________________________________ REPORT #3 "SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS" Jim Wright 38 Pentyla Baglan Rd Port Talbot West Glamorgan SA12 8AA Wales UK ________________________________________________ REPORT #4 "EVALUATING MULTI-LEVEL SALES PLANS" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: Conrad Fry 1 Avon Gardens West Bridgford Nottingham England NG2 6BP ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----- HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PLAN WILL MAKE YOU $MONEY$ ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Let's say you decide to start small just to see how well it works. Assume your goal is to get 10 people to participate on your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the Internet will EASILY get a larger response.) Also assume that everyone else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets ONLY 10 downline members. Follow this example to achieve the STAGGERING results below. 1st level--your 10 members with $5.......................$50 2nd level--10 members from those 10 ($5 x 100)........$500 3rd level--10 members from those 100 ($5 x 1,000)...$5,000 4th level--10 members from those 1,000 ($5x10,000).$50,000 THIS TOTALS ------ $55,550 Remember, this assumes that the people who participate only recruit 10 people each. Think for a moment what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Lots of people get 100s of participants! THINK ABOUT IT! Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing (surely you can afford $20). You obviously already have an Internet connection and e-mail is FREE! REPORT #3 shows you the most productive methods for bulk e-mailing and purchasing e-mail lists. Some list & bulk e-mail vendors even work on trade! Over 50,000, new people, get on the Internet EVERYDAY (CBS NEWS)! *******TIPS FOR SUCCESS******* * TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt, professional, and follow the directions accurately. * Send for the four reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have them when the orders start coming in because: When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the requested product (report) to comply with the U.S. Postal & Lottery Laws, Title 18, Sections 1302 and 1341 or Title 18, Section 3005 in the U.S. Code, also Code of Federal Regs. vol. 16, Sections 255 and 436, which state that "a product or service must be exchanged for money received." * ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THE ORDERS YOU RECEIVE. * Be patient and persistent with this program. If you follow the instructions exactly, the results WILL undoubtedly be SUCCESSFUL! * ABOVE ALL, HAVE FAITH IN YOURSELF AND KNOW YOU WILL SUCCEED! *******YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINE******* Follow these guidelines to help assure your success: If you don't receive 10 to 20 orders for REPORT #1 within two weeks, continue advertising until you do. Then, a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT #2. If you don't, continue advertising until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you, and the cash can continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. If you want to generate more income, send another batch of e- mails and start the whole process again! There is no limit to the income you will generate from this business! PLEASE NOTE: If you need help with starting a business, registering a business name, learning how income tax is handled, etc., contact your local office of the Small Business Administration (a Federal agency) 1-(800)827-5722 for free help and answers to questions. Also, the Internal Revenue Service offers free help via telephone and free seminars about business tax requirements. Your earnings and results are highly dependent on your activities and advertising. This letter constitutes no guarantees stated nor implied. In the event that it is determined that this letter constitutes a guarantee of any kind, that guarantee is now void. Any testimonials or amounts of earnings listed in this letter may be factual or fictitious. If you have any question of the legality of this letter contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Consumer Protection in Washington DC. *******T E S T I M O N I A L S******* This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rule of not trying to place your name in a different position, it won't work and you'll lose a lot of potential income. I'm living proof that it works. It really is a great opportunity to make relatively easy money, with little cost to you. If you do choose to participate, follow the program exactly, and you'll be on your way to financial security. Sean McLaughlin, Jackson, MS My name is Frank. My wife, Doris, and I live in Bel-Air, MD. I am a cost accountant with a major U.S. Corporation and I make pretty good money. When I received the program I grumbled to Doris about receiving "junk mail." I made fun of the whole thing, spouting my knowledge of the population and percentages involved. I "knew" it wouldn't work. Doris totally ignored my supposed intelligence and jumped in with both feet. I made merciless fun of her, and was ready to lay the old "I told you so" on her when the thing didn't work... well, the laugh was on me! Within two weeks she had received over 50 responses. Within 45 days she had received over $147,200 in $5 bills! I was shocked! I was sure that I had it all figured and that it wouldn't work. I AM a believer now. I have joined Doris in her "hobby." I did have seven more years until retirement, but I think of the "rat race" and it's not for me. We owe it all to MLM. Frank T., Bel-Air, MD I just want to pass along my best wishes and encouragement to you. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. I even checked with the U.S. Post Office to verify that the plan was legal. It definitely is! IT WORKS! Paul Johnson, Raleigh, NC The main reason for this letter is to convince you that this system is honest, lawful, extremely profitable, and is a way to get a large amount of money in a short time. I was approached several times before I checked this out. I joined just to see what one could expect in return for the minimal effort and money required. To my astonishment, I received $36,470.00 in the first 14 weeks, with money still coming in. Phillip A. Brown, Esq. Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my mind to participate in this plan. But conservative that I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that there was just no way that I wouldn't get enough orders to at least get my money back. Boy, was I surprised when I found my medium- size post office box crammed with orders! For a while, it got so overloaded that I had to start picking up my mail at the window. I'll make more money this year than any 10 years of my life before. The nice thing about this plan is that it doesn't matter where in the U.S. people live. There simply isn't a better investment with a faster return. Mary Rockland, Lansing, MI I had received this program before. I deleted it, but later I wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get another copy, so I had to wait until I was e-mailed another program...11 months passed then it came...I didn't delete this one!...I made more than $41,000 on the first try!! D. Wilburn, Muncie, IN This is my third time to participate in this plan. We have quit our jobs, and will soon buy a home on the beach and live off the interest on our money. The only way on earth that this plan will work for you is if you do it. For your sake, and for your family's sake don't pass up this golden opportunity. Good luck and happy spending! Charles Fairchild, Spokane, WA ORDER YOUR REPORTS TODAY AND GET STARTED ON YOUR ROAD TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM! NOW IS THE HOUR! DECISIVE ACTION YIELDS POWERFUL RESULTS ! ********************************************************* Your request to be removed will be processed within 24 hours. DISCLAIMER: Under Bill s.1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th US Congress this letter Cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender includes contact information & a method of removal.To be removed from future mailings just reply with REMOVE in the subject line.Thank you for your kind consideration. From felix323 at 123india.com Tue Oct 10 11:07:39 2000 From: felix323 at 123india.com (felix323 at 123india.com) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 03:07:39 +0900 Subject: CDR: Surf 1 0 T I M E S F A S T E R Message-ID: <200010101807.DAA24347@iris.ce.hallym.ac.kr> Now available worldwide: New High Speed Modem Cable and Booster Software accelerate up to 10 times your actual Internet connection. No other dual system delivers better performance. Learn all about this new technology here: http://3dfastnet.is-here.net THERE ISNT ANOTHER COMPANY IN THE WORLD THAT CAN MAKE YOU A DEAL LIKE THIS! http://3dfastnet.is-here.net To be removed, reply with the word "REMOVE" in the subject heading, your name will be removed within 24 hrs from the list. From jimdbell at home.com Wed Oct 11 01:26:34 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 04:26:34 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regions References: Message-ID: <007101c0335c$24316a80$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: Lucky Green Subject: RE: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regions > Sunder wrote, quoting > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13863.html > > > [...] > > It's my understanding that TV detector vans work by picking up > > the radiation emitted by cathode ray tube TVs - which should mean > > that, if you're rich enough to run an LCD monitor they'll never > > know you're a secret Paxman admirer. > > A popular, but false, myth. The video cards radiate more than the CRT's. > Laptops tend to be the worst offenders. > > --Lucky Green As to the video cards... Sorry, Lucky, but you're going to have to support this a little better. Emissions are a function of the signal voltage in a conductor, and the extent that this conductor is free to emit. The latter is strongly related to (among other things) the wavelength of the signal versus the conductor length: To emit "well" requires an "antenna" length a significant fraction of 1/4 wave, and that would be about 40 cm for 150 MHz video signals. (I am assuming a signal velocity of 0.8C, since it's PC-board insulated.) These days it's hard to find a video card as long as 10 cm, and the path length from the D/A to the output connector is probably 3 cm or so. (And that is a pc board trace which is on a 4 (or more) layer PC board, not exactly conducive to unintended radiation. Besides, the voltage on that signal is probably around 1 volt, quite low. And, remember that this video card is, itself, stuck inside an enclosure which is at least intended to shield the outside world from the signals, at least more than it already is.. Compare this to the monitor: Those low-level video signals are amplified a few times to drive the electron guns, and they modulate the passage of electrons over a 24,000-volt circuit, in a not-particularly-well-shielded (and huge) vacuum tube. The length of that tube is close to 50 cm, just right to emit ca. 150 MHz. The two ends of the tube must be insulated from each other, of course. Naturally, the case of that monitor is...plastic. As for the laptops: I am unfamiliar with the way laptops drive their LCD displays, but if they don't possess a SVGA-type (X/Y scanned) signal internally, perhaps they can avoid emitting a useful signal. CRT's "write" with an electron beam and must time-multiplex their video information. LCD's (particularly TFT's)COULD be implemented so that the actual display is scanned on only one axis, making it virtually impossible to "read." The data being sent to that LCD driver would have to be some sort of parallel digital, I suppose. Jim Bell, N7IJS .. From submit at mail.com Tue Oct 10 18:18:52 2000 From: submit at mail.com (SU-2000) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 05:18:52 +0400 Subject: CDR: rEGISTRACIQ...@SUbmit-2K Message-ID: <200010110119.SAA11796@toad.com> Специально для Вас. Вашему вниманию предлагается - программа "Submit-2K" для автоматического размещения информации в Интернет, на различных Досках Объявлений и регистрации в поисковых системах. Обеспечит гарантированное продвижение Вашей информации в Интернет, поможет сэкономить огромное количество денег и времени. Подробней: http://submit2k.i-connect.com From seachelle_one at yahoo.com Wed Oct 11 08:18:56 2000 From: seachelle_one at yahoo.com (Michelle) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 08:18:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: beOutdoors spam scam exposed Message-ID: <20001011151856.17619.qmail@web1404.mail.yahoo.com> I know the beOutdoors spamming incedent is an old issue, but I thought you might be interested in reading this message I posted on n.a.n.e. Also, I got the original lie they told mixed up, but please note that no one was fired as a result. (The original beOutdoors lie is at the bottom as a refresher.) > Hello! > > Boy are you going to be glad that you are reading > this. I used to work at beOutdoors.com until very > recently. > > I know the real story about what happened with that > whole spamming incident. > > There was never a young IT guy who was fired and > broke > into the building and spammed a bunch of people, but > I > think you already knew that. > > Karla Story is the Director of Business Development, > but more importantly, she is the best friend of the > wife of Randy Hoffman, President of beOutdoors.com > and > former Republican candidate for the U.S. House of > Represenstatives. Karla purchased a CD containing 30 > million names and email addresses for $110 for the > express purpose of spamming them. Apparently, it > seemed like a viable advertising campaign at the > time. > > Geng (James) Qu, formerly of KPMG, now Director of > IT > at beOutdoors.com, wrote a program for Randy that > would automatically send a mass email to batches of > about 25,000 addresses at a time. They specifically > pulled out AOL addresses since they were a Gold > Anchor > tenant in AOL Shopping. > > Randy would come into the back room (Oh, I forgot to > mention that at the time they were located in a > strip > mall and 14 people worked there - so much for their > "very secure location". Also, some of the servers > were > down in the LA area at a place where there is no way > in hell this would happen.) and say, "Let's run off > the next 25,000." The rest of us knew they were > doing > a big mailing, but we thought that they were sending > things only to registered users. Besides, the > Director > of IT was our entire IT department at the time. > > Later when James noticed that we were getting a lot > of > bounce backs, he attributed it to server problems. > Another employee showed him the thread (yours) > regarding this spamming incident. > > James had no idea that Randy had put out that bogus > story about a break-in. Right away he knew that it > would come back to haunt them. As I mentioned, they > had no IT people other than the Director of IT. > Also, > the only person who had been fired prior to that was > a > graphics person, and it hadn't been a recent firing. > > I know that this is an old issue, but as you are the > self-proclaimed blight upon all spammers, or > something > similar, I thought that you might still be > interested. > > By the way, just so that you don't think I am a > disgruntled employee who is making this up, I wasn't > fired. I gave them a full two weeks notice like a > good > employee would. > > However, if you are interested in hearing many more > examples of the lack of integrity at beOutdoors.com, > I > would be more than happy to oblige. I never signed a > non-disclosure agreement. > > Enjoy! >From Exodus: We have contacted our customer regarding your "beoutdoors.com" spam complaint. Below is their explanation describing the situation. Between Friday evening May 5, 2000 and Monday morning, May 8, 2000 there was unauthorized use of beOutdoors assets and its Internet access that resulted in the sending of unsolicited commercial email to an unknown number of email addresses. This was done without any authorization or knowledge of any company manager. Specifically sometime Friday evening May 5 one of our young technical employees (now ex-employee) and a friend of his entered the beOutdoors facility (without authorization) and set up an email program on an internal server to send our cash sweepstakes announcement to email addresses contained on a CD the employees friend had acquired. We are unable to determine the number of emails sent or to whom they were sent since three of our internal servers crashed as a result of the individuals unauthorized use. Based upon complaints we do know that many individuals received several copies of the email. Due to the crash of our internal servers it has taken us a little over a week to become fully operational again and complete our investigation to determine if there was criminal intent. After a discussion with the District Attorney�s office and the individuals who perpetrated the email disaster it appears that there was no criminal intent just misguided, unauthorized actions by two very immature individuals. The employee was terminated but not prosecuted. We want to apologize to Exodus and any others that may have been impacted in anyway by the unauthorized actions of a now former employee. --- -- Eric Uratchko Policy Enforcement Specialist Exodus Communications, Inc. 1-888-2EXODUS, Ext. 7700 -- Kathleen Policy Enforcement Manager Exodus Communications, Inc. 1-888-2EXODUS, Ext. 3984 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ From reinhold at world.std.com Wed Oct 11 06:08:37 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 09:08:37 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> Message-ID: At 2:24 PM -0700 10/10/2000, Ed Gerck wrote: >"Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > >> You may well be right about the accepted definition of >> non-repudiation, but if you are then I would amend my remarks to say >> that known cryptographic technology cannot provide non-repudiation >> service unless we are willing to create a new legal duty for >> individuals and corporations to protect their secret key or accept >> what ever consequences ensue. I don't think that is acceptable. > >Non-repudiation is, according to how myself and the PKIX WG consensus >views it, a useful concept both in technical as well as in legal >terms. Further, >neither myself nor the specific discussion in the PKIX WG saw any need to >require a specific legal framework to talk about technical applications >of the non-repudiation concept. So, yes, technology can provide >for non-repudiation services and the question whether or not these >services are useful to provide evidences to a legal layer depends on >many *other* considerations -- such as for example the legal regime >(common law, civil law, statutes, contracts, etc.), which we do not control. >What we can do on the technical side is provide protocols (with and without >crypto -- for example, with timestamps that may be signed or made available >in a tamperproof public record) that support non-repudiation as a service that >prevents the denial of an act. This service is completely different from a >service that proves an act, which is authentication. Neither of >these services is >absolute, though, and thus the notion of non-repudiation cannot be of an >absolute answer. This is a common point between law and technology -- >anything can be repudiated. > >> I find the rest of your comment a tad too opaque. Could you give >> some examples of what you have in mind? > >You can check for example >http://www.imc.org/draft-ietf-pkix-technr or >ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pkix-technr-01.txt > The Abstract of the draft-ietf-pkix-technr says > This document describes those features of a service which processes > signed documents which must be present in order for that service to > constitute a "technical non-repudiation" service. A technical > non-repudiation service must permit an independent verifier to > determine whether a given signature was applied to a given data > object by the private key associated with a given valid certificate, > at a time later than the signature. The features of a technical non- > repudiation service are expected to be necessary for a full non- > repudiation service, although they may not be sufficient. > My original point was the the technical definition of non-repudiation was much narrower that the legal definition. This draft seems to agree. It goes on to say: > The NR service is expected to provide evidence that a given object > was signed by the private key corresponding to a given certificate > which was valid at the time of signature. It is not anticipated that > the use of the NR service will ordinarily constitute execution of a > contract, or acceptance of any other legal obligation. It is > anticipated that any use of this service in accepting legal > obligations would be the subject of legislation or judicial decision > in various jurisdictions, which are likely to lay additional > technical burdens upon the provision of such a service to such an > extent as to constitute another, larger service which need not be the > same in all jurisdictions. It is outside the scope of the definition > of this service to provide evidence that the signer and the subject > of the signing certificate are the same, that the signer has been > adequately informed of the content which is signed, that the signer > is not acting under duress, etc. My concern is that the vast majority of informed lay people, lawyers, judges, legislators, etc. will hear "non-repudiation" and hear "absolute proof." If you doubt this, read the breathless articles written recently about the new U.S. Electronic Signatures Act. I don't think technologists should be free to use evocative terms and then define away their common sense meaning in the fine print. Certainly a valid public key signature is strong evidence and services like that described in the draft can be useful. I simply object to calling them "non-repudiation services." I would not object to "anti-repudiation services," "counter-repudiation services" or "repudiation-resistant technology." Would the banking industry employ terms like "forgery-proof checks," "impregnable vaults" or "pick-proof locks" to describe conventional security measures that were known to be fallible? Arnold Reinhold From marcel at aiurea.com Wed Oct 11 06:29:51 2000 From: marcel at aiurea.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 09:29:51 -0400 Subject: CDR: Know Your Customer Message-ID: <00bb01c03387$4f241460$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> > from http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/10/national/10PESO.html > > > October 10, 2000 > > U.S. Companies Tangled in Web of Drug Dollars > By LOWELL BERGMAN > > > On a rainy day last June, a group of corporate executives gathered in a > conference room at the Justice Department for a meeting with Attorney > General Janet Reno and other top government officials. > > The executives represented some of the pillars of corporate America - > Hewlett-Packard, Ford Motor Company, Whirlpool. The session was not > publicized because those at the meeting shared an unlikely and potentially > embarrassing problem: their companies, they feared, were being singled out > in the nation's war on drugs, and neither they nor the government was quite > sure what to do. > > With the intensifying federal crackdown on money laundering, agents had been > tracking drug money into the accounts of American corporations and their > distributors and dealers. In fact, federal officials said, about $5 billion > a year in Colombian drug money is used to buy goods and services - from > cigarettes to computer chips - from American companies. > > What makes that possible is a system known as the black-market peso > exchange, a complex money trade that law enforcement officials say has > become increasingly important to the Colombian narcotics trade. > > The system - really a network of currency brokers with offices in New York, > Miami, the Caribbean and South America - is essentially an underground money > market that lets the traffickers exchange American dollars for Colombian > pesos. Those dollars, which stay in the United States, are then bought by > Colombian companies that use them to buy American goods for sale back home. > > But the government's efforts to seize that money have put it on a collision > course with corporations, which say they are victims with no way of knowing > that they and their distributors are being paid with drug money. > > As they met on June 6, those executives, lawyers and law enforcement > officials found themselves grappling with a conundrum: when does drug money > stop being drug money? How far does a company's responsibility go? > > The questions have been confronting law enforcement officials for years. > > "What are we going to do?" asked Greg Passic, a former drug enforcement > agent who now advises the government on the economics of the narcotics > industry. "We've got the Fortune 500 involved in our drug- money laundering > process." > > For a long time, because of lax enforcement of United States currency laws, > the drug traffickers were able to launder billions of dollars through > American financial institutions. A crackdown in the 1980's pushed > traffickers to what they saw as a virtually fail-safe system for getting > back their profits - the black-market peso exchange. > > Their growing reliance on that system shows how deeply the drug trade has > become entwined in the legitimate economies of the United States, Colombia > and other nations. > > Colombian officials said that as much as 45 percent of their country's > imported consumer goods are bought with money laundered through the peso > exchange. > > On the American side, law enforcement officials said the exchange has > largely eliminated the trade deficit with Colombia. The market, said the > customs commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, "is the ultimate nexus between crime > and commerce, using global trade to mask global money laundering." > > So far, no large American company has faced criminal charges. And companies > have almost always been able to prevent federal officials from keeping money > that has been seized. > > But in the last few years, as frustration has risen, the government has > taken a tougher line. There have been Congressional hearings intended to put > companies on notice by name. Prosecutors have issued warnings and stepped up > efforts to seize laundered money. > > At the same time, the government has encouraged companies to institute "know > your customer" policies similar to those used in the financial industry. The > policies gave dealers and distributors techniques for recognizing money > laundering. Thus educated, the government thought, the companies would be > less able to argue that they simply could not have known. > > In drawing the line between legitimate and illegitimate profits, the > government must not only prove that the money came from drug deals; it must > show that the recipient "knew or should have known" its source. > > In the war on drugs, that line has proved very fuzzy. > > Trading Dollars for Pesos > > Congress passed the first money- laundering laws in the early 1970's - > requiring, among other things, that banks report any cash transaction over > $10,000 - but the laws were loosely enforced. By 1979, the Federal Reserve > Bank in Miami had more cash than the other federal reserve banks combined. > > It took the uproar over the cocaine epidemic in the early 80's for banks to > comply with the law. And with the resulting crackdown, traffickers resorted > to the black market, which for decades had provided Colombian businesses > with dollars at less than the official exchange rate of 2,000 pesos to the > dollar. The rate in Colombia is fixed by the government. > > One peso broker recently agreed to describe how the system works. > > The process begins when the broker receives a call from a Colombian drug > trafficker or his American representative. The two negotiate an exchange > rate for pesos, usually 30 percent to 40 percent below the fixed rate. So > $10,000 might be worth 12 million pesos instead of 20 million at the > official rate. > > The dollars are then delivered to the broker, who promises to deliver pesos > to the trafficker's bank account after the dollars are sold to Colombian > businesses. The dealer's insurance is the broker's knowledge that to do > otherwise would almost surely mean death. > > The broker maintains several runners - "smurfs," in law enforcement lingo - > who deposit the cash into hundreds of United States bank accounts in amounts > of less than $10,000, to avoid scrutiny. > > At the same time, the broker's office in Colombia negotiates with business > people there who want cheap dollars to buy everything from consumer goods to > helicopters. > > Usually, that exchange rate is 20 percent below market, so a business owner > in Colombia might pay 16 million pesos, instead of 20 million pesos at the > fixed rate, for $10,000. > > The pesos are then transferred - in this example, 12 million pesos - to the > traffickers' accounts. The broker keeps the difference, 4 million pesos in > this instance. Then at the businessman's direction, the dollars in the > American banks are used to pay for American goods. > > The peso brokerage is one part of the process that supplies Colombia with > inexpensive goods from the United States and around the world. Colombian > authorities said the goods were often smuggled into the country, costing > Colombia more than $300 million a year in tax revenue. > > Colombia has made collecting that lost revenue a priority. But the black > market has considerable appeal because it puts a lot of inexpensive foreign > goods on the Colombian market. > > The exchange has also increased American exports to Colombia. > > "This is positive for U.S. business, there is no doubt about it," said Mike > Wald, who runs a consortium of law enforcement agencies in Florida focusing > on the peso exchange. "The Colombian, if he pays less for his dollars, can > buy more goods. That's a pretty obvious economic fact. But we have to > realize where this money originates. It's drug money." > > Tangled With Drug Money > > Two companies that have turned up in the American government's > anti-laundering efforts are Phillip Morris and Bell Helicopter Textron. > > Phillip Morris products in particular have been a major presence in > Colombia. Marlboro cigarettes are readily available at prices investigator s > said indicated that they were bought with black market dollars and smuggled > into the country. > > Earlier this year, Phillip Morris was sued in the Eastern District of New > York by the Colombian tax collectors. The federal lawsuit accused the > company of being involved in cigarette smuggling and in the laundering of > drug proceeds. > > Phillip Morris has denied the allegations, saying that it did not know its > products were being exploited for money laundering. In addition, without > admitting wrongdoing, it recently signed an agreement with Colombia, > pledging to stop its products from entering the black market or being used > to launder money. > > In 1995, in Federal District Court in San Juan, Puerto Rico, Phillip > Morris's former distributors in northern South America were indicted for > laundering $40 million in black market pesos. > > A member of the defense lawyers said the money was used to buy Phillip > Morris cigarettes, liquor and other products for the Colombian market. But > the defense team member said the defendants did not know that the money came > from drug sales. > > Phillip Morris severed its relationship with the defendants in 1998 and said > it did not know that its products were being smuggled or that black market > money was used to buy them. > > In another case, Bell Helicopter is challenging the seizure of $300,000 from > its accounts, money, according to court documents, that was generated by > drug smuggling. > > It was part of more than $1 million that the United States believed was > supplied a peso-exchange broker to buy a Bell aircraft. The helicopter was > seized in Panama at the request of the United States. > > The case has become a sore point for American law enforcement in part > because the helicopter was sold to a Colombian businessman linked to the > country's right-wing paramilitaries. > > Seeking Cooperation > > The deepening struggle between prosecutors and business executives is what > led to the meeting with Attorney General Reno and other government > officials, including Deputy Attorney General Eric H. Holder and Deputy > Treasury Secretary Stuart E. Eizenstat. The companies invited were > Hewlett-Packard, Ford, General Motors, Sony, Westinghouse, Whirlpool and > General Electric Company, Treasury officials said. > > None of the companies returned phone calls seeking comment, except General > Electric and Sony. Sony said it would have no comment. But General > Electric's counsel, Scott Gilbert, said his company instituted a strict > compliance program five years ago, after reports that its refrigerators were > being used in money-laundering operations. > > As part of its policy, Mr. Gilbert said General Electric warns dealers to be > aware of "red flags" - a customer's lack of interest in discounts, an > unwillingness to give information about the company, or unusual forms of > payment like large amounts of cash or checks written on the account of a > third party. > > The new policy has cut sales of appliances to Latin America by 23,000 units, > or over 20 percent, said an executive at General Electric. > > Alan Dooty, a customs official, said the companies had been selected for the > June meeting because their products had shown up in the black market in > Colombia. The exception was General Electric, which he singled out as a > "good citizen." > > Before the meeting, some of the companies expressed concern that they would > be punished. But once they arrived, Mr. Dooty said, they were assured that > the government was seeking cooperation. > > A follow-up session in July bogged down in legal murk. > > An industry representative familiar with the meeting said: "The Justice and > Treasury Departments realized that they were trying to identify drug money > that had morphed, been transformed, in layers of transactions involving > distributors, authorized dealers, financing arrangements with unregulated > money lenders called `factors' and the other realities of commercial life." > > More meetings are scheduled for this fall. From gt at tuckers.de Tue Oct 10 18:35:28 2000 From: gt at tuckers.de (Gil Tucker) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 09:35:28 +0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Surf 1 0 T I M E S F A S T E R References: <200010101807.DAA24347@iris.ce.hallym.ac.kr> Message-ID: <001b01c03329$7f4b7060$de0aa8c0@p400> REMOVE REMOVE ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 2:07 AM Subject: Surf 1 0 T I M E S F A S T E R > > > Now available worldwide: > > New High Speed Modem Cable and Booster Software > accelerate up to 10 times your actual Internet > connection. > > No other dual system delivers better performance. > > Learn all about this new technology here: > http://3dfastnet.is-here.net > > THERE ISN'T ANOTHER COMPANY IN THE WORLD THAT > CAN MAKE YOU A DEAL LIKE THIS! > > http://3dfastnet.is-here.net > > > To be removed, reply with the word "REMOVE" in the subject > heading, your name will be removed within 24 hrs from the list. > > From boo at datashopper.dk Wed Oct 11 00:40:22 2000 From: boo at datashopper.dk (Bo Elkjaer) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 09:40:22 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA Message-ID: Hi Yesterday oct. 10 NSA was granted another patent for a cryptographic device invented by William Friedman. The application for the patent was filed oct. 23 1936 -- 64 years ago. The patent can be found here: http://164.195.100.11/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ft00&s1='national+security+agency'&OS="national+security+agency"&RS="national+security+agency" Interesting read. Yours Bo Elkjaer, Denmark >>Bevar naturen: Sylt et egern.<< >>URL: http://www.datashopper.dk/~boo/index.html<< >>ECHELON URL:<< >>http://www1.ekstrabladet.dk/netdetect/echelon.iasp<< From smb at research.att.com Wed Oct 11 07:25:21 2000 From: smb at research.att.com (Steven M. Bellovin) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:25:21 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi Message-ID: <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> In message <5.0.0.25.2.20001010154833.03a01b80 at ebible.org>, Michael Paul Johnso n writes: > >To put this suggestion into perspective, consider that in the real world, pure > cipher strength is rarely the weakest link in the security chain, provided th >at a reasonable key length and cipher are chosen. Having done that, go for it >if you still think you can afford the extra time, space, and key management wi >th (probably) no measurable increase in overall system security. Precisely. What is the *real* threat model? History does indeed show that believed-secure ciphers may not be, and that we do indeed need a safety margin. But history shows even more strongly that there are many better ways to the plaintext, and that's the real goal. --Steve Bellovin From dpj at world.std.com Wed Oct 11 07:28:30 2000 From: dpj at world.std.com (David Jablon) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:28:30 -0400 Subject: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: References: <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001011102830.008707c0@world.std.com> "Anti-repudiation" sounds good to me. ... even if does remind me of "antidisestablishmentarianism". Come to think of it, now even that term sounds appropriate here -- as our belief in the value of methods that deter key "dis-establishment". Pretty scary. -- dpj At 09:08 AM 10/11/00 -0400, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: >My concern is that the vast majority of informed lay people, lawyers, >judges, legislators, etc. will hear "non-repudiation" and hear >"absolute proof." If you doubt this, read the breathless articles >written recently about the new U.S. Electronic Signatures Act. > >I don't think technologists should be free to use evocative terms and >then define away their common sense meaning in the fine print. >Certainly a valid public key signature is strong evidence and >services like that described in the draft can be useful. I simply >object to calling them "non-repudiation services." I would not object >to "anti-repudiation services," "counter-repudiation services" or >"repudiation-resistant technology." Would the banking industry employ >terms like "forgery-proof checks," "impregnable vaults" or >"pick-proof locks" to describe conventional security measures that >were known to be fallible? From declan at well.com Wed Oct 11 07:37:55 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:37:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: Note to Dems: Don't Let Joseph Lieberman Log On Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001011103722.023a1bc0@mail.well.com> [I wrote this Lieberman piece the week we learned he was going to be the Dems' VP nominee but never got around to sending it out. Here it is, for your (potential) amusement. --Declan] ******** http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/11/143236&mode=nested Note to Dems: Don't Let Joe Lieberman Log On from the back-away-from-that-mouse-senator dept. By Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com) An open letter to Democrats: Your vice presidential candidate, Senator Joseph Lieberman, is without question a determined fellow. Who else would pen 1700-word essays carefully analyzing how many DWPM -- that's Dirty Words Per Minute -- appear on prime-time TV? Who else would painstakingly construct an oh-so-Washington response: The FCC should step in and threaten those TV networks with loss of their licenses if they don't cough up, Al Capone-style, protection programming? In the first hour of primetime, Lieberman writes in an essay published the week he accepted the veep slot, "sexual references have now reached an average of 3.69 per hour." Now, let's put aside the question of why an esteemed member of the world's greatest deliberative body feels the urge to take a counter to phrases like "Want to come up to my place for a drink?" It's true that Lieberman is quoting a study and perhaps didn't perform the mind-splitting task of weighing whether "Your place or mine?" falls into the safe-for-Junior or the raise-the-alarum category, though given his apparent predilection for prurience, one has to wonder. But calm down, Nadine Strossen: There's nothing particularly Orwellian about this precise, prudish algebra. That's because such fractional calculations, combined with the high-pitched harmonics of smug moral superiority, bespeak not so much Big Brother as an invigorated Kenneth Starr after a particularly rousing Bible study group. Does it really matter whether there are 3.692 sex mentions per hour or 3.714? More importantly, does nobody in Washington remember "significant figures" from their junior high math classes? One gets the impression that even if the sex-mentions-per-hour plummeted to 0.01, Lieberman would still be railing against Hollywood -- in much the same fervid-but-futile way that Moms used to warn teens about the corrupting influence of Elvis, and that was even before The King grew jowly, middle-aged, and potbellied. No, what really worries me aren't Lieberman's views on network TV. Let's be honest: Prime time television is as moribund nowadays as Dan Quayle's presidential ambitions, and even less interesting to chat about. What worries me is how behind the curve this fellow is. I mean, this guy wants to be able to succeed, in a pinch, Bill Clinton in the Oval Office. Sure, Clinton will be best remembered for unconsummated hummers from Monica, but at least he'd be an entertaining chap to hang out and swill beer with at a Yankees game. You just know that if Lieberman were sitting next to you, he'd whip out his calculator and start adding up how many times per minute each player swore. More to the point, it was Bob Dole who ran against Clinton four years ago by pandering to the right-wingers and whining about Hollywood's "nightmares of depravity." Can't Al & Joe think of anything new? Note to Dems: Big Bob lost. Of course, if the latest polls are any indication, the same thing's going to happen to Al and Joe. Why shouldn't they follow Dole's lead again post-November, if only to escape the ranks of the new unemployed? The former moral crusader and Viagra spokesman -- who has done as much to popularize discussions of problematic penises as Bill Clinton, albeit in a far more lucrative way -- this May inked a deal with Comedy Central, best known for raunchy shows like "South Park" that feature plots such as Satan getting buggered by Saddam Hussein. It may not be traditional family values, but Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms would surely approve. The real problem is what might happen if Lieberman discovers the Internet. He's a smart enough guy, even sponsored the obligatory anti-spam legislation, but then again you'd be hard-pressed nowadays to find any Congresscritter who hasn't. He may even be reasonably wired, might even read his own email, but you know that he's never spent any time mucking around the underbelly of the Net. You don't have to go very far. Just go to altavista.com and type in, say, "foot fetish." Presto! The advanced artificial intelligence of one of the leading search engines kicks in, and you get your neural-network-certified picks: "Female foot fetishes," "bare foot fetishes," "male foot fetishes." The press has made a lot of Lieberman's status as an Orthodox Jew, so one presumes he won't be a fan of jewishfetish.com, even though all the men do appear to be properly circumsized. If Lieberman is so eager to sic those hapless FCC bureaucrats on network television, imagine what he'd do to the Net. He's already been talking about creating a .xxx top level domain for smut, but I don't think he quite realizes how much of it there is out there. So, in the name of brotherly love, don't ever, ever let Joseph Lieberman log on. Sincerely, Declan McCullagh Washington, DC http://www.mccullagh.org/ From bear at sonic.net Wed Oct 11 08:31:14 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 11:31:14 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regions In-Reply-To: <007101c0335c$24316a80$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, jim bell wrote: >> A popular, but false, myth. The video cards radiate more than the CRT's. >> Laptops tend to be the worst offenders. >> >> --Lucky Green > >As to the video cards... >Sorry, Lucky, but you're going to have to support this a little better. >Emissions are a function of the signal voltage in a conductor, and the >extent that this conductor is free to emit. Given that a laptop uses an LCD display, there's really no good reason, electronically speaking, why its video hardware should have to do the ((scan+horizontal_retrace)*+vertical_retrace) sequence that the technology for getting a coherent signal relies upon. But the fact is, laptop hardware does write bits in a predefined order, (in fact the same order as CRT-based machines) so it's a worthwhile question whether anyone can figure the order and pick up the emissions from the video hardware. This looks like the sort of thing that can be resolved by experiment though; Anybody got enough DSP smarts to put an induction coil next to a laptop monitor and *see* whether they can read the darn thing? Also, it looks like the sort of thing that could be designed around. If someone were building a "secure laptop" they could make a video system and drivers that wrote the bits in a different, randomized order each time, and which only wrote the changed bits. If anybody is actually making a product like this, it would be a strong indication that *somebody* with money to spend on R&D considers it a valid threat model, because nobody makes products without a market. Bear From warlord at MIT.EDU Wed Oct 11 08:38:27 2000 From: warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins) Date: 11 Oct 2000 11:38:27 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: "Steven M. Bellovin"'s message of "Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:25:21 -0400" References: <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> Message-ID: "Steven M. Bellovin" writes: > Precisely. What is the *real* threat model? > > History does indeed show that believed-secure ciphers may not be, and > that we do indeed need a safety margin. But history shows even more > strongly that there are many better ways to the plaintext, and that's > the real goal. Why try to pick a Medeco when it's locking a glass door? :-) -derek PS: This isn't a hypothetical; I visited a friend's parents a number of years ago, and noticed that their front door, all glass (with nothing behind it) was locked using a Medeco lock. For those who don't know, a Medeco is a top-of-the-line lock, practically impossible to pick, drill out, etc. -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH warlord at MIT.EDU PGP key available From mike.just at entrust.com Wed Oct 11 08:47:40 2000 From: mike.just at entrust.com (Mike Just) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 11:47:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Mo nday August 2000) Message-ID: <3120721CA75DD411B8340090273D20B1295F55@sottmxs06.entrust.com> I'll add two words to the list: "support" (as opposed to "provide"), and "accountability." I prefer to say that a digital signature is a tool that "supports accountability." I suppose that "supports non-repudiation" would be fine as well. My concern is when the phrase "provides non-repudiation" is used it implies that complete non-repudiation can be provided technically (which I don't believe is the case). Mike J. > -----Original Message----- > From: David Jablon [mailto:dpj at world.std.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 10:29 AM > To: Arnold G. Reinhold > Cc: dcsb at ai.mit.edu; cryptography at c2.net; cypherpunks at cyberpass.net > Subject: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First > Monday August 2000) > > > "Anti-repudiation" sounds good to me. > > ... even if does remind me of "antidisestablishmentarianism". > Come to think of it, now even that term sounds appropriate here -- as > our belief in the value of methods that deter key "dis-establishment". > Pretty scary. > > -- dpj > > At 09:08 AM 10/11/00 -0400, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: > >My concern is that the vast majority of informed lay people, > lawyers, > >judges, legislators, etc. will hear "non-repudiation" and hear > >"absolute proof." If you doubt this, read the breathless articles > >written recently about the new U.S. Electronic Signatures Act. > > > >I don't think technologists should be free to use evocative > terms and > >then define away their common sense meaning in the fine print. > >Certainly a valid public key signature is strong evidence and > >services like that described in the draft can be useful. I simply > >object to calling them "non-repudiation services." I would > not object > >to "anti-repudiation services," "counter-repudiation services" or > >"repudiation-resistant technology." Would the banking > industry employ > >terms like "forgery-proof checks," "impregnable vaults" or > >"pick-proof locks" to describe conventional security measures that > >were known to be fallible? > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 3869 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gt at tuckers.de Tue Oct 10 21:01:57 2000 From: gt at tuckers.de (Gil Tucker) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:01:57 +0800 Subject: CDR: remove References: <200010101807.DAA24347@iris.ce.hallym.ac.kr> <001b01c03329$7f4b7060$de0aa8c0@p400> Message-ID: <003f01c0333a$e2257800$de0aa8c0@p400> ----- Original Message ----- From: Gil Tucker To: ; Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 9:35 AM Subject: Re: Surf 1 0 T I M E S F A S T E R > > > > > > > > > > > > REMOVE > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 2:07 AM > Subject: Surf 1 0 T I M E S F A S T E R > > > > > > > > Now available worldwide: > > > > New High Speed Modem Cable and Booster Software > > accelerate up to 10 times your actual Internet > > connection. > > > > No other dual system delivers better performance. > > > > Learn all about this new technology here: > > http://3dfastnet.is-here.net > > > > THERE ISN'T ANOTHER COMPANY IN THE WORLD THAT > > CAN MAKE YOU A DEAL LIKE THIS! > > > > http://3dfastnet.is-here.net > > > > > > To be removed, reply with the word "REMOVE" in the subject > > heading, your name will be removed within 24 hrs from the list. > > > > > > From tom at ricardo.de Wed Oct 11 09:04:32 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:04:32 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Know Your Customer References: <00bb01c03387$4f241460$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Message-ID: <39E48E76.941DB948@ricardo.de> Marcel Popescu wrote: > > U.S. Companies Tangled in Web of Drug Dollars > > By LOWELL BERGMAN I like the term "drug money", that is used throughout this article as if there were no tomorrow. how about "prostitution money" or "copyright money"? wonder why I haven't yet heard about those. From jamesbeck at skiutahtoday.com Wed Oct 11 11:28:38 2000 From: jamesbeck at skiutahtoday.com (jamesbeck at skiutahtoday.com) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:28:38 -0600 (MDT) Subject: CDR: Increase-Web-Business.com Message-ID: <200010111828.MAA45519@rapidnet.com> Here's a great site about Increasing Web Business... http://www.Increase-Web-Business.com AOL CLICK Best Regards, James Beckham DigiBiz Online _______________________________________________________________ I received your email as someone interested in Internet Business Services/Opps. If I received your email cypherpunks at cyberpass.net in error, please send an email to: fogtister at netcourrier.com with "REMOVE" in the subject line and we will immediately remove you. List removal: mailto:fogtister at netcourrier.com?subject=REMOVE _______________________________________________________________ From jamesbeck at skiutahtoday.com Wed Oct 11 11:28:39 2000 From: jamesbeck at skiutahtoday.com (jamesbeck at skiutahtoday.com) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:28:39 -0600 (MDT) Subject: CDR: Increase-Web-Business.com Message-ID: <200010111828.MAA45524@rapidnet.com> Here's a great site about Increasing Web Business... http://www.Increase-Web-Business.com AOL CLICK Best Regards, James Beckham DigiBiz Online _______________________________________________________________ I received your email as someone interested in Internet Business Services/Opps. If I received your email cypherpunks at minder.net in error, please send an email to: fogtister at netcourrier.com with "REMOVE" in the subject line and we will immediately remove you. List removal: mailto:fogtister at netcourrier.com?subject=REMOVE _______________________________________________________________ From mdpopescu at geocities.com Wed Oct 11 09:59:37 2000 From: mdpopescu at geocities.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:59:37 -0400 Subject: CDR: Think cash Message-ID: <004f01c033a4$9651a4c0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> An interesting idea has surfaced on the freenet-chat list: is it possible to build a program that creates some sort of a puzzle, whose answer the generating computer knows (and can verify), but which can only be answered by a human being, not by a computer? [Additional requirement: it should be easy for the human to answer the puzzle.] My proposal was to randomly create an image, which should be 1) easily recognizable by a human (say the image of a pet), but 2) complex enough so that no known algorithm could "reverse-engineer" this. [You need a randomly-generated image because otherwise one could build a large database of all the possible images and the correct answers.] Background information would also be very useful - see http://www.digitalblasphemy.com/userg/images/969403123.shtml - it's easy for a human being to identify the animal in the picture, but (AFAIK) impossible to write a program to do the same thing. Ideas? Mark --- All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification. From CHARLESP at maltanet.net Wed Oct 11 13:05:01 2000 From: CHARLESP at maltanet.net (C.PISANI) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 13:05:01 -0700 Subject: CDR: bugging devives Message-ID: <001d01c033be$c57d4d20$e3629ec3@charlespisani> check out http://www.internationalinvestigationbureau.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 424 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bear at sonic.net Wed Oct 11 13:09:48 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 13:09:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: >The fact that some people put Medeco's in glass doors, doesn't mean >Medeco should never develop a better lock. I don't have a problem with people who manufacture locks. I have a problem with the people who sell them. A sign of irrational fear is when the thing that is the *symbol* of security -- in this case the lock, or the cipher, is made very strong -- but used in a way that does not afford good *actual* security. If the fear of being burgled weren't at least partly irrational, meaning if it were based mostly on experience rather than mostly on fear -- we'd be seeing doors with half-inch thick steel plates in them to provide the same level of security as the medeco lock -- and reinforced concrete walls to provide the same level of security as the door. Ditto ciphers. A strong cipher is like that Medeco lock, or even better - but if the "door" is a dumb key management policy, or the key is easily guessable, then what has been gained? Because what is a lock, really? It makes it harder to get in *without breaking anything*. But actual burglars could really care less whether they break some of your stuff -- provided it's stuff they can't steal. So if actual burglars were as common as the people who sell these fancy locks tend to make out in their sales pitches, most folks would know, from experience, that burglars who break a window or a door are far more common than burglars who pick a lock -- and would be demanding *actual* security, meaning windows, doors and walls made of unbreakable stuff, rather than just *symbolic* security, of a strong lock or a strong cipher. If you want to propose a "Paranoid Encryption Standard", IE, a system for people who actually *DO* expect people to spend several million bucks and hundreds of man-years and thousands of CPU-years trying to break it, then it's going to have to encompass a hell of a lot more than ciphers. Start with physical machine security -- put the box in a concrete bunker with armed guards, give it a flat-panel monitor and roll your own drivers and video hardware. Stick a thermite grenade with a photosensitive fuse in the hard drive box. Make a continuous circuit through all the case components, that will detect anybody taking the case off, and blow the HD if the circuit's broken. Do a couple dozen other things along this line, and you'll have the physical security thing covered about as well as your cipher protects the data. But you're not through yet -- you've got the lock and the door, but burglars can still come in through the windows and the walls. You've got to do some real serious data security as well. First of all, nothing unencrypted is EVER written to the hard drive except a bootstrap loader that prompts for a cipher key. When it gets the cipher key, it reads and attempts to unencrypt the rest of the boot record. There is NO swap partition, and no swapping OS is to be used. The system computes a new cipher key every day using a cryptographically strong random number generator, and notifies you of it in a pencil-and-paper cipher that you can solve. (on high-entropy binary data, pencil-and-paper ciphers are actually quite strong) That's the key you would need to use the following day. If you don't log on for one day, you will not have the key for the following day, period. Thus, if someone seizes your box and you can hold out for *one* day, the data is GONE. But the burglars can still come in, maybe, through the roof. So just to make sure of it, put a timer in there that blows the HD if it's ever been more than 24 hours since you were last logged on. *There's* your paranoid encryption standard. Use blowfish for the cipher, and the cipher won't be the weakest point. Bear From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Wed Oct 11 10:53:20 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 13:53:20 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Think cash Message-ID: > ---------- > Marcel Popescu[SMTP:mdpopescu at geocities.com] wrote: > An interesting idea has surfaced on the freenet-chat list: is it possible > to > build a program that creates some sort of a puzzle, whose answer the > generating computer knows (and can verify), but which can only be answered > by a human being, not by a computer? [Additional requirement: it should be > easy for the human to answer the puzzle.] > > My proposal was to randomly create an image, which should be 1) easily > recognizable by a human (say the image of a pet), but 2) complex enough so > that no known algorithm could "reverse-engineer" this. [You need a > randomly-generated image because otherwise one could build a large > database > of all the possible images and the correct answers.] Background > information > would also be very useful - see > http://www.digitalblasphemy.com/userg/images/969403123.shtml - it's easy > for > a human being to identify the animal in the picture, but (AFAIK) > impossible > to write a program to do the same thing. > > Ideas? > > Mark > That's a really interesting question. My off-the-cuff answer would be 'no'. The constraints which say that the problem is randomly generated by a computer and the answer also evaluated by a computer are the killers. Any problem which one computer can create, and solve, can also be solved by another. Perhaps one could generate the solution, and find a problem which is solved by that solution, but finding a type of problem which humans will always solve one way, and computers another is the rub. You refer the the problem of recognizing a photo of an animal. It used to be said that no computer program could reliably distinguish between a dog and a cat, but I'm not sure that's the case since the development of neural networks. Almost any question which has a solution which is clear, unambiguous, and easy determined by a human can probably also be solved by either a regular program or a neural net. What you are really attempting to find is a reliable, fast, single-question Turing test. I'm far from sure this is possible. Peter Trei From reinhold at world.std.com Wed Oct 11 11:55:46 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 14:55:46 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: References: <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> Message-ID: >"Steven M. Bellovin" writes: > >> Precisely. What is the *real* threat model? >> >> History does indeed show that believed-secure ciphers may not be, and >> that we do indeed need a safety margin. But history shows even more >> strongly that there are many better ways to the plaintext, and that's >> the real goal. Ciphers are components of security systems, not complete security systems. How best to improve a component is a legitimate engineering question even if there is reason to believe they will often be misapplied. At present there is no serious threat to 3DES, so why did we bother with the whole AES exercise? [Look at the benchmarks? --Perry] Anyway, I think there is an interesting theoretical question here: Design a cipher algorithm P that assumes as primitives 5 ciphers, C1, ...,C5 (or more generally N ciphers for odd N > 1) with the same block size and key length. P is to have the same block size and key length as the Ci and is to be provably secure against chosen plaintext attacks even under the following conditions: 1. One of the Ci is a strong cipher (i.e. there is no attack faster than trying all the keys) 2. An attacker gets to supply the other four Ci, subject to the condition that they be cipher like: i.e. they must be bijections between the input and output domains, the bijection is the same if the key value is the same and there are no extra outputs. 3. The attacker knows the details of the secure algorithm. P should be as simple as possible not employ any additional cryptographic primitives (e.g hashes, S-boxes or special constants). Derek Atkins adds: > >Why try to pick a Medeco when it's locking a glass door? :-) The fact that some people put Medeco's in glass doors, doesn't mean Medeco should never develop a better lock. Arnold Reinhold From warlord at MIT.EDU Wed Oct 11 12:07:20 2000 From: warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins) Date: 11 Oct 2000 15:07:20 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: "Arnold G. Reinhold"'s message of "Wed, 11 Oct 2000 14:55:46 -0400" References: <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> Message-ID: No, you're right. Medeco should certainly work on a better lock. Except there comes a point at which, relatively speaking, ALL doors are "glass" doors compared to the security of this new medeco++ lock. At which point no, it doesn't make sense to develop an even better lock until you come up with better doors. :) -derek "Arnold G. Reinhold" writes: > Derek Atkins adds: > > > > >Why try to pick a Medeco when it's locking a glass door? :-) > > The fact that some people put Medeco's in glass doors, doesn't mean > Medeco should never develop a better lock. > > > Arnold Reinhold -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH warlord at MIT.EDU PGP key available From bear at sonic.net Wed Oct 11 15:31:56 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 15:31:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA In-Reply-To: <20001011193753.18504.qmail@nym.alias.net> Message-ID: >On Wednesday, October 11, Bo Elkjaer Wrote: >>Yesterday oct. 10 NSA was granted another patent for a >cryptographic device invented by William Friedman. The >application for the >patent was filed oct. 23 1936 -- 64 years >ago. > On 11 Oct 2000, raze wrote: >My question is this; why would they patent something that is 64 year old technology? This is like the Enigma machine no?! > Um, actually, no. The attacks we know on Rotor machines assume that the rotors rotate at predictable, constant intervals. This was true of the Engigma, but not true of some later Rotor machines. The papertape variation of this system, with every cipher wheel rotating by some varying amount between each letter, won't fall to any rotor attacks we know of until the papertapes have repeated at least twice each. Even then, it takes some fancy mathematics to figure out *how* to apply the rotor cryptanalysis to the system. After reading this newer patent, I think it's actually *LESS* secure than the system it purports to replace. I could be wrong here -- I'd like to actually see the diagrams and drawings and my browser doesn't support 'em -- but it looks like the rotations are constant per keystroke with this system, which would make it fall to rotor cryptanalysis. The crucial question, the one I can't make out without looking at the diagrams, is whether the mapping of rotations to rotors is different each time. Here's what I bet: department of the army didn't like the paper tape idea -- too fragile, too vulnerable to wet, required delicate machinery to read that had to be maintained -- and they wanted something a lot more rugged. So he designed something that ditched the paper tape idea for them. It wasn't as secure, but it was still better than the Hebern-style machines that were likely under consideration as an alternative. Bear From cyphrpnk at shannon.permutation.net Wed Oct 11 07:07:51 2000 From: cyphrpnk at shannon.permutation.net (cyphrpnk) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 16:07:51 +0200 Subject: CDR: Its called Staballoy(possible mispelling) in sail boat keels In-Reply-To: ; from shamrock@cypherpunks.to on Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 12:11:40AM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20001011160751.A15004@shannon.permutation.net> Hi Lucky, went looking myself once so I could machine some .308 bt in DU found it in an industrial catalogue catering to the large oceangoing sailboat industry... this was circa 1986... if I would still interested that is where I would start my research...(i.e. lee lapin and scott french( "whole spy cataloge, bigbrother game" etc ) is where I got that hint... cheers a cypherpunk From cyphrpnk at shannon.permutation.net Wed Oct 11 07:16:45 2000 From: cyphrpnk at shannon.permutation.net (cyphrpnk) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 16:16:45 +0200 Subject: CDR: Damn its good having you back Jim!! In-Reply-To: <007101c0335c$24316a80$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com>; from jimdbell@home.com on Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 04:26:34AM -0400 References: <007101c0335c$24316a80$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <20001011161645.B15004@shannon.permutation.net> Its good to have you back Jim... one of your anonymous fans... BTW in a small startup I worked for for 2 years(it never came to fruition) developing anonymous digital cash technologies with chaumian technologies, the expression "good enough for Assasination Politics" came to be regarded as high praise for digital cash systems that were tight enough for privacy/anonymity... From support at support.informit.com Wed Oct 11 14:37:37 2000 From: support at support.informit.com (support at support.informit.com) Date: 11 Oct 2000 16:37:37 -0500 Subject: CDR: InformIT Member Password Information Message-ID: Dear cypher punk, This message has been sent to you to ensure that you can take full advantage of our new site. Please note the following change with regard to our log in procedure, and keep this message for future reference. When logging in to InformIT, you now need to use your *e-mail address* and password instead of your user name and password. Here is your current account information, for your reference. First Name: cypher Last Name: punk User Name: cypherpunk E-mail: cypherpunks at toad.com Password: cypherpunk When asked to log in, please enter your *e-mail address* and password as listed above. We've already moved all of your account information and the content of your MyInformIT page to the new site. If you have any problems, please e-mail general at support.informit.com Thanks, Mel From wolf at priori.net Wed Oct 11 16:57:09 2000 From: wolf at priori.net (Meyer Wolfsheim) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 16:57:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Multi-part security solutions (Was: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) Message-ID: <200010120008.UAA13402@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 4585 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wolf at priori.net Wed Oct 11 16:57:09 2000 From: wolf at priori.net (Meyer Wolfsheim) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 16:57:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Multi-part security solutions (Was: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) Message-ID: <200010120009.UAA13407@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 4585 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jimdbell at home.com Wed Oct 11 14:36:32 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 17:36:32 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regions References: <39E3EBFB.544BC930@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <002901c033ca$72511260$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: Steve Furlong Subject: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regions > Lucky Green wrote: > > Sunder wrote, quoting > > > It's my understanding that TV detector vans work by picking up > > > the radiation emitted by cathode ray tube TVs - which should mean > > > that, if you're rich enough to run an LCD monitor they'll never > > > know you're a secret Paxman admirer. > > > > A popular, but false, myth. The video cards radiate more than the CRT's. > > Laptops tend to be the worst offenders. > > Cables are a problem, too. Video signals from a fully-shielded computer > connected to a fully-shielded monitor by a regular, unshielded cable can > be read. Effective snooping distance goes down, though I don't remember > by what factor. Which is a good reason to use a shielded cable, of the lowest practical length.. (check the resistance from one cable-end-housing to the other. If it's open it's NOT properly shielded. If it's shorted it MAY be properly shielded.) Further, whether or not the cable is shielded, putting one of those snap-on ferrite core filters at each end of the video cable, plus one each foot or so, does an excellent job preventing RF from propagating along the cable shield and radiating. Jim Bell, N7IJS. From wolf at priori.net Wed Oct 11 17:41:36 2000 From: wolf at priori.net (Meyer Wolfsheim) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 17:41:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Multi-part security solutions (Was: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: <200010120009.UAA13407@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> Message-ID: <200010120047.UAA13556@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1809 bytes Desc: not available URL: From theforce18 at melrun.org Wed Oct 11 15:49:23 2000 From: theforce18 at melrun.org (theforce18 at melrun.org) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 17:49:23 -0500 Subject: CDR: Are your bills too high?...we can help!!! Message-ID: <56id5a7lcvjn.6th0g@mail.melrun.org> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 3459 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 11 18:11:48 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 18:11:48 -0700 Subject: Multi-part security solutions (Was: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: <200010120009.UAA13407@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> References: <200010120009.UAA13407@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> Message-ID: At 4:57 PM -0700 10/11/00, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: > >> Derek Atkins adds: >> >> > >> >Why try to pick a Medeco when it's locking a glass door? :-) >> >> The fact that some people put Medeco's in glass doors, doesn't mean >> Medeco should never develop a better lock. > >Sure, Medeco should keep working on developing the best locks that it can >produce. > >However, if you are going to design your structure with a glass door, it >really makes no technological sense to exceed the security provided by the >glass door with the other components (locks, hinges, etc.). Put a Medeco >or an ASSA in a door that can be jimmied or broken down, and you've gained >nothing that you wouldn't have had with a high quality lock lacking a >sidebar. Except a warm fuzzy feeling inside: "We have unpickable locks!" Well, not so. This whole discussion is missing an important ontological factor: whether intrusion is detectable. A Medeco lock on a glass door may seem crazy, but a pickable lock on a glass door means those who know how to pick locks--like cops who have access to lock guns--can enter at will without any persistent evidence of their intrusion. The application to crypto is that the issue of personal data security (black bag jobs on keys, for example) is a separate issue from machine to machine security. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 11 18:15:28 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 18:15:28 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Multi-part security solutions (Was: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: <200010120047.UAA13556@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> References: <200010120047.UAA13556@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> Message-ID: At 5:41 PM -0700 10/11/00, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >Further thoughts on this matter... > >I think that we should escalate the level of liability a potential >attacker has to face when attempting to compromise a security system. > >We should have laptops equipped with high explosives, such that the laptop >detonates after a certain number of failed logins. Let's see how popular >laptop theft is then. Agreed. However, the commies and simp-wimps have created "liability" laws which make such personal protection measures completely infeasible in every country infected with the American legal disease. Pace trap guns, of course. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From BestFriend at twcny.rr.com Wed Oct 11 18:21:15 2000 From: BestFriend at twcny.rr.com (BestFriend at twcny.rr.com) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 18:21:15 Subject: CDR: WHAT CAN YOU GET FOR $20??? Message-ID: <100.508244.860458@twcny.rr.com> What can you get for $20.00? A pizza A tank of gas A haircut Lunch with a friend A parking place How About FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE!!!! Looking for that extra something, to help your life have that little extra comfort? Do you work to cover the bills? Fed up with paying out and not receiving the rewards you wish for? Then have an open mind And read all of this, before you make a decision- it will be worth your while. _______________________________________________ Subject: MUST READ! ! ! ... TV Advertised! ! ! ... Fun-Lucrative Fellow Entrepreneur If you wish to learn about an exceptional opportunity in the Home Business arena...Read On. "Your living is determined not so much by what life brings to you as by the attitude you bring to life; not so much by what happens to you as by the way your mind looks at what happens." This is going to be a great New Year for you! Please read all of this! EARN $100,000 PER YEAR SENDING E-MAIL!!! **************************************************************** You can earn $50,000 or more in the next 90 days sending e-mail, seem impossible? Read on for details (no, there is no 'catch')... ---------------------------------------------------------------- "AS SEEN ON NATIONAL TV" Thank you for your time and Interest. This is the letter you've been hearing about in the news lately. Due to the popularity of this letter on the internet, a major nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of the program, described below, to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved once and for all that there are, absolutely no laws prohibiting the participation in the program. This has helped to show people that this is a simple, harmless and fun way to make some extra money at home. The results of this show have been truly remarkable. Since so many people are participating now, those involved are doing much better than ever before. Everyone makes more as more people try it out. It is very, very exciting to be a part of this plan. You will understand once you experience it. "HERE IT IS, BELOW" ================================================ ================================================ *** Print This Now For Future Reference *** The following income opportunity is one you may be interested in taking a look at. It can be started with VERY LITTLE investment and the income return is TREMENDOUS!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make at least $50,000 in less than 90 days! Please read the enclosed program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEYMAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come into contact with people, do any hard work and best of all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions, and your dreams will come true. This e-mail marketing program works perfectly...100%, EVERY TIME. E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this non- commercialized method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using e-mail. Get your piece of this program now! MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, both Stanford Research and the Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold through multi-level methods by the late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 500,000 millionaires in the U.S., 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last few years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45 people become millionaires everyday through Multi-Level Marketing. You may have heard this story before, but over the summer Donald Trump made an appearance on the David Letterman Show. Dave asked him what he would do if he lost everything and had to start over from scratch. Without hesitating, Trump said he would find a good network marketing company and get to work. The audience started to hoot and boo him. He looked out at the audience and dead-panned his response - "That's why I'm sitting up here and you are all sitting out there!" With network marketing you have two sources of income. Direct commissions from sales you make yourself and commissions from sales made by people you introduce to the business. Residual income is the secret of the wealthy. It means investing time or money once and getting paid again and again and again. In network marketing, it also means getting paid for the work of others. The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. My name is Ellie Gilbert. Two years ago, the corporation I worked for, the past twelve years, down-sized and my position was eliminated. After many unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over $40,000... I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life and I am writing to share the experience in hopes that this will change your life, FINANCIALLY, FOREVER!!! In mid December, I received this program via e-mail. Six month's prior to receiving this program I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they would work or not. One claimed that I would make a million dollars in one year...it didn't tell me I'd have to write a best selling book to make it! But, as I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to start, without putting me further into debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. But like most of you I was still a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161 24-hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal! After determining the program was LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT." Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. The great thing about e- mail is that I don't need any money for printing to send out the program, and because all of my orders are fulfilled via e-mail, the only expense is my time. I'm telling you as it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost me. In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. Your goal is to "RECEIVE at least 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. If you don't, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My first step in making $50,000 in 90 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. Your goal is to "RECEIVE AT LEAST 100+ ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL." Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 1, of my e- mailing of 10,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car. Please take time to read the attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER! Remember, it won't work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won't work, you'll lose out on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you must meet your goal of 20+ orders for REPORT #1, and 100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS! If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a business owner and in financial trouble, as I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a good luck sign. I DID! Sincerely, Ellie Gilbert P.S. Do you have any idea what $58,000 looks like piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME! A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports you should have concluded that such a program, one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate... because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich". You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over 4 MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e- mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be on every one of them! Remember though, the more you send out the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS NOW UP TO YOU! "THINK ABOUT IT" Before you delete this program from your mailbox, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS! Jody Jacobs, Richmond, VA HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS INSTRUCTIONS: This method of raising capital REALLY WORKS 100 %, EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use up to $50,000 or more in the next 90 days. Before you say "BULL... ", please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what you do: As with all multi- level businesses, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the GREATEST Multi-Level Mail Order Marketing anywhere: This is what you MUST do: 1. Order all 4 reports shown on the list below (you can't sell them if you don't order them). * For each report, send $5.00 (�5) CASH, the NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING, YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS, and YOUR NAME & RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a problem) to the person whose name appears on the list next to the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAIL PROBLEMS! * When you place your order, make sure you order each of the four reports. You will need all four reports so that you can save them on your computer and resell them. * Within a few days you will receive, via e-mail, each of the four reports. Save them on your computer so they will be accessible for you to send to the 1,000's of people who will order them from you. 2. IMPORTANT-- DO NOT alter the names of the people who are listed next to each report, or their sequence on the list, in any way other than is instructed below in steps "a" through "f" or you will lose out on the majority of your profits. Once you understand the way this works, you'll also see how it doesn't work if you change it. Remember, this method has been tested, and if you alter it, it will not work. a. Look below for the listing of available reports. b. After you've ordered the four reports, take this letter and remove the name and address under REPORT #4. This person has made it through the cycle and is no doubt counting their $50,000! c. Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down to REPORT #4. d. Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down to REPORT #3. e. Move the name and address under REPORT #1 down to REPORT #2. f. Insert your name/address in the REPORT #1 position. Please make sure you copy every name and address ACCURATELY! 3. Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names, and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to the instruction portion of this letter. 4. Now you're ready to start an advertising campaign on the WORLD WIDE WEB! SEND OUT THIS LETTER (with your name added) TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN, EVEN FRIENDS AND FAMILY. Advertising on the WEB can be very, very inexpensive, and there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Another avenue which you could use for advertising is e-mail lists. You can buy these lists for under $20/20,000 addresses or you can pay someone to take care of it for you. BE SURE TO START YOUR AD CAMPAIGN IMMEDIATELY! 5. For every $5.00(�5) you receive, all you must do is e-mail them the report they ordered. THAT'S IT! ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS! This will help guarantee that the e-mail THEY send out, with YOUR name and address on it, will be prompt because they can't advertise until they receive the report! To grow fast be prompt and courteous. ------------------------------------------ AVAILABLE REPORTS ------------------------------------------ ***Order Each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME*** Notes: * - ALWAYS SEND $5(�5) CASH FOR EACH REPORT * - ALWAYS SEND YOUR ORDER VIA THE QUICKEST DELIVERY * - Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in at least two sheets of paper * - On one of those sheets of paper, include: (a) the number & name of the report you are ordering, (b) your e-mail address, and (c) your postal address. ___________________________________________________________ REPORT #1 "HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: K. Winchell (will accept your currency) PO Box 283 Sandy Creek, NY USA 13145 _______________________________________________________ REPORT #2 "MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: E.Mills (will accept your currency) PO Box 2 Mowbray Heights Launceston,Tasmania Australia 7248 ________________________________________________ REPORT #3 "SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS" Jim Wright 38 Pentyla Baglan Rd Port Talbot West Glamorgan SA12 8AA Wales UK ________________________________________________ REPORT #4 "EVALUATING MULTI-LEVEL SALES PLANS" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: Conrad Fry 1 Avon Gardens West Bridgford Nottingham England NG2 6BP ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----- HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PLAN WILL MAKE YOU $MONEY$ ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Let's say you decide to start small just to see how well it works. Assume your goal is to get 10 people to participate on your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the Internet will EASILY get a larger response.) Also assume that everyone else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets ONLY 10 downline members. Follow this example to achieve the STAGGERING results below. 1st level--your 10 members with $5.......................$50 2nd level--10 members from those 10 ($5 x 100)........$500 3rd level--10 members from those 100 ($5 x 1,000)...$5,000 4th level--10 members from those 1,000 ($5x10,000).$50,000 THIS TOTALS ------ $55,550 Remember, this assumes that the people who participate only recruit 10 people each. Think for a moment what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Lots of people get 100s of participants! THINK ABOUT IT! Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing (surely you can afford $20). You obviously already have an Internet connection and e-mail is FREE! REPORT #3 shows you the most productive methods for bulk e-mailing and purchasing e-mail lists. Some list & bulk e-mail vendors even work on trade! Over 50,000, new people, get on the Internet EVERYDAY (CBS NEWS)! *******TIPS FOR SUCCESS******* * TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt, professional, and follow the directions accurately. * Send for the four reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have them when the orders start coming in because: When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the requested product (report) to comply with the U.S. Postal & Lottery Laws, Title 18, Sections 1302 and 1341 or Title 18, Section 3005 in the U.S. Code, also Code of Federal Regs. vol. 16, Sections 255 and 436, which state that "a product or service must be exchanged for money received." * ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THE ORDERS YOU RECEIVE. * Be patient and persistent with this program. If you follow the instructions exactly, the results WILL undoubtedly be SUCCESSFUL! * ABOVE ALL, HAVE FAITH IN YOURSELF AND KNOW YOU WILL SUCCEED! *******YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINE******* Follow these guidelines to help assure your success: If you don't receive 10 to 20 orders for REPORT #1 within two weeks, continue advertising until you do. Then, a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT #2. If you don't, continue advertising until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you, and the cash can continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. If you want to generate more income, send another batch of e- mails and start the whole process again! There is no limit to the income you will generate from this business! PLEASE NOTE: If you need help with starting a business, registering a business name, learning how income tax is handled, etc., contact your local office of the Small Business Administration (a Federal agency) 1-(800)827-5722 for free help and answers to questions. Also, the Internal Revenue Service offers free help via telephone and free seminars about business tax requirements. Your earnings and results are highly dependent on your activities and advertising. This letter constitutes no guarantees stated nor implied. In the event that it is determined that this letter constitutes a guarantee of any kind, that guarantee is now void. Any testimonials or amounts of earnings listed in this letter may be factual or fictitious. If you have any question of the legality of this letter contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Consumer Protection in Washington DC. *******T E S T I M O N I A L S******* This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rule of not trying to place your name in a different position, it won't work and you'll lose a lot of potential income. I'm living proof that it works. It really is a great opportunity to make relatively easy money, with little cost to you. If you do choose to participate, follow the program exactly, and you'll be on your way to financial security. Sean McLaughlin, Jackson, MS My name is Frank. My wife, Doris, and I live in Bel-Air, MD. I am a cost accountant with a major U.S. Corporation and I make pretty good money. When I received the program I grumbled to Doris about receiving "junk mail." I made fun of the whole thing, spouting my knowledge of the population and percentages involved. I "knew" it wouldn't work. Doris totally ignored my supposed intelligence and jumped in with both feet. I made merciless fun of her, and was ready to lay the old "I told you so" on her when the thing didn't work... well, the laugh was on me! Within two weeks she had received over 50 responses. Within 45 days she had received over $147,200 in $5 bills! I was shocked! I was sure that I had it all figured and that it wouldn't work. I AM a believer now. I have joined Doris in her "hobby." I did have seven more years until retirement, but I think of the "rat race" and it's not for me. We owe it all to MLM. Frank T., Bel-Air, MD I just want to pass along my best wishes and encouragement to you. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. I even checked with the U.S. Post Office to verify that the plan was legal. It definitely is! IT WORKS! Paul Johnson, Raleigh, NC The main reason for this letter is to convince you that this system is honest, lawful, extremely profitable, and is a way to get a large amount of money in a short time. I was approached several times before I checked this out. I joined just to see what one could expect in return for the minimal effort and money required. To my astonishment, I received $36,470.00 in the first 14 weeks, with money still coming in. Phillip A. Brown, Esq. Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my mind to participate in this plan. But conservative that I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that there was just no way that I wouldn't get enough orders to at least get my money back. Boy, was I surprised when I found my medium- size post office box crammed with orders! For a while, it got so overloaded that I had to start picking up my mail at the window. I'll make more money this year than any 10 years of my life before. The nice thing about this plan is that it doesn't matter where in the U.S. people live. There simply isn't a better investment with a faster return. Mary Rockland, Lansing, MI I had received this program before. I deleted it, but later I wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get another copy, so I had to wait until I was e-mailed another program...11 months passed then it came...I didn't delete this one!...I made more than $41,000 on the first try!! D. Wilburn, Muncie, IN This is my third time to participate in this plan. We have quit our jobs, and will soon buy a home on the beach and live off the interest on our money. The only way on earth that this plan will work for you is if you do it. For your sake, and for your family's sake don't pass up this golden opportunity. Good luck and happy spending! Charles Fairchild, Spokane, WA ORDER YOUR REPORTS TODAY AND GET STARTED ON YOUR ROAD TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM! NOW IS THE HOUR! DECISIVE ACTION YIELDS POWERFUL RESULTS ! ********************************************************* Your request to be removed will be processed within 24 hours. DISCLAIMER: Under Bill s.1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th US Congress this letter Cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender includes contact information & a method of removal.To be removed from future mailings just reply with REMOVE in the subject line.Thank you for your kind consideration. From reeza at flex.com Wed Oct 11 22:07:33 2000 From: reeza at flex.com (Reese) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 19:07:33 -1000 Subject: CDR: Re: And you thought Nazi agitprop was controversial? In-Reply-To: <004401c01f2e$5fce82e0$6dd9aec7@authoriu> References: <4.3.0.20000912232935.01c1e360@mail.well.com> <3.0.5.32.20000913064702.03929e70@mrlizard.com> <39BF958C.2299@attglobal.net> <007701c01d97$60d1c000$1501a8c0@ang394> <39BFA106.35D3@attglobal.net> <007d01c01d9c$021afa40$1501a8c0@ang394> <39C05AA5.34AE@attglobal.net> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001011190511.00d23940@flex.com> At 09:02 AM 15/09/00 -0700, T. Bankson Roach wrote: >Nobody today dare say that cramming >your penis up another man's feces filled ass might not be a good health >plan during the AIDS epidemic, which they are horrified to admit started >as a direct result of such filth covered "fun". http://www.plif.com/archive/wc106.gif "Like, whatever man, you know." From raze at nym.alias.net Wed Oct 11 12:37:53 2000 From: raze at nym.alias.net (raze) Date: 11 Oct 2000 19:37:53 -0000 Subject: CDR: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA Message-ID: <20001011193753.18504.qmail@nym.alias.net> My question is this; why would they patent something that is 64 year old technology? This is like the Enigma machine no?! On Wednesday, October 11, Bo Elkjaer Wrote: >Yesterday oct. 10 NSA was granted another patent for a >cryptographic device invented by William Friedman. The >application for the >patent was filed oct. 23 1936 -- 64 years >ago. From kelsey.j at ix.netcom.com Wed Oct 11 17:13:20 2000 From: kelsey.j at ix.netcom.com (John Kelsey) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 20:13:20 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> Message-ID: <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2587 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gbroiles at netbox.com Wed Oct 11 17:29:22 2000 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 20:29:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Think cash In-Reply-To: <004f01c033a4$9651a4c0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20001011171650.02be2b20@mail.speakeasy.org> At 12:59 PM 10/11/00 -0400, Marcel Popescu wrote: >Real-To: "Marcel Popescu" > >An interesting idea has surfaced on the freenet-chat list: is it possible to >build a program that creates some sort of a puzzle, whose answer the >generating computer knows (and can verify), but which can only be answered >by a human being, not by a computer? [Additional requirement: it should be >easy for the human to answer the puzzle.] > >My proposal was to randomly create an image, which should be 1) easily >recognizable by a human (say the image of a pet), but 2) complex enough so >that no known algorithm could "reverse-engineer" this. [You need a >randomly-generated image because otherwise one could build a large database >of all the possible images and the correct answers.] Background information >would also be very useful - see >http://www.digitalblasphemy.com/userg/images/969403123.shtml - it's easy for >a human being to identify the animal in the picture, but (AFAIK) impossible >to write a program to do the same thing. I don't follow the other list you mentioned, so I don't know what the actual problem to solve is - my guess is that this is an anti-bot protection measure, intended to make sure that only human participants can engage in a conversation. If that's the problem - or if it's similar - you'll also need to make the puzzle difficult enough that it's hard to brute-force or solve statistically - let's say you provide the other party with 20 images, 19 cats and 1 dog, and ask them to identify the dog. What keeps a bot from answering the question 20 times? Let's assume the first arms-race countermeasure prevents answering the question more than once by generating puzzles on-the-fly from known cat and dog images - so the bot just picks an answer randomly, and keeps doing that until they hit. Can God create a rock so big he can't lift it? I think you're barking up the wrong tree, thinking about "known algorithms" and such - just like with crypto, the real way in isn't to attack the strong front door, but to just go around it. This sounds like maybe it's essentially a credentialling/ID problem, where you're generating credentials on the fly based on a short-form Turing test. Can you restate the problem so that instead of a Turing test it's a more familiar multi-channel authentication process? (e.g., require new participants to have "introductions" from existing participants, track introductions, and remove the access for accounts found to be bots, or found to have introduced bots .. or similar.) -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 11 20:42:02 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 20:42:02 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001011232039.01c658e0@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001011232039.01c658e0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 11:20 PM -0400 10/11/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/12/0326212&mode=nested > > Bush Links Columbine Massacre to Internet Use > posted by cicero on Wednesday October 11, @10:25PM > from the sounds-a-lot-like-joseph-lieberman dept. > > George W. Bush may have bested Al Gore in tonight's presidential > debate, but it sure wasn't because of the governor's tech-savviness. > Warned the Texas Republican, in response to a gun-control question: > "Columbine spoke to a larger issue, and it's really a matter of > culture. It's a culture that somewhere along the line we begun to > disrespect life, where a child can walk in and have their heart > turn dark as a result of being on the Internet and walk in and > decide to take somebody else's life." It was undeniably a good, > mushy, appeal-to-the-softhearted line, but the sheer schmaltziness of > it is in questionable taste. For instance: Was the Net really to > blame? Shouldn't even a "compassionate conservative" want to hold > miscreants responsible for their own actions? And would the guv have > offered the same warning to millions of Americans if the Columbine > killers had, say, been regulars at the public library? > >Transcript is at: >http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/12/0326212&mode=nested This was a very small, and inconsequential, part of the debate/discussion. Had George Bush called for _Internet licensing_ in some concrete way, comparable to the way Al Gore called for gun licensing, I would be more concerned about Bush's comments. But he did not. Throwing in a line about the Columbine creeps being influenced by the Internet (or by Quake and Doom and other games, or by "The Matrix," or by being spoiled suburban brats) is not the same as calling for unconstitutional abridgments of freedoms. Normally I vote Libertarian. This year I may vote for Bush as a vote for who will do me, us, and the Constitution the lesser damage of the two. (All voting is about bang for the buck, about effectiveness of a vote...an election is not about "voting for the best man," it is instead about minimizing damage.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 11 18:23:07 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 21:23:07 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Think cash In-Reply-To: <004f01c033a4$9651a4c0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> References: <004f01c033a4$9651a4c0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Message-ID: At 12:59 PM -0400 10/11/00, Marcel Popescu wrote: >An interesting idea has surfaced on the freenet-chat list: is it possible to >build a program that creates some sort of a puzzle, whose answer the >generating computer knows (and can verify), but which can only be answered >by a human being, not by a computer? [Additional requirement: it should be >easy for the human to answer the puzzle.] There are not any examples that I know of that are exponentially harder for computers to solve than for humans to solve. There may be examples which polynomially harder for computers to solve (e.g., 1000 800 MHz Pentium IIIs for 3 hours vesus a single human for one second), but this is not interesting from a crypto perspective. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From boo at datashopper.dk Wed Oct 11 12:41:10 2000 From: boo at datashopper.dk (Bo Elkjaer) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 21:41:10 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA In-Reply-To: <20001011193753.18504.qmail@nym.alias.net> Message-ID: On 11 Oct 2000, raze wrote: > My question is this; why would they patent something that is 64 year old technology? This is like the Enigma machine no?! Note that the patent-application was filed in 1936. Obviously they were interested in keeping any info relating to the invention confidential. But theres no need for that anymore, given that the technology in the patent is completely obsolete by now. Yours Bo Elkjaer, Denmark > > On Wednesday, October 11, Bo Elkjaer Wrote: > >Yesterday oct. 10 NSA was granted another patent for a >cryptographic device invented by William Friedman. The >application for the >patent was filed oct. 23 1936 -- 64 years >ago. > >>Bevar naturen: Sylt et egern.<< >>URL: http://www.datashopper.dk/~boo/index.html<< >>ECHELON URL:<< >>http://www1.ekstrabladet.dk/netdetect/echelon.iasp<< From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 11 18:54:42 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 21:54:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: Multi-part security solutions (Was: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) References: <200010120047.UAA13556@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> Message-ID: <39E5199E.882DD6CC@acmenet.net> Meyer Wolfsheim wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Further thoughts on this matter... > > I think that we should escalate the level of liability a potential > attacker has to face when attempting to compromise a security system. I like where you're coming from, but there's one nit: > Cyanide gas enabled car alarms. (I'm flexible on whether it is actually > cyanide, or something better). Currently some cars won't start without a > specific ignition key with an embedded chip. I say, let the car start if > hot-wired... then a few minutes later, automatically roll the windows, > force the locks, and gas the fucker who stole the car. No damage to the > upholstery. Their sphincters would probably release at some point. You still need Scotchguard, or whatever replaced it. Other than that, great ideas. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 11 21:56:56 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 21:56:56 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 10:55 PM -0500 10/11/00, Mac Norton wrote: >Let me see if I understand this. It's okay to blame the Net for >Columbine as long as you don't call for licensing. So it's OK >to blame gunshows for gun murders as long as you don't call >for licensing? Right? I don't like either, but it's a long way from actually passing a law. Those who try to license either guns or speech have, of course, earned liquidation. That part goes without saying. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From boo at datashopper.dk Wed Oct 11 12:58:18 2000 From: boo at datashopper.dk (Bo Elkjaer) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 21:58:18 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA In-Reply-To: <20001011193753.18504.qmail@nym.alias.net> Message-ID: On 11 Oct 2000, raze wrote: On a sidenote: This is a link to a picture of cryptograph-inventor William Friedmans grave. Note the inscription: "knowledge is power". http://www.findagrave.com/pictures/2631.html >>Bevar naturen: Sylt et egern.<< >>URL: http://www.datashopper.dk/~boo/index.html<< >>ECHELON URL:<< >>http://www1.ekstrabladet.dk/netdetect/echelon.iasp<< From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 11 22:07:50 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 22:07:50 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 08:42:02PM -0700 References: <4.3.0.20001011232039.01c658e0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20001011220750.C2974@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 3008 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Wed Oct 11 20:55:38 2000 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 22:55:38 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Let me see if I understand this. It's okay to blame the Net for Columbine as long as you don't call for licensing. So it's OK to blame gunshows for gun murders as long as you don't call for licensing? Right? MacN PS: What part of this debate/discussion was *not* very small, and inconsequential? M On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > > This was a very small, and inconsequential, part of the debate/discussion. > > Had George Bush called for _Internet licensing_ in some concrete way, > comparable to the way Al Gore called for gun licensing, I would be > more concerned about Bush's comments. But he did not. > > Throwing in a line about the Columbine creeps being influenced by the > Internet (or by Quake and Doom and other games, or by "The Matrix," > or by being spoiled suburban brats) is not the same as calling for > unconstitutional abridgments of freedoms. > > Normally I vote Libertarian. This year I may vote for Bush as a vote > for who will do me, us, and the Constitution the lesser damage of the > two. (All voting is about bang for the buck, about effectiveness of a > vote...an election is not about "voting for the best man," it is > instead about minimizing damage.) > > > --Tim May > > > -- > ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- > Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, > ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero > W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, > "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. > > From declan at well.com Wed Oct 11 20:20:47 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 23:20:47 -0400 Subject: CDR: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001011232039.01c658e0@mail.well.com> http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/12/0326212&mode=nested Bush Links Columbine Massacre to Internet Use posted by cicero on Wednesday October 11, @10:25PM from the sounds-a-lot-like-joseph-lieberman dept. George W. Bush may have bested Al Gore in tonight's presidential debate, but it sure wasn't because of the governor's tech-savviness. Warned the Texas Republican, in response to a gun-control question: "Columbine spoke to a larger issue, and it's really a matter of culture. It's a culture that somewhere along the line we begun to disrespect life, where a child can walk in and have their heart turn dark as a result of being on the Internet and walk in and decide to take somebody else's life." It was undeniably a good, mushy, appeal-to-the-softhearted line, but the sheer schmaltziness of it is in questionable taste. For instance: Was the Net really to blame? Shouldn't even a "compassionate conservative" want to hold miscreants responsible for their own actions? And would the guv have offered the same warning to millions of Americans if the Columbine killers had, say, been regulars at the public library? Transcript is at: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/12/0326212&mode=nested From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 11 20:54:10 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 23:54:10 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use References: <4.3.0.20001011232039.01c658e0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <39E5359F.E880AC83@acmenet.net> Tim May wrote: > Throwing in a line about the Columbine creeps being influenced by the > Internet (or by Quake and Doom and other games, or by "The Matrix," > or by being spoiled suburban brats) is not the same as calling for > unconstitutional abridgments of freedoms. I don't recall hearing that the football team was influenced by the Internet or the rest. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From jays at panix.com Wed Oct 11 21:05:41 2000 From: jays at panix.com (Jay Sulzberger) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 00:05:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Excellent ideas. And the place to start is with Arnold Reinhold's improvement to the cyphers. oo--JS. On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Ray Dillinger wrote: > > > On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: > > >The fact that some people put Medeco's in glass doors, doesn't mean > >Medeco should never develop a better lock. > > I don't have a problem with people who manufacture locks. > I have a problem with the people who sell them. > > A sign of irrational fear is when the thing that is the > *symbol* of security -- in this case the lock, or the cipher, > is made very strong -- but used in a way that does not afford > good *actual* security. > > If the fear of being burgled weren't at least partly > irrational, meaning if it were based mostly on experience > rather than mostly on fear -- we'd be seeing doors with > half-inch thick steel plates in them to provide the same > level of security as the medeco lock -- and reinforced > concrete walls to provide the same level of security as > the door. > > Ditto ciphers. A strong cipher is like that Medeco > lock, or even better - but if the "door" is a dumb > key management policy, or the key is easily guessable, > then what has been gained? > > Because what is a lock, really? It makes it harder to > get in *without breaking anything*. But actual burglars > could really care less whether they break some of your > stuff -- provided it's stuff they can't steal. So if > actual burglars were as common as the people who sell > these fancy locks tend to make out in their sales pitches, > most folks would know, from experience, that burglars > who break a window or a door are far more common than > burglars who pick a lock -- and would be demanding > *actual* security, meaning windows, doors and walls made > of unbreakable stuff, rather than just *symbolic* security, > of a strong lock or a strong cipher. > > If you want to propose a "Paranoid Encryption Standard", > IE, a system for people who actually *DO* expect people > to spend several million bucks and hundreds of man-years > and thousands of CPU-years trying to break it, then it's > going to have to encompass a hell of a lot more than > ciphers. Start with physical machine security -- put > the box in a concrete bunker with armed guards, give it > a flat-panel monitor and roll your own drivers and video > hardware. Stick a thermite grenade with a photosensitive > fuse in the hard drive box. Make a continuous circuit > through all the case components, that will detect anybody > taking the case off, and blow the HD if the circuit's > broken. Do a couple dozen other things along this line, > and you'll have the physical security thing covered about > as well as your cipher protects the data. > > But you're not through yet -- you've got the lock and the > door, but burglars can still come in through the windows > and the walls. You've got to do some real serious data > security as well. > > First of all, nothing unencrypted is EVER written to the > hard drive except a bootstrap loader that prompts for a > cipher key. When it gets the cipher key, it reads and > attempts to unencrypt the rest of the boot record. > > There is NO swap partition, and no swapping OS is to be used. > > The system computes a new cipher key every day using a > cryptographically strong random number generator, and notifies > you of it in a pencil-and-paper cipher that you can solve. > (on high-entropy binary data, pencil-and-paper ciphers are > actually quite strong) That's the key you would need to > use the following day. If you don't log on for one day, > you will not have the key for the following day, period. > Thus, if someone seizes your box and you can hold out for > *one* day, the data is GONE. > > But the burglars can still come in, maybe, through the roof. > > So just to make sure of it, put a timer in there that blows > the HD if it's ever been more than 24 hours since you were > last logged on. > > *There's* your paranoid encryption standard. Use blowfish for > the cipher, and the cipher won't be the weakest point. > > Bear > > > From thannon19 at melrun.org Wed Oct 11 22:40:36 2000 From: thannon19 at melrun.org (thannon19 at melrun.org) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 00:40:36 -0500 Subject: CDR: Looking for a new car!!!!! Message-ID: <1bfm3s7jvs8s8kdk3n.31nfpgdpyh0d@mail.melrun.org> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 2398 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kawen123 at aol.com Thu Oct 12 01:50:59 2000 From: kawen123 at aol.com (kawen123 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 01:50:59 Subject: CDR: FREE VACATION!!!!! Message-ID: <321.588585.872520@aol.com> NEED TO GETAWAY??? I would like to take a minute to offer you a FREE VACATION!!!!! Just take a moment and click the link below (or copy to your browser) http://reports.emarketplacedirect.com/pages/1095814.html and visit my website. I would like to give you details on your FREE VACATION and I would like to share with you my excitement for signing up with E-Marketplace Direct. I am finding that the FREE information has proven to me to have astounding results. I am getting more hits on my website than I ever imagined since I started using these tools. If you are a web beginner, or home office hero I hope you find the FREE information a great asset to your desire to achieve your dreams. Let nothing stand in your way. The WORLD is literally at your fingertips. PLEASE take advantage of the FREE VACATION offer. You Are Just a Click Away From Some Serious Cash! http://reports.emarketplacedirect.com/pages/1095814.html From tgardner23 at melrun.org Thu Oct 12 00:08:15 2000 From: tgardner23 at melrun.org (tgardner23 at melrun.org) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 02:08:15 -0500 Subject: CDR: FREE vacation getaway! Message-ID: <233a5y87.407q1kfc78@mail.melrun.org> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 3291 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kelsey.j at ix.netcom.com Thu Oct 12 00:19:17 2000 From: kelsey.j at ix.netcom.com (John Kelsey) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 03:19:17 -0400 Subject: Multi-part security solutions (Was: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: <200010120008.UAA13402@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> Message-ID: <4.1.20001012025607.0099b6c0@pop.ix.netcom.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2896 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Amy_Amber2 at excite.com Thu Oct 12 04:01:12 2000 From: Amy_Amber2 at excite.com (Amy_Amber2 at excite.com) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 04:01:12 Subject: #1 INTERNET MARKETING SOLUTION 0118 Message-ID: <736.222523.151361@excite.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4289 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 12 01:11:28 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 04:11:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Think cash In-Reply-To: >> Marcel Popescu[SMTP:mdpopescu at geocities.com] wrote: >> My proposal was to randomly create an image, which should be 1) easily >> recognizable by a human (say the image of a pet), but 2) complex enough so >> that no known algorithm could "reverse-engineer" this. [You need a >> randomly-generated image because otherwise one could build a large >> database of all the possible images and the correct answers.] >> Background information would also be very useful - see >> http://www.digitalblasphemy.com/userg/images/969403123.shtml - it's easy >> for a human being to identify the animal in the picture, but (AFAIK) >> impossible to write a program to do the same thing. Ideas? At 01:53 PM 10/11/00 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: >You refer the the problem of recognizing a photo of an animal. >It used to be said that no computer program could reliably >distinguish between a dog and a cat, but I'm not sure that's >the case since the development of neural networks. Blind humans aren't always good at recognizing screen images. Neural networks are good at recognizing things. Sometimes more precisely defined algorithms are good too. Some examples of recognition systems - you can look in the archives for pointers to the UCBerkeley "Naked People Finder", which does a reasonably accurate job of distinguishing whether pictures on the internet contain naked people. The people who did the research on that also designed the "Incredible Horse Finder", which identifies horse pictures on the net. I remember that those systems did a lot of modelling; I don't remember if they also did neural nets or not. If they wanted to describe shapes of dogs and cats and differentiate between them, it would be relatively doable. There's also a company out there that does "passfaces" - they pop up 9 pictures of people's faces, and you identify which one is in the set that's you password-equivalent. They do about 4 rounds of this, with random sets of faces; it's closer to a PIN than a real passphrase in strength, because they thought that was enough for their problem space. An interesting aspect of it is that humans are very good at recognizing faces, but not usually that good at describing them, so it's hard to give somebody else your passface set. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Thu Oct 12 04:19:29 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 07:19:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Think cash In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Trei, Peter wrote: >by a computer are the killers. Any problem which one computer >can create, and solve, can also be solved by another. Not true. One example from the theory of computation: given a finite set of 3x3 matrices, determine whether some finite matrix product of them equals zero (i.e. repetition and reordering is allowed). This is a noncomputable problem, even when we know that all such series can be computer generated and a given solution can be easily verified. Sort of cracked me when I first found it. Naturally this particular problem isn't suitable for human consumption, like the original mail required. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From sfurlong at acmenet.net Thu Oct 12 06:25:24 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:25:24 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA References: Message-ID: <39E5BB85.663B74D3@acmenet.net> Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Bo Elkjaer wrote: > > >Note that the patent-application was filed in 1936. Obviously they were > >interested in keeping any info relating to the invention confidential. But > >theres no need for that anymore, given that the technology in the patent > >is completely obsolete by now. > > So... How do you defend such a patent? How does this sort of thing mesh with > the idea of patents as a reward for disclosure? The inventor worked for the NSA (or, rather NSA's predecessors) and the inventions were classified "for national security". In other words, it's for the chiiiildren. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 12 09:31:24 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:31:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 2:23 PM +0300 10/12/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Bo Elkjaer wrote: > >>Note that the patent-application was filed in 1936. Obviously they were >>interested in keeping any info relating to the invention confidential. But >>theres no need for that anymore, given that the technology in the patent >>is completely obsolete by now. > >So... How do you defend such a patent? How does this sort of thing mesh with >the idea of patents as a reward for disclosure? > There is no defense of such patents. You are correct that patents are intended to encourage disclosure and yet protect inventors for some limited period. (Not all of us even support patents. Namely, ideas are just ideas. Making it illegal for some to use ideas, which they may well have thought of on their own, is thought control. In a crypto anarchic society, patents will mostly be moot.) Granting patents to work done in the 1930s is bizarre. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From marcel at aiurea.com Thu Oct 12 06:49:34 2000 From: marcel at aiurea.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:49:34 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Think cash References: <5.0.0.25.2.20001011171650.02be2b20@mail.speakeasy.org> Message-ID: <00f201c03453$15198da0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Thu Oct 12 07:12:42 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 10:12:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regio Message-ID: > ---------- > Lucky Green[SMTP:shamrock at cypherpunks.to] wrote: > Sunder wrote, quoting > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13863.html > > > > > [...] > > It's my understanding that TV detector vans work by picking up > > the radiation emitted by cathode ray tube TVs - which should mean > > that, if you're rich enough to run an LCD monitor they'll never > > know you're a secret Paxman admirer. > > A popular, but false, myth. The video cards radiate more than the CRT's. > Laptops tend to be the worst offenders. > > --Lucky Green > Yep. Most laptops have a video card for attaching an external monitor, with an unshielded port - they thus spray out monitor-driving RF signals while they run, regardless of whether there is a monitor out there to receive them. Of course, a *good* laptop design would power off the video card if it's not in use, to extend battery life if nothing else. I don't know if they do this. One of my home systems is a Compaq desktop with an LCD screen. It does *not* use a standard video cable: there is a pure digital interface for the LCD. (I've never investigated as to whether I can seperately remove the SVGA card or interface). Peter Trei From mmotyka at lsil.com Thu Oct 12 10:27:50 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (Michael Motyka) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 10:27:50 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use Message-ID: <39E5F496.1A32B4F@lsil.com> G.W.Bush is mentally negligible. He's fully capable of linking Scooby Doo to the Columbine Massacre. And while right-wingers just attack the BOR from a different angle than left-wingers, Bush **may** be the minimal damage choice this time around. It's not a pretty picture. From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 12 10:29:53 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 10:29:53 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use In-Reply-To: <00101212143600.09245@reality.eng.savvis.net> References: <4.3.0.20001011232039.01c658e0@mail.well.com> <00101212143600.09245@reality.eng.savvis.net> Message-ID: At 12:14 PM -0500 10/12/00, Jim Burnes wrote: >On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > >> >> Normally I vote Libertarian. This year I may vote for Bush as a vote >> for who will do me, us, and the Constitution the lesser damage of the >> two. (All voting is about bang for the buck, about effectiveness of a >> vote...an election is not about "voting for the best man," it is >> instead about minimizing damage.) >> >> >> --Tim May > >Actually, your vote should be about getting what you want, not what >you don't want. The quickest way to do that now is to consistently vote >for the worst possible candidate. Possibly. All votes are about "cost/benefit" issues. The cost of voting, the benefits of voting, and further subdivided into the benefits of voting for various candidates. In most cases, the costs of voting exceed any expected benefits. Merely travelling to a polling place and spending half an hour or so voting is a cost greater than the benefits. Spending tens of hours watching news coverage of the election process is in a different league of wasted effort altogether. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From drt at un.bewaff.net Thu Oct 12 01:35:03 2000 From: drt at un.bewaff.net (Doobee R. Tzeck) Date: 12 Oct 2000 10:35:03 +0200 Subject: CDR:Multi-part security solutions (Was: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: Meyer Wolfsheim's message of "Wed, 11 Oct 2000 16:57:09 -0700 (PDT)" References: <200010120009.UAA13407@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> Message-ID: <87snq278z6.fsf@c0re.bewaff.net> Meyer Wolfsheim writes: > Most burglar aren't going to spend the time picking your locks, > regardless of what you have installed. The James Bond approach of sticking > a pick in a lock (sans tension wrench), wiggling it a half a second, and > then opening the door is pure fantasy. Lock picking, even for a very > seasoned locksmith, takes more time than can be afforded in most cases. In Germany there is a Group calling themselvs "Sportenthusiasts of Lockpicking" - http://www.ssdev.de/ They have a tournament every year at the CCC Congress and be assured they open nearly every Lock in James Bond Time. drt -- Aber laß mich dich gleich mal vor der Zeitverschwendung deines Lebens bewahren: wenn du mit diesem Problem schon überfordert bist, ist Assembler nichts für dich. Denn da muß man logisch denken und Probleme selbständig lösen, die sonst ein Compiler für einen löst. ---Felix von Leitner http://koeln.ccc.de/~drt/ From dsr at bbn.com Thu Oct 12 07:42:50 2000 From: dsr at bbn.com (-dsr-) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 10:42:50 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regio In-Reply-To: ; from ptrei@rsasecurity.com on Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 10:12:42AM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20001012104148.C464@bbn.com> On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 10:12:42AM -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: > > Yep. Most laptops have a video card for attaching an external monitor, > with an unshielded port - they thus spray out monitor-driving RF signals > while they run, regardless of whether there is a monitor out there to > receive them. > > Of course, a *good* laptop design would power off the video card if it's > not in use, to extend battery life if nothing else. I don't know if they do > this. All the laptops I've used in the last 6 years (IBM, Compaq, Dell) have had built-in hotkeys to switch from LCD, LCD+CRT, CRT. Monitors attached to the VGA port while the laptops were in LCD-only mode consistently blinked their messages for "No video source". APM (which virtually all current PCs support) allows for monitor blanking, suspend, and powerdown. XFree86 and Windows support these functions. -dsr- From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 12 10:46:01 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 10:46:01 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Make legal threats, go to jail for 20 years In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001012124519.01ebe020@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001012124519.01ebe020@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 12:46 PM -0400 10/12/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >This is from a bill that both the House and Senate passed (yesterday): > >Whoever knowingly provides or obtains the labor or services of a >person...by means of the abuse or threatened abuse of law or the >legal process, >shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. > >URL: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.03244: > >I can imagine some abuses of this, in workplace situations or divorce cases... As Jim Burnes said in his post this morning, increasing fascism may be a Good Thing. (Though I've been watching the escalation of fascism for 35+ years and it hasn't seemed to have brought us any closer to the point where patriots will rise up and take back their country. A few nests of statists blown up, a few corrupt politicians assassinated, but not much else.) As for this new law, it's par for the course. It's Yet Another Law to pressure the proles with. Used as a bargaining chip. Tell me, anyone, will Bill Clinton ever face _any_ actual prison time for lying to a court, for suborning perjury by his staff, for threatening Kathleeen Willey and others? Is anyone in the White House facing imprisonment for illegally obtaining and using confidential FBI files for political purposes? The Feds are anxious to prosecute poltical opponents for merely obtaining Social Security Numbers illegally, but do nothing when the White House does it. (And what of the U.S. Marshal's service releasing the SSN of _me_ and including innuendo that I am planning to assassinate a federal judge? Believe me, when this happened I went on high alert. I figured a set up raid was coming.) This new law cited above, one of thousands, will be used precisely by the Power Elite to suppress their enemies. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 12 08:17:04 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 11:17:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001012080911.0091a6d0@pop.sprynet.com> At 11:56 PM 10/11/00 -0400, Mac Norton wrote: >Let me see if I understand this. It's okay to blame the Net for >Columbine as long as you don't call for licensing. So it's OK >to blame gunshows for gun murders as long as you don't call >for licensing? Right? >MacN You can 'blame' anyone for anything anytime you don't like their message.. doesn't mean you can control it with state violence.. e.g., religion, hollywood, erotica, nra, nambla, Democratic party, kkk, teletubbies, etc. Ie, your 'blame' is as cheap as your words. Pretty simple, really: sticks and stones can break your bones, but bits will never hurt you. (Unless you're a content producer getting napsterized, but that's another thread :-) From tom at ricardo.de Thu Oct 12 08:37:37 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 11:37:37 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regio References: Message-ID: <39E5D9A5.8765EA98@ricardo.de> "Trei, Peter" wrote: > Of course, a *good* laptop design would power off the video card if it's > not in use, to extend battery life if nothing else. I don't know if they do > this. they do. my thinkpad has a config option where you can turn the external display on and off. From paul at cluefactory.org.uk Thu Oct 12 03:48:35 2000 From: paul at cluefactory.org.uk (Paul Crowley) Date: 12 Oct 2000 11:48:35 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Multi-part security solutions (Was: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: Meyer Wolfsheim's message of "Wed, 11 Oct 2000 16:57:09 -0700 (PDT)" References: <200010120008.UAA13402@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> Message-ID: <871yxm5o8s.fsf@hedonism.subnet.hedonism.cluefactory.org.uk> Meyer Wolfsheim writes: > The only reasons I see for having a security system (be it an encryption > product, or a physical access device) with a large discrepancy in the level > of security that the individual components provide is either: [snip reasons a, b and c] I'm sure you've thought of this, but there's also a reason (d): because the most convenient component for a particular application is vastly more secure than you need. When using a cipher as a component, you might as well use a ludicrously strong one like Rijndael or Blowfish, because there's nothing to be gained from using a weaker one. Good locks are more expensive than bad ones, but strong crypto is free. -- __ \/ o\ Employ me! Cryptology, security, Perl, Linux, TCP/IP, and smarts. /\__/ paul at cluefactory.org.uk http://www.cluefactory.org.uk/paul/cv/ From jamesd at echeque.com Thu Oct 12 08:54:11 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 11:54:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Think cash In-Reply-To: <004f01c033a4$9651a4c0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001012080516.01985378@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 12:59 PM 10/11/2000 -0400, Marcel Popescu wrote: > An interesting idea has surfaced on the freenet-chat list: is it possible to > build a program that creates some sort of a puzzle, whose answer the > generating computer knows (and can verify), but which can only be answered > by a human being, not by a computer? [Additional requirement: it should be > easy for the human to answer the puzzle.] Origami world. Computer generates a random 3D object out of large polygons with fairly sharp angles of contact, subject to various limits on the way in which the object is generated. Displays 2D image of 3D object. Human infers 3D object from 2D image, infers unseen portions of the image from rules by which the 3D image is generated -- for example that the object must make sense mechanically -- that it should be stable resting on a plane. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG FsI/AmqwnRejJ3WVIhX/j+c0WMncAQoIrw1mt1Zt 4wdSf8gtla5o0J0s/JI1xGJQQmUEc8MrdpkaXGURD From Free.E.Book.traffic.20000 at unbounded.com Thu Oct 12 12:04:36 2000 From: Free.E.Book.traffic.20000 at unbounded.com (Free.E.Book.traffic.20000 at unbounded.com) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 12:04:36 Subject: CDR: Satellite promotion with direct email Message-ID: <209.577885.583412@Promotion> You are invited to view our free E Book on "How to Promote your Satellite Business Through Direct Email" See: http://63.82.144.35/327/4738756838489.html Thank You To be removed from further mailings send a bank email to traffic2000 at unbounded.com with "remove" in the subject. --------------------------------------------------------------- Please report any internet abuse to abusecop at mail.ru From juicy at melontraffickers.com Thu Oct 12 12:10:11 2000 From: juicy at melontraffickers.com (A. Melon) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 12:10:11 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine Message-ID: Tim May wimps out: > Normally I vote Libertarian. This year I may vote for Bush as a vote > for who will do me, us, and the Constitution the lesser damage of the > two. (All voting is about bang for the buck, about effectiveness of a > vote...an election is not about "voting for the best man," it is > instead about minimizing damage.) Spoken like a true simp-wimp. A vote for *either* algore or gwbush is a direct vote for the New World Order. No ifs, ands, or buts. They are both trilateralists, scumbag bush even went the same Skull&Bones route his father did, his grandfather did, etc. There is no difference, Nader is right, it's TweedleDum & TweedleDee, Dumb & Dumber. Vote Nader -- at least he's honest. And don't give us all that horseshit about Nader=commutarian. Just because he's pro-labor and anti- megacorp doesn't make him a socialist, or commu-anything. You've shown your true colors, Tim -- you're just a simp-wimp under the skin. Vote for Bush and the NWO, commieboy. From jburnes at savvis.net Thu Oct 12 10:14:36 2000 From: jburnes at savvis.net (Jim Burnes) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 12:14:36 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001011232039.01c658e0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <00101212143600.09245@reality.eng.savvis.net> On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > > Normally I vote Libertarian. This year I may vote for Bush as a vote > for who will do me, us, and the Constitution the lesser damage of the > two. (All voting is about bang for the buck, about effectiveness of a > vote...an election is not about "voting for the best man," it is > instead about minimizing damage.) > > > --Tim May Actually, your vote should be about getting what you want, not what you don't want. The quickest way to do that now is to consistently vote for the worst possible candidate. Only by maximally accellerating the downward spiral this country has been in for 70 years or more will the sheeple start to wake up. Like I've said before. When you have alcohol poisoning the best thing to do is dump your stomach contents. Get the poison out. You won't do it by gradually falling asleep and dying from it. Bring on the socio/fascist state. I'd like Stalinist communism by 10am tomorrow morning please. I know that would wake at least 10% up. Its the steady march of gradualism that is killing this country. If our great grandfathers went into suspended animation in 1910 and were awakened now they would be in shock. Not just from the technology, but with the willingness with which we tolerate our enslavement. jim -- Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From declan at well.com Thu Oct 12 09:46:38 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 12:46:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: Make legal threats, go to jail for 20 years Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001012124519.01ebe020@mail.well.com> This is from a bill that both the House and Senate passed (yesterday): Whoever knowingly provides or obtains the labor or services of a person...by means of the abuse or threatened abuse of law or the legal process, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. URL: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.03244: I can imagine some abuses of this, in workplace situations or divorce cases... -Declan From anonymous at openpgp.net Thu Oct 12 10:05:57 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 13:05:57 -0400 Subject: CDR: simonsingh on bbc Message-ID: I am currently presenting a TV series for Channel 4 in Britain, entitled The Science of Secrecy. It airs on Thursday nights at either 9.00 or 9.30pm until November 2. The final programme includes an exclusive interview with Clifford Cocks, the secret co-inventor of RSA. This is the first time that a British Government cryptographer has been permitted to talk about his work. Details of the series can be found on the Channel 4 website The series is accompanied by a book entitled The Science of Secrecy. Please note, this is an adaptation of The Code Book, and so it will not be of interest to anybody who has already read The Code Book. It has the advantage of following the series more closely and contains more illustrations. Hence, I would certainly recommend it to anybody who has not read The Code Book, and who wants to learn more about cryptography having watched the TV series. I hope that the TV series will be shown overseas, but as yet there are no plans to do this. http://www.simonsingh.com/cipher.htm From anonymous at openpgp.net Thu Oct 12 10:10:32 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 13:10:32 -0400 Subject: CDR: Stu Baker making an ass of himself at Surveillance by Desgn Message-ID: <059102cda0c02e7d327dbc1603d36528@mixmaster.ceti.pl> In http://heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/konf/8847/1.html Mr Baker, who served as the General Counsel (senior lawyer) of the U.S. National Security Agency from 1992-1994, began his speech in "anonymous" disguise, wearing a large black cycle mask and a baseball cap turned back to front. He made a series of rude remarks about himself and others, in an attempt to show the dangers of what he called "the anonymity industry". The audience appeared baffled by his conduct. Does anyone have pictures online? ...later... Former NSA counsel Stuart Baker cited ZKS a week later as a leading member of the "anonymity industry" and claimed "in the long term, law enforcement will find ways to make anonymity partial". Companies like ZKS, he threatened, could in some countries face civil discovery suits, or even "could be charged with complicity in crime". Its "something to keep your eyes on", he added with apparent enthusiasm. We know who we should keep an eye on, Stu baby From Knaps24 at aol.com Thu Oct 12 10:22:16 2000 From: Knaps24 at aol.com (Knaps24 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 13:22:16 EDT Subject: CDR: stats Message-ID: would you be able to send me statistics on how many people are killed by police officer fire in a year? thank you knaps24 From vlynch at predictit.com Thu Oct 12 10:37:09 2000 From: vlynch at predictit.com (Vanessa Lynch) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 13:37:09 -0400 Subject: CDR: take me off ur list thank you! Message-ID: Vanessa Lynch Manager, Partner Services Predict It, Inc. P 212.217.1223 E vlynch at predicit.com From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Thu Oct 12 10:43:52 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 13:43:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Make legal threats, go to jail for 20 years cpunk Message-ID: > Declan McCullagh[SMTP:declan at well.com] wrote: > > This is from a bill that both the House and Senate passed (yesterday): > > Whoever knowingly provides or obtains the labor or services of a > person...by means of the abuse or threatened abuse of law or the legal > process, > shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or > both. > > URL: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.03244: > > I can imagine some abuses of this, in workplace situations or divorce > cases... > > -Declan > While almost any law can be abused, I think you'd need a really odd situation for normal people to be able to use this one abusively. For civilians, as far as I can see, it means that filing a totally bogus SLAPP suit, or (for example) threatening to make false reports of child abuse to get leverage in a divorce are now punishable beyond what they already are. Let us remember who the greatest abusers of law and the legal process are: LEAs and prosecutors. It appears to me that this law is far more a curb on the behaviour of bad cops and over-zealous DAs than anyone else. DAs too often obtain false testimony against third parties or plea bargains by threatening trumped-up charges. Corrupt cops can similarly threaten false or totally overblown charges to obtain services from the weak and defenseless. I suspect that in so far as far as any law can be considered 'good' this is one of the less bad ones. Of course, I rejoice that IANAL. Peter Trei From anonymous at openpgp.net Thu Oct 12 10:50:26 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 13:50:26 -0400 Subject: CDR: thank you Mr. Bin Laden Message-ID: Historical and current counter-US activities seem to be focussing more on hitting the .mil (and spyhqHHHembassies) vs. airlines. Members of the flying public appreciate your new, more-to-the-point focus, Osama, and your PR consultant should be praised. See you in Utah... By The Associated Press A look at recent terrorist attacks against United States interests. July 8, 1998 -- U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania bombed, killing 224 people, 12 of whom were Americans. June 25, 1996 -- Truck bomb explodes outside the Khobar Towers housing complex near Dharan, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 Americans and injuring more than 500 Americans and Saudis. Nov. 13, 1995 -- Car bomb detonates at a U.S. military headquarters in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, killing five Americans. Sept. 13, 1995 -- Rocket-propelled grenade pierces wall of U.S. Embassy in Moscow, but causes no injuries. Dec. 21, 1988 -- Pan Am Boeing 747 explodes over Lockerbie, Scotland on a flight from London to New York, killing 270 people. Sept. 5, 1986 -- Hijackers seize Pan Am jumbo jet carrying 358 people at Karachi Airport. Twenty people killed when security forces storm the plane. April 2, 1986 -- Four Americans killed when a bomb under a seat explodes on a TWA airliner en route from Rome to Athens. June 14, 1985 -- Shiite gunmen seize a TWA airliner and forced it to Beirut, Lebanon. U.S. Navy diver was killed and 39 Americans held hostage for 17 days. Sept. 20, 1984 -- Car bomb at U.S. Embassy annex in east Beirut, Lebanon kills 16 and injures the ambassador. Dec. 12, 1983 -- Shiite extremists set off car bombs in front of the U.S. and French embassies in Kuwait City, killing five people and wounding 86. Oct. 23, 1983 -- Shiite suicide bomber blows up U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, killing 241 Americans. April 18, 1983 -- Suicide car-bomber blows up U.S. Embassy in Beirut, killing 17 Americans. Nov. 4, 1979 -- Islamic students storm U.S. Embassy in Tehran, Iran, holding 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Thu Oct 12 04:23:04 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 14:23:04 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Bo Elkjaer wrote: >Note that the patent-application was filed in 1936. Obviously they were >interested in keeping any info relating to the invention confidential. But >theres no need for that anymore, given that the technology in the patent >is completely obsolete by now. So... How do you defend such a patent? How does this sort of thing mesh with the idea of patents as a reward for disclosure? Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From mikefreeman at hushmail.com Thu Oct 12 11:26:04 2000 From: mikefreeman at hushmail.com (mikefreeman at hushmail.com) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 14:26:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: britan to allow insurers to do genetic test for checking hereditary traits Message-ID: <200010121824.LAA12461@user1.hushmail.com> --Hushpart_boundary_jxjHqnFohYQDqoYSiPrCarsndlHbIuEg Content-type: text/plain http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_968000/968443.stm --Hushpart_boundary_jxjHqnFohYQDqoYSiPrCarsndlHbIuEg-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: If you are not using HushMail, this message could have been read easily by the many people who have access to your open personal email messages. Get your FREE, totally secure email address at http://www.hushmail.com. From ndi at eudoramail.com Thu Oct 12 00:56:25 2000 From: ndi at eudoramail.com (fran ndi ndi) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 14:56:25 +0700 Subject: CDR: Keyboard & Mouse Recorder Message-ID: Does anyone know where I can get a keyboard recorder for WIN95 and OS/2 and free (no paY) I would like to record the mouse and keyboard strokes. Then re-run the host program at a pre-determined time. Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com From ravage at ssz.com Thu Oct 12 16:09:00 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 18:09:00 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: <39DA5C01.7E77FEA2@acmenet.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > < the traffic be encrypted>> > Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes. This subthread came along > because some people have noticed that anonymous remailers are used for > an awful lot of spam. Peter Trei proposed that remailers could pass > along only encrypted mail. My understanding was that Alice, the > message's author, would encrypt the message with Bob's public key; Bob > is the end recipient: a person or a mailing list or whatever. Alice > would send the message through Ramona, the anonymous remailer. Ramona is > requiring that messages be encrypted as a means of filtering out spam. > Ramona does not need to know Bob's public or private keys; Ramona cares > only that the message is encrypted. So? I set up a email address that I offer to the spammers to sign up to the anonymous remailers and then it proxies their email into the encrypted network. I figure this baby'll stop'em for about six months. For it to really stop spam it would need to be well distributed. So how do you offset the increased sys admin issues this raises? Then there is the old key management problem. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From rah at shipwright.com Thu Oct 12 10:13:42 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 18:13:42 +0100 Subject: CDR: Swedish Team Cracks Tough Computer Codes (was Re: NewsScan Daily, 12 October 2000 ("Above The Fold")) In-Reply-To: <200010121533.LAA32592@marcella.ecarm.org> References: <200010121533.LAA32592@marcella.ecarm.org> Message-ID: They must mean RSA512, of course. Given various people's pings to me about the death of 128-bit RC4, :-), someone should tell the New York Times, and others, about the difference between symmetric and asymmetric ciphers... Cheers, RAH At 9:12 AM -0700 on 10/12/00, NewsScan wrote: > SWEDISH TEAM CRACKS TOUGH COMPUTER CODES > A team of Swedish computer enthusiasts has succeeded in deciphering 10 > increasingly difficult codes presented by author Simon Singh in his > bestseller, "The Code Book." Singh, who has a doctorate in physics at > Cambridge University in the U.K., took two years to develop the brain > teasers with Dr. Paul Leyland, who works for Microsoft in Cambridge. The > codes, which took the Swedes the equivalent of 70 years of computer time to > decrypt, ranged from ciphers dating back to ancient Greece through the > famed Nazi Enigma code machine used in World War II. The team was awarded a > check for $15,000 for their efforts. Team leader Fredrik Almgren said the > task was extremely daunting and that he and his fellow scientists were > tempted to abandon the effort several times: "The first stages were very > simple but at one point we thought we wouldn't get any further than stage > eight. When you do come to the 10th stage it is a question of heavy > mathematics and rather difficult algorithms that I don't even claim to > understand myself." (Reuters/New York Times 12 Oct 2000) > http://partners.nytimes.com/2000/10/12/technology/12R-CODE2.html -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From ravage at ssz.com Thu Oct 12 16:21:49 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 18:21:49 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001003191328.00a2bde0@idiom.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Bill Stewart wrote: > At 05:00 PM 10/3/00 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: > > >A remailer should do NO content checking, ever. > >It's ONLY job is to route and destroy traffic analysis. > > No, its ONLY job is to do whatever the operator says it will do. Not really, the thing may not do what the operator says or necessarily in the way they may say. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 12 18:27:04 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 18:27:04 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Multi-part security solutions (Was: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: References: <200010120009.UAA13407@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> <200010120009.UAA13407@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001012182704.00a1a210@idiom.com> At 06:11 PM 10/11/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: >A Medeco lock on a glass door may seem crazy, but a pickable lock on >a glass door means those who know how to pick locks--like cops who >have access to lock guns--can enter at will without any persistent >evidence of their intrusion. Intrusion detection is important. Also, if it doesn't cost significantly more, you might as well use the Medeco lock on the glass door, or use 128-bit RC4 instead of 40-bit. Besides, the Medeco lock is probably more durable than the El Cheapo, and less likely to jam in an unlocked position. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 12 18:36:07 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 18:36:07 -0700 Subject: CDR: RE: Make legal threats, go to jail for 20 years cpunk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001012183607.00a1e100@idiom.com> >> Declan McCullagh[SMTP:declan at well.com] wrote: >> This is from a bill that both the House and Senate passed (yesterday): >> >> Whoever knowingly provides or obtains the labor or services of a >> person...by means of the abuse or threatened abuse of law or the legal >> process, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more >> than 20 years, or both. >> URL: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.03244: >> I can imagine some abuses of this, in workplace situations or divorce >> cases... At 01:43 PM 10/12/00 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: >While almost any law can be abused, I think you'd need a really >odd situation for normal people to be able to use this one abusively. Blackmail was already illegal; this just makes some kinds of blackmail a Federal crime with enhanced penalties, which I'm not convinced is particularly necessary. The kind of abuse that's been in the papers that's probably what this law is designed to make a show of opposing is illegal immigrants being kept in indentured servitude by the coyotes who import them. It's mostly Asians working in the garment industry in California, but there are probably other large groups like this as well. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 12 18:10:10 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:10:10 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD In-Reply-To: References: <007101c0335c$24316a80$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001012180920.0098b5f0@idiom.com> Here's an empirical result, if we can ignore theory a minute :-) A few years ago, I was using my laptop a few feet away from my parents' TV set, and text from my laptop showed up on the screen. It was shredded into a couple of pieces, because the sync was hosed, but it was quite identifiable as my text, so a spook with good equipment shouldn't have much trouble reading it. If you want more details, dredge the cypherpunks archives. One of the issues is that most laptops have video ports on the back to allow you to plug in real monitors, and if you don't have anything plugged in, they're sitting there with raw pins pointing out. I'm not sure if my PC was in "use both displays" mode or "only use the LCD" mode - most laptops don't have an indicator other than "the LCD is dark"... Among other things, most laptops are designed so that the PC model of display card interface is maintained, so it's transparent to software that's poking around where it shouldn't. Palmtops probably behave differently, but I wouldn't trust them either. At 11:31 AM 10/11/00 -0400, Ray Dillinger wrote: >On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, jim bell wrote: > >>> A popular, but false, myth. The video cards radiate more than the CRT's. >>> Laptops tend to be the worst offenders. >>> --Lucky Green >> >>As to the video cards... >>Sorry, Lucky, but you're going to have to support this a little better. >>Emissions are a function of the signal voltage in a conductor, and the >>extent that this conductor is free to emit. > >Given that a laptop uses an LCD display, there's really no good >reason, electronically speaking, why its video hardware should >have to do the ((scan+horizontal_retrace)*+vertical_retrace) >sequence that the technology for getting a coherent signal >relies upon. > >But the fact is, laptop hardware does write bits in a predefined >order, (in fact the same order as CRT-based machines) so it's a >worthwhile question whether anyone can figure the order and pick >up the emissions from the video hardware. > >This looks like the sort of thing that can be resolved by experiment >though; Anybody got enough DSP smarts to put an induction coil next >to a laptop monitor and *see* whether they can read the darn thing? > >Also, it looks like the sort of thing that could be designed around. >If someone were building a "secure laptop" they could make a video >system and drivers that wrote the bits in a different, randomized >order each time, and which only wrote the changed bits. If anybody >is actually making a product like this, it would be a strong >indication that *somebody* with money to spend on R&D considers >it a valid threat model, because nobody makes products without a >market. > > Bear > > > > > > > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From limitln at cooptel.qc.ca Thu Oct 12 19:13:41 2000 From: limitln at cooptel.qc.ca (Vincent Labrecque) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:13:41 -0500 Subject: CDR: test, ignore Message-ID: <20001012211341.C27625@cooptel.qc.ca> From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Thu Oct 12 19:22:36 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 22:22:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD regions Message-ID: > On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, jim bell wrote: > > >> A popular, but false, myth. The video cards radiate more than > the CRT's. > >> Laptops tend to be the worst offenders. > >> > >> --Lucky Green > > > >As to the video cards... > >Sorry, Lucky, but you're going to have to support this a little better. > >Emissions are a function of the signal voltage in a conductor, and the > >extent that this conductor is free to emit. NP. There is plenty of conductor in a laptop. What tends to be missing, though, is shielding. In particular, laptops tend to have plastic cases. Without a metal case, even a badly designed, at all, a little signal goes a long way. You also may wish to inquire with Ross Anderson or Markus Kuhn what type of computer their group uses for the van Eck demos and why. Last I talked about this with them, it was a laptop. Have fun, --Lucky Green "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 12 20:36:38 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 23:36:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001012202621.0092e9a0@pop.sprynet.com> At 12:36 PM 10/12/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: >In a crypto anarchic >society, patents will mostly be moot.) Really? If you have a factory, or open a virtual storefront, you have a public (meat, seizable) presence. Patents are enforced by guns against locatable assets which have exploited the patents. I realize that *copyrighted* bits will be hard to track, but not an address that ships patent-infringing (or for that matter, trademark-infringing) goods. To paraphrase, Meat is vulnerable, bits are safe. But (with the exception of software patents) patents are embodied in things, and things are traceable. From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 12 20:36:38 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 23:36:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Think cash In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001012080516.01985378@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <004f01c033a4$9651a4c0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001012193753.00920650@pop.sprynet.com> At 11:54 AM 10/12/00 -0400, James A.. Donald wrote: > -- >At 12:59 PM 10/11/2000 -0400, Marcel Popescu wrote: > > An interesting idea has surfaced on the freenet-chat list: is it possible to > > build a program that creates some sort of a puzzle, whose answer the > > generating computer knows (and can verify), but which can only be answered > > by a human being, not by a computer? [Additional requirement: it should be > > easy for the human to answer the puzzle.] > >Origami world. > >Computer generates a random 3D object out of large polygons with fairly >sharp angles of contact, subject to various limits on the way in which the >object is generated. Displays 2D image of 3D object. > >Human infers 3D object from 2D image, infers unseen portions of the image >from rules by which the 3D image is generated -- for example that the >object must make sense mechanically -- that it should be stable resting on >a plane. You seem to be supposing that human perceptual algorithms (and the illusions they produce) are somehow unknowable or unreplicable by nonanimal machinery. This is meat chauvinism. Look into David Marr's _Vision_ for starters... or Grossburg's (of BU) stuff.. Now back to your regularly scheduled spam laced with cryptography From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 12 20:53:40 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 23:53:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001012180920.0098b5f0@idiom.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001012204828.00935710@pop.sprynet.com> At 09:10 PM 10/12/00 -0400, Bill Stewart wrote: >with raw pins pointing out. I'm not sure if my PC was in >"use both displays" mode or "only use the LCD" mode - >most laptops don't have an indicator other than "the LCD is dark"... A good reason for the airlines asking you to keep your radiating equiptment off during avionics-dependence time.. From ravage at ssz.com Thu Oct 12 21:58:52 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 23:58:52 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001012202621.0092e9a0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: > At 12:36 PM 10/12/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: > >In a crypto anarchic > >society, patents will mostly be moot.) > > Really? Actualy, with respect to free market theory, yes. Per Hayek, 1. A homogeneous commodity offered and demanded by a large number of relatively small sellers and buyers, none of whom expects to exercise by their action a perceptible influence on price. 2. Free entry into the market and absence of other restraints on the movement of prices and resources. 3. Complete knowledge of the relevant factors on the part of all participants in the market. Consider 1, It must be universal in nature or design (homogeneous, one is like any other, interchangeable). None expect to make an influence in the price so clearly no participant 'owns' or 'controls' any particular aspect about the widget or its availability. Consider 2, The 'free entry' requires that any party wishing to participate as either a buyer or seller is free to do so. Contrary to both patent and copyright theory. Consider 3, Probably more applicable to copyright over patents. Patents are intended to make the knowledge wide spread but control the actual use/implimentation. A rather long quote from Hayek, Patents, in particular, are specially interesting from our point of view because they provide so clear an illustration of how it is necessary in all such instances not to apply the ready formula but to go back to the rationale of the market system and to decide for each class what the precise rights are to be which the government ought to protect. This is a task at least as much for economist as for lawyers. Perhaps it is not a waste of your time if I illustrate what I have in mind by quoting a rather well known decision in which an American judge argued that "as to the suggestion that competitors were excluded from the use of the patent we answer that such exclusion may be said to have been the very essence of the right conferred by the patent" and adds "as it is the privilige of any owner of property to use it or not to use it without any question of motive." It is this last statement which seems to be to be significant for the way in which a mechanical extension of the property concept by lawyers has done so much to create undesirable and harmful privilige. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 13 01:27:06 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 01:27:06 -0700 Subject: CDR: Two items, of varying relevance to the list Message-ID: Two items which may have only slight relevance to the list. I've been waiting for an opportunity to mention them in context... First, Judea Pearl's "Causality." A mix of logic, AI, and ontology. Closely related to issues of belief and causality. (Some of you may know of my interest in Dempster-Shafer belief theory...this is closely related.) Second, just watched "Lola rennt," aka "Run, Lola, Run," for the fourth or fifth time. Saw it in a theater the first time, a year or so ago. It's interesting that German is so willing to absorb new language terms, completely unlike French. English has embraced foreign expressions, and so, it seems, has German. Of these two points, the Pearl book is more significant, ultimately. But the film has its place. Sorry there is no "crypto significance" here. No S-box details, no Rijndael details. TS. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 12 22:59:00 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 01:59:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001012202621.0092e9a0@pop.sprynet.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001012225547.009c5160@idiom.com> At 11:36 PM 10/12/00 -0400, David Honig wrote: >At 12:36 PM 10/12/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: >>In a crypto anarchic >>society, patents will mostly be moot.) > >Really? If you have a factory, or open a virtual storefront, >you have a public (meat, seizable) presence. >Patents are enforced by guns against locatable >assets which have exploited the patents. > >I realize that *copyrighted* bits will be hard to track, but not an address >that ships patent-infringing (or for that matter, trademark-infringing) goods. >To paraphrase, Meat is vulnerable, bits are safe. But (with the exception of >software patents) patents are embodied in things, and things are traceable. It's often hard to tell whether a physical object violates a given patent or not - bitspace is often pretty subtle stuff, especially if it's manufacturing methods rather than end results that are the subject of the patent. But increasingly, the interesting patents are (gak) software, (gak gak) algorithms, and (gak phfft) business methods, all of which are basically bits that are potentially easy to make untraceable. Sure, if you actually have to ship somebody the infringing code on a CDROM or DVD, then there's some traceability, but that's decreasingly interesting as a distribution method. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From que_sera at my-deja.com Fri Oct 13 06:01:10 2000 From: que_sera at my-deja.com (First Name Last Name) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 06:01:10 -0700 Subject: CDR: From LibertyWire: 8 Fallacies in the Presidential Debates Message-ID: <200010131301.GAA16526@mail19.bigmailbox.com> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: From PDBANKS at excite.com Fri Oct 13 06:49:52 2000 From: PDBANKS at excite.com (EUGENE BANKS) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 06:49:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: ids Message-ID: <20096003.971444992096.JavaMail.imail@blizzard.excite.com> Hey i got your email from a message board. But since it seems you know enough about fake ids. I had a question and i was hoping you could answer it for me. I wanted to get a new identity and i was told i could do it two ways. 1 way was to steal a living persons identity, and the other was to steal a dead persons id. write back if you know anything to help me. _______________________________________________________ Say Bye to Slow Internet! http://www.home.com/xinbox/signup.html From benjy16 at juno.com Fri Oct 13 04:22:42 2000 From: benjy16 at juno.com (benjy d dunivan) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 07:22:42 -0400 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <20001013.072245.-477035.0.benjy16@juno.com> ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. From pjcjr at us.ibm.com Fri Oct 13 07:17:12 2000 From: pjcjr at us.ibm.com (Peter Capelli/Raleigh/Contr/IBM) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:17:12 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: ids Message-ID: 'Eugene', Quick question for you: other than 'living' people, and 'dead' people, what other kinds of people have ID? Perhaps you can steal mom's drivers license out of her purse when she gives you your allowance? Thanks! -p "Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin, 1759 EUGENE BANKS @cyberpass.net on 10/13/2000 09:49:52 AM Please respond to EUGENE BANKS Sent by: owner-cypherpunks at cyberpass.net From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Fri Oct 13 07:18:04 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:18:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk Message-ID: > ---------- > From: Jim Choate[SMTP:ravage at einstein.ssz.com] > Reply To: Jim Choate > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2000 7:09 PM > To: cypherpunks at einstein.ssz.com > Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk > > > On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Steve Furlong wrote: > > > < > the traffic be encrypted>> > > > Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes. This subthread came along > > because some people have noticed that anonymous remailers are used for > > an awful lot of spam. Peter Trei proposed that remailers could pass > > along only encrypted mail. My understanding was that Alice, the > > message's author, would encrypt the message with Bob's public key; Bob > > is the end recipient: a person or a mailing list or whatever. Alice > > would send the message through Ramona, the anonymous remailer. Ramona is > > requiring that messages be encrypted as a means of filtering out spam. > > Ramona does not need to know Bob's public or private keys; Ramona cares > > only that the message is encrypted. > > So? I set up a email address that I offer to the spammers to sign up to > the anonymous remailers and then it proxies their email into the encrypted > network. I figure this baby'll stop'em for about six months. > Jim: A spammer (or your spammer's proxy) is not going to individually encrypt messages to thousands or millions of end-recipients, each with their own public key - the time factor makes this uneconomical, and the hassle factor of finding all the recipient public keys makes it impractical. Thus, only remailers which send out plaintext are useful to spammers as exit remailers. It is only exit remailers (ie, the remailer which sends to the final recipient) which get hassled for sending spam. The goal is to make remailer operators life easier by preventing them from being used to spam random lusers, who may initiate complaints against the remailer operator. It is not to prevent spam passing through a remailer somewhere in mid-cloud. While such encrypted spam will increase the volume of traffic, for most remailers that is a Good Thing - more material to confuse the traffic analysis. As long as it gets dropped before leaving the remailer network, no harm is done. Steve understands this, as does every one else but you. What's the problem? > For it to really stop spam it would need to be well distributed. So how do > you offset the increased sys admin issues this raises? > Any remailer operator can decide not to pass along plaintext. So long as the message sender is aware of this property, nothing more needs to be distributed. There are no increased sysadmin issues. > Then there is the old key management problem. > > James Choate > No, there is not, beyond the fact that the message originator must know the final recipient's public key. Jim, do you really understand how remailer chaining works? Peter Trei > Vizzini: HE DIDN'T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE! > Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you > think it means. > - The Princess Bride > > > From bill.stewart at pobox.com Fri Oct 13 10:25:02 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:25:02 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use In-Reply-To: References: <00101212143600.09245@reality.eng.savvis.net> <4.3.0.20001011232039.01c658e0@mail.well.com> <00101212143600.09245@reality.eng.savvis.net> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001013102502.009a5d20@idiom.com> >>On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: >>> Normally I vote Libertarian. This year I may vote for Bush as a vote >>> for who will do me, us, and the Constitution the lesser damage of the >>> two. (All voting is about bang for the buck, about effectiveness of a >>> vote...an election is not about "voting for the best man," it is >>> instead about minimizing damage.) Back in 1984, I decided it was more important to vote for the anti-Reagan Democrat than to vote for the disorganized-again Libertarians; it was annoying that the Dems couldn't come up with anybody less tacky than Walter Mondale, but it would be better than getting four more years of Reagan/Bush wars and probably another 4-8 of Bush. All my vote accomplished was telling the Democrats that next time they should pick yet another loser to throw the election, though we fortunately ended up getting rid of Bush earlier, replacing an evil president with one who doesn't have enough principles to be consistently evil. Not doing that again. If you want to vote for somebody to stop Gore, rather than voting your conscience, it's probably more valuable to vote for Nader - he's no prize, but the Democrats deserve to get split. In some ways, it's too bad that Buchanan got the Reform nomination instead of Jesse, since that would have made splitting the Republicans possible also, but Buchanan does mean that the Libertarians have a chance of beating the Reform party this time... Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Fri Oct 13 10:45:59 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:45:59 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gov. Bush links Columbine massacre to Internet use In-Reply-To: <00101212143600.09245@reality.eng.savvis.net> References: <4.3.0.20001011232039.01c658e0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001013104559.009a6540@idiom.com> At 12:14 PM 10/12/00 -0500, Jim Burnes wrote: >Actually, your vote should be about getting what you want, not what >you don't want. The quickest way to do that now is to consistently vote >for the worst possible candidate. >Only by maximally accellerating the downward spiral this country >has been in for 70 years or more will the sheeple start to wake up. Feh. Voting for the occasional crazy may be worthwhile (like Ross Perot, who may have been a scary guy but was no worse than Bush; Clinton may have been scary before the fact but in practice turned out surprisingly good, in large part because his personal ethics problems kept him tied up all the time.) Causing more evil mainly gets more sheeple in the mood for evil - Germany's hundred-plus years of militarism and National and International Socialism wasn't worth the cost. >Like I've said before. When you have alcohol poisoning the best >thing to do is dump your stomach contents. Get the poison out. >You won't do it by gradually falling asleep and dying from it. Yeah - but you do that by drinking ipecac, not by drinking Everclear. Like, gag me with a spoon.... >If our great grandfathers went into suspended animation in 1910 >and were awakened now they would be in shock. Not just from >the technology, but with the willingness with which we tolerate >our enslavement. Let's see - the generation that brought us the Income Tax, Prohibition, "Separate but Equal" Supreme Court support for mandatory segregation, The War To End All Wars, Teddy Roosevelt/Hearst Newspapers invading Cuba, Schenck busted for speaking against the draft before the US joined WW1 and the Supreme Court voting that his conviction was just fine, the destructive reparations against Germany that led to the rise of fascism, pro-inflation Populists, monopolies and trust-busters... Most people from that day would feel right at home, except for little details like cars and MTV and lack of decent trains, and the government bribing sheeple wholesale instead of Tammany retail. There are a few differences - the union movement has wimped out, with the AFLCIO as a conservative establishment-joining bargaining group, compared with the Wobblies and other real strikers, and by now more people believe that Communism is bad, and they've got mixed feelings about working for big companies instead of running small businesses themselves after most of a century. But mostly it's the same old same old. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 13 01:02:39 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 11:02:39 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Make legal threats, go to jail for 20 years In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001012124519.01ebe020@mail.well.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Whoever knowingly provides or obtains the labor or services of a >person...by means of the abuse or threatened abuse of law or the legal process, >shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. > >URL: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:h.r.03244: > >I can imagine some abuses of this, in workplace situations or divorce cases... OTOH, it could be extremely useful with frivolous patents etc. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From jimdbell at home.com Fri Oct 13 11:53:13 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 11:53:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Two items, of varying relevance to the list References: Message-ID: <001d01c03546$d7022a00$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Tim May > It's interesting that German is so willing to absorb new language > terms, completely unlike French. English has embraced foreign > expressions, and so, it seems, has German. Maybe they've decided they need more "sprechenraum". Jim Bell From Mike_Rogers at hotmail.com Fri Oct 13 12:38:11 2000 From: Mike_Rogers at hotmail.com (Mike) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 12:38:11 -0700 Subject: CDR: Go check out gradfinder! Message-ID: <20001013193915.RQIQ8768.mail2.rdc2.bc.home.com@localhost> I thought you might like this. Gradfinder lets you keep track of your school buddies. They never spam you or put you on a mailing list and it's free! Click here to check it out! -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 301 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Mike_Rogers at hotmail.com Fri Oct 13 12:50:19 2000 From: Mike_Rogers at hotmail.com (Mike) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 12:50:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Oops! Sorry about that! Message-ID: <20001013195123.RXDG8768.mail2.rdc2.bc.home.com@localhost> Sorry! :{ I accidentally cut out most of my message.  I wanted to tell you to chck out gradfinder. It's a cool way of keeping track of your school friends. They never spam you or put you on mailing lists and it's free!!!!! Click here! Mike. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 553 bytes Desc: not available URL: From marcel at aiurea.com Fri Oct 13 11:04:29 2000 From: marcel at aiurea.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:04:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Fw: [Fwd: Markierte Musik: SDMI Crack] Message-ID: <008501c0353f$f279bc50$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Yiihaaaa! Will they release SDMI knowing that it is broken? [Not that it wasn't a bad idea from the start.] -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Markierte Musik: SDMI Crack Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:32:16 +0200 X-Loop: openpgp.net From: "q/depesche" To: quintessenz-list at quintessenz.at q/depesche 00.10.13/1 Markierte Musik: SDMI Crack Wie Salon Magazine berichtet, wurde das von der Musikindustrie favorisierte Muik-Wasserzeichen System, die so genannte "Secure digital Music Initiative" einem Crack zugef|hrt. Was dieser zu bedeuten hat, ist noch nicht ganz sicher. -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- | Watch out -- recording industry executives are about to start running for cover. All of the Secure Digital Music Initiative's watermarks -- its much ballyhooed music protection scheme -- have been broken. A spokesperson for SDMI has denied the reports, but according to three off-the-record sources, the results of the Hack SDMI contest are in and not one single watermark resisted attack. The hacking contest, which invited the general Net population to break the recording industry's watermarking system and win $10,000, ended Sunday; this week, SDMI members are meeting in Los Angeles to discuss the results. Although a core group of participants (including members of the Recording Industry Association of America) who coordinated the testing process are aware of the contest results, the larger SDMI consortium has yet to be informed. The key issue is whether the breaks are meaningful or not -- in other words, could any hacker repeat the breaks, and is the quality of the music preserved even when the watermark is scrubbed out? According to one insider, all these hacks were, in fact, technically "solid." The hacker boycott of SDMI organized by members of the programming community who were suspicious of what they saw as an attempt to coopt their labor in the service of a corrupt industry has turned out to be effectively irrelevant. According to one witness attending the SDMI conference, recording industry members held an emergency meeting at 6 a.m. PDT Thursday to discuss the results. SDMI members and the press will likely be informed Friday, several sources said, although most speculated that the record industry would try to downplay the results. Voll Text From no.user at anon.xg.nu Fri Oct 13 12:30:16 2000 From: no.user at anon.xg.nu (No User) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:30:16 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: FBI: We Need Cyber Ethics Education Message-ID: Bill Stewart wrote: > Tim's spoof got to me before the original did, > and I'd read about halfway through before noticing that > it was probably a spoof and then noticing it was from Tim :-) > That's the problem with stuff that's too realistically written... "There oughtta be a law..." From mnpjl88 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 13 14:49:02 2000 From: mnpjl88 at yahoo.com (mnpjl88 at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:49:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: cypherpunks, The Holidays are just around the corner -QXWP Message-ID: <200010132149.OAA17445@cyberpass.net> Dear cypherpunks, This letter is about an opportunity to make an incredible amount of Money ( CASH !!!) in a very short time. Seriously cypherpunks, couldn't you use a little extra cash for Christmas and the up coming holidays? The cost is only $6.00! This is the 16th day since I started receiving $ cash, and so far I have received $5,845 (in $1 Bills)...so I guess this is really working! Give it a try! All I did was follow the instructions in the letter that I received below, and sent out some e-mail to people who responded to my ads. Here is a testimony from one of the thousands who have benefited from this simple investment plan. "I'm a retired attorney, and about a year ago a man came to me with a letter. The letter he brought to me is the same letter before you now. He asked me to verify that this letter was legal. I told him that I would review it and get back to him. When I first read the letter, I thought it was some off the wall idea to make money. A week later I met again with my client to discuss the issue. I told him that the letter will be all right. I was curious about the letter, so he told me how it worked. I thought it was a long shot, so I decided against participating. Before my client left, I asked him to keep me updated as to his results. About two months later he called me to tell me that he had received more than $800,000.00 in cash! I didn't believe him so he asked me to try the plan and see for myself." "I thought about it for a few days and decided that there was not much to lose. I followed the instructions exactly and mailed out 200 letters. Sure enough the money started coming in! It came slowly at first, but after three weeks I was getting more than I could open in a day. After three months the money stopped coming. I kept a precise record of my earnings and at the end it totaled $868,439.00. I earn a good living as an attorney, but as anyone in the legal profession will tell you, there is a lot of stress that comes with the territory. I decided if things worked out, I would retire from practice and play golf. This time I sent out 500 letters. Well, three months later, I had totaled $2,344,178.00." "I met my old client for lunch to find out exactly how it works. He told me that there were a few similar letters going around. What made this one different is the fact that there were six names on the letter, not three like most others. That act alone resulted in more returns. The other factor was the advice I gave him in making sure the whole thing was perfectly legal, since no one wants to risk doing anything illegal. I bet now you are curious about what little changes I told him to make. Well, if you send a letter like this one out, to be legal, you must sell something if you expect to received a dollar. I told him that anyone sending a dollar must received something in RETURN. So when you send a dollar to each of the six names on the list, you must include a slip of paper saying, "Please add me to your mailing list" and include your name and mailing address. This is the key to the program. The item you will received for your dollar sent, is THIS letter and the right to earn thousands." Follow the simple instructions EXACTLY, and in less than three months you should receive MORE THAN $800,000.00 IN COLD HARD CASH! 1) IMMEDIATELY send $1.00 (US$) to each of the six people listed below. THE SOONER YOU SEND THE "$1.00 LETTERS" THE SOONER YOU CAN START GETTING A RETURN! Wrap the dollar in a note saying "PLEASE ADD ME TO YOUR MAILING LIST". 1. Angie Marques 1485 Welburn Ave. Gilroy, CA 95020 2. Steve Piffero 322 Escalona Dr. Santa Cruz, CA 95060 3. Tony Marques 48813 Sauvignon Ct. Fremont, CA 94539 4. Rob Wallace 3300 Tracy Dr. Santa Clara, CA 95051 5. Cary Motter 669 Vasona Ct. Los Gatos, CA 95032 6. Matthew Lindsey 5313 Chatham Lake Dr. Virginia Beach, VA 23464 6. 2) REMOVE the NAME and ADDRESS NEXT to #1 at the top of the list and move the rest of the names UP one position. Then place YOUR name in the #6 spot. This is best done by saving this to a file and entering your information on line #6. Be careful when you type the addresses. Don't forget to PROOFREAD them. Make SURE that the names and addresses are correct. 3) When you have COMPLETED the above instructions, you have several options on how you market the letter - through the Postal Service, through E-mail, through posting in "FREE CLASSIFIED ADS" and "NEWSGROUPS" ON THE INTERNET, or through whatever way you think is most effective. To send this letter out to thousands of people and increase your profits, I suggest you use a Bulk E-mail company. Call 207-896-7915 to have your letter emailed. They are fast, effective and give excellent service. 100,000 emailings costs just $89.00 and they are running a special now of 50,000 additional mailings FREE!!! This letter has been proven perfectly legal for all of the above as long as you follow the instructions, because you are purchasing membership in our exclusive mailing list. The more you send out, the more YOU will make. We strongly encourage you to mail this letter to family, friends, and relatives as well. THIS IS A SERVICE AND IS 100% LEGAL. (Refer to title 18, section 1302 &1341 of the US Postal and Lottery Laws) Assume for example you get a 8% return rate. 1) When you mail out 200 letters, ONLY 16 people send you $1.00 2) Those 16 people mail out 200 letters, (3200 letters) and ONLY 256 people send you $1.00 3) Those 256 people mail out 200 letters, (51,200 letters) and ONLY 4, 096 people send you $1.00 4) Those 4,096 people mail out 200 letters (812,200 letter) and ONLY 65,536 people send you $1.00 5) Those 69,536 people mail out 200 letters (13,107,200 letters) and ONLY 1,048,576 people send you $1.00. At the Next level your name- drops off the list. Think about it. Look what you WILL have BEFORE your name-drops off the list! I know this looks and sounds unbelievable. Just try it, and you will be happy that you did because you will received proof when THOUSANDS of ONE-DOLLAR BILLS start to pile up! ***MAKE SURE you send One US dollar to each of the six names on the list. (This is VERY IMPORTANT), with a note saying "PLEASE ADD ME TO YOUR MAILING LIST" P.S. You've read this far, so let me ask you one simple question, WHAT HAVE YOU GOT TO LOSE? Even with a 1% return you will still get $100,000.00 in 90 DAYS!!! What you can gain is an income, like the example in this letter. You will have a very small expense, but you will reap HUGE potential returns. What do you have to lose? I invite you to JOIN our mailing list RIGHT NOW! Thanks you for your time. GOOD LUCK & BEST WISHES TO YOU !!! From syverson at itd.nrl.navy.mil Fri Oct 13 12:27:46 2000 From: syverson at itd.nrl.navy.mil (Paul Syverson) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 15:27:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Revised Deadline for FC'01 submission Message-ID: Many have been asking about extensions. Here is a CFP with the extension explicitly included as a revised deadline. Note that there will be no further extensions beyond what is listed below. -Paul Syverson Final Call for Papers Financial Cryptography '01 ************DEADLINE EXTENDED: SEE BELOW************ February 19-22, 2001 Grand Cayman Marriott Beach Resort Cayman Islands, BWI Original papers are solicited on all aspects of financial data security and digital commerce in general for submission to the Fifth Annual Conference on Financial Cryptography (FC01). FC01 aims to bring together persons involved in the financial, legal and data security fields to foster cooperation and exchange of ideas. Relevant topics include Anonymity Protection Infrastructure Design Auditability Legal/ Regulatory Issues Authentication/Identification Loyalty Mechanisms Certification/Authorization Payments/ Micropayments Commercial Transactions Privacy Issues Copyright/ I.P. Management Risk Management Digital Cash/ Digital Receipts Secure Banking Systems Economic Implications Smart Cards Electronic Purses Trust Management Implementations WaterMarking INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS: Electronic submission strongly encouraged. Electronic submissions due 6AM, Washington DC time, October 23, 2000. (Instructions available at http://www.fc01.uwm.edu). Alternatively, send a cover letter and 15 copies of an extended abstract to be received no later than October 23, 2000 to the Program Chair. The extended abstract should start with the title, names of authors, abstract, and keywords followed by a succinct statement appropriate for a non-specialist reader specifying the subject addressed, background, main achievements, and significance to financial data security. Submissions are limited to 15 single-spaced pages of 11pt type and should constitute substantially original material. Panel proposals are due no later than November 27, 2000 (or postmarked and airmailed by November 20). Panel proposals should include a brief description of the panel and a list of prospective panelists. Notification of acceptance or rejection of papers and panel proposals will be sent to authors no later than December 8, 2000. Authors of accepted papers must guarantee that their papers will be presented at the conference and must be willing to sign an acceptable copyright agreement with Springer-Verlag. Use the above address for electronic submissions or mail hardcopy to: Paul Syverson, FC01 Program Chair Center for High Assurance Computer Systems (Code 5540) Naval Research Laboratory Washington DC 20375 USA email: syverson at itd.nrl.navy.mil Web: www.syverson.org phone: +1 202 404-7931 PROCEEDINGS: Final proceedings will be published by Springer Verlag in their Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS) series. Preproceedings will be available at the conference, but final versions will not be due until afterwards, giving authors the opportunity to revise their papers based on presentations and discussions at the meeting. Program Committee Matt Blaze, AT&T Labs - Research Yair Frankel, Ecash Matt Franklin, UC Davis David Kravitz, Wave Systems Corp. Arjen Lenstra, Citicorp Philip MacKenzie, Lucent Bell Labs Avi Rubin, AT&T Labs - Research Jacques Stern, Ecole Normale Sup�rieure Kazue Sako, NEC Stuart Stubblebine, CertCo Paul Syverson (Chair), Naval Research Laboratory Win Treese, Open Market, Inc. Doug Tygar, UC Berkeley Michael Waidner, IBM Zurich Research Lab Moti Yung, CertCo Important Dates Extended Abstract Submissions Due: Oct. 23, 2000, 6AM, Washington DC time (or hardcopy received by Oct. 23, 2000) Panel Proposal Submissions Due: November 27, 2000 Notification: Dec 8, 2000 Electronic submission information: See http://www.fc01.uwm.edu General Chair Stuart Haber, InterTrust STAR Lab Electronic Submission chair George Davida, UWM Further Information about conference registration and on travel, hotels, and Grand Cayman itself will follow in a separate general announcement. FC01 is organized by the International Financial Cryptography Association. Additional information will be found at http://fc01.ai --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From honig at sprynet.com Fri Oct 13 12:49:33 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 15:49:33 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001012225547.009c5160@idiom.com> References: <3.0.5.32.20001012202621.0092e9a0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001013070929.00925bb0@pop.sprynet.com> At 10:55 PM 10/12/00 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: > >It's often hard to tell whether a physical object violates >a given patent or not - bitspace is often pretty subtle stuff, >especially if it's manufacturing methods rather than end results >that are the subject of the patent. > >But increasingly, the interesting patents are (gak) software, >(gak gak) algorithms, and (gak phfft) business methods, >all of which are basically bits that are potentially easy to make untraceable. >Sure, if you actually have to ship somebody the infringing code >on a CDROM or DVD, then there's some traceability, >but that's decreasingly interesting as a distribution method. Before anyone else starts, don't take my hypothesis that patents will survive in a crypto-abundant world as endorsement for the USP&TO lunacy we've all seen. You can limit the context to physical-object or manufacturing patents. It is has been pretty well argued that bits will be very hard to regulate in any sense of that word; and also that USPTO has been doing too much PCP during work hours. From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Fri Oct 13 08:14:26 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 16:14:26 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: New OLD cryptograph patent for NSA References: Message-ID: <39E726D2.64A8CF51@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> I guess they wanted the patent for recognition. A sort of pat on the back. The government grants patents so I suppose they can grant themselves as many as they like if it makes them feel good. Rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Whit Diffie gave an interesting talk about intellectual priority and scholarly recognition at UCL over here a couple of years ago - of course the spooks don't get any outside their own fences, the poor little lambs... Ken Brown Tim May wrote: > > At 2:23 PM +0300 10/12/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > >On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Bo Elkjaer wrote: > > > >>Note that the patent-application was filed in 1936. Obviously they were > >>interested in keeping any info relating to the invention confidential. But > >>theres no need for that anymore, given that the technology in the patent > >>is completely obsolete by now. > > > >So... How do you defend such a patent? How does this sort of thing mesh with > >the idea of patents as a reward for disclosure? > > > > There is no defense of such patents. You are correct that patents are > intended to encourage disclosure and yet protect inventors for some > limited period. > > (Not all of us even support patents. Namely, ideas are just ideas. > Making it illegal for some to use ideas, which they may well have > thought of on their own, is thought control. In a crypto anarchic > society, patents will mostly be moot.) > > Granting patents to work done in the 1930s is bizarre. > > --Tim May From George at Orwellian.Org Fri Oct 13 13:43:55 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 16:43:55 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: New penalties to silence whistle blowers Message-ID: <200010132043.QAA01154@www3.aa.psiweb.com> http://foxnews.com/national/101300/leaks.sml Congress Increases Penalty for Classified Leaks Friday, October 13, 2000 An intelligence bill passed by Congress could stifle the ability of whistle-blowers and the media to get information to the public by expanding criminal penalties for government employees leaking secrets. [snip] From justice4all at fan.com Fri Oct 13 14:41:31 2000 From: justice4all at fan.com (justice4all at fan.com) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 17:41:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: Love a good mystery? Message-ID: <001013174011D9.11292@weba2.iname.net> Try this one: http://members.aol.com/justicewrtr/justice4all/main.htm --------------------------------------------------------------------- Get free email from CNN Sports Illustrated at http://email.cnnsi.com/ From ravage at ssz.com Fri Oct 13 17:18:55 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 19:18:55 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Trei, Peter wrote: > A spammer (or your spammer's proxy) is not going to > individually encrypt messages to thousands or > millions of end-recipients, each with their own public > key - the time factor makes this uneconomical, and > the hassle factor of finding all the recipient public > keys makes it impractical. Thus, only remailers > which send out plaintext are useful to spammers > as exit remailers. They do it now, sans encryption. The mass distribution is what makes it economical. If the encryption can be gateway'ed then it's useless and doesn't raise the cost significantly. A more useful mechanism would be to distribute the keys and appropriate client software to spammers. What's a flat $50?... > It is only exit remailers (ie, the remailer which sends > to the final recipient) which get hassled for sending > spam. And it has NOTHING to do with the encryption. The lack of log's is what prevents back tracing. > The goal is to make remailer operators life easier by > preventing them from being used to spam random > lusers, who may initiate complaints against the > remailer operator. No, the goal is to stop spammers. In addition, there are aspects of remailer operation that make the complaints about spam pretty irrelevant. > It is not to prevent spam passing through a remailer > somewhere in mid-cloud. While such encrypted > spam will increase the volume of traffic, for most > remailers that is a Good Thing - more material to > confuse the traffic analysis. As long as it gets > dropped before leaving the remailer network, no > harm is done. Nobody said anything about the interim processing until now. How is this relevant to the 'free speech' aspect of requiring the use of particular forms of encryption end-to-end. Where's the key management mechanism to ensure the security of the traffic in the reamiler network? > Steve understands this, as does every one else but > you. > > What's the problem? It's your problem, there are aspects of this proposal that are simply silly, and several others that haven't been adequately explained or examined. You talk about decreasing the load due to spam, and don't even recognize that you've replaced it with a whole other process. One that potentialy could be more complicated, error prone, and expensive in time and resource impact than the original 'problem'. The solution to bad speech is more speech, not regulation. And don't kid yourself that setting up such a mechanism isn't regulatory. > Any remailer operator can decide not to pass along plaintext. So long as the > message sender is aware of this property, nothing more needs to be > distributed. > There are no increased sysadmin issues. What algorithm are you proposing to identify plain-text? There are key managment issues, what is your proposal for this problem? There is the increased complication of admining the box (think of resources to support both the remailer operation as well as the encryption - consider that scale carefuly). I'm in Zimbabwe and the remailer is in the US, how do I manage the keys to enter the network in such a way that it is secure? > No, there is not, beyond the fact that the message originator must know the > final recipient's public key. You need the key to get into the remailer, otherwise how does it tell the message is encrypted? You seriosly propose sticking some static PGP header for example will stop anyone, spammers know how to use word processors too you know. > Jim, do you really understand how remailer chaining works? Yep. Apparently better than you do. Have a nice day you pretentious butthead. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Fri Oct 13 19:12:05 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 21:12:05 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: <006901c02ee4$a38d6df0$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Marcel Popescu wrote: > X-Loop: openpgp.net > From: "Jim Choate" > > > I also thought of an example where a famine was averted due to government > > intervention. > > > > The current hurricane in Belize. Had the government not stepped in and > > 'price fixed' the stores would have been depleted and cached by the few a > > week ago. > > > > Why in major disasters do prices go up, when it is clear this is contrary > > to the best interest of the market? That without price fixing the majority > > of people will be left without. Why is this hands-off philosophy not held > > accountable for its failings? I must assume that the resultant famine due > > to price inflation by the individual resource owners is still a result of > > that government interference. ;) > > Jim, are you really THIS dumb? Nobody can be this dumb and live long. > > There's no person called "market", therefore it has no "interest". No stupid, there are lot's of persons called the 'market'. There is no 'market' without those individuals. When the market goes out of equilibrium then free market mechanisms are not enough to correct. It is not in the interest of the market to have a percentage of the market die due to resource limitations. If you don't get this then I'm not the dumb one here. Oh, on your comment about database usage and the 'ownership of 39'. You mis-represent the situation. It isn't the number that is of interest and debate, it's the 'Marcel is ...' part. In effect you are taking a number (i.e. your 39) and applying a context to it based on the activity of one or more individuals. They in effect 'author context' that gives the '39' a meaning greater than it's cardinality/ordinality. The reality is that anytime any agent accesses data in a database that has context provided by my activity then they are accessing a work of my creation. How come I don't get, for example, a dollar each time my context is accessed? It's effectively theft. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From rah at shipwright.com Fri Oct 13 15:23:49 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 23:23:49 +0100 Subject: CDR: Revised Deadline for FC'01 submission Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From jamesd at echeque.com Fri Oct 13 21:10:51 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 00:10:51 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Think cash In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001012193753.00920650@pop.sprynet.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001012080516.01985378@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001013202500.018c0c10@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 11:36 PM 10/12/2000 -0400, David Honig wrote: > You seem to be supposing that human perceptual algorithms (and the > illusions they produce) are somehow unknowable or unreplicable by > nonanimal machinery. > > This is meat chauvinism. Claims of computer vision, and computer walking, and computers doing well anything that a spider can do well, are a mixture of hype and fraud. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 7N6aeuJRFBnYna+aAOMenoR8XGxuEYD+S3obIVsh 4zJ7VgEMhSpp8c7Y3l1tjow+Rtk1ECNzEcq82V1i3 From john323 at 123india.com Fri Oct 13 09:50:18 2000 From: john323 at 123india.com (john323 at 123india.com) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 00:50:18 +0800 (CST) Subject: CDR: Your message to 309,000 OPP SEEKERS! Message-ID: <200010131650.AAA03564@ns.qingyuan.net> 100% RISK-FREE ADVERTISING TO 309,000 OPPORTUNITY SEEKERS Guaranteed Results FED UP OF: Being shut down by your ISP's, People screaming, People sending you FLAMES, Being bombarded with COUNTER OFFERS, Then let us take over the hassles for you. THERE ISNT ANOTHER COMPANY IN THE WORLD THAT CAN MAKE YOU A DEAL LIKE THIS! http://secure.driveweb.de/ To be removed, reply with the word "REMOVE" in the subject heading, your name will be removed within 24 hrs from the list. From team at adultfriendfinder.com Fri Oct 13 21:29:34 2000 From: team at adultfriendfinder.com (team at adultfriendfinder.com) Date: 14 Oct 2000 04:29:34 -0000 Subject: CDR: Adult Friend Finder Again Offers 6 Months of FREE Gold! Message-ID: <20001014042934.6522.qmail@e44.friendfinder.com> Dear cypherpunks, Thanks again for being a member of Adult Friend Finder, the largest, free online sex directory for over 6 million members looking for partners. We hope you're having fun and finding spicy new connections. You can find Adult Friend Finder at: More people than ever before have been able to find great sex partners and open-minded friends thanks to Adult Friend Finder! Last month alone we had more than 400,000 new members joined our community. Everywhere you look at Adult Friend Finder, our members are making connections! 7 The Chat Rooms are always buzzing, with tons of people talking dirty and steaming up the circuits! 7 Thousands of sexually adventurous new members join each day, looking for partners that wet their appetite! If you're serious about meeting a hot partner, it's time to become a serious member. As a Gold member, you'll have the power and freedom to find the perfect match for your next sexual adventure. Gold Membership comes complete with these rewards: 7 Send unlimited emails to all our members 7 Enjoy a full access pass to view and respond to member profiles 7 More responses by having your profile at the top of the listings 7 Get exclusive access to the most advanced searches 7 Plus so much more! In order to help you enjoy the best of Adult Friend Finder, we are extending our offer to give you up to six months of FREE gold. From now until October 31st, get an extra 3 months of FREE Gold privileges when you buy the first 3 months Gold Membership. You can also buy one year of Gold and we'll throw in another 6 months, absolutely FREE. There's no better deal out there, and no better place to meet exciting new people than Adult Friend Finder! It's easy to become a Gold Member! Here's all you need to do: 1. Go to http://adultfriendfinder.com/ 2. Login with your handle: cypherpunks (you can request your password from the site) 3. Click on the "upgrade" link on the main page. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Adult Friend Finder is part of an online network of sites that offer a variety of great services to over 9 million members. These sites include the following: http://nudecards.com - Free adult email cards http://alt.com - Alternative lifestyles personals http://outpersonals.com - Gay personals http://adultfriendfinder.com - Adults only personals http://loveastrology.com - Horoscopes and biorhythms http://nightmail.com - Free web email http://remindermail.com - Free email reminders http://friendfinder.com - Dating and friendship personals http://asiafriendfinder.com - Chinese personals http://germanfriendfinder.com - German personals http://amigosamores.com - Spanish personals http://sportsfriendfinder.com - Sports/Recreation personals http://seniorfriendfinder.com - Senior personals http://churchfriendfinder.com - Christian/spiritual personals http://sharerent.com - Roommate/housing directory http://friendpages.com - Free homepages http://friendparty.com - Free photo sharing and online invites http://nicecards.com - Free email cards -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Adult Friend Finder is anti-spam. This email is sent to you in association with the opt-in member "cypherpunks" on Adult Friend Finder. To remove your profile from the site, please log into http://adultfriendfinder.com and click on the "update" link. Thanks! The Adult Friend Finder Team "Tell a friend about Adult Friend Finder!" From christof at ece.WPI.EDU Sat Oct 14 03:02:56 2000 From: christof at ece.WPI.EDU (Christof Paar) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 06:02:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CHES Workshop 2001 Message-ID: Workshop on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems 2001 (CHES 2001) http://www.chesworkshop.org Paris - France May 13 - 16, 2001 First Call for Papers General Information The focus of this workshop is on all aspects of cryptographic hardware and embedded system design. The workshop will be a forum of new results from the research community as well as from the industry. Of special interest are contributions that describe new methods for efficient hardware implementations and high-speed software for embedded systems, e.g., smart cards, microprocessors, DSPs, etc. We hope that the workshop will help to fill the gap between the cryptography research community and the application areas of cryptography. Consequently, we encourage submission from academia, industry, and other organizations. All submitted papers will be reviewed. This will be the third CHES workshop. The first workshop, CHES '99, was held at WPI in August of 1999 and was very well received by academia and industry. There were 170 participants, more than half of which were from outside the United States. The second workshop, CHES 2000, was also held at WPI in August of 2000 and had an attendance of 180. The third workshop, CHES 2001, will be held in Paris in May of 2001. The topics of interest include but are not limited to: * Computer architectures for public-key cryptosystems * Computer architectures for secret-key cryptosystems * Reconfigurable computing and applications in cryptography * Cryptographic processors and co-processors * Modular and Galois field arithmetic architectures * Tamper resistance on the chip and board level * Smart card attacks and architectures * Efficient algorithms for embedded processors * Special-purpose hardware for cryptanalysis * Fast network encryption * True and pseudo random number generators * Cryptography in wireless applications Instructions for Authors Authors are invited to submit original papers. The preferred submission form is by electronic mail to ches at ece.orst.edu. Papers should be formatted in 12pt type and not exceed 12 pages (not including the title page and the bibliography). The title page should contain the author's name, address (including email address and an indication of the corresponding author), an abstract, and a small list of key words. Please submit the paper in Postscript or PDF. We recommend that you generate the PS or PDF file using LaTeX, however, MS Word is also acceptable. All submissions will be refereed. Only original research contributions will be considered. Submissions must not substantially duplicate work that any of the authors have published elsewhere or have submitted in parallel to any other conferences or workshops that have proceedings. Important Dates Submission Deadline: February 15th, 2001. Acceptance Notification: March 31st, 2001. Final Version due: April 21st, 2001. Workshop: May 13th - 16th, 2001. NOTE: The CHES dates May 13th - 16th are Sunday - Wednesday succeeding Eurocrypt 2001 which ends on Thursday, May 10th. Mailing List If you want to receive emails with subsequent Call for Papers and registration information, please send a brief mail to ches at ece.orst.edu. Program Committee Ross Anderson, Cambridge University, England Jean-Sebastien Coron, Gemplus, France Kris Gaj, George Mason University, USA Jim Goodman, Chrysalis-ITS, Canada Anwar Hasan, University of Waterloo, Canada Peter Kornerup, Odense University, Denmark Bart Preneel, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Jean-Jacques Quisquater, Universite Catholique de Louvain, Belgium Christoph Ruland, University of Siegen, Germany Erkay Savas, cv cryptovision, Germany Joseph Silverman, Brown University and NTRU Cryptosystems, Inc., USA Jacques Stern, Ecole Normale Superieure, France Colin Walter, Computation Department - UMIST, U.K. Michael Wiener, Entrust Technologies, Canada Organizational Committee All correspondence and/or questions should be directed to either of the Organizational Committee Members: Cetin Kaya Koc (Publications Chair) Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering Oregon State University Corvallis, Oregon 97331, USA Phone: +1 541 737 4853 Fax: +1 541 737 8377 Email: Koc at ece.orst.edu David Naccache (Program Chair and Local Organization) Gemplus Card International 34 Rue Guynemer 92447 Issy les Moulineaux Cedex, FRANCE Phone: +33 1 46 48 20 11 Fax: +33 1 46 48 20 04 Email: David.Naccache at gemplus.com Christof Paar (Publicity Chair) Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering Worcester Polytechnic Institute Worcester, MA 01609, USA Phone: +1 508 831 5061 Fax: +1 508 831 5491 Email: christof at ece.wpi.edu Workshop Proceedings The post-proceedings will be published in Springer-Verlag's Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS) series. Notice that in order to be included in the proceedings, the authors of an accepted paper must guarantee to present their contribution at the workshop. For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "dcsb-request at reservoir.com" with one line of text: "help". --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From bear at sonic.net Sat Oct 14 10:27:46 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 10:27:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Jim Choate wrote: >No stupid, there are lot's of persons called the 'market'. There is no >'market' without those individuals. When the market goes out of >equilibrium then free market mechanisms are not enough to correct. They most assuredly are enough to correct the problem, provided they are allowed to work. >It is not in the interest of the market to have a percentage of the market >die due to resource limitations. If you don't get this then I'm not the >dumb one here. If there is a resource limitation such that a larger population cannot be supported *easily*, then the market comes back into equilibrium by killing off the excess humans. The problem is corrected, and things may then continue on a more even keel. Get it through your head -- the Market is NOT the same thing as the individual economic actors whose actions make it up. That is the fundamental mistake made by Marx and Rousseau -- Thoroughly refuted by Adam Smith and Thoreau, but you can ignore the theorists anyway, and look at history for the refutation instead. Bear From ravage at ssz.com Sat Oct 14 09:06:11 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 11:06:11 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Jim Choate wrote: > > >No stupid, there are lot's of persons called the 'market'. There is no > >'market' without those individuals. When the market goes out of > >equilibrium then free market mechanisms are not enough to correct. > > On a similar vein, just about every somehow understandable version of free > market theory is based on the assumption of a steady state market. Is there a distinction between 'equilibrium' and 'steady state' in this context? > The theory does not include a temporal element. I'd say with respect to individual exchanges you are correct. This means the results of some exchange i doesn't effect exchange t, even if they involve the same participants. This lack of information transfer, economic amnesia, is my primary dislike for this theory. However, the concept of equilibrium does have a time variable. The flow of time is actualy required for any 'measurement' of that 'equilibrium' (I'll continue to assume parity per my question above) to be meaningful. There is of course no requirement that time be linear or smooth. > If you want to study those, you're bound for such a quagmire of stochastic > nonlinear differential equations that you would not believe. Hence, the > global stability of any reasonably realistic model of markets is practically > impossible to guarantee with current mathematical tools. It is quite > possible for such systems to behave badly enough to kill most of the > participants in the market, for instance. Besides, the basic continuity > assumptions behind mathematical economics practically guarantee that the > theory does not take such possibilities seriously - I know of no models > which take into account the discrete, limited number of people participating > in the market. Many of the folks I deal with have turned to cellular models. They seem to behave in a reasonable manner and they're reasonably easy to manage. My personal interest is in the application of modelling the near term politico-military situation with the two China's. There is psychohistory at egroups.com, there are several interesting participants and several of us are working on a CROWDS model. I also have a history list at SSZ, cliology at ssz.com. For more info, http://einstein.ssz.com/sci-tech/index.html#cliology Right now I'm working on a CROWDS project that models behaviour in aircraft. It's pretty simple, an ASCII map and some behaviour rules to animate the passengers written in Perl. Pretty standard cellular automaton theory. I hope to start on my China simulator some time next year. Right now I'm collecting data on the American Civil War, WWII (German perspective), and the current China participants. The goal is to include 'political', 'social', and 'economic' factors into a CA and their effect on military force growth and use. Speaking of CA's. I've heard that Wolfrom's new book is supposed to be out sometime in the next year or so. He claims to have a fundamentaly new modelling science if I understand the marketing slicks (and they're not too inaccurate). I've been saying for several years that an unrecognized threat is the amount of data available to the larger governments is enough to setup and run a economic simulator using real world data sets. It's the reason I am so certain that there must be increased individual involvement and that control of that data must be mediated by the person generating it - in all cases. There is no justification for any access to that record being exempt from monitoring - law enforcement arguments considered. > Free market theory, though interesting, useful and absolutely much better > than most available alternatives simply does not cover it all. It is an > abstraction which probably should not be attained any more than the > socialist one. Which raises the real question of "Ok, where to now?"... ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Sat Oct 14 09:14:39 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 11:14:39 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Declan v Salon Message-ID: So, who's the odds on favorite in this one? ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From rah at shipwright.com Sat Oct 14 03:19:17 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 11:19:17 +0100 Subject: CDR: CHES Workshop 2001 Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From ravage at ssz.com Sat Oct 14 09:33:32 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 11:33:32 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Authority - is it a useful concept today and in the future? Message-ID: This is perhaps the fundamental question to human problems. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From rfiero at pophost.com Sat Oct 14 12:04:00 2000 From: rfiero at pophost.com (Richard Fiero) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 12:04:00 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200010141909.NAA24508@pophost.com> The following seems just backwards. Marxist thought holds that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Ray Dillinger wrote: . . . >Get it through your head -- the Market is NOT the same thing as >the individual economic actors whose actions make it up. That is >the fundamental mistake made by Marx and Rousseau -- Thoroughly >refuted by Adam Smith and Thoreau, but you can ignore the theorists >anyway, and look at history for the refutation instead. > > Bear With respect to equilibria, it's an unwarranted assumption that a market has just one stable point. Certainly the Great Depression was a stable but undesirable situation. With respect to weird math and models, there is no proof that -any- math describes the situation. You are free to use any math that you like. If there were a predictive model, you'd become extremely rich. Models are just pictorial aids to thinking. Finite number of market participants? No problem. Combined Value auctions handle this perfectly. Indeed, find me an infinite number of buyers for something and I'll figure out a way to produce it. From rah at shipwright.com Sat Oct 14 04:22:50 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 12:22:50 +0100 Subject: CDR: London Anarchist Book Fair today? Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From roach_s at intplsrv.net Sat Oct 14 09:28:17 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 12:28:17 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD In-Reply-To: References: <007101c0335c$24316a80$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001014112017.00abeed0@mail.intplsrv.net> At 10:31 AM 10/11/2000, Ray Dillinger wrote: ... >Also, it looks like the sort of thing that could be designed around. >If someone were building a "secure laptop" they could make a video >system and drivers that wrote the bits in a different, randomized >order each time, and which only wrote the changed bits. If anybody >is actually making a product like this, it would be a strong >indication that *somebody* with money to spend on R&D considers >it a valid threat model, because nobody makes products without a >market. This could easily be the recipe for a flickering monitor. First of all, the refresh rate needs to be probably in excess of twice what the human eye can see, just so a random signal can be detected before the old signal has expired. if you can count to 4 in n length of time, then you can only reliably provide all the information in that time by keeping to the same order. 1,2,3,4. or 4,3,2,1 or 1,3,2,4, etc. But not 1,2,3,4,3,2,4,1. By the time it rewrote 1, the old 1 would be out of date, and it would appear that you had video problems, (shortly followed by a headache). If you can count to 16, but only need to count to 4, then your options are tremendous. 1,2,3,4,3,4,2,4,2,3,1,2,4, 11 commands from 1 to the next 1 in this example. from line to that same line. This would allow for a secure monitor that didn't invite eyestrain. Good luck, Sean From roach_s at intplsrv.net Sat Oct 14 12:10:40 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 14:10:40 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: From LibertyWire: 8 Fallacies in the Presidential Debates In-Reply-To: <200010131301.GAA16526@mail19.bigmailbox.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001014140207.00acad30@mail.intplsrv.net> I was reading along until shortly after this point. Then it started talking about truth or ignorance of the two dominant candidates. At 08:01 AM 10/13/2000, First Name Last Name wrote: >This is in reference to the most recent debate, but it has important >points for cpunks to consider (though some of these will be pretty obvious). >--------------------------- >L i b e r t y W i r e ... > Smaller Government ... And don't look to either party to pressure its >candidate to reduce government. The Republicans >have increased spending during their five years in >control of Congress at a rate of 3.2% per year, >while the Democrats in the previous five years >increased spending by 3.9% a year -- hardly a >significant difference. Spending during George >Bush, Sr.'s four years as President increased by >4.3% per year, while spending during Clinton's >seven years in office has increased by 3.2% per >year. I did the math. ((3.2*5)+(3.9*3))/8~=3.5 (3.4625) 3.5 !=3.2 I don't have but two years documented here to figure the spending increase for Bush Sr. but I imagine it too will not add up. If I got my math severly wrong, be sure to let me know. ... >Fallacy #8: "There's a difference in character >between the candidates." > >This may be the biggest fallacy of all. Bush and >Gore are each trying to sell you on the idea that >his character is superior to Bill Clinton's. > >But Clinton's biggest moral flaw is his inability >to tell the truth. And neither Mr. Bush nor Mr. >Gore has demonstrated any regard for the truth. >The fallacies I've listed here (and a more >complete listing would make this article far too >long) show that neither one is reluctant to >perpetuate fraudulent assumptions. The only excuse >either can offer is that he isn't aware that the >assumptions are false -- in which case his >ignorance makes him unfit to be President. > >It's simple: both Al Gore and George Bush are too >dishonest to be considered, or too ignorant to be >qualified. You aren't going to get what you by >electing a politician won't even tell the truth >about the current state of government or his >intentions for the Presidency. ... At this point, based on the above math, I stopped reading. Good luck, Sean Roach From jimdbell at home.com Sat Oct 14 14:51:32 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 14:51:32 -0700 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi References: <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> Message-ID: <000b01c03628$eabfbd40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> > Why try to pick a Medeco when it's locking a glass door? :-) > > -derek > > PS: This isn't a hypothetical; I visited a friend's parents a number > of years ago, and noticed that their front door, all glass (with > nothing behind it) was locked using a Medeco lock. For those who > don't know, a Medeco is a top-of-the-line lock, practically impossible > to pick, drill out, etc. The solution is obvious, to a chemist. Make the glass door double-glazed, sealed at the edges, and filled with hydrogen cyanide (prussic acid). (with a smidgen of phosphoric acid added to prevent long-term polymerization.) Jim Bell BS Chem MIT '80 From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sat Oct 14 06:02:35 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 16:02:35 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Jim Choate wrote: >No stupid, there are lot's of persons called the 'market'. There is no >'market' without those individuals. When the market goes out of >equilibrium then free market mechanisms are not enough to correct. On a similar vein, just about every somehow understandable version of free market theory is based on the assumption of a steady state market. The theory does not include a temporal element. If you want to study those, you're bound for such a quagmire of stochastic nonlinear differential equations that you would not believe. Hence, the global stability of any reasonably realistic model of markets is practically impossible to guarantee with current mathematical tools. It is quite possible for such systems to behave badly enough to kill most of the participants in the market, for instance. Besides, the basic continuity assumptions behind mathematical economics practically guarantee that the theory does not take such possibilities seriously - I know of no models which take into account the discrete, limited number of people participating in the market. Free market theory, though interesting, useful and absolutely much better than most available alternatives simply does not cover it all. It is an abstraction which probably should not be attained any more than the socialist one. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ravage at ssz.com Sat Oct 14 14:51:01 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 16:51:01 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: [9fans] New release (fwd) Message-ID: ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 17:14:07 -0400 From: rob pike Reply-To: 9fans at cse.psu.edu To: 9fans at cse.psu.edu Subject: [9fans] New release A new release of Plan 9 is now available at http://plan9.bell-labs.com/plan9 You can download a full distribution or an update relative to the previous release, dated July 29 2000. For a variety of reasons the update is larger than previous ones, but still much smaller than the full release. Although this is primarily a maintenance release, it contains a number of new things. - The open source license has been updated to improve some of the more contentious clauses and to add language about the Plan 9 trademark. - More VGA cards are supported, particularly the 3dfx, and more now have support for hardware acceleration. - The AccuPoint II's extra buttons are now connected to `button 2' of the mouse interface; thanks to Ionkov for the crucial piece of information. (See mouse(8).) - The cpu command now has the ability to encrypt the data on its communication channel. This facility is enabled by default, use cpu -e clear to turn it off. - Acme now has a command language for editing, essentially identical to sam's. - Formatted I/O for floating point has been rewritten to provide the best possible answer always. - There is a full set of `rune string' routines installed in the C library. - Pipefile(1) is installed; it is used by the accupoint support and by Kenji's ktrans. - Lp will now print to an HP DeskJet and in fact to any Ghostscript- supported device. - New command leak(1) detects memory leaks in running programs without prior arrangement; thanks to Russ Cox. - Scat now has the ability to orient the maps to place the zenith up; thanks to Doug McIlroy. - /bin/termrc has a simple mechanism to enable system-dependent configuration. cpurc should do the same, but doesn't, for historical reasons. There are doubtless many more minor things. -rob From honig at sprynet.com Sat Oct 14 17:51:17 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 17:51:17 -0700 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <000b01c03628$eabfbd40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001014175117.007f7520@pop.sprynet.com> At 02:51 PM 10/14/00 -0700, jim bell wrote: > >The solution is obvious, to a chemist. Make the glass door double-glazed, >sealed at the edges, and filled with hydrogen cyanide (prussic acid). (with >a smidgen of phosphoric acid added to prevent long-term polymerization.) > >Jim Bell >BS Chem MIT '80 Well you're back in full form :-) Mr. B but the counter is not even a full chem suit, merely a fireman's or diver's oxygen system. DH BS EECS-CS, Cog Sci MIT '86 From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 14 19:16:44 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 19:16:44 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001014191427.019cca00@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 04:02 PM 10/14/2000 +0300, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > On a similar vein, just about every somehow understandable version > of free arket theory is based on the assumption of a steady state > market. The theory does not include a temporal element. Your ignorance of economics is as breathtaking as your ignorance of African famines. How old are you? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 9p9Avnl/xDuiPWrV69o6sWcjQlZIzZCO0q0KCuH3 4TdRsjtBfMLThLdJnSB09sCWWFdLuFEZ8DY98CP0Q From mhw at wittsend.com Sat Oct 14 16:19:27 2000 From: mhw at wittsend.com (Michael H. Warfield) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 19:19:27 -0400 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <000b01c03628$eabfbd40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com>; from jimdbell@home.com on Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:51:32PM -0700 References: <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> <000b01c03628$eabfbd40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <20001014191927.C21286@alcove.wittsend.com> On Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:51:32PM -0700, jim bell wrote: > > Why try to pick a Medeco when it's locking a glass door? :-) > > -derek > > PS: This isn't a hypothetical; I visited a friend's parents a number > > of years ago, and noticed that their front door, all glass (with > > nothing behind it) was locked using a Medeco lock. For those who > > don't know, a Medeco is a top-of-the-line lock, practically impossible > > to pick, drill out, etc. > The solution is obvious, to a chemist. Make the glass door double-glazed, > sealed at the edges, and filled with hydrogen cyanide (prussic acid). (with > a smidgen of phosphoric acid added to prevent long-term polymerization.) First kid with a bee-bee gun and you're on the evening news. I've lost a couple of similar doors in the past to kids, both my own and neighbors... > Jim Bell > BS Chem MIT '80 Mike -- Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | mhw at WittsEnd.com (The Mad Wizard) | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it! From nobody at noisebox.remailer.org Sat Oct 14 19:19:35 2000 From: nobody at noisebox.remailer.org (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 20:19:35 -0600 Subject: CDR: Re: needs Message-ID: <77c0cd403e963d79bbe212a3c4e68ed8@noisebox.remailer.org> On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, diego wrote: > send me a copy of anarchy's cookbook please http://www.infoshop.org/cookbook.html From sustae at intergate.ca Sat Oct 14 20:47:36 2000 From: sustae at intergate.ca (sustae at intergate.ca) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 20:47:36 -0700 Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi References: <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> <3.0.6.32.20001014175117.007f7520@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <00ae01c0365a$a8cc6d20$e0607318@surrey1.bc.wave.home.com> I wouldn't recommend boobytrapping the glass in that manner. I'd go with a ballistic laminate on the glass. That way I can avoid wearing an NBCW suit and body armour on around the house if some joker threw a brick(or worse)through the window.. ie:Ding-Dong + brick=Big mess+ouch all over YOU! Getting wacked with your own trap sucks big time, no? Let your own level of paranoia decide on the thickness of laminate to go with (tire irons, etc -> .50cal BMG API) Regards, Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Honig" To: "jim bell" ; "Derek Atkins" ; "Steven M. Bellovin" Cc: ; ; Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2000 5:51 PM Subject: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi > At 02:51 PM 10/14/00 -0700, jim bell wrote: > > > >The solution is obvious, to a chemist. Make the glass door double-glazed, > >sealed at the edges, and filled with hydrogen cyanide (prussic acid). (with > >a smidgen of phosphoric acid added to prevent long-term polymerization.) > > > >Jim Bell > >BS Chem MIT '80 > > Well you're back in full form :-) Mr. B but the counter is not even a > full chem suit, merely a fireman's or diver's oxygen system. > > DH > BS EECS-CS, Cog Sci MIT '86 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From honig at sprynet.com Sat Oct 14 17:53:43 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 20:53:43 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Burglar Politics, Tempesting PC's that watch TV and DVD In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.1.20001014112017.00abeed0@mail.intplsrv.net> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001014174249.007f68d0@pop.sprynet.com> At 12:28 PM 10/14/00 -0400, Sean Roach wrote: >At 10:31 AM 10/11/2000, Ray Dillinger wrote: >... >>Also, it looks like the sort of thing that could be designed around. >>If someone were building a "secure laptop" they could make a video >>system and drivers that wrote the bits in a different, randomized >>order each time, and which only wrote the changed bits. If anybody >>is actually making a product like this, it would be a strong >>indication that *somebody* with money to spend on R&D considers >>it a valid threat model, because nobody makes products without a >>market. > >This could easily be the recipe for a flickering monitor. First of all, 1. RD's idea sounds like something the content-protection folks would like... writing to a RAM-based display in customized, random order... 2. Electronics are so much faster than human visual flicker fusion frequencies... From joel45cl at netzero.net Sat Oct 14 19:06:57 2000 From: joel45cl at netzero.net (diego) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 21:06:57 -0500 Subject: CDR: needs Message-ID: <000a01c0364c$9aa20e20$d6903004@joe> send me a copy of anarchy's cookbook please -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 349 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Results at TVEyes.com Sat Oct 14 23:55:14 2000 From: Results at TVEyes.com (Results at TVEyes.com) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 02:55:14 -0400 Subject: CDR: crypto Message-ID: <59EBFD05352BD411B71600D0B74739D1CBFE4A@maileyes.tveyes.com> Your keyword(s), crypto, was recently spoken on YTV during Anti-Gravity Room. Sunday, Oct 15 2000 at 02:55 AM ......superboy #32 we all know the traditional super boy - smily younger version of superman and walker of crypto the superdog ...... For details, visit http://www.TVEyes.com/database/expand.asp?ln=2426432&Key=crypto Just follow the above link to keep your account active for this keyword. For total control of your keywords, go to http://www.tveyes.com/log_in.asp Get $200 in FREE Gasoline: no risk, no obligation! http://clk4.com/cgi-bin/conv.pl?73118 From eugene.leitl at lrz.uni-muenchen.de Sun Oct 15 10:19:36 2000 From: eugene.leitl at lrz.uni-muenchen.de (Eugene Leitl) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 10:19:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <000b01c03628$eabfbd40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> <000b01c03628$eabfbd40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <14825.59176.958818.154616@lrz.uni-muenchen.de> jim bell writes: > The solution is obvious, to a chemist. Make the glass door double-glazed, > sealed at the edges, and filled with hydrogen cyanide (prussic acid). (with > a smidgen of phosphoric acid added to prevent long-term polymerization.) The solution is obvious, to a chemist. Laminate the glass door with a sheet of clear (impact or air sensitive) high explosive. Extra points for using detonating HE, since turning glass into powder and not littering up the sidewalk with glass shards. From ravage at ssz.com Sun Oct 15 08:38:55 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 10:38:55 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 15 Oct 2000, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Jim Choate wrote: > > >> On a similar vein, just about every somehow understandable version of free > >> market theory is based on the assumption of a steady state market. > > > >Is there a distinction between 'equilibrium' and 'steady state' in this > >context? > > None. But I think both terms are easily misunderstood - in most cases we can > analyze the local time behavior of differential equations based on steady > state assumptions. Good. I agree with your comment. The reason that I was asking was situations like 'A-B Chemical Oscillators' and B-Z generators from chemistry as well. There is a clear stability but there isn't a singular steady-state. It seems to me that a statistical mechanical market modelled as a CA could have similar structures (e.g. Glider Guns). It would be interesting to understand what that meant in real world behaviour. > >Many of the folks I deal with have turned to cellular models. They seem to > >behave in a reasonable manner and they're reasonably easy to manage. My > >personal interest is in the application of modelling the near term > >politico-military situation with the two China's. > > Cellular automata are nice and well understood. But isn't this quite a leap > from analytic treatment to the direction of numerical simulation? Not that > there's anything wrong with that, but to me some of the theoretical > questions (like the question of fundamental stability) really seem to live > more in the domain of equations. Since it's well understood that CA's represent a general computing mechanism it's not a leap at all really. Just a different manner of instantiating them. I think the clear superiority comes from CA's treating a distinctly modular market modularly where'as DE's tend to consider a continous domain. people, time, items, services, and specie come in modular forms. CA's inherently instantiate the concept of 'I' in the model, allow each cell to have unique 'neighborhood' rulesets. The hard part is to figure out how to take that equation and convert it into a 'neighborhood' ruleset. The work of Wolfram and Rucker has been quite helpful in this aspect. Other nice features of CA's is that they are naturals for parallel processing. They also fit into OO programming concepts easily. When you couple this with concepts like 'small networks', 'cake cutting algorithms', evolutionary/genetic algorithms, and fuzzy algebra/logic, and include game theory in the 'neighborhood' ruleset you end up with a very flexible tool. This approach is very multi-disciplinary and differs in characteristics from normal CA's with simple 'survival neighborhood' rulesets. One difference that drasticlly changes the behaviour is the allowance of 'action at a distance' with respect to 'neighborhood' selection. Make the state of the current cell a function of distant cells and not just immediate neighbors. Along this same vein, instead of the state dependencies being immediate add 'speed of light' limits via diffusion mechanisms. You can also use things like 'Annealling Theory' and spin-glasses. As Rucker says, There is a better way. YOU can do it. Seek the Gnarl! ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 15 11:56:09 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:56:09 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: <200010141909.NAA24508@pophost.com> References: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001015114544.019c0ab8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 12:04 PM 10/14/2000 -0700, Richard Fiero wrote: > With respect to equilibria, it's an unwarranted assumption that a > market has just one stable point. Certainly the Great Depression > was a stable but undesirable situation. It was only stable thanks to massive government intervention. You will notice that the recent Asian crisis started with a market crisis of confidence in government financial instruments similar to that which occurred just before the beginning of the great depression. The Asian governments responded to this crisis by looking at what governments did back during the great depression, and proceeding to do the opposite of whatever governments did back then. While the crisis of confidence caused some initial hardship, this would have swiftly evaporated as it did in the Asian crisis. What really caused the great depression in the United states was Smoot Hawley and government intervention to maintain artificially high wages for some groups, and artificially high prices to pay those artificially high wages. Similar wage and price policies in France today are accompanied by similarly high permanent unemployment, with totalitarian parties receiving a larger vote in France than they ever received in America during the great depression. If those wage and price policies were accompanied by Smoot Hawley, we would probably soon enough get a totalitarian regime in France. In Spain during the great depression, they simultaneously employed artificial wage policies, Smoot Hawley like tariff policies, and also massive Keynsian stimulation. This had the interesting result that they suffered an inflationary depression, the first major occurrence of the infamous stagflation, and did wind up with a totalitarian regime. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG /Il4oyhjZLMpYwPkHNBPkbDOvCqdT3i6s2Idi6VJ 4sWymZlb3VNvWA2v0KrisTwsq0/5Ts0zVfqLM8ICX From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 15 12:18:52 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 12:18:52 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.1.2.20001014191427.019cca00@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001015115716.02586668@shell11.ba.best.com> -- > I freely admit that I have absolutely no authority over things > economic. But I do think you too have an overly simplified view of > the theory - you do not seem to distinquish between the derivation > of some of the parameters (e.g. price) of a dynamic system which is > assumed to be in equilibrium based on known ones (e.g. measures > of/related to demand, availability etc.) from actually working with > the time evolution of the system (none of the variables are known a > priori and the solution consists of complete time functions). Economists do that all the time. It is called modeling. Lucas and Lawrence Klein won nobel prizes for doing it. I expect that other economists that I am not familiar with have also won Nobels in it. > For instance, in the basic example given above - price formation of > a single good in an ideal closed market (i.e. given the normal > assumptions of independence of participants, continuity of > variables, perfect knowledge and so on) - can you cite a single > understandable source with the rigorous derivation of bounds for > over/undershoot in price upon rapid fluctuation in supply? I doubt that I could provide any source on economics that you would regard as understandable. You are asking for a prediction of the behavior of human actors, predicting what people will do. One can only derive "rigorous" results if one makes assumptions about how people think and what they want. The most rigorous attempt at that is known as "rational expectations theory". Rational expectations theory (for which Lucas got his Nobel) assumes that people will make the best guess they can about future behavior of the market, then base their present behavior on that best guess, and the market will then reflect that present behavior. This of course produces inaccurate results for obvious reasons, and economists attempt to model people more accurately but less rigorously by using "rational ignorance" and "bounded rationality." All these are major areas of study in economics. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG DxdupuGKPAB/3JK3xLW6o/vv+Pqu/DksQ40lUL6M 4brEUhWqvkA5XljkmlgM1eGujT4yTvhuOYMtt5ayb From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 15 03:02:55 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 13:02:55 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001014191427.019cca00@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: > > On a similar vein, just about every somehow understandable version > > of free arket theory is based on the assumption of a steady state > > market. The theory does not include a temporal element. > >Your ignorance of economics is as breathtaking as your ignorance of African >famines. I freely admit that I have absolutely no authority over things economic. But I do think you too have an overly simplified view of the theory - you do not seem to distinquish between the derivation of some of the parameters (e.g. price) of a dynamic system which is assumed to be in equilibrium based on known ones (e.g. measures of/related to demand, availability etc.) from actually working with the time evolution of the system (none of the variables are known a priori and the solution consists of complete time functions). For instance, in the basic example given above - price formation of a single good in an ideal closed market (i.e. given the normal assumptions of independence of participants, continuity of variables, perfect knowledge and so on) - can you cite a single understandable source with the rigorous derivation of bounds for over/undershoot in price upon rapid fluctuation in supply? Indeed, even if we assume no stochastic element is present, I think this is a scenario in which solutions can be found which are far from optimal in the sense of stable state theory. When you refer to my ignorance, you perhaps mean that the above situation has in fact been rigorously analyzed. I've never claimed otherwise. The point is, such analysis is usually tricky enough to be incomprehensible to your average math graduate and it produces results which have little to do with the optimal-allocation-of-resources mantra of true free market believers. >How old are you? I can't think of a single reason why a person interested in civilized discussion would want to ask that. But 22 is the number. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From galt at inconnu.isu.edu Sun Oct 15 12:08:47 2000 From: galt at inconnu.isu.edu (John Galt) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 13:08:47 -0600 (MDT) Subject: CDR: Re: needs In-Reply-To: <000a01c0364c$9aa20e20$d6903004@joe> Message-ID: Go down to the bookstore and buy your own damn copy. On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, diego wrote: > send me a copy of anarchy's cookbook please > -- Armageddon means never having to say you're sorry. Who is John Galt? galt at inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 15 03:14:38 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 13:14:38 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Jim Choate wrote: >> On a similar vein, just about every somehow understandable version of free >> market theory is based on the assumption of a steady state market. > >Is there a distinction between 'equilibrium' and 'steady state' in this >context? None. But I think both terms are easily misunderstood - in most cases we can analyze the local time behavior of differential equations based on steady state assumptions. However, global properties of the system, like unconditional stability, cannot. I think most of what a layperson knows about economics is based on the former while the latter is a specialty to chaos theorists. >Many of the folks I deal with have turned to cellular models. They seem to >behave in a reasonable manner and they're reasonably easy to manage. My >personal interest is in the application of modelling the near term >politico-military situation with the two China's. Cellular automata are nice and well understood. But isn't this quite a leap from analytic treatment to the direction of numerical simulation? Not that there's anything wrong with that, but to me some of the theoretical questions (like the question of fundamental stability) really seem to live more in the domain of equations. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From STRKDOGG at aol.com Sun Oct 15 10:59:14 2000 From: STRKDOGG at aol.com (STRKDOGG at aol.com) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 13:59:14 EDT Subject: CDR: MONEY FOR FREE! Message-ID: <7a.b6ec5f2.271b4a72@aol.com> MAKE MONEY FAST, EASY, AND LEGALLY -------------------------------------------------------------------- : Posted by $$$strick:nine$$$ on oct, 2000 at 22:08:47: : : April, 1997 : Fellow Debtor: : This is going to sound like a con, but in fact IT WORKS! The person who : is now #8 on the list was #9 when I got it, which was only a few days ago. : Five dollars is a small investment in your future. Forget the lottery : for a week, and give this a try. It can work for ALL of us. : You can edit this list with a word processor or text editor and then : convert it to a text file. : Good Luck!! : Dear Friend: : My name is Johnny Ponce. In September 1998 my car was repossessed and the : bill collectors were hounding me like you wouldn't believe. I was laid : off and my unemployment checks had run out. The only escape I had from : the pressures of failure was my computer and my modem. I longed to turn : my advocation into my vocation. : In January 1999 my family and I went on a ten day cruise to the tropics. : I bought a brand new Lincoln Town Car with CASH in February 1989. I am : currently building a new home on the west coast of Florida, with a private : pool, boat slip, an a beautiful view of the bay from my breakfast room : table and patio. I will never have to work again. Today I am RICH! I have : earned over $400,000.00 (Four Hundred Thousand Dollars) to date and will : become a millionaire within 4 or 5 months. Anyone can do the same. This : money making program works perfectly every time, 100% of the time. I have : NEVER failed to earn $50,000.00 or more whenever I wanted. Best of all, : you never have to leave home except to go to your mailbox or post office. : In October 1998, I received a letter in the mail telling me how I could : earn $50,000.00 or more whenever I wanted. I was naturally very skeptical : and threw the letter on the desk next to my computer. It's funny though, : when you are desparate, backed into a corner, your mind does crazy things. : I spent a frustrating day looking through the want ads for a job with a : future. The pickings were sparse at best. That night I tried to unwind : by booting up my computer and calling several bulletin boards. I read : several of the messages posted and then glanced at the letter laying next : to the computer. All at once it became clear to me. I now had the key to : my dreams. : I realized that with the power of the computer I could expand and enhance : this money making formula into the most unbelievable cash flow generator : that has ever been created. I substituted the computer bulletin boards in : place of the post office and electronically did by computer what others : were doing by mail. Now only a few letters are mailed manually. Most of : the hard work is speedily downloaded to other bulletin boards throughout : the world. If you believe that someday you deserve that lucky break that : you have waited for all of your life, simply follow the easy instructions : below. Your dreams WILL come true. : : Sincerely yours, : Johnny Ponce : : *************************************************************** : -----========INSTRUCTIONS===============----- : *************************************************************** : Follow these instructions EXACTLY, and in 20 to 60 days you will have : received well over $50,000.00 cash, all yours. This program has remained successful : because of the HONESTY and integrety of the participants. Please continue : its success by CAREFULLY ADHERING to the instructions. : Welcome to the world of Mail Order! This little business is somewhat : different than most mail order houses. Your product is not solid and tangible, but : rather a service. You are in the business of developing Mailing Lists. Many : large corporations are happy to pay big bucks for quality lists. : (The money made from the mailing lists is secondary to the income which is : made from people like yourself requesting that they be included in that : list.) : : [1] Immediately mail $1.00 to the first 5 names listed below, starting at : number 1 through number 5. SEND CASH ONLY. (Total investment: $5.00) : Enclose a note with each letter stating: : "Please add my name to your mailing list". : Include; Your name, Mailing address, and E-mail address. : (note) This is a legitimate service that you are requesting and you are : paying $1.00 for this service. : [2] Remove the name that appears as number 1 on the list. Move the other : 9 names up one position (Number 2 becomes number 1, number 3 becomes : number 2, and so on). Place your name, address, and zip code in the : number 10 position. : (note) You do not need to add your e-mail address to the list. Only add : your e-mail address to the 5 letters you send to the first 5 names : listed. : (extra note) When you change the names and put your name in the 10 : position, you have to Save As when you are done.... : then to send this to yourself so your name is in the 10 : position, hit compose mail...then attach this file and : send this file to yourself.......then it will work to send : to other people. : [3] With your name in the number 10 position, upload this ENTIRE file to : 10 (ten) different bulletin boards. You may post it to the BBS's : message base or to the file section. Name it FASTCASH.TXT, and use the : file description comments to draw attention to this file and its great : potential for all of us. In addition, send this out by E-Mail to as many : people as possible. : (note) Essentially what this does is circulate this file around, which is what you : want to do. So sending this out to as many people as you can is to your benefit. : [4] Within 60 days you will receive over $50,000.00 in CASH. : : Keep a copy of this file for yourself so that you can use it again and again : whenever you need money. As soon as you mail out these letters you are : automatically in the mail order business. People will be sending YOU $1.00 : to be placed on your mailing list. : This mailing list can then be rented to a broker that can be found in your : local yellow pages listings for additional income on a regular basis. The : list will become more valuable as it grows in size. : This is a service. ** IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL ** : If you have any doubts as to the legality of this service, please refer to : Title 18, Sections 1302 and 1341 of the Postal Lottery Laws. : NOTE: Make sure that you retain EVERY name and address sent to you, either : on computer or hard copy, but do not discard the names and notes that : people send to you. This is PROOF that you are truly providing a : service, and should the I.R.S. or some other government agency question : you, you can provide them with this proof! : Remember, as each post is downloaded and the instructions carefully followed, : five memebers will be reimbursed for their participation as a List Developer : with $1.00 each. Your name will move up the list geometrically so that when : your name reaches the number 5 position you will be receiving thousands of : dollars in cash. : REMEMBER - THIS PROGRAM FAILS ONLY IF YOU ARE NOT HONEST - PLEASE!! : PLEASE BE HONORABLE...IT DOES WORK! THANK YOU : : *************************************************************** : -----============THE LIST===============----- : *************************************************************** : 1.Marty Aliniz rt. 10 box 139-a : edinburg tx. 78539 : 2. David Salinger 47 Diana's Trail : Roslyn, NY 11576 : 3. Tim Gulczynski 2171 Clark St. : East Troy, WI 53120 : 4. Brian Gregson 4404 E. 90th Pl. : Tulsa, OK 74137 : 5. Jesse Zuckerman 19475 Woodlands Lane : Huntington Beach, CA 92648 : 6. David Jenson 47 1/2 West 200 North : Price, UT 84501 : 7. Roger Lew 1433 5th Ave. : Oakland, Ca, 94606 : 8. Chris Karow 701 Fulton St. S.E. #287 : Minneapolis, MN 55455 : 9. James Huff 1097 Glenwood dr. : Radcliff, Ky 40160 : 10. Juan F. Ponce 6245 Parkside ave. : San Diego, C.A. 92139 . : : ****************************************************************************** *********** : The following letters were written by a participating members in this program: : *************************************************************************** ************** : To those with the COMMON sense to participate in this easy money opportunity: : About six months ago I received the enclosed post in letter form. I : ignored it. I received about five more of the same letter within the next : two week.I ignored them also. Of course, I was tempted to follow through : and dreamed of making thousands, but I was convinced it was just another gimmick : and could not possibly work. : I was wrong! About three weeks later I saw this same letter posted on a : local bulletin board in Montreal. I liked the idea of giving it a try with my : computer. I didn't expect much because I figured, if other people were as : skeptical as I, they would not be too quick to part with $5.00. But, I BUY : LOTTERY TICKETS WEEKLY IN MY PROVINCE AND HAVE NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT BUT : TICKET STUBS! This week I decided to look at this as my weekly lottery : purchase. I addressed the envelopes and mailed out $1.00 in each as directed. : Two weeks went by and I didn't receive anything in the mail. The fourth week : rolled around and I couldn't believe what happened! I can not say that I : received $50,000.00, but it was definitely well over $35,000.00! For the : first time in 10 years I got out of debt. It was great. Of course, it did not : take me long to go through my earnings, so I am using this excellent money : opportunity once again. FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AND GET READY TO ENJOY! : Please send a copy of this letter along with the enclosed letter so together : we can convince people who are skeptical that this really does work! : : Good Luck, : Charles Kust : St Agathe Que. : : ANOTHER ADDITION BY A PARTICIPATING MEMBER : WHAT HAVE YOU GOT TO LOSE, A MAXIMUM OF 5$ !JUST TRY IT! : SPREAD IT EVERYWHERE, THE MORE YOU SPREAD THE MORE YOU MAKE! : : (((((Roger Lew))))) : Hello, my name is Roger Lew . As you may have : noticed I'm the seventh name on this list, so I do not have : a rags-to-riches story to tell here. However, I did make : a phone call to the 2nd name on this list, Jane Beckon. : Did she have a rags to riches story to tell? Not exactly, : but then I found out that she did not follow the : instructions precisely. You see, Jane lost faith in : the program before she had finished following instructions. : She only uploaded this file on one BBS, which happens to be : operated by Brian Sassounian, the 3rd name on this list. : Jane told me that she has received $600.00 to date : (1/6/95). I realize this is far from the $50,000.00 : promised at the first of this file, yet one must keep : two things in mind: : 1. $600.00 is more than 100 times her initial investment, and it only took about : an hour of her time (there's nothing to lose). : 2. This program works mathematically on an exponential scale. In other : words, for every one BBS that this file is uploaded onto, it should : spread to at least ten other BBSs and possibly a whole lot more. So, if : Jane had uploaded his file on all ten BBSs, she should have at least : gotten a hundred-fold of what she has, which would be $600.00. Not bad : for a few hours work and a $6.25 investment (including postage). : Finally, I would like to exhort those who become involved : in this program to maintain its integrity by being honest. : It is the only way that it can possibly pay off. In other : words, be sure to enter your name at the bottom of the : list and not in one of the top five positions (actually : this would be robbing yourself since it is while your name : is in the lower positions that it gets multiplied : exponentially over hundreds of BBSs). And, of course, : send your $1.00 off to the first five names. As I write : this I have not made a penny (that's because I have not : uploaded this yet), but I thought you might like to hear : from someone at the bottom of the list, instead of someone : claiming rags-to-riches. I hope such is true, and I'm : sure it will be if we all stick with it. The potential is : definitely here! : : =============================================================== : OK HERE'S THE DEAL. AT PRESENT I AM A BUSINESS MAJOR AT VANDERBILT : AND THIS PROGRAM MAKES A WORLD OF SENSE TO ME. I RECENTLY READ ABOUT : A GUY THAT TOOK A PENNY FROM EVERY PERSON'S BANK ACCOUNT AT THE NEW YORK : CITY BANK. AFTER 2 YEARS OF DOING THIS ILLEGALY HE BECAME A MILLIONAIRE. : BUT GOT GREEDY AND GOT CAUGHT. SAME PRINCIPLE HERE. TAKE A DOLLAR : FROM EVERYONE WHO GETS THIS AND ALTHOUGH THEIR GIVING PRACTICALLY : NOTHING, THE RECEIVER IS GETTING LOTS. SORTA THE HUMANE THING TO DO. : IF YOU COULD GIVE A GUY A BUCK AND HELP HIM HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY OFF A : DEBT OR SAVE MONEY FOR RETIREMENT WHY NOT? THEN AFTER YOU SEND A : DOLLAR JUST MANIPULATE THIS FILE LIKE IT STATES ABOVE AND PEOPLE WILL BE : HELPING YOU OUT TOO. MY DAD TAUGHT ME TO BE CAREFUL OF THINGS THAT : SOUND TO GOOD TO BE TRUE CAUSE THEY USUALLY ARE BUT WHAT CAN YOU : LOSE BY GIVING $5!!! YOU HAVE ALL TO WIN AND NOTHING TO LOSE. L8R ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From STRKDOGG at aol.com Sun Oct 15 11:06:22 2000 From: STRKDOGG at aol.com (STRKDOGG at aol.com) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:06:22 EDT Subject: CDR: TOP SECRET INFO Message-ID: MAKE MONEY FAST, EASY, AND LEGALLY -------------------------------------------------------------------- : Posted by $$$strick:nine$$$ on oct, 2000 at 22:08:47: : : April, 1997 : Fellow Debtor: : This is going to sound like a con, but in fact IT WORKS! The person who : is now #8 on the list was #9 when I got it, which was only a few days ago. : Five dollars is a small investment in your future. Forget the lottery : for a week, and give this a try. It can work for ALL of us. : You can edit this list with a word processor or text editor and then : convert it to a text file. : Good Luck!! : Dear Friend: : My name is Johnny Ponce. In September 1998 my car was repossessed and the : bill collectors were hounding me like you wouldn't believe. I was laid : off and my unemployment checks had run out. The only escape I had from : the pressures of failure was my computer and my modem. I longed to turn : my advocation into my vocation. : In January 1999 my family and I went on a ten day cruise to the tropics. : I bought a brand new Lincoln Town Car with CASH in February 1989. I am : currently building a new home on the west coast of Florida, with a private : pool, boat slip, an a beautiful view of the bay from my breakfast room : table and patio. I will never have to work again. Today I am RICH! I have : earned over $400,000.00 (Four Hundred Thousand Dollars) to date and will : become a millionaire within 4 or 5 months. Anyone can do the same. This : money making program works perfectly every time, 100% of the time. I have : NEVER failed to earn $50,000.00 or more whenever I wanted. Best of all, : you never have to leave home except to go to your mailbox or post office. : In October 1998, I received a letter in the mail telling me how I could : earn $50,000.00 or more whenever I wanted. I was naturally very skeptical : and threw the letter on the desk next to my computer. It's funny though, : when you are desparate, backed into a corner, your mind does crazy things. : I spent a frustrating day looking through the want ads for a job with a : future. The pickings were sparse at best. That night I tried to unwind : by booting up my computer and calling several bulletin boards. I read : several of the messages posted and then glanced at the letter laying next : to the computer. All at once it became clear to me. I now had the key to : my dreams. : I realized that with the power of the computer I could expand and enhance : this money making formula into the most unbelievable cash flow generator : that has ever been created. I substituted the computer bulletin boards in : place of the post office and electronically did by computer what others : were doing by mail. Now only a few letters are mailed manually. Most of : the hard work is speedily downloaded to other bulletin boards throughout : the world. If you believe that someday you deserve that lucky break that : you have waited for all of your life, simply follow the easy instructions : below. Your dreams WILL come true. : : Sincerely yours, : Johnny Ponce : : *************************************************************** : -----========INSTRUCTIONS===============----- : *************************************************************** : Follow these instructions EXACTLY, and in 20 to 60 days you will have : received well over $50,000.00 cash, all yours. This program has remained successful : because of the HONESTY and integrety of the participants. Please continue : its success by CAREFULLY ADHERING to the instructions. : Welcome to the world of Mail Order! This little business is somewhat : different than most mail order houses. Your product is not solid and tangible, but : rather a service. You are in the business of developing Mailing Lists. Many : large corporations are happy to pay big bucks for quality lists. : (The money made from the mailing lists is secondary to the income which is : made from people like yourself requesting that they be included in that : list.) : : [1] Immediately mail $1.00 to the first 5 names listed below, starting at : number 1 through number 5. SEND CASH ONLY. (Total investment: $5.00) : Enclose a note with each letter stating: : "Please add my name to your mailing list". : Include; Your name, Mailing address, and E-mail address. : (note) This is a legitimate service that you are requesting and you are : paying $1.00 for this service. : [2] Remove the name that appears as number 1 on the list. Move the other : 9 names up one position (Number 2 becomes number 1, number 3 becomes : number 2, and so on). Place your name, address, and zip code in the : number 10 position. : (note) You do not need to add your e-mail address to the list. Only add : your e-mail address to the 5 letters you send to the first 5 names : listed. : (extra note) When you change the names and put your name in the 10 : position, you have to Save As when you are done.... : then to send this to yourself so your name is in the 10 : position, hit compose mail...then attach this file and : send this file to yourself.......then it will work to send : to other people. : [3] With your name in the number 10 position, upload this ENTIRE file to : 10 (ten) different bulletin boards. You may post it to the BBS's : message base or to the file section. Name it FASTCASH.TXT, and use the : file description comments to draw attention to this file and its great : potential for all of us. In addition, send this out by E-Mail to as many : people as possible. : (note) Essentially what this does is circulate this file around, which is what you : want to do. So sending this out to as many people as you can is to your benefit. : [4] Within 60 days you will receive over $50,000.00 in CASH. : : Keep a copy of this file for yourself so that you can use it again and again : whenever you need money. As soon as you mail out these letters you are : automatically in the mail order business. People will be sending YOU $1.00 : to be placed on your mailing list. : This mailing list can then be rented to a broker that can be found in your : local yellow pages listings for additional income on a regular basis. The : list will become more valuable as it grows in size. : This is a service. ** IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL ** : If you have any doubts as to the legality of this service, please refer to : Title 18, Sections 1302 and 1341 of the Postal Lottery Laws. : NOTE: Make sure that you retain EVERY name and address sent to you, either : on computer or hard copy, but do not discard the names and notes that : people send to you. This is PROOF that you are truly providing a : service, and should the I.R.S. or some other government agency question : you, you can provide them with this proof! : Remember, as each post is downloaded and the instructions carefully followed, : five memebers will be reimbursed for their participation as a List Developer : with $1.00 each. Your name will move up the list geometrically so that when : your name reaches the number 5 position you will be receiving thousands of : dollars in cash. : REMEMBER - THIS PROGRAM FAILS ONLY IF YOU ARE NOT HONEST - PLEASE!! : PLEASE BE HONORABLE...IT DOES WORK! THANK YOU : : *************************************************************** : -----============THE LIST===============----- : *************************************************************** : 1.Marty Aliniz rt. 10 box 139-a : edinburg tx. 78539 : 2. David Salinger 47 Diana's Trail : Roslyn, NY 11576 : 3. Tim Gulczynski 2171 Clark St. : East Troy, WI 53120 : 4. Brian Gregson 4404 E. 90th Pl. : Tulsa, OK 74137 : 5. Jesse Zuckerman 19475 Woodlands Lane : Huntington Beach, CA 92648 : 6. David Jenson 47 1/2 West 200 North : Price, UT 84501 : 7. Roger Lew 1433 5th Ave. : Oakland, Ca, 94606 : 8. Chris Karow 701 Fulton St. S.E. #287 : Minneapolis, MN 55455 : 9. James Huff 1097 Glenwood dr. : Radcliff, Ky 40160 : 10. Juan F. Ponce 6245 Parkside ave. : San Diego, C.A. 92139 . : : ****************************************************************************** *********** : The following letters were written by a participating members in this program: : *************************************************************************** ************** : To those with the COMMON sense to participate in this easy money opportunity: : About six months ago I received the enclosed post in letter form. I : ignored it. I received about five more of the same letter within the next : two week.I ignored them also. Of course, I was tempted to follow through : and dreamed of making thousands, but I was convinced it was just another gimmick : and could not possibly work. : I was wrong! About three weeks later I saw this same letter posted on a : local bulletin board in Montreal. I liked the idea of giving it a try with my : computer. I didn't expect much because I figured, if other people were as : skeptical as I, they would not be too quick to part with $5.00. But, I BUY : LOTTERY TICKETS WEEKLY IN MY PROVINCE AND HAVE NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT BUT : TICKET STUBS! This week I decided to look at this as my weekly lottery : purchase. I addressed the envelopes and mailed out $1.00 in each as directed. : Two weeks went by and I didn't receive anything in the mail. The fourth week : rolled around and I couldn't believe what happened! I can not say that I : received $50,000.00, but it was definitely well over $35,000.00! For the : first time in 10 years I got out of debt. It was great. Of course, it did not : take me long to go through my earnings, so I am using this excellent money : opportunity once again. FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AND GET READY TO ENJOY! : Please send a copy of this letter along with the enclosed letter so together : we can convince people who are skeptical that this really does work! : : Good Luck, : Charles Kust : St Agathe Que. : : ANOTHER ADDITION BY A PARTICIPATING MEMBER : WHAT HAVE YOU GOT TO LOSE, A MAXIMUM OF 5$ !JUST TRY IT! : SPREAD IT EVERYWHERE, THE MORE YOU SPREAD THE MORE YOU MAKE! : : (((((Roger Lew))))) : Hello, my name is Roger Lew . As you may have : noticed I'm the seventh name on this list, so I do not have : a rags-to-riches story to tell here. However, I did make : a phone call to the 2nd name on this list, Jane Beckon. : Did she have a rags to riches story to tell? Not exactly, : but then I found out that she did not follow the : instructions precisely. You see, Jane lost faith in : the program before she had finished following instructions. : She only uploaded this file on one BBS, which happens to be : operated by Brian Sassounian, the 3rd name on this list. : Jane told me that she has received $600.00 to date : (1/6/95). I realize this is far from the $50,000.00 : promised at the first of this file, yet one must keep : two things in mind: : 1. $600.00 is more than 100 times her initial investment, and it only took about : an hour of her time (there's nothing to lose). : 2. This program works mathematically on an exponential scale. In other : words, for every one BBS that this file is uploaded onto, it should : spread to at least ten other BBSs and possibly a whole lot more. So, if : Jane had uploaded his file on all ten BBSs, she should have at least : gotten a hundred-fold of what she has, which would be $600.00. Not bad : for a few hours work and a $6.25 investment (including postage). : Finally, I would like to exhort those who become involved : in this program to maintain its integrity by being honest. : It is the only way that it can possibly pay off. In other : words, be sure to enter your name at the bottom of the : list and not in one of the top five positions (actually : this would be robbing yourself since it is while your name : is in the lower positions that it gets multiplied : exponentially over hundreds of BBSs). And, of course, : send your $1.00 off to the first five names. As I write : this I have not made a penny (that's because I have not : uploaded this yet), but I thought you might like to hear : from someone at the bottom of the list, instead of someone : claiming rags-to-riches. I hope such is true, and I'm : sure it will be if we all stick with it. The potential is : definitely here! : : =============================================================== : OK HERE'S THE DEAL. AT PRESENT I AM A BUSINESS MAJOR AT VANDERBILT : AND THIS PROGRAM MAKES A WORLD OF SENSE TO ME. I RECENTLY READ ABOUT : A GUY THAT TOOK A PENNY FROM EVERY PERSON'S BANK ACCOUNT AT THE NEW YORK : CITY BANK. AFTER 2 YEARS OF DOING THIS ILLEGALY HE BECAME A MILLIONAIRE. : BUT GOT GREEDY AND GOT CAUGHT. SAME PRINCIPLE HERE. TAKE A DOLLAR : FROM EVERYONE WHO GETS THIS AND ALTHOUGH THEIR GIVING PRACTICALLY : NOTHING, THE RECEIVER IS GETTING LOTS. SORTA THE HUMANE THING TO DO. : IF YOU COULD GIVE A GUY A BUCK AND HELP HIM HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY OFF A : DEBT OR SAVE MONEY FOR RETIREMENT WHY NOT? THEN AFTER YOU SEND A : DOLLAR JUST MANIPULATE THIS FILE LIKE IT STATES ABOVE AND PEOPLE WILL BE : HELPING YOU OUT TOO. MY DAD TAUGHT ME TO BE CAREFUL OF THINGS THAT : SOUND TO GOOD TO BE TRUE CAUSE THEY USUALLY ARE BUT WHAT CAN YOU : LOSE BY GIVING $5!!! YOU HAVE ALL TO WIN AND NOTHING TO LOSE. L8R ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From natedog at well.com Sun Oct 15 14:34:42 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:34:42 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from jdimov@cis.clarion.edu on Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 05:28:19PM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1323 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sustae at home.com Sun Oct 15 17:23:58 2000 From: sustae at home.com (..) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 17:23:58 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi References: <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com><000b01c03628$eabfbd40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <14825.59176.958818.154616@lrz.uni-muenchen.de> Message-ID: <000a01c03707$6076efc0$e0607318@surrey1.bc.wave.home.com> Wouldn't an errant BB, baseball, etc. blow your house to matchsticks with this scenario? Or just all the glass, assuming you didn't do that yourself "Tim Allen-ing" this thing into place? I guess if you used just enough explosive to blow the glass into dust, you basically accomplish the bad guys task for him. How many dead chemists does it take to qualify for a Darwin award anyways? > The solution is obvious, to a chemist. Laminate the glass door with a > sheet of clear (impact or air sensitive) high explosive. Extra points > for using detonating HE, since turning glass into powder and not > littering up the sidewalk with glass shards. > From jdimov at cis.clarion.edu Sun Oct 15 14:28:19 2000 From: jdimov at cis.clarion.edu (Jordan Dimov) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 17:28:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: I don't know much about crypto politics, but... isn't it utterly obvious that the mere fact that the NSA suggest a certain algorithm (say Rijndael) for a national standard and recomends its use internationally imply that they have a pretty darn good idea (if not actual technology) on how to break it efficiently? I just don't see why else they would advocate its use. After all isn't the fact that NSA could break DES since the 70's the reason for the 'success' of DES? From onlinefreeshopping at yahoo.com Sun Oct 15 14:40:04 2000 From: onlinefreeshopping at yahoo.com (onlinefreeshopping at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 17:40:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: $100 For Shopping Message-ID: <200010152140.RAA03441@mail.virtual-estates.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 1083 bytes Desc: not available URL: From septi2 at msn.com Sun Oct 15 18:16:04 2000 From: septi2 at msn.com (septicare) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 18:16:04 -0700 Subject: CDR: Septic system helpful info Message-ID: <020e74513220fa0CPIMSSMTPU01@email.msn.com> Septicare, Inc. PO BOX 450 Stormville, NY 12533 845.226.3545 email address - help at septicare.com This ad is being sent in compliance with Senate bill 1618, Title3, section 301. http://www.senate.gov?~murkowski/commercialemail/S771index.html Further transmission to you by us will be stopped at no cost to you by sending a reply to our email address, help at septicare.com with the word "remove" in the subject line. **************************************************************** If your home is served by a septic system please check out our site, http://www.septicare.com. (You can do this by clicking on the "www.septicare.com".) In addition to receiving a free sample of Septicare, an environmentally safe bacteria and enzyme treatment, you will get a wealth of helpful info on maintaining your septic system. Also, we have an 800 number to answer any specific septic system questions, not covered at the site. Please check us out. Thank you. From declan at well.com Sun Oct 15 16:05:11 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 19:05:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: Senate approves online booze ban; FCC, landlords, and telcos Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001015190506.00a6d030@mail.well.com> http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/15/2120258&mode=nested Senate Votes to Restrict Online Booze Sales posted by cicero on Sunday October 15, @04:19PM from the so-junior-doesn't-order-that-$45-california-merlot dept. The U.S. Senate voted 95-0 last week to restrict online alcohol sales. The purported reason: Beer and wine wholesalers claim it would protect children. "This law will put real power behind state efforts to enforce laws that require responsible marketing (and) ID checks," one lobbyist said in a Wired News article. The real reason: Wholesalers fear being bypassed by mail order firms -- that would mean losing lucrative markups -- and have handed millions of dollars in campaign contributions to Congress. The House has already approved the bill, part of an unrelated measure about trafficking in sex slaves, and the president is expected to sign it shortly. http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/14/1956211&mode=nested FCC Wants to Force Net Access on Landlords posted by cicero on Saturday October 14, @02:47PM from the so-much-for-private-property dept. Adam Thierer of the conservative Heritage Foundation writes in with a recent article he wrote about the FCC. He's angry about a proposed regulation the agency is considering: It requires apartment and office building owners to let telcom companies wire the place, at a cost to be determined by the Feds. So much for private property, eh? Thierer's article is below. From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 15 19:11:19 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 19:11:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> References: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 02:34 PM 10/15/2000 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: > IMHO, the NSA has enough expertise and technology to crack just > about any cipher out there. No it does not. The expertise of the NSA, great though it is, is small compared to the expertise outside the NSA. > As much as that may suck, there isn't a whole lot we can do about > it. Besides, in the new world of globalization, I think we should > be worrying more about corporations than about the NSA. Have you been sealed in a box the last ten years? Companies may send you junk mail. Governments will confiscate your property and put you in jail,. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG qZj5j+f7JSR/ABzZK5+/yir7dimu3IsDLh8h4sB/ 48gAnJ2OI1E8YcgQ/re3gj59q4FMPy3wGT4nB6PZ8 From rfiero at pophost.com Sun Oct 15 20:40:32 2000 From: rfiero at pophost.com (Richard Fiero) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 20:40:32 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001015114544.019c0ab8@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <200010141909.NAA24508@pophost.com> Message-ID: <4.0.1.20001015192348.008ece50@postoffice.pacbell.net> James A.. Donald wrote: >At 12:04 PM 10/14/2000 -0700, Richard Fiero wrote: > > With respect to equilibria, it's an unwarranted assumption that a > > market has just one stable point. Certainly the Great Depression > > was a stable but undesirable situation. > >It was only stable thanks to massive government intervention. > . . . Jah jah, Herr Donald. Yes, the stupid and pampered working class caused businessmen to not invest in production and wages sufficient to consume the output. Haha! Perhaps at gunpoint the slackers will work a bit harder. Or faced with starvation and no health care the louts will return to their machines. Oops, sounds like today. A wooden shoe, a sabot, in your machine, sir. But this was a deflationary spiral where an investment today is worth less tomorrow, or the same investment can be made cheaper tomorrow -- or next year. Not being a theologian, I can only offer Friedrich Hayek's sadly wrong observations: "[U]p to 1927 I should have expected that the subsequent depression would be very mild. But in that year an entirely unprecedented action was taken by the American monetary authorities [who] succeeded, by means of an easy-money policy, inaugurated as soon as the symptoms of an impending reaction were noticed, in prolonging the boom for two years beyond what would otherwise have been its natural end. And when the crisis finally occurred, deliberate attempts were made to prevent, by all conceivable means, the normal process of liquidation." This is contrary to events. Fearing a bubble, the Fed tightened not loosened. As Herbert Hoover later wrote: "The 'leave-it-alone liquidationists' headed by Secretary of the Treasury Mellon felt that government must keep its hands off and let the slump liquidate itself. Mr. Mellon had only one formula: 'Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate'. He held that even panic was not altogether a bad thing. He said: 'It will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life. Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wrecks from less competent people.'" Friedrich Hayek again: "...still more difficult to see what lasting good effects can come from credit expansion. The thing which is most needed to secure healthy conditions is the most speedy and complete adaptation possible of the structure of production. If the proportion as determined by the voluntary decisions of individuals is distorted by the creation of artificial demand resources [are] again led into a wrong direction and a definite and lasting adjustment is again postponed. The only way permanently to 'mobilise' all available resources is, therefore to leave it to time to effect a permanent cure by the slow process of adapting the structure of production..." And herein we wander off into fantasy land: >You will notice that the recent Asian crisis started with a market crisis >of confidence in government financial instruments similar to that which >occurred just before the beginning of the great depression. > >The Asian governments responded to this crisis by looking at what >governments did back during the great depression, and proceeding to do the >opposite of whatever governments did back then. > >While the crisis of confidence caused some initial hardship, this would >have swiftly evaporated as it did in the Asian crisis. What really caused >the great depression in the United states was Smoot Hawley and government >intervention to maintain artificially high wages for some groups, and >artificially high prices to pay those artificially high wages. > >Similar wage and price policies in France today are accompanied by >similarly high permanent unemployment, with totalitarian parties receiving >a larger vote in France than they ever received in America during the great >depression. If those wage and price policies were accompanied by Smoot >Hawley, we would probably soon enough get a totalitarian regime in France. > >In Spain during the great depression, they simultaneously employed >artificial wage policies, Smoot Hawley like tariff policies, and also >massive Keynsian stimulation. This had the interesting result that they >suffered an inflationary depression, the first major occurrence of the >infamous stagflation, and did wind up with a totalitarian regime. > > --digsig > James A. Donald > 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG > /Il4oyhjZLMpYwPkHNBPkbDOvCqdT3i6s2Idi6VJ > 4sWymZlb3VNvWA2v0KrisTwsq0/5Ts0zVfqLM8ICX > From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Sun Oct 15 18:44:42 2000 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 20:44:42 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: UNIVERSITY DIPLOMAS FOR YOU, LIKE TODAY! 5182 In-Reply-To: <000044074be3$00002dce$0000143e@Mail.ee> Message-ID: Do you award the DDS, Doctor of Divine Surgery? If so, please contact me at this address. Rev. N.M. Norton On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 jldsd at Mail.ee wrote: > UNIVERSITY DIPLOMAS > > Obtain a prosperous future, money earning power, > and the admiration of all. > > Diplomas from prestigious non-accredited > universities based on your present knowledge > and life experience. > > No required tests, classes, books, or interviews. > > Bachelors, masters, MBA, and doctorate (PhD) > diplomas available in the field of your choice. > > No one is turned down. > (USE REFERENCE CODE DIPLOMA 1) > CLICK BLUE LINKClick Here > (USE REFERENCE CODE DIPLOMA 1) > *************************************************** > OR CALL NOW to receive your diploma within days!!! > 1-602-230-4252 > > Call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, including > Sundays and holidays. > > To be removed from future mailings eva454 at ghanamail.com with remove as the subject > > From maryevans at bigfoot.com Sun Oct 15 18:43:48 2000 From: maryevans at bigfoot.com (maryevans at bigfoot.com) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 21:43:48 -0400 Subject: CDR: Improve Performance Message-ID: <200010160143.VAA23340@router.invlogic.com> We reviewed your site at http://216.167.120.50 As website promotion specialists, we can maximize your Worldwide Web exposure. 7 Breakthrough software optimizing search engine placement. 7 Results: 50% increase in traffic in as little as 2 weeks. 7 Bottom Line: Increased Internet traffic = Increased profits. We invite you to respond now for a FREE website placement analysis. Ask about 2 weeks of FREE website promotion. Please include your phone number and home page URL so we may better serve you. Sincerely, Mary Evans, Director of Marketing This message is sent in compliance of the new email bill section 301. Per Section 301., Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 1618, further transmissions to you by the sender of this email will be stopped at no cost to you. This message is not intended for residents in the state of WA, NV, CA and VA. Screening of address has been done to the best of our technical ability. (remove in subject line) We fully respect your request for removal. From marshall at athena.net.dhis.org Sun Oct 15 18:57:52 2000 From: marshall at athena.net.dhis.org (David Marshall) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 21:57:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: UNIVERSITY DIPLOMAS FOR YOU, LIKE TODAY! In-Reply-To: Mac Norton's message of "Sun, 15 Oct 2000 21:48:50 -0400" References: Message-ID: <843dhxh7jy.fsf@athena.dhis.org> Mac Norton writes: > Do you award the DDS, Doctor of Divine Surgery? > If so, please contact me at this address. > Rev. N.M. Norton I don't think that they do. They don't offer degrees in English either. They do, however, offer degrees in hip So-Cal slang and 'bonics. What it is, man! Just slip dem some billz and they'll hit ya back on the first with diplomaz, my bruddah! Like, totally, and stuff. From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 15 21:59:07 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 21:59:07 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: <4.0.1.20001015192348.008ece50@postoffice.pacbell.net> References: <4.3.1.2.20001015114544.019c0ab8@shell11.ba.best.com> <200010141909.NAA24508@pophost.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001015213031.02569ca8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 12:04 PM 10/14/2000 -0700, Richard Fiero wrote: > > > With respect to equilibria, it's an unwarranted assumption that > > > a market has just one stable point. Certainly the Great > > > Depression was a stable but undesirable situation. James A.. Donald wrote: > > It was only stable thanks to massive government intervention. > Jah jah, Herr Donald. Yes, the stupid and pampered working class > caused businessmen to not invest in production and wages sufficient > to consume the output. Haha! You are presupposing the Marxist explanation of depressions, an explanation that Lenin abandoned in 1910. > As Herbert Hoover later wrote: > : : "The 'leave-it-alone liquidationists' headed by Secretary of > : : the Treasury Mellon felt that government must keep its hands > : : off and let the slump liquidate itself. Mr. Mellon had only > : : one formula: 'Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate > : : the farmers, liquidate real estate'. President Herbert Hoover, evidently, was not of the leave it alone philosophy. During the Asian economic crisis, a crisis very similar to that which Hoover faced, Clinton WAS of the liqudidate and leave it alone philosophy, perhaps because the world has seen the consequences of Hoover's philosophy. Everyone commended the Hong Kong approach, instant liquidation for any insolvent enterprise, with the bailiffs taking the pictures off the boardroom walls and cleaning out the liquor cabinent, while the Indonesian approach of resisting liquidation was met with hostility and eventually the foreign encouraged overthrow of the then Indonesian government. The key reason the Indonesian government was overthrown was that it was stiffing Hong Kong creditors in the same way that President Hoover was stiffing American creditors. Hoover's meddling had utterly disastrous and counterproductive results. The result, as usual with government programs that fail catastrophically, was for the government to react to failure by escalating the program. Stiffing creditors of course instantly dries up private credit. Everyone stops lending, which produces a dramatic fall in privately issued liquidity, a catastrophic fall in the volume and velocity of money, which of course swiftly turns a modest recession into a major depression. Of course that was only a minor catastrophe compared to wage and price control policy practiced first by Hoover and then far more forcefully by his successor. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Q/jE+dKkT0Z6VKG21oD8CkhHtBpvihdy+jG+g+lq 4C3pJhlLPi6Jgc5i7eeGS9OZSmeM50dJAcMcrn9di From marshall at athena.net.dhis.org Sun Oct 15 19:03:23 2000 From: marshall at athena.net.dhis.org (David Marshall) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 22:03:23 -0400 Subject: CDR: Swedish Team Cracks Tough Computer Codes (was Re: NewsScan Daily, In-Reply-To: "R. A. Hettinga"'s message of "Thu, 12 Oct 2000 14:21:01 -0400" References: <200010121533.LAA32592@marcella.ecarm.org> Message-ID: <84snpxfspw.fsf@athena.dhis.org> "R. A. Hettinga" writes: > They must mean RSA512, of course. > > Given various people's pings to me about the death of 128-bit RC4, :-), > someone should tell the New York Times, and others, about the difference > between symmetric and asymmetric ciphers... > > Cheers, > RAH Someone might also want to tell them that "70 years of computer time" is a meaningless measurement unless they define how many cycles are in a year of "computer time." Of course, I could be missing some phantom standard concerning what constitutes a year of computer time. > > codes, which took the Swedes the equivalent of 70 years of computer time to > > decrypt, ranged from ciphers dating back to ancient Greece through the From egerck at nma.com Sun Oct 15 22:20:13 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 22:20:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> Message-ID: <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> Arnold, Internet RFCs are technical specifications that use common English words in a strictly defined manner. To suggest that the use of names in computer code or Internet RFCs might have legal implications ... imagine lawyers examining some code and trying to attach meaning to variable names? Or to UNIX commands? For example, to kill or killall? Context dependent vocabulary can become highly amusing or disastrous if taken in a universal context, as was recently pointed out in the PKIX list by Peter Gien when someone complained about the legal implications of "good" as defined in RFC 2560. Non-repudiation is not different. In the crypto and RFC realm it means "a service that prevents the denial of an act" [Handbook of Cryptography, X.509, PKIX]. Different lawyers in different countries may define whatever they want but I note that the legal use of "non-repudiation" by banks worldwide is very similar to "a service that prevents the denial of an act". Cheers, Ed Gerck "Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > My concern is that the vast majority of informed lay people, lawyers, > judges, legislators, etc. will hear "non-repudiation" and hear > "absolute proof." If you doubt this, read the breathless articles > written recently about the new U.S. Electronic Signatures Act. > > I don't think technologists should be free to use evocative terms and > then define away their common sense meaning in the fine print. > Certainly a valid public key signature is strong evidence and > services like that described in the draft can be useful. I simply > object to calling them "non-repudiation services." I would not object > to "anti-repudiation services," "counter-repudiation services" or > "repudiation-resistant technology." Would the banking industry employ > terms like "forgery-proof checks," "impregnable vaults" or > "pick-proof locks" to describe conventional security measures that > were known to be fallible? From natedog at well.com Sun Oct 15 22:26:19 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 22:26:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com>; from jamesd@echeque.com on Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 07:11:19PM -0700 References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1867 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bill.stewart at pobox.com Mon Oct 16 00:42:35 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 00:42:35 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Rijndael & Hitachi In-Reply-To: <20001014191927.C21286@alcove.wittsend.com> References: <000b01c03628$eabfbd40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <20001011142522.F217E35DC2@smb.research.att.com> <000b01c03628$eabfbd40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001016004235.008ece50@idiom.com> At 07:19 PM 10/14/00 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote: >On Sat, Oct 14, 2000 at 02:51:32PM -0700, jim bell wrote: >> The solution is obvious, to a chemist. Make the glass door double-glazed, >> sealed at the edges, and filled with hydrogen cyanide (prussic acid). (with >> a smidgen of phosphoric acid added to prevent long-term polymerization.) > > First kid with a bee-bee gun and you're on the evening news. >I've lost a couple of similar doors in the past to kids, both my own and >neighbors... Or a snowball, or a baseball. When I was in college, you could tell which dorms had lacrosse players in them by the number of broken windows. Someone else > clear high explosives. Deploy that widely enough and you'll increase BB-gun sales radically. Poisoning a whole household by cracking the cyanide window is bad, but blowing up the whole window with one little pellet could be fun, if you're into that sort of thing. and a clearer head > bullet-proof glass. Burglar alarms are another good approach - if the glass gets broken, make sure everybody knows about it real fast. One of my neighbors in college had somebody break into her apartment by breaking the back picture window. They stole her TV and one of her two pot plants; she had to hide the other one in the car while the cops were there. We presumed they couldn't carry both pot plants on top of the TV. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Mon Oct 16 00:46:01 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 00:46:01 -0700 Subject: CDR: Authority - is it a useful concept today and in the future? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001016004601.009dd670@idiom.com> At 11:33 AM 10/14/00 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: > >This is perhaps the fundamental question to human problems. Do you mean "Is threatening people with violence to get them to obey you a morally acceptable form of behavior" is the question, or do you mean "Does threatening people with violence successfully get what you want often enough that it's worth the risk of having them fight back, or do the peasants usually do a lousy job if you keep whipping them so it's not worth the bother"? Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Mon Oct 16 00:52:02 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 00:52:02 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: New penalties to silence whistle blowers In-Reply-To: <200010132043.QAA01154@www3.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001016005202.008ecac0@idiom.com> At 04:43 PM 10/13/00 -0400, George at orwellian.org wrote: >http://foxnews.com/national/101300/leaks.sml > >Congress Increases Penalty for Classified Leaks > >Friday, October 13, 2000 > >An intelligence bill passed by Congress could stifle the ability of >whistle-blowers and the media to get information to the public by >expanding criminal penalties for government employees leaking secrets. >[snip] David Lesher forwarded the following to Cyberia-L SECRECY NEWS from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy October 13, 2000 ** CONGRESS ADOPTS OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT CONGRESS ADOPTS OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT Congress yesterday approved the Intelligence Authorization Act for FY 2001, including a provision that criminalizes the disclosure of any information that the executive branch says is properly classified. It is a breathtaking removal of checks and balances on the executive branch, and an undeserved endorsement of the highly arbitrary national security classification system. It is part of the worst intelligence bill ever legislated, adopted by one of the worst congresses in the country's history. "This provision marks the first time that Congress has placed the full force of criminal law behind the executive branch's classification system," said Rep. Nancy Pelosi on the House floor yesterday. "This ... will create, make no mistake about it, with not one day of hearings, without one moment of public debate, without one witness, an official secrets act," said Rep. Bob Barr. "For those who do not know what an official secrets act is, it is something that we have never had in this country. It has been broached many times, particularly in the Cold War era. But our regard for constitutional civil liberties, our regard for the first amendment ... has in every case in which an effort has been made to enact an official secrets act beaten back those efforts." Until now. Yesterday's House floor debate on the Intelligence Authorization Act is posted here: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2000_cr/h101200.html _________________ Steven Aftergood Project on Government Secrecy Federation of American Scientists http://www.fas.org/sgp/index.html Email: saftergood at igc.org ------ End of forwarded message ------- Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From commerce at home.com Sun Oct 15 23:03:03 2000 From: commerce at home.com (Me) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 02:03:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> Message-ID: <00e801c03736$bf413fe0$0100a8c0@matthew> From: "Nathan Saper" > Already, with WTO/NAFTA/etc. regulations, corporations > are often outside of the control of governments. Huh? Tarquin Fintimlinbin-Whinbimlim-Bus Stop F'Tang F'Tang Olé Biscuit-Barrel? From bill.stewart at pobox.com Sun Oct 15 23:40:49 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 02:40:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Fw: [Fwd: Markierte Musik: SDMI Crack] In-Reply-To: <008501c0353f$f279bc50$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001015231431.009019f0@idiom.com> Heh. That's the fun thing about Internet scale when trying to keep information secret - even with a mass boycott by the open-souce community against a request for cracking or massive obedience to license restrictions on reverse-engineering, it only takes one skilled person (or in this case several) to totally shred the secrecy of a technically bad design. Copy protection is a fundamentally hard problem - if you've got a secure processor, with a built-in private key that can execute commands sent to it public-key encrypted, or that has a public key built in and only executes commands signed by the public key, that outputs directly in analog (or directly to a D/A converter if your threat model doesn't include people snarfing each tune from hardware) you can probably make it work. That's similar to what we'd need to do really secure voice communications. Or if you've got sound cards with different secret keys on each card that only play tunes individualized for that card (so you send your serial number, credit card, and tune request to PayRIAA.com and it gives you an E-MP3 for your player, not usable with any other player you've got. At 02:04 PM 10/13/00 -0400, Marcel Popescu wrote: >Yiihaaaa! Will they release SDMI knowing that it is broken? >[Not that it wasn't a bad idea from the start.] > >-------- Original Message -------- >Subject: Markierte Musik: SDMI Crack >Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:32:16 +0200 >X-Loop: openpgp.net >From: "q/depesche" >To: quintessenz-list at quintessenz.at > >q/depesche 00.10.13/1 > >Markierte Musik: SDMI Crack > >Wie Salon Magazine berichtet, wurde das von der Musikindustrie >favorisierte Muik-Wasserzeichen System, die so genannte "Secure >digital Music Initiative" einem Crack zugeführt. Was dieser zu >bedeuten hat, ist noch nicht ganz sicher. > >-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- >| Watch out -- recording industry executives are about to start >running for cover. All of the Secure Digital Music Initiative's >watermarks -- its much ballyhooed music protection scheme -- have >been broken. A spokesperson for SDMI has denied the reports, but >according to three off-the-record sources, the results of the Hack >SDMI contest are in and not one single watermark resisted attack. > >The hacking contest, which invited the general Net population to >break the recording industry's watermarking system and win >$10,000, ended Sunday; this week, SDMI members are meeting in >Los Angeles to discuss the results. Although a core group of >participants (including members of the Recording Industry >Association of America) who coordinated the testing process are >aware of the contest results, the larger SDMI consortium has yet to >be informed. > >The key issue is whether the breaks are meaningful or not -- in other >words, could any hacker repeat the breaks, and is the quality of the >music preserved even when the watermark is scrubbed out? >According to one insider, all these hacks were, in fact, technically >"solid." The hacker boycott of SDMI organized by members of the >programming community who were suspicious of what they saw as >an attempt to coopt their labor in the service of a corrupt industry has >turned out to be effectively irrelevant. > >According to one witness attending the SDMI conference, recording >industry members held an emergency meeting at 6 a.m. PDT >Thursday to discuss the results. SDMI members and the press will >likely be informed Friday, several sources said, although most >speculated that the record industry would try to downplay the results. > >Voll Text >CP=SAL&DN=660> > > > > > > > > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 16 02:43:57 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 05:43:57 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Fw: [Fwd: Markierte Musik: SDMI Crack] References: <008501c0353f$f279bc50$4801a8c0@Microbilt.com> Message-ID: <39EACCA8.DAF2B12C@ricardo.de> Marcel Popescu wrote: > > Yiihaaaa! Will they release SDMI knowing that it is broken? [Not that it > wasn't a bad idea from the start.] > they might add a fake-key system similiar to CSS, then sue everyone under the DMCA. then again, maybe, just maybe - this time they learned from their friends' (MPAA) mistakes... nah. :) From xs97 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 16 07:09:33 2000 From: xs97 at yahoo.com (xs97 at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 07:09:33 -0700 Subject: CDR: E-Mail your message to millions, risk free 26096 Message-ID: <200010151405.QAA03228@internet.eunet.sk> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 648 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 15 23:30:54 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 09:30:54 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 15 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: >Have you been sealed in a box the last ten years? Companies may send you >junk mail. Governments will confiscate your property and put you in jail,. Not to mention the newer trend of governments doing the dirty work for the companies, all in the name of 'national security' or 'strategic advantage'... Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From bill.stewart at pobox.com Mon Oct 16 09:46:37 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 09:46:37 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001016094637.009a6610@idiom.com> At 07:18 PM 10/13/00 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: >Where's the key management mechanism to ensure the security of the traffic >in the remailer network? That's unfortunately a potentially serious problem given current practice. Most remailer keys are unsigned, or at best self-signed, so the only way to know if a key is the real one is to compare it with the first announcement of the remailer on the remailer-operators list - which as far as I know isn't archived anywhere. *Sloppy* practice, and not hard to change if people wanted to. And some remailers occasionally change their keys, either for periodic hygiene or because they lost a disk drive, or at least there are announcements to the list claiming they have, usually not even signed with the old key. Of course, no Bad Guy would *ever* think of eavesdropping the PGP.com or MIT keyservers to do traffic analysis on key requests. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Mon Oct 16 06:47:31 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 09:47:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Glass doors [was: Rijndael & Hitachi] cpunk Message-ID: > ---------- > From: sustae at intergate.ca[SMTP:sustae at intergate.ca] > I wouldn't recommend boobytrapping the glass in that manner. > I'd go with a ballistic laminate on the glass. [...] > Ed > > At 02:51 PM 10/14/00 -0700, jim bell wrote: > > > > > >The solution is obvious, to a chemist. Make the glass door > double-glazed, > > >sealed at the edges, and filled with hydrogen cyanide (prussic acid). > I agree with Ed - let us not confuse our goals with our means. The goal is to have a door which is transparent - it lets those in look out (and, perhaps only coincidentally) those outside look in. It also acts as a window, letting letting light into the house, and at night illuminating the door area from the inside. The goal is *not* to secure a door made out of glass. The goal is a transparent door. Go with Lexan. I often find stepping back and saying 'exactly what are we actually trying to acheive here?' is a powerful tool for solving problems. Its all too easy to try to add fixes to a bad solution, rather than find a different one. Peter Trei [Anyone remember the guy who proposed invasion proofing a home by boobytrapping it with biowarfare agents, and somehow immunizing your family against them?] [I've dropped coderpunks and cryptography from the cc: list, since this has gone *way* off-topic. - pt ] From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Mon Oct 16 00:35:40 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 10:35:40 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001015115716.02586668@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 15 Oct 2000, James A.. Donald wrote: >Economists do that all the time. It is called modeling. Lucas and >Lawrence Klein won nobel prizes for doing it. I expect that other >economists that I am not familiar with have also won Nobels in it. Of course. I'm just saying that most people, including many with extensive training in economic theory, simply do not have the level of mathematical sophistication to say *anything* about the long term dynamic behavior of economic systems even when the human and stochastic elements are abstracted away completely. So, there are few absolutes in economics. >You are asking for a prediction of the behavior of human actors, predicting >what people will do. One can only derive "rigorous" results if one makes >assumptions about how people think and what they want. The most rigorous >attempt at that is known as "rational expectations theory". You do not understand my point. Human factors are something which, naturally, cannot be predicted. But even if we model humans as, basically, automata, and impose severe conditions on their behavior, we are *still* left with a system which is exceedingly difficult to analyze globally. Hence the scarcity of stability and optimality proofs and even reasonable bounds on the expected behavior of global variables. The fact is that people on this list often use aggressive market economic arguments while discussing proposed social reforms. Now, if there is any inherent unstability to pure free market economy such arguments should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From George at Orwellian.Org Mon Oct 16 07:42:23 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 10:42:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: More on Carnivore Message-ID: <200010161442.KAA11473@www4.aa.psiweb.com> http://foxnews.com/national/101300/carnivoretwo_riley.sml FBI's Carnivore Just the First Step In Cyber Surveillance Monday, October 16, 2000 By Patrick Riley The FBI says its controversial Carnivore system is just "the tip of the iceberg" when it comes to Internet surveillance because an even sharper-toothed information chomper is now in development. Amid all the hubbub over whether the current system violates privacy rights, the agency has been quietly working on both "Carnivore 2.0" and "Carnivore 3.0," according to FBI documents released this month under a Freedom of Information Act claim filed by the Electronic Privacy Information Center. The current Carnivore is version 1.3.4, according to the documents. An "Enhanced Carnivore" program has been under development since last November - under a $650,000 contract scheduled to end in January 2001. Most of the details on the souped-up snoopers were blacked out in heavy black marker before the papers were released. The Federal Bureau of Investigation makes no bones about its plans for the system, which sifts an Internet Service Provider's transmissions to track suspects' online activity. "As it looks today, it could be completely different a year from now," said FBI spokesman Paul Bresson. "Really, we've only seen the tip of the iceberg in terms of the change in technology." He said improving Carnivore is vital for keeping pace with criminal elements. "This is going to continue to be a cat-and-mouse game," he said. "There's always going to be software and other encryption technology that render a system less useful." He declined to give specific details. But privacy experts say an evolving Carnivore presents a problem for those trying to keep an eye on it. "It's a moving target," said David Banisar, a senior fellow at EPIC. "It means there needs to be continual oversight, not just onetime oversight. It means that if we get the source code we'll have to get the source code as it changes also, and do a re-analysis as the functions of the software change." The program's source code, the piece of information most sought after by activists trying to figure out if Carnivore reads the e-mail of more than just those targeted by a court order, was omitted from the 600-plus pages given to EPIC in the first of several planned releases. But the organization has vowed to continue fighting for it. Despite the incomplete technical blueprint, the newly public papers do shed some light on what sequels to Carnivore might look like. Three jargon-heavy lines of text that survived the FBI censor reveal that Version 2.0 will be capable of "built-in data analysis that Carnivore doesn't appear to do now," Banisar said. That means being able to display captured Internet data as soon as Carnivore intercepts it. The current system merely stores the data and two other programs - "Packeteer" and "Coolminer" - must be used to process and display it. No information was released from the Version 3.0 section but research mentioned elsewhere in the unclassified papers involves an aspect of the technology dubbed "Dragon Net" that captures telephone conversations held via the Web - a process known as "voice over IP" technology. Banisar suspects the FBI might also want its future sniffers to have the ability to track multiple targets simultaneously. That wouldn't bode well, he said. "The more capability it has to intercept more than one target, the more likely it is to be abused." While the current Carnivore is purely monogamous, it casts a wider net than commonly thought, according to an analysis of the FBI documents by anti-computer crime site SecurityFocus.com. Carnivore can "be programmed to watch for all the Internet activities of a particular person," said Kevin Poulson, editorial director at SecurityFocus and a former hacker. The system can even reconstruct Web pages viewed by a suspect. "All that's been talked about is its ability to monitor e-mail." In light of this, said EPIC's Banisar: "It makes you wonder what else they could possibly want." From netad at netad24.com Mon Oct 16 04:02:45 2000 From: netad at netad24.com (netad at netad24.com) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:02:45 +0000 (GMT) Subject: CDR: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=96lscheichs_oder_Schr=C3=B6eder_=3F?= Message-ID: <2755268.971694165213.JavaMail.root@nobody.knows.me> Wer treibt den Benzinpreis immer höher? Bei http://www.wetellyou.de , dem internationalen Treffpunkt für Experten und Ratsuchende, finden Sie Antwort auf diese und weitere Fragen. Ihr Wissen ist gefragt - Werden Sie Experte und teilen Sie es mit Anderen http://www.wetellyou.de . Abmelden: http://netad24.com/servlet/exp_spam.Servlet1?dir=unsubscribe&Email=cypherpunks at toad.com From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 16 02:36:40 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:36:40 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: Message-ID: <39EACC28.C97D0F13@ricardo.de> "Trei, Peter" wrote: > No, there is not, beyond the fact that the message originator must know the > final recipient's public key. > > Jim, do you really understand how remailer chaining works? and that wouldn't even be an excuse: I don't (completely) and I could come up with this idea. :) From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 16 02:41:52 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:41:52 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Two items, of varying relevance to the list References: <001d01c03546$d7022a00$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <39EACD60.A7EBEC19@ricardo.de> jim bell wrote: > > It's interesting that German is so willing to absorb new language > > terms, completely unlike French. English has embraced foreign > > expressions, and so, it seems, has German. > > Maybe they've decided they need more "sprechenraum". > "sprachraum", actually. :) german has always accepted a lot of foreign terms. during the late middle ages, it was mostly french, in modern times it's mostly english. I guess it comes from sitting in the middle of a continent (borders to 9 other countries) - you just can't close yourself off against foreign influence. From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Mon Oct 16 08:45:00 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:45:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Anonymous Remailers cpunk Message-ID: Jim: This is the last time I'm going to respond to you on this topic. Everyone else understands my point, and there's a limit to how much effort I'm going to go to correct a single obtuse individual. > ---------- > Jim Choate[SMTP:ravage at einstein.ssz.com] wrote > On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Trei, Peter wrote: > > > A spammer (or your spammer's proxy) is not going to > > individually encrypt messages to thousands or > > millions of end-recipients, each with their own public > > key - the time factor makes this uneconomical, and > > the hassle factor of finding all the recipient public > > keys makes it impractical. Thus, only remailers > > which send out plaintext are useful to spammers > > as exit remailers. > > They do it now, sans encryption. The mass distribution is what makes it > economical. If the encryption can be gateway'ed then it's useless and > doesn't raise the cost significantly. > > A more useful mechanism would be to distribute the keys and appropriate > client software to spammers. What's a flat $50?... > $50 is nothing, of course. Requiring that each message to be encrypted with the final recipient's public key is far from nothing. Sending 10^5 emails without encryption is trivial. Encrypting 10^5 emails is far from trivial. We're raising the cost to the spammer far more than we're adding to the effort of the remailer operator. You speak of gatewaying - who exactly is going to set up a free gateway to encrypt 10^5 messages, each to a different public key? All that does is shift the cost to the gatewayer; it does not eliminate it. > > It is only exit remailers (ie, the remailer which sends > > to the final recipient) which get hassled for sending > > spam. > > And it has NOTHING to do with the encryption. The lack of log's is what > prevents back tracing. > Jim: go back to the genesis of this thread. The discussion was along the lines of "There are too few remailers. Why?" Among of the reasons cited are that remailer operators often get shut down by their ISPs or network poviders because of complaints from end recipients of messages - they get spam, threats, illegal material, etc. It does not matter that the remailer keeps no logs; the end recipients mail server does, and that's enough for the recipient's ISP (or the LEAs) to take action. This situation not only gets remailers shut down; it discourages people from starting them in the first place. My proposal makes using the remailer for spam economically prohibitive, and ensures that the only recipients are crypto-aware types, who are far less likely to misunderstand what's going on than J. Random Luser. > > The goal is to make remailer operators life easier by > > preventing them from being used to spam random > > lusers, who may initiate complaints against the > > remailer operator. > > No, the goal is to stop spammers. > There you go again... Please read the thread. The goal is not to 'stop spammers'. It's to 'Stop actions against remailers, some of which are caused by their misuse as spam conduits'. Preventing spam from exiting the remailers achieves that goal. > In addition, there are aspects of remailer operation that make the > complaints about spam pretty irrelevant. > > > It is not to prevent spam passing through a remailer > > somewhere in mid-cloud. While such encrypted > > spam will increase the volume of traffic, for most > > remailers that is a Good Thing - more material to > > confuse the traffic analysis. As long as it gets > > dropped before leaving the remailer network, no > > harm is done. > > Nobody said anything about the interim processing until now. How is this > relevant to the 'free speech' aspect of requiring the use of particular > forms of encryption end-to-end. > That's true. The use of doomed (since they'll be dropped before they leave the network) spam messages as cover traffic is something that occured to me as I wrote the letter. It is a nice side effect of my proposal, as long as spammers continue to send doomed spam into the system. > Where's the key management mechanism to ensure the security of the traffic > in the reamiler network? > Same as it always was. > > Steve understands this, as does every one else but > > you. > > > > What's the problem? > > It's your problem, there are aspects of this proposal that are simply > silly, and several others that haven't been adequately explained or > examined. > > You talk about decreasing the load due to spam, and don't even recognize > that you've replaced it with a whole other process. One that potentialy > could be more complicated, error prone, and expensive in time and resource > impact than the original 'problem'. > No Jim, I'm not talking about decreasing the load due to spam. I'm talking about making life easier for remailer operators. In the long run, it'll reduce spam as well, since spammers will learn not to include remailers which send only encrypted mail in their remailer chains. > The solution to bad speech is more speech, not regulation. And don't kid > yourself that setting up such a mechanism isn't regulatory. > A remailer operator can operate his remailer in any way he or she wants, and so long as they publish their policies and adhere to them, there is no basis for anyone to criticize them (this is a thing called 'freedom'). > > Any remailer operator can decide not to pass along plaintext. So long as > the > > message sender is aware of this property, nothing more needs to be > > distributed. > > There are no increased sysadmin issues. > > What algorithm are you proposing to identify plain-text? There are key > managment issues, what is your proposal for this problem? There is the > increased complication of admining the box (think of resources to support > both the remailer operation as well as the encryption - consider that > scale carefuly). > > I'm in Zimbabwe and the remailer is in the US, how do I manage the keys to > enter the network in such a way that it is secure? > Jim: I think I'm beginning to appreciate the depth of your lack of comprehension. Remailers do not encrypt anything. All the encryption steps are done by the originator of the message - successively encrypting the message with public key of the recipient (an optional step in current remailers), and then by the public key of each remailer in the chain working back to the originator. Each remailer decrypts the message with it's private key, All it knows is to send the inner contents on to the next remailer in the chain, or to the final recipient. This is how remailer chaining works today. The only change I propose is that, if after applying it's own public key to decrypt a message, the remailer notices that the decrypted material does not match one of the well known formats for encrypted messages (ie, it is likely plaintext), that it drop the message. I won't discuss the recognition algorithm here, since I have already done so and others have even published sample code. It can be done. > > No, there is not, beyond the fact that the message originator must know > the > > final recipient's public key. > > You need the key to get into the remailer, otherwise how does it tell the > message is encrypted? You seriosly propose sticking some static PGP header > for example will stop anyone, spammers know how to use word processors too > you know. > > > Jim, do you really understand how remailer chaining works? > > Yep. Apparently better than you do. > > Have a nice day you pretentious butthead. > ROTFLMAO > James Choate > Peter Trei From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 16 02:54:58 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:54:58 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: Message-ID: <39EAD072.2AA091D5@ricardo.de> Jim Choate wrote: > They do it now, sans encryption. The mass distribution is what makes it > economical. If the encryption can be gateway'ed then it's useless and > doesn't raise the cost significantly. it is INDIVIDUAL encryption. want to spam 100,000 people? gotta encrypt your spam 100,000 times to 100,000 different keys. if you have a fast machine that takes only a second to do so, it'll cost you just over a day... > It's your problem, there are aspects of this proposal that are simply > silly, and several others that haven't been adequately explained or > examined. > > You talk about decreasing the load due to spam, and don't even recognize > that you've replaced it with a whole other process. One that potentialy > could be more complicated, error prone, and expensive in time and resource > impact than the original 'problem'. this process is exactly as complicated as you sending me a PGP-encrypted message. remailer or not doesn't make a difference. don't you get it? all we do is couple remailers with PGP encryption, enforcing the second by a simple test in the first. > The solution to bad speech is more speech, not regulation. And don't kid > yourself that setting up such a mechanism isn't regulatory. it's my remailer, and I can do to it whatever I like. you are, of course, free to not use it. > What algorithm are you proposing to identify plain-text? several have been discussed here over the past week or so. none are perfect, but most are good enough to distinguish between spam (which has a describeable structure) and encrypted stuff (which, too, has a describeable structure). > There are key > managment issues, what is your proposal for this problem? There is the > increased complication of admining the box (think of resources to support > both the remailer operation as well as the encryption - consider that > scale carefuly). there is no additional complication. to prove that, I'm in the process of setting up just such a remailer. this takes some time since I have no experience in remailer operation, but it'll be done. if anyone wants to help me, send me a mail > You need the key to get into the remailer, otherwise how does it tell the > message is encrypted? I can see whether or not a text is greek or russian without understanding it. likewise, I bet you that anyone on this list can identify an ASCII-armoured PGP message with a single glance. shouldn't be too tough to teach that to a machine, should it? > You seriosly propose sticking some static PGP header > for example will stop anyone, spammers know how to use word processors too > you know. please take a look at the simple script I posted here recently. tell me how you want to get it to accept any of the standard spam messages. hint: adding a fake PGP header won't work. From jrp at pun.org Mon Oct 16 11:58:01 2000 From: jrp at pun.org (Joshua R. Poulson) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:58:01 -0700 Subject: why should it be trusted? References: Message-ID: <00f901c037a3$02eac0b0$e2dc3a9e@pdx.informix.com> > I don't know much about crypto politics, but... isn't it utterly > obvious that the mere fact that the NSA suggest a certain algorithm (say > Rijndael) for a national standard and recomends its use internationally > imply that they have a pretty darn good idea (if not actual technology) > on how to break it efficiently? I just don't see why else they would > advocate its use. After all isn't the fact that NSA could break DES since > the 70's the reason for the 'success' of DES? Isn't utterly obvious that the NSA, just any decent person, compartmentalizes its security so that if one system were broken, the other systems would not necessarily be broken? Also, compromise of the other systems would not be publicized, necessarily, and they are smaller and more easily replaced with new systems. --jrp From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 16 03:09:08 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 12:09:08 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <39EAD3C4.FC8EF3CF@ricardo.de> "James A.. Donald" wrote: > > As much as that may suck, there isn't a whole lot we can do about > > it. Besides, in the new world of globalization, I think we should > > be worrying more about corporations than about the NSA. > > Have you been sealed in a box the last ten years? Companies may send you > junk mail. Governments will confiscate your property and put you in jail,. seems there's two people who spent the last century or so in a box. companies buy/bribe/lobby governments into passing laws that will make the government throw you in jail (on the expense of the gov) in case you anger the corp. MPAA/DVDCCA vs. The Internet, anyone? From zedder2000 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 16 12:31:48 2000 From: zedder2000 at yahoo.com (Hi There...) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 12:31:48 Subject: CDR: Boost your internet connection and PC's speed.. Message-ID: <200010160306.UAA09849@cyberpass.net> Wish you had a faster system and Internet connection? Join the club. We all turn on our computers and log in to the net, sometimes for hours every day. When you add up all the time you're plugged in and online, it's amazing how much more productivity (and free time!) you could gain if your computer and Internet connection weren't holding you back from what you *really* want to be doing. http://ascentive.00server.com/ But at what cost? A high-speed Internet connection can cost hundreds or thousands of dollars annually, and the latest high-end systems start at $3,000. If you don't want to shell out, what can you do instead? The secret lies in Windows, which (not surprisingly) has built-in "bottlenecks" that clog the travel of data through your system's internal pathways, seriously slowing down your computer and Internet connection. Windows arrives on your computer "optimized" for a large corporate LAN. That makes sense for Microsoft, which has to meet the expectations of demanding corporate buyers who extensively test new systems on the LAN before making a purchasing decision. But where does it leave the home user? You've shelled out good money for your computer and Internet connection, but you can't use it to its full potential because you're not on a large corporate network. Fortunately, there's software to optimize how Windows uses *your* system hardware and Internet connection, boosting your computer and Internet performance. http://ascentive.00server.com/ Optimize your computer and Internet connection as part of your occasional maintenance routine, like defragmenting your hard drive. Ascentive SpeedPak http://ascentive.00server.com/ - Bundle includes webROCKET Internet Optimizer and winROCKET Computer Optimizer. Pros: - Guaranteed speed boost for your computer and Internet connection. - Includes lifetime technical support via phone and email. - Very easy to install and use. You'll be up and running in 5 minutes. - One-click QuickOptimize button takes care of most users, and experts will appreciate the custom Detailed Optimization screen. Cons: - None that we could find. : Note: You are receiving this email because you subscribed to DailyOnline, one of the Internet's most popular email lists. To cancel your e-subscription, send an email to zedder2000 at yahoo.com with 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Mon Oct 16 14:43:00 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:43:00 -0700 Subject: CDR: Wireless Location Technology for 3G - Nortel / CambridgePositioning Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001016144300.009a6930@idiom.com> Big Brother will know where you are. Advertisers will know where you are. But will *you* know where you are? Or when they know where you are? http://www.nortelnetworks.com/corporate/news/newsreleases/2000c/10_11_000066 9_cambridge_positioning.html Nortel Networks, Cambridge Positioning Systems Plan to Develop Location Technology BARCELONA, Spain - Nortel Networks* [NYSE/TSE: NT] and Cambridge Positioning Systems (CPS) have signed a letter of intent to jointly develop Location Technology for 3G (UMTS) wireless networks. The resulting products, to be developed once the parties successfully negotiate a final license agreement, will provide location-based, value-added services for 3G network operators. CPS will develop Location Technology based on the Observed Time Difference of Arrival (OTDOA) standard. This is an extension of its success in promoting the 2G equivalent - Enhanced Observed Time Difference (E-OTD). Nortel Networks will integrate and market CPS products into its e-mobility* Location Center, part of an end-to-end solution for Wireless Internet. Nortel Networks believes that OTDOA will become a powerful location method that will have minimal cost impact on both handsets and infrastructure. Nortel Networks e-mobility Location Center is a pivotal component in the next generation Wireless Internet. The e-mobility Location Center is the intelligent hub/gateway between a suite of location determination technologies and mobility applications and services. Nortel Networks strategy is to pursue an open standard and standards compliant universal platform that will enable integration of best-in-class location determination technologies. This will allow Nortel Networks to provide a fully tested and integrated, carrier grade, end-to-end solution for location determination, management and interface into value-added applications and services. In a recent study, the Strategis Group projected a mobile location market estimated at more than US$30 billion in 2005. "We are driving the evolution of a profitable, new high-performance Internet," said Alastair Westgarth, vice president, Wireless Internet, Nortel Networks. "With this effort, CPS and Nortel Networks will be able to provide consumers and businesses with speedy downloads of location-based services on mobile devices, whether they be mobile phones, handheld devices or laptop computers." "This letter of intent today builds on the work in 2G that we have been concluding with Nortel Networks," said Chris Wade, chief executive officer, Cambridge Positioning Systems. "We believe that location enablement will be a fundamental technology platform for 3G networks." Cambridge Positioning Systems Limited (CPS) is a company focusing on the provision of Mobile Location systems and services for mobile phone users. CPS has two product streams to its business: its high accuracy location technology called Cursor and a wide range of location-based applications for corporate and consumer use called Coverge. Visit us at www.cursor-system.com. Nortel Networks is a global Internet and communications leader with capabilities spanning Optical, Wireless, Local Internet and eBusiness. The Company had 1999 U.S. GAAP revenues of US$21.3 billion and serves carrier, service provider and enterprise customers globally. Today, Nortel Networks is creating a high-performance Internet that is more reliable and faster than ever before. It is redefining the economics and quality of networking and the Internet, promising a new era of collaboration, communications and commerce. Visit us at www.nortelnetworks.com. Certain information included in this press release is forward-looking and is subject to important risks and uncertainties. The results or events predicted in these statements may differ materially from actual results or events. Factors which could cause results or events to differ from current expectations include, among other things: the impact of price and product competition; the dependence on new product development; the impact of rapid technological and market change; the ability of Nortel Networks to make acquisitions and/or integrate the operations and technologies of acquired businesses in an effective manner; general industry and market conditions and growth rates; international growth and global economic conditions, particularly in emerging markets and including interest rate and currency exchange rate fluctuations; the impact of consolidations in the telecommunications industry, the uncertainties of the Internet; stock market volatility; the ability of Nortel Networks to recruit and retain qualified employees; and the impact of increased provision of customer financing by Nortel Networks. For additional information with respect to certain of these and other factors, see the reports filed by Nortel Networks with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. Nortel Networks disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. *Nortel Networks, the Nortel Networks logo, the Globemark and e-mobility are trademarks of Nortel Networks. Contact for Press and Analysts: Beatrice Germain Nortel Networks 33 6 85 74 35 65 germainb at nortelnetworks.com Susan Kwon Nortel Networks 972-684-5701 skwon at nortelnetworks.com Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From apoio at giganetstore.com Mon Oct 16 07:37:53 2000 From: apoio at giganetstore.com (apoio at giganetstore.com) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:37:53 +0100 Subject: CDR: MGM - Apresenta 2 em 1 Message-ID: <0970654371410a0WWWNETSTORE@wwwnetstore> 2 em 1 Escolha 2 dos seguintes filmes pelo preço de 1 O Homem da Máscara de Ferro Rain Man, Encontro de Irmãos Rob Roy Thelma & Louise À Primeira Vista O Feitiço da Lua Justiça Vermelha Profissão Duro Os Reis do Sub-Mundo Algemados Jogos Quase Perigosos Um Peixe Chamado Vanda Todos os Cães Merecem o Céu A Jóia Encantada Chuva de Fogo Para retirar o seu email desta mailing list deverá entrar no nosso site http://www.giganetstore.com , ir à edição do seu registo e retirar a opção de receber informação acerca das nossas promoções e novos serviços. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 7051 bytes Desc: not available URL: From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Mon Oct 16 07:40:06 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:40:06 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Two items, of varying relevance to the list References: <001d01c03546$d7022a00$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <39EACD60.A7EBEC19@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <39EB1346.2529AA0B@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Tom Vogt wrote: > > jim bell wrote: > > > It's interesting that German is so willing to absorb new language > > > terms, completely unlike French. English has embraced foreign > > > expressions, and so, it seems, has German. > > > > Maybe they've decided they need more "sprechenraum". > > > > "sprachraum", actually. :) > > german has always accepted a lot of foreign terms. during the late > middle ages, it was mostly french, in modern times it's mostly english. > I guess it comes from sitting in the middle of a continent (borders to 9 > other countries) - you just can't close yourself off against foreign > influence. But we're on the edge of a continent and we've absorbed more foreign words than *you* :-) How many languages are there where even a well-educated person would only be expected to know about a quarter of the words in the dictionary? And even that means you are learning 10-20 words a day for your entire life. In fact more than anybody & its being going on a long time. Loads of possible reasons (none of which are more than Just So Stories as far as I know) - way back when Christian missionaries turned up they adapted English words (same applies to German AFAIK) to describe specifically Christian things. Most European countries adapted the Latin or Greek rather than inventing their own. So we have sets of words like easter/passiontide rood/cross atonement/reconciliation/redemption/salvation... loads of words to mean the same, or similar things - and later on there seemed to be a similar sharing of words between English & Norse (& sometimes Dutch/Low German as well). So "ship", "skiff" and "skip" (in the sense of a large container) all survive, but mean slightly different things. As do "shirt" and "skirt". - then the famous layering of courtly Norman French on top of homely English so that we got the only language that has different words for dead animals and live - The recent English habit of not changing foreign spellings, so you can spot Latin, Greek, French etc. words in writing & preservbe a sense of their differentness. (slightly diluted in north America: sulphur/sulfur yacht/yaucht gaol/jail (though in the UK we mostly write "jail" these says) pyjama/pajama) - but most of all the sense that it is bad style to use the same word (except for little ones) more than once in a sentence. Does German do that? From egerck at nma.com Mon Oct 16 16:37:01 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 16:37:01 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> Message-ID: <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> "Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > At 10:20 PM -0700 10/15/2000, Ed Gerck wrote: > >Arnold, > > > >Internet RFCs are technical specifications that use common English words in > >a strictly defined manner. To suggest that the use of names in computer code > >or Internet RFCs might have legal implications ... imagine lawyers examining > >some code and trying to attach meaning to variable names? Or to UNIX > >commands? For example, to kill or killall? > > I don't have to imagine it. I have been on the witness stand trying > to explain terminology in technical documents that was quoted out of > context by opposing council. (We won, but it cost a bundle in legal > fees and management time.) I would also remind you of the _NSAKEY > flap and countless product liability cases where minutia in > engineering documents played a pivotal role. Also there is a big > difference between comments in source code or Unix command names and > a technical specification, like an RFC, that undergoes a formal > review and approval process. The last will be given much more weight. Borrowing from a private comment from Bob Jueneman, whatever the technical community decides that non-repudiation means, it probably isn't what the legal community means. So be it. Certainly the legal profession uses ordinary English words to mean other than their ordinary meaning in a particular context, and so do other professions. BTW, consider the word "impregnable". Everyone knows what it means, right? Wrong! Consider the sentence "Alice is impregnable." It has two diametrically opposite meanings! > >Context dependent vocabulary can become highly amusing or disastrous > >if taken in a universal context, as was recently pointed out in the PKIX list > >by Peter Gien when someone complained about the legal implications of > >"good" as defined in RFC 2560. Non-repudiation is not different. > >In the crypto > >and RFC realm it means "a service that prevents the denial of an > >act" [Handbook > >of Cryptography, X.509, PKIX]. Different lawyers in different countries may > >define whatever they want but I note that the legal use of > >"non-repudiation" by > >banks worldwide is very similar to "a service that prevents the > >denial of an act". > > Even if your spec contained an explicit definition of > "non-repudiation" that made clear its technical limitations, there is > a high likelihood that the public and the legal system will be > mislead. But the definition you cite dose not even do that. Here is > what my "Random House Dictionary of the English Language" says about > the meaning of "prevent:" > > "... Prevent, hamper, hinder, impede refer to different degrees of > stoppage of action or progress. To prevent is to stop something > effectually by forestalling action and rendering it impossible: 'to > prevent the sending of a message'..." > > No cryptographic technology that I am aware of can fairly be said to > render the denial of an act impossible. Of course not, and we agree this much. That is why I wrote earlier that non-repudiation is not a "stronger" authentication or a long-lived one. In my view, a non-repudiation proof could be disqualifed by an authentication proof. Non-repudiation does NOT trump authentication -- which is what this original thread (First Monday article) proposed, based on some mythical "trusted systems". Regarding the word prevent, Merriam-Webster teaches that PREVENT implies taking advance measures against something possible or probable . This is the first meaning -- after this comes ANTICIPATE and, at last, FORESTALL. So, while you say that Random House teaches that FORESTALL is the first meaning, I do not see as this as the rule. And, in this specific case it does not even make sense to use FORESTALL because there is nothing to be interrupted -- but it does make a lot of sense IMO to take advance measures against a probable or possible denial. So, non-repudiation is a service that take advance measures against a probable or possible denial of an act. In other words, PREVENTS the denial of an act. This is the standard meaning in cryptography applications. Maybe it is already similar or becomes similar to the meaning used by lawyers, or by banks. Good for them! OTOH, some lawyers and lawmakers are oftentimes the first ones to use the term "identifty theft" -- which simply is not a theft, it is impersonation. I hope we in crypto don't have to use "identity theft" as well. And, they can continue to use it. Cheers, Ed Gerck From roach_s at intplsrv.net Mon Oct 16 15:22:17 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 17:22:17 -0500 Subject: CDR: Fwd: RE: take me off ur list thank you! Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001016171653.00ac8770@mail.intplsrv.net> You try to be civil, you get threatened. I guess I learned my lesson. Last one turned out to be reasonable. Good luck, Sean Roach By the way, is the shift Only used for emphasis these days? What about punctuation? Is there a corrollary to usage of punctuation, capitalization, and intelligence? >From: "Vanessa Lynch" >To: "Sean Roach" >Subject: RE: take me off ur list thank you! >Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 10:07:48 -0400 >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >Importance: Normal >X-Rcpt-To: >X-DPOP: Email supplied by temporary trial Version 2.8e of DPOP > > i did NOT subscribe to this crap so u take me off or im reporting this >site!!!!!!1 > >-----Original Message----- >From: Sean Roach [mailto:roach_s at intplsrv.net] >Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2000 2:15 PM >To: Vanessa Lynch >Subject: Re: take me off ur list thank you! > > >At 12:37 PM 10/12/2000, you wrote: > > > >Vanessa Lynch > >Manager, Partner Services > >Predict It, Inc. > >P 212.217.1223 > >E vlynch at predicit.com > >Do so yourself by sending a message to majordomo at einstein.ssz.com with >unsubscribe cypherpunks on it's own line, in the body. > >It is also possible, it's not my job to check, that your end of the list >may use a different listserve program. > >You should have gotten instructions for unsubscribing yourself when you >first subscribed. From natedog at well.com Mon Oct 16 17:56:48 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 17:56:48 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <00e801c03736$bf413fe0$0100a8c0@matthew>; from commerce@home.com on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 02:03:03AM -0400 References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <00e801c03736$bf413fe0$0100a8c0@matthew> Message-ID: <20001016175648.D1718@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 786 bytes Desc: not available URL: From honig at sprynet.com Mon Oct 16 14:57:25 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 17:57:25 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> At 01:37 AM 10/16/00 -0400, Nathan Saper wrote: >On Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 07:11:19PM -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >> Have you been sealed in a box the last ten years? Companies may send you >> junk mail. Governments will confiscate your property and put you in jail,. >> > >Companies are wanting to keep records of genetic information and other >HUGE infringments on privacy. Sure, right now, the bigger risk is the >government (what with Carnivore and all), but I'd say that in less >than a decade, global corporations will be much more powerful than any >government. Already, with WTO/NAFTA/etc. regulations, corporations >are often outside of the control of governments. Hilarious. You make JD's point. A company just wants to estimate the cost to insure you. A government wants to take your DNA at a traffic stop and run it against their collection so they can arrest you. From natedog at well.com Mon Oct 16 17:57:38 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 17:57:38 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from ssyreeni@cc.helsinki.fi on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:30:54AM +0300 References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <20001016175738.E1718@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1014 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 16 15:58:02 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 17:58:02 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: RE: take me off ur list thank you! In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.1.20001016171653.00ac8770@mail.intplsrv.net> Message-ID: Ms. Lynch, I'm sorry to hear of your discomfiture. I believe I may be able to help in some small manner. First off Sean has no input into the operation of SSZ and it's resources. If you are having a problem with a resource at ssz.com then you should speak to me. Let's address each of the problems in turn. - You are subscribed to a CDR node, which one? If your email says it comes from cypherpunks at ssz.com or something similar then you can unsubscribe following the instructions at, http://einstein.ssz.com/cdr/index.html Otherwise you'll need to contact the list admin at the site you do get it at. There are currently something in the range of six or seven active sites you could be subscribed through. They are listed in the above URL. - You didn't sign up to the list. The SSZ node does not allow 2-party subscriptions. This means that your email address can only be (un)subscribed from the list from the same address that is being (un)subscribed. A party at another address would require manual processing of such a request and I haven't had any and don't generaly grant them If you are getting email from SSZ and you did not do it yourself, Your account is cracked very possibly, somebody has your password and is using it. Please contact your ISP or network system administration and request information for dealing with such an incident. - As to reporting this site. To alleviate your sense of injustice I can assure you there are several federal and foreign law and intelligence agencies monitoring this list. Fortunately, the majority of nodes (and SSZ in particular) are located in the United States so the legal recourse open to you is very limited under US law. I have a lawyer familiar in the legal standings, I'd be happy to to provide you his name if you're interested in further research into this matter. Good luck getting your problems straightened out. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Sean Roach wrote: > You try to be civil, you get threatened. > > I guess I learned my lesson. Last one turned out to be reasonable. > > Good luck, > > Sean Roach > > By the way, is the shift Only used for emphasis these days? What about > punctuation? Is there a corrollary to usage of punctuation, > capitalization, and intelligence? > > >From: "Vanessa Lynch" > >To: "Sean Roach" > >Subject: RE: take me off ur list thank you! > >Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 10:07:48 -0400 > >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) > >Importance: Normal > >X-Rcpt-To: > >X-DPOP: Email supplied by temporary trial Version 2.8e of DPOP > > > > i did NOT subscribe to this crap so u take me off or im reporting this > >site!!!!!!1 > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Sean Roach [mailto:roach_s at intplsrv.net] > >Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2000 2:15 PM > >To: Vanessa Lynch > >Subject: Re: take me off ur list thank you! > > > > > >At 12:37 PM 10/12/2000, you wrote: > > > > > > >Vanessa Lynch > > >Manager, Partner Services > > >Predict It, Inc. > > >P 212.217.1223 > > >E vlynch at predicit.com > > > >Do so yourself by sending a message to majordomo at einstein.ssz.com with > >unsubscribe cypherpunks on it's own line, in the body. > > > >It is also possible, it's not my job to check, that your end of the list > >may use a different listserve program. > > > >You should have gotten instructions for unsubscribing yourself when you > >first subscribed. > From natedog at well.com Mon Oct 16 18:00:58 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:00:58 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EAD3C4.FC8EF3CF@ricardo.de>; from tom@ricardo.de on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 12:09:08PM +0200 References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <39EAD3C4.FC8EF3CF@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <20001016180058.F1718@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1389 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Mon Oct 16 18:04:39 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:04:39 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com>; from honig@sprynet.com on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 05:57:25PM -0400 References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1807 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 16 09:04:58 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:04:58 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Two items, of varying relevance to the list References: <001d01c03546$d7022a00$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <39EACD60.A7EBEC19@ricardo.de> <39EB1346.2529AA0B@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Message-ID: <39EB272A.96AC844E@ricardo.de> Ken Brown wrote: > But we're on the edge of a continent and we've absorbed more foreign > words than *you* :-) I wasn't under that impression, so far. > - and later on there seemed to be a similar sharing of words between > English & Norse (& sometimes Dutch/Low German as well). So "ship", > "skiff" and "skip" (in the sense of a large container) all survive, but > mean slightly different things. As do "shirt" and "skirt". living in northern germany, I should add that low german (the local dialect) is very similiar to english in some respects. even though I can hardly speak it, I can immediatly think of a dozen or so words where the english equivalent is closer than the (high) german one. > - but most of all the sense that it is bad style to use the same word > (except for little ones) more than once in a sentence. Does German do > that? yes, it is. maybe to a lesser degree, because you DO stay consistent with the main topic, but it is generally considered bad style to be repetitive without need, and german classes spend some time on the topic, drawing up lists of words with similiar meanings that can be used for variety. the most famous one is "speak", which has a LONG list of similiar words in pretty much every language. From barbee at rvi.net Mon Oct 16 18:23:20 2000 From: barbee at rvi.net (Barbara E. Bee Weidenbach) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:23:20 -0700 Subject: CDR: Business question Message-ID: <39EBAA08.1034C0BB@rvi.net> Dearest: This is a bran new invention ,never been done,we are offering this invention for sale or license. Does this invention meet your criteria ? Nightlight Blinds glow in the dark . Comfort in the night , amuse your little ones to sleep. Saftey in the night , guiding you way in the dark. This is a place for favorite cartoon heros to thrive. Add to your decor , or creat one. Warm attractive light add ambience to any room in your home. Protype view at http://www.geocities.com/glo_venetian or http://www.beeline.to/beebach barbee at rvi.net 541-592-4128 Warmest Regards Sincerely Bee Home Decor The Nightlight Blinds Ms. Barbara E. Bee Weidenbach From egerck at safevote.com Mon Oct 16 18:25:43 2000 From: egerck at safevote.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:25:43 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: Message-ID: <39EBAA96.8FFDE3C9@safevote.com> Mac Norton wrote: > Oh and as to non-repudiation and lawyers throwing that term > around loosely: Most lawyers would probably tell you that, > for their purposes, whatever the parties *agree* to be > non-repudiation *is* non-repudiation as between *them*. Yes. > The hard cases are the ones where there's no agreement and > the law must supply a default rule, or derive a rule from > the conduct of the parties. Those are the instances you > have in mind, I take it. In such cases, where "course of > dealing" and "course of performance" between the parties > sheds little or no light, the law often looks to "trade > usage." To which the work of punks, among others, may > be relevant. Yes. That is why it needs to be defined in technical terms, in order to avoid (but not forestall) overloading. From the previous discussion and hair-splitting on "prevent" I am inclined to use the definition of non-repudiation as "non-repudiation is a service that takes advance measures against a probable or possible denial of an act" if I want to be sloppy. If I want to be technically precise (but perhaps unavoidably obscure), I would continue to use "non-repudiation is the denial of a falsity." I am forwarding to you a comment by Tony Bartoletti, with the following ending: I don't think that it is worth debating whether toothpaste prevents, helps to prevent, serves to prevent, hampers, hinders, impedes or forestalls tooth decay. When theory meets the real world, some slippage will occur. and that is why I think such debates are interesting. We need to see the different sides of truth rather than believing that there is just one truth -- which is, of course, the one we have (invariably so, it seems) ;-) Cheers, Ed Gerck From reinhold at world.std.com Mon Oct 16 16:06:34 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:06:34 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> Message-ID: At 10:20 PM -0700 10/15/2000, Ed Gerck wrote: >Arnold, > >Internet RFCs are technical specifications that use common English words in >a strictly defined manner. To suggest that the use of names in computer code >or Internet RFCs might have legal implications ... imagine lawyers examining >some code and trying to attach meaning to variable names? Or to UNIX >commands? For example, to kill or killall? I don't have to imagine it. I have been on the witness stand trying to explain terminology in technical documents that was quoted out of context by opposing council. (We won, but it cost a bundle in legal fees and management time.) I would also remind you of the _NSAKEY flap and countless product liability cases where minutia in engineering documents played a pivotal role. Also there is a big difference between comments in source code or Unix command names and a technical specification, like an RFC, that undergoes a formal review and approval process. The last will be given much more weight. > >Context dependent vocabulary can become highly amusing or disastrous >if taken in a universal context, as was recently pointed out in the PKIX list >by Peter Gien when someone complained about the legal implications of >"good" as defined in RFC 2560. Non-repudiation is not different. >In the crypto >and RFC realm it means "a service that prevents the denial of an >act" [Handbook >of Cryptography, X.509, PKIX]. Different lawyers in different countries may >define whatever they want but I note that the legal use of >"non-repudiation" by >banks worldwide is very similar to "a service that prevents the >denial of an act". Even if your spec contained an explicit definition of "non-repudiation" that made clear its technical limitations, there is a high likelihood that the public and the legal system will be mislead. But the definition you cite dose not even do that. Here is what my "Random House Dictionary of the English Language" says about the meaning of "prevent:" "... Prevent, hamper, hinder, impede refer to different degrees of stoppage of action or progress. To prevent is to stop something effectually by forestalling action and rendering it impossible: 'to prevent the sending of a message'..." No cryptographic technology that I am aware of can fairly be said to render the denial of an act impossible. Arnold Reinhold From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Mon Oct 16 17:20:46 2000 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:20:46 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Ed Gerck wrote: > > OTOH, some lawyers and lawmakers are oftentimes the first ones to use the term > "identifty theft" -- which simply is not a theft, it is impersonation. I hope we > in crypto don't have to use "identity theft" as well. And, they can continue to use it. Speaking as a lawyer, one of "they,", they should not continue to use it. Identity theft might be accomplishable in some scenario, one in which I somehow induced amnesia in you, for example, but otherwise the use of the term to cover what you rightly point is simply impersonation, does a disservice to my profession as well as yours. As to "prevent," it seems to me that Random House has the better of Merriam-Webster here. Apparently what M-W really means in their first sense of the word is a combination, something like "anticipate and take measures to forestall or render impossible." Now, the anticipation may be brief, and the measures spontaneous, but that's what I gather they really wanted to say at M-W. If so, they're loading more on to "prevent" than it always has to carry. MacN From bill.stewart at pobox.com Mon Oct 16 19:38:17 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:38:17 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001016193817.009a5930@idiom.com> I've reordered several sections of the discussion. At 07:18 PM 10/13/00 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: > On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Trei, Peter wrote: > > It is only exit remailers (ie, the remailer which sends > > to the final recipient) which get hassled for sending spam. >And it has NOTHING to do with the encryption. >The lack of log's is what prevents back tracing. Back tracing is only necessary if They weren't eavesdropping in the first place. Remember that the goal of remailers is to prevent serious attackers from tracing traffic, not just to prevent complainers from succeeding. If you allow unencrypted incoming traffic, you lose. If you allow unencrypted outgoing traffic, you also lose, unless the destination is a public Usenet forwarder or something. The only unencrypted email you should be delivering to normal recipients is something like "Hi! An anonymous person who you know wants to send you a secret message. Get PGP at www.pgp.com and publish your keys" Eric Hughes and Raph Levien did some work a few years ago indicating that message sizes may be enough to analyze traffic flows in a Type I remailer network anyway - you need to go with Mixmaster or maybe even Pipenets for security. Of course, no Bad Guy would *ever* think of eavesdropping the PGP.com or MIT keyservers to do traffic analysis on key requests. >> A spammer (or your spammer's proxy) is not going to >> individually encrypt messages to thousands or ... >They do it now, sans encryption. The mass distribution is what makes it >economical. If the encryption can be gateway'ed then it's useless and >doesn't raise the cost significantly. >A more useful mechanism would be to distribute the keys and appropriate >client software to spammers. What's a flat $50?... If the spammer can get a gateway to do the work of fetching keys and encrypting messages for millions of spam targets, the gateway is probably toast for a few weeks anyway. Remember that the spammer has all the time they want for pre-computation - they're only vulnerable once they start sending out mass quantities of messages. (On the other hand, what spammers do lack is clues and creativity.) It used to be possible to extract keys from the PGP keyservers, which meant that a low-tech spammer could nab 5-20000 email addresses and a high-tech spammer could also nab that many crypto keys. I've heard people say there are over a million keys in the current LDAP servers; I haven't explored whether it's easy to bulk extract them (e.g. query on "email address includes '@'".) If you wanted to build a custom crypto-spamware for this volume, you've got a few advantages over vanilla PGP. The bulk of the mail message is the same for everybody, so there's no need to encrypt the body multiple times - just encrypt it once and use the same symmetric key for each, and only do the public-key part separately for each target. If there are message parts that do change, e.g. the encrypted part contains the "Request-Remailing-To: target37 at wherever.com" and the remailer doesn't enforce encrypted-outgoing-only, you can still make it work by exploiting CBC's self-synchronization. Set up the message so the variable line is padded to a whole number of cypher blocks (e.g. N*8 byte) ending with two of whichever Carriage Return/Linefeed you need, then two more blocks of disposable junk, then more real text (again, probably starting with CR/LF), and the CBC will misdecrypt the disposable blocks but sync up again afterwords. Ugly, but shouldn't be particularly destructive, if you can survive the occasional unprintables. This lets you only do hard work for the public-key encryption and the symmetric-key parts that surround it, without having to do symmetric-key encryption on the whole message every time. It's much tougher to pull this off for something that needs to create good cyphertext as its output, so it's much tougher to trick remailers with encrypted-outgoing-only. You at least have to duplicate encryption for more PGP header, but you might be able to get past it into the message body safely. If you're doing a long spam, it may still be worthwhile, though if all you're sending is two blinking multicolored lines of Get your RED-HOT SPAM HERE http://www.spam-monger.com/ you probably weren't creative enough to have done this much work :-) >> The goal is to make remailer operators life easier by >> preventing them from being used to spam random >> lusers, who may initiate complaints against the >> remailer operator. > >No, the goal is to stop spammers. >In addition, there are aspects of remailer operation that make the >complaints about spam pretty irrelevant. There are two problems - spammers and harassers. The prevalent cypherpunks remailer attitudes toward spammers seems to be keeping them from overwhelming your resources and making sure complaints about spam go to /dev/null or the apology autoresponder instead of your real mailbox, but more serious harassers can get you shut down faster. A harassment apology autoresponder helps a bit, but encrypted-only-outgoing radically reduces the threat, and keeps most of the spammers abusing other people. If you're running your own Tier 1 ISP, and you host Spamford, you can become the next Dead AGIS, but it takes a *lot* of complaint. If you're running your own small ISP, you're relatively safe, but enough complaints can get your Tier 1 upstreams to drop you. But if you're just a customer, your ISP may have some tolerance level but a determined abuser can still get you shut down. >> It is not to prevent spam passing through a remailer >> somewhere in mid-cloud. While such encrypted >> spam will increase the volume of traffic, for most >> remailers that is a Good Thing - more material to >> confuse the traffic analysis. As long as it gets >> dropped before leaving the remailer network, no >> harm is done. > >Nobody said anything about the interim processing until now. >How is this relevant to the 'free speech' aspect of requiring >the use of particular forms of encryption end-to-end. Middleman remailers don't get complaints except about resource utilization - Peter had addressed the issue that exit remailers need some protection from spam complaints, but for middle remailers you just don't need to worry. (You still need encrypted outgoing for security, but if your output only goes to remailers that enforce encrypted incoming you don't need to implement anything yourself, though it doesn't hurt you.) >I'm in Zimbabwe and the remailer is in the US, how do I manage the keys to >enter the network in such a way that it is secure? PGP web of trust works fine, just a bit slower from there. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Mon Oct 16 17:41:52 2000 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:41:52 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Oh and as to non-repudiation and lawyers throwing that term around loosely: Most lawyers would probably tell you that, for their purposes, whatever the parties *agree* to be non-repudiation *is* non-repudiation as between *them*. The hard cases are the ones where there's no agreement and the law must supply a default rule, or derive a rule from the conduct of the parties. Those are the instances you have in mind, I take it. In such cases, where "course of dealing" and "course of performance" between the parties sheds little or no light, the law often looks to "trade usage." To which the work of punks, among others, may be relevant. MacN From deus_hades at yahoo.com Mon Oct 16 17:41:54 2000 From: deus_hades at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ing.=20Fausto=20C.G.?=) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:41:54 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Stop spam! Message-ID: <20001017004154.68612.qmail@web9102.mail.yahoo.com> I dont now where did you get my e-mail, but I am receiving spam from you. Stop it right now, please, I didnt ask you for your spam. This time I am asking it kindly, next time I wont ask it this way. Thank you. ===== Ing. Fausto C. G. Empresa: INSYS (http://www.insys-corp.com.mx) "Ipsa scientia potestas est" .-Francis Bacon. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Obtenga su dirección de correo-e gratis @yahoo.com en http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Mon Oct 16 17:48:24 2000 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:48:24 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Protecting Our Children In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001016203902.00b376b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: Makes it a crime not to keep the cough medicine in the triple lock gun cabinet it also mandates? Or just gives more money to the DEA to seek Peace With Honor in the War On Drugs? MacN On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: > To be voted on in the House tomorrow: > (9) H.R. 5312 - Protecting Our Children From Drugs Act of 2000 > > It's not on Thomas, and I don't feel like dispatching my intern to get the > text, so your guess is as good as mine. > > -Declan > > From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 16 20:12:53 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 20:12:53 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> Message-ID: At 2:34 PM -0700 10/15/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 05:28:19PM -0400, Jordan Dimov wrote: >> >> I don't know much about crypto politics, but... isn't it utterly >> obvious that the mere fact that the NSA suggest a certain algorithm (say >> Rijndael) for a national standard and recomends its use internationally >> imply that they have a pretty darn good idea (if not actual technology) >> on how to break it efficiently? I just don't see why else they would >> advocate its use. After all isn't the fact that NSA could break DES since >> the 70's the reason for the 'success' of DES? > >IMHO, the NSA has enough expertise and technology to crack just about >any cipher out there. As much as that may suck, there isn't a whole >lot we can do about it. Besides, in the new world of globalization, I >think we should be worrying more about corporations than about the NSA. What is the basis for this claim about the NSA having such expertise and technology? Paranoia, ESP, cluelessness, or actual knowledge? Do you believe, for example, that the NSA knows how to factor very large numbers? Do you believe they have a dramatically faster factoring algorithm than any mathematicians suspect exists? I would also ask if you think the NSA has some hidden supply of computers, except we both know there aren't enough places in the solar system to park the numbers they would need to brute force readily-attainable key sizes. So, could you explain your first comment? After that we can move on to your "fear the corporations, not the government" bit of cluelessness. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From declan at well.com Mon Oct 16 17:39:29 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 20:39:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Protecting Our Children Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001016203902.00b376b0@mail.well.com> To be voted on in the House tomorrow: (9) H.R. 5312 - Protecting Our Children From Drugs Act of 2000 It's not on Thomas, and I don't feel like dispatching my intern to get the text, so your guess is as good as mine. -Declan From natedog at well.com Mon Oct 16 20:50:41 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 20:50:41 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 08:12:53PM -0700 References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> Message-ID: <20001016205040.A2358@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2890 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Mon Oct 16 20:53:21 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 20:53:21 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001016233352.B5230@positron.mit.edu>; from rsw@MIT.EDU on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 11:33:53PM -0400 References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <00e801c03736$bf413fe0$0100a8c0@matthew> <20001016175648.D1718@well.com> <20001016233352.B5230@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20001016205321.B2358@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1135 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jamesd at echeque.com Mon Oct 16 21:06:50 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:06:50 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001016210314.00baac30@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 02:34 PM 10/15/2000 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: > > > IMHO, the NSA has enough expertise and technology to crack just > > > about any cipher out there. James A. Donald: > > No it does not. > > > > The expertise of the NSA, great though it is, is small compared to > > the expertise outside the NSA. At 10:26 PM 10/15/2000 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: > Assuming we can evaluate accurately the magnitude of what goes on > inside the NSA... I know vastly more about cryptography than you do, and people who know vastly more about cryptography than I are confident that codes that pass lengthy peer review by themselves and people as good as they are, are unlikely to be broken by the NSA. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG ZlLhlzxncCnQOkHB8te81wDKtqWhcCTT3ldo+CKM 4lKVCVGVGO8ePP0CTWjDpfM+MInzJaH477ddm+DDY From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 16 21:16:15 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:16:15 -0700 Subject: CDR: A helpful ruling on "anonymity" Message-ID: This is a helpful ruling. No kidding. No spoof. --fair use excerpt begins-0- Monday October 16 4:29 PM ET Anonymous Net Posting Not Protected By CATHERINE WILSON, AP Business Writer MIAMI (AP) - In a ruling that challenges online anonymity, a Florida appeals court declared Monday that Internet service providers must divulge the identities of people who post defamatory messages on the Internet. Critics of the ruling say it could have a chilling effect on free expression in Internet chat rooms. .... Lauren Gelman, public policy director with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, is concerned that other courts could follow the lead of the 3rd District Court of Appeals in approving subpoenas. ``This kind of speech happens all the time in all kinds of chat rooms,'' Gelman said. ``We don't want to see these subpoenas become regularly used to cause people to self-censor themselves.'' ``The court had the potential to set an important precedent about the right to speak anonymously on the Internet,'' Lidsky said. ``The courts are eventually going to have to come to grips with this issue and decide how broad free speech rights are in cyberspace.'' --end excerpt-- Lidsky doesn't get it. There is no "right to speak anonymously on the Internet" (or anywhere else). If Alice observes Bob make a comment, and Alice chooses to speak about her observations, or is required by a court to speak about her observations, Bob cannot assert some "right to anonymity." Now, had the court said that all words must be traceable, must be signed, and so on, then this would be a different kettle of fish. But they didn't. The court just said, in this case, that the usual process of discovery and production of evidence is not trumped by some claim of a "right to anonymity." No surprises there. This is helpful because it pushed anonymity back into the technological arena, where it belongs. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 16 21:27:07 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:27:07 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001016205040.A2358@well.com> References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <20001016205040.A2358@well.com> Message-ID: At 8:50 PM -0700 10/16/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > >On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 08:12:53PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > > > >> What is the basis for this claim about the NSA having such expertise >> and technology? Paranoia, ESP, cluelessness, or actual knowledge? >> > >Speculation, nothing more. Notice the "IMHO" above. I'm not claiming >to be stating facts. I asked you to provide some _basis_ for your claim, not to quibble about "not claiming to be stating facts." > >Most crypto algorithms are mathematically sound. I'm not worried >about the NSA finding some miraculous way to factor large numbers. >I'm worried about the NSA discovering security bugs in crypto tools. Recall that your precise words were: "IMHO, the NSA has enough expertise and technology to crack just about any cipher out there." This is a claim about _ciphers_, a claim often made by the clueless. ("Any cipher can be broken...," "The NSA has more than enough computer power...," are the most common variants.) You are a twit. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From natedog at well.com Mon Oct 16 21:39:22 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:39:22 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EBCCF9.647D44C6@acmenet.net>; from sfurlong@acmenet.net on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 11:53:26PM -0400 References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <00e801c03736$bf413fe0$0100a8c0@matthew> <20001016175648.D1718@well.com> <20001016233352.B5230@positron.mit.edu> <39EBCCF9.647D44C6@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <20001016213922.A2510@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1143 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Mon Oct 16 21:46:25 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:46:25 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:27:07PM -0700 References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <20001016205040.A2358@well.com> Message-ID: <20001016214625.B2510@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2233 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Oct 16 19:51:57 2000 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:51:57 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: [texas-hpr] Whiskey, Cigars, and Guns (fwd) Message-ID: ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:39:36 -0500 From: "Jon H. Ruehle" Reply-To: rocketry-texas-hpr at egroups.com To: nhrc-list at dars.org, rocketry-texas-hpr at egroups.com, rocketry-austin at egroups.com Subject: [texas-hpr] Whiskey, Cigars, and Guns I read Mark Bundick's latest article on the NAR/TRA fight with the Bureau of Whiskey, Cigars, and Guns. It ocurred to me that we could solve the funding problem in this manner: I got some official membership numbers from TRA & NAR. TRA has 3900 and NAR has 3700 adult members for a combined total of 7,600. So that would make a $10 donation necessary to meet the goal of $75,000 that is needed to fight the BATF in court. That seems like a small price to pay (if that's is really all that is needed) to help solve the problem. I just wonder how long they will last (the money and the trial) and will there be more money needed? I realize that the NAR members would not benefit as much as TRA, but it seems only fitting that low power model rocet motors would be next on the BATF list, so it would be in the interest of NAR low power modelers to pitch in too. I fly both, so it is of interest to me. Jon H. Ruehle NASA Houston Rocket Club Tripoli Rocketry Association #08430 _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~> Restaurants, Movies, Weather, Traffic & More! Access Tellme from any phone. For more info visit: http://click.egroups.com/1/9534/10/_/7662/_/971750382/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------_-> From bill.stewart at pobox.com Mon Oct 16 22:07:58 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:07:58 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: References: <20001017004154.68612.qmail@web9102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001016220758.00a6ca10@idiom.com> Cypherpunks works like any anarchy. *You're* running cypherpunks. If you want something done the way you want it done, *do it* and get other people to help you. Also, given that the list has been around for almost a decade, and has archives, you might consider seeing if it's been discussed. You shouldn't have to search back more than a month.... At 10:31 PM 10/16/00 -0400, Jordan Dimov wrote: > >That's shame indeed. Couldn't whoever's running cypherpunks setup a >goddamn sendmail filter or something? > > >On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, [iso-8859-1] Ing. Fausto C.G. wrote: > >> I dont now where did you get my e-mail, but I am >> receiving spam from you. Stop it right now, please, I >> didnt ask you for your spam. This time I am asking it >> kindly, next time I wont ask it this way. >> >> Thank you. >> >> ===== >> Ing. Fausto C. G. >> >> Empresa: INSYS (http://www.insys-corp.com.mx) >> "Ipsa scientia potestas est" .-Francis Bacon. >> >> _________________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Obtenga su dirección de correo-e gratis @yahoo.com >> en http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com >> > > > > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From jdimov at cis.clarion.edu Mon Oct 16 19:31:56 2000 From: jdimov at cis.clarion.edu (Jordan Dimov) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:31:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: <20001017004154.68612.qmail@web9102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: That's shame indeed. Couldn't whoever's running cypherpunks setup a goddamn sendmail filter or something? On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, [iso-8859-1] Ing. Fausto C.G. wrote: > I dont now where did you get my e-mail, but I am > receiving spam from you. Stop it right now, please, I > didnt ask you for your spam. This time I am asking it > kindly, next time I wont ask it this way. > > Thank you. > > ===== > Ing. Fausto C. G. > > Empresa: INSYS (http://www.insys-corp.com.mx) > "Ipsa scientia potestas est" .-Francis Bacon. > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Obtenga su direcci�n de correo-e gratis @yahoo.com > en http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com > From declan at well.com Mon Oct 16 19:32:54 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:32:54 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: RE: take me off ur list thank you! In-Reply-To: ; from ravage@einstein.ssz.com on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 05:58:02PM -0500 References: <4.3.2.7.1.20001016171653.00ac8770@mail.intplsrv.net> Message-ID: <20001016223254.A23132@cluebot.com> Allow me to be more uncharacteristically succinct (it's been a long day): Ms. Lynch, get a clue. Stop frothing. Until then, spare us the venting. Yours truly, A friend On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 05:58:02PM -0500, Jim Choate wrote: > > Ms. Lynch, > > I'm sorry to hear of your discomfiture. I believe I may be able to help in > some small manner. > > First off Sean has no input into the operation of SSZ and it's resources. > If you are having a problem with a resource at ssz.com then you should > speak to me. > > Let's address each of the problems in turn. > > - You are subscribed to a CDR node, which one? > > If your email says it comes from cypherpunks at ssz.com or > something similar then you can unsubscribe following the > instructions at, > > http://einstein.ssz.com/cdr/index.html > > Otherwise you'll need to contact the list admin at the > site you do get it at. There are currently something in > the range of six or seven active sites you could be > subscribed through. They are listed in the above URL. > > - You didn't sign up to the list. > > The SSZ node does not allow 2-party subscriptions. This means > that your email address can only be (un)subscribed from the > list from the same address that is being (un)subscribed. A > party at another address would require manual processing of > such a request and I haven't had any and don't generaly grant > them If you are getting email from SSZ and you did not do it > yourself, > > Your account is cracked very possibly, somebody has your password > and is using it. Please contact your ISP or network system > administration and request information for dealing with such an > incident. > > - As to reporting this site. To alleviate your sense of injustice > I can assure you there are several federal and foreign law > and intelligence agencies monitoring this list. > > Fortunately, the majority of nodes (and SSZ in particular) > are located in the United States so the legal recourse open > to you is very limited under US law. I have a lawyer familiar in > the legal standings, I'd be happy to to provide you his name if > you're interested in further research into this matter. > > Good luck getting your problems straightened out. > > ____________________________________________________________________ > > He is able who thinks he is able. > > Buddha > > The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate > Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com > www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 > -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Sean Roach wrote: > > > You try to be civil, you get threatened. > > > > I guess I learned my lesson. Last one turned out to be reasonable. > > > > Good luck, > > > > Sean Roach > > > > By the way, is the shift Only used for emphasis these days? What about > > punctuation? Is there a corrollary to usage of punctuation, > > capitalization, and intelligence? > > > > >From: "Vanessa Lynch" > > >To: "Sean Roach" > > >Subject: RE: take me off ur list thank you! > > >Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 10:07:48 -0400 > > >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) > > >Importance: Normal > > >X-Rcpt-To: > > >X-DPOP: Email supplied by temporary trial Version 2.8e of DPOP > > > > > > i did NOT subscribe to this crap so u take me off or im reporting this > > >site!!!!!!1 > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Sean Roach [mailto:roach_s at intplsrv.net] > > >Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2000 2:15 PM > > >To: Vanessa Lynch > > >Subject: Re: take me off ur list thank you! > > > > > > > > >At 12:37 PM 10/12/2000, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > >Vanessa Lynch > > > >Manager, Partner Services > > > >Predict It, Inc. > > > >P 212.217.1223 > > > >E vlynch at predicit.com > > > > > >Do so yourself by sending a message to majordomo at einstein.ssz.com with > > >unsubscribe cypherpunks on it's own line, in the body. > > > > > >It is also possible, it's not my job to check, that your end of the list > > >may use a different listserve program. > > > > > >You should have gotten instructions for unsubscribing yourself when you > > >first subscribed. > > > From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 16 21:03:29 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 23:03:29 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: <35ef637b5c366a720f012b20c2beb949@remailer.ch> Message-ID: On 17 Oct 2000, Anonymous wrote: > Pipe the message into GPG and test the output on STDERR. > > There was some perl code posted to the list not too long ago which does this. So, now everyone has to use GPG. Why? How do you propose to answer the increased attacks on the protocol now that you've made it the monopoly? I thought the point of anonymous remailers and commen crypto was to enhance liberty rather than enforce (coerce) another standard. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From rsw at MIT.EDU Mon Oct 16 20:33:53 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 23:33:53 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001016175648.D1718@well.com>; from natedog@well.com on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 05:56:48PM -0700 References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <00e801c03736$bf413fe0$0100a8c0@matthew> <20001016175648.D1718@well.com> Message-ID: <20001016233352.B5230@positron.mit.edu> Nathan Saper wrote: > > Huh? Tarquin Fintimlinbin-Whinbimlim-Bus Stop F'Tang F'Tang Olé > > Biscuit-Barrel? > > Uh, what? This is a reference to a Monty Python sketch. Tarqin Fintimlinbin-Whinbimlim-Bus Stop F'Tang F'Tang Ole Biscuit-Barrel was the candidate for the Silly Party. In case you're wondering, Kevin Philips BONG! was the Somewhat Silly Party candidate, and the Very Silly Party candidate's name is not possible to type. :-) -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 887 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sfurlong at acmenet.net Mon Oct 16 20:53:26 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 23:53:26 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <00e801c03736$bf413fe0$0100a8c0@matthew> <20001016175648.D1718@well.com> <20001016233352.B5230@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: <39EBCCF9.647D44C6@acmenet.net> "Riad S. Wahby" wrote: > > Nathan Saper wrote: > > > Huh? Tarquin Fintimlinbin-Whinbimlim-Bus Stop F'Tang F'Tang Olé > > > Biscuit-Barrel? > > > > Uh, what? > > This is a reference to a Monty Python sketch. We must now convene the Cypherpunks Repulsive Activities Panel to evaluate Mr. Saper's fitness not only to read the Cypherpunks list but to have an Internet presense at all. Not recognizing a Monty Python sketch?! The mind wobbles. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From kerry at vscape.com Tue Oct 17 00:27:19 2000 From: kerry at vscape.com (Kerry L. Bonin) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:27:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: <3.0.32.20001017002552.047815a0@shell13.ba.best.com> At 09:27 PM 10/16/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: >At 8:50 PM -0700 10/16/00, Nathan Saper wrote: [snip] >Recall that your precise words were: > >"IMHO, the NSA has enough expertise and technology to crack just about >any cipher out there." > >This is a claim about _ciphers_, a claim often made by the clueless. >("Any cipher can be broken...," "The NSA has more than enough >computer power...," are the most common variants.) And yet ciphers are a significant target of the NSA. Sure, they devote significant resources to exploiting weaknesses in key management, but ciphers are a primary target. Many people who discuss the capabilities of the NSA do not use proper methodology in extrapolating their technical capabilities. General purpose computers and supercomputers are not well suited to attacking ciphers - custom silicon is the best means. Extrapolate capabilities from the EFF DES crack project and you are somewhat closer (1536 ASIC w/ 24 cores/ASIC yielded 4.52 days/crack of 56 bit keyspace), then take into consideration the advantages of using more sophisticated semiconductor processes (ECL 15 years ago, GaAs on Sapphire today) and the higher clock rates that go with that (40MHz to well > 1GHz), and rerun your numbers. Instead of a small cabinet, fill floors of buildings with these machines, and you have realtime cracking farms. It should be noted that increasing the keyspace isn't a magic protection implying the heat entropy of the universe prevents a crack - the NSA has been playing with Feistel networks since before most cryptographers even knew about DA, not to mention the possibilities of many other unknown weaknesses in Feistel networks being known to the NSA. As for my own comments, I wrote layout and design tools used on these NSA custom chips in the mid 80's, certified for use with the "NSA Standard Cell Library" by their chip designers (they were just one of the customers of the CAD/CAM/CAE software I worked on back then...) I don't think its unreasonable to extrapolate that a sufficiently high priority message can be cracked by the NSA in near realtime, regardless of the cipher strength used, without significant knowledge of the nature of the plaintext. I'd imagine most attacks focus on key management, but anyone serious about the game will have obscene numbers of gates chewing on ciphertext. Kerry L. Bonin (speaking for self, insert lawyer joke here...) Sr. Engineer, Security/Cryptography, Cisco Systems. VScape lead architect - Adaptive secure clustering for multiuser VR. From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 16 21:27:52 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:27:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EBCCF9.647D44C6@acmenet.net> References: Message-ID: At 11:53 PM -0400 10/16/00, Steve Furlong wrote: >"Riad S. Wahby" wrote: >> >> Nathan Saper wrote: >> > > Huh? Tarquin Fintimlinbin-Whinbimlim-Bus Stop F'Tang F'Tang Olé >> > > Biscuit-Barrel? >> > >> > Uh, what? >> >> This is a reference to a Monty Python sketch. > >We must now convene the Cypherpunks Repulsive Activities Panel to >evaluate Mr. Saper's fitness not only to read the Cypherpunks list but >to have an Internet presense at all. > >Not recognizing a Monty Python sketch?! The mind wobbles. The Ministry of Funny Wogs has been notified. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 17 00:28:51 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:28:51 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <00e801c03736$bf413fe0$0100a8c0@matthew> References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <00e801c03736$bf413fe0$0100a8c0@matthew> Message-ID: >From: "Nathan Saper" >> Already, with WTO/NAFTA/etc. regulations, corporations >> are often outside of the control of governments. > >Huh? Tarquin Fintimlinbin-Whinbimlim-Bus Stop F'Tang F'Tang Olé >Biscuit-Barrel? I think the second sentence makes more sense. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 17 00:50:36 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:50:36 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> Message-ID: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 05:57:25PM -0400, David Honig wrote: >> At 01:37 AM 10/16/00 -0400, Nathan Saper wrote: >> >On Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 07:11:19PM -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >> >> Have you been sealed in a box the last ten years? Companies may send you >> >> junk mail. Governments will confiscate your property and put >>you in jail,. >> >> >> > >> >Companies are wanting to keep records of genetic information and other >> >HUGE infringments on privacy. Sure, right now, the bigger risk is the >> >government (what with Carnivore and all), but I'd say that in less >> >than a decade, global corporations will be much more powerful than any >> >government. Already, with WTO/NAFTA/etc. regulations, corporations >> >are often outside of the control of governments. >> >> Hilarious. You make JD's point. A company just wants to >> estimate the cost to insure you. A government wants to take >> your DNA at a traffic stop and run it against their collection >> so they can arrest you. > >When do cops take DNA at traffic stops? > >Even if they do (which I haven't heard of, but I could be wrong), the >trend right now is more corporate power, less governmental power. As >I said before, we are already seeing this trend, what with >corporations able to circumvent countries' environmental codes and >whatnot. It will only get worse. Then you aren't paying attention. Corporations have *NO* power over you that doesn't come from the barrel of a government gun. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 17 00:58:56 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:58:56 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001016213922.A2510@well.com> References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <00e801c03736$bf413fe0$0100a8c0@matthew> <20001016175648.D1718@well.com> <20001016233352.B5230@positron.mit.edu> <39EBCCF9.647D44C6@acmenet.net> <20001016213922.A2510@well.com> Message-ID: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 11:53:26PM -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: >> "Riad S. Wahby" wrote: >> > >> > Nathan Saper wrote: >> > > > Huh? Tarquin Fintimlinbin-Whinbimlim-Bus Stop F'Tang F'Tang Olé >> > > > Biscuit-Barrel? >> > > >> > > Uh, what? >> > >> > This is a reference to a Monty Python sketch. >> >> We must now convene the Cypherpunks Repulsive Activities Panel to >> evaluate Mr. Saper's fitness not only to read the Cypherpunks list but >> to have an Internet presense at all. >> >> Not recognizing a Monty Python sketch?! The mind wobbles. >> > >And Python is my favorite scripting language, too. > >I really need to rent some videos or something... I'd suggest "Cryptic Seduction". -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From btroyan at bellatlantic.net Mon Oct 16 22:11:44 2000 From: btroyan at bellatlantic.net (Bartley R. Troyan) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:11:44 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: Message-ID: <39EBDF90.611E40DE@bellatlantic.net> Jim Choate wrote: > > On 17 Oct 2000, Anonymous wrote: > > > Pipe the message into GPG and test the output on STDERR. > > > > There was some perl code posted to the list not too long ago which does this. > > So, now everyone has to use GPG. Why? How do you propose to answer the > increased attacks on the protocol now that you've made it the monopoly? No one is saying you have to use GPG. The source code is freely available. Anyone can take the algorithm it uses to analyze its input, and outputs whatever it outputs on STDERR when a non-encrypted message is detected, and incorporate it into their own software. You can make it better, or different, or do whatever you feel like doing with it. If some people decide to run remailers that only propagate email that looks encrypted based on GPG's algorithm for detecting encryption, more power to them. If you don't want to use these remailers, you don't have to. > I thought the point of anonymous remailers and commen crypto was to > enhance liberty rather than enforce (coerce) another standard. Yes, enhancing liberty is one useful reason to run or use a remailer. If you don't like the ones that require incoming traffic to be encrypted, don't use them. Run your own. You'll get more spam complaints from end-recipients, but that's your problem. Or use somebody else's. There's no shortage of unrestricted remailers out there. -Bart > ____________________________________________________________________ > > He is able who thinks he is able. > > Buddha > > The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate > Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com > www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 > -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 17 01:18:13 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:18:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20001017002552.047815a0@shell13.ba.best.com> References: <3.0.32.20001017002552.047815a0@shell13.ba.best.com> Message-ID: At 12:27 AM -0700 10/17/00, Kerry L. Bonin wrote: > >And yet ciphers are a significant target of the NSA. Sure, they devote >significant resources to exploiting weaknesses in key management, but >ciphers are a primary target. > >Many people who discuss the capabilities of the NSA do not use proper >methodology in extrapolating their technical capabilities. General purpose >computers and supercomputers are not well suited to attacking ciphers - >custom silicon is the best means. For a message encrypted (or signed, a related problem) with a PKS cipher, recovering the plaintext involves factoring the modulus...so far as we know. This factoring may be done with conventional computers, special-purpose computers, or even exotic computers (tanks of DNA computers, billions of Net-connected computers, superconducting geodes orbiting around Neptune, quantum computers, whatever.) (Note that I am assuming here a pure PKS/RSA cipher, with no use of IDEA or 3DES or AES, etc. This is feasible for short messages. ) A look at the work factors (cf. Rivest's paper of circa 1993-4, or Schneier's book, or any of several other books, or one's own calculations) will show the pointlessness of throwing more computer power at sufficiently large moduli. Absent a breakthrough in factoring (and I mean a _major_ breakthrough, not a polynomial factor speedup), a modulus of thousands of decimal digits will never be factored. The "RSA-129" challenge becomes the "RSA-1000" challenge. Moore's Law won't do any good, nor will using ASICs or gate arrays or even nanotechnology. A quantum computer _might_ make a difference (though this is unproven). > >Extrapolate capabilities from the EFF DES crack project and you are >somewhat closer (1536 ASIC w/ 24 cores/ASIC yielded 4.52 days/crack of 56 >bit keyspace), then take into consideration the advantages of using more >sophisticated semiconductor processes (ECL 15 years ago, GaAs on Sapphire >today) and the higher clock rates that go with that (40MHz to well > 1GHz), >and rerun your numbers. Instead of a small cabinet, fill floors of >buildings with these machines, and you have realtime cracking farms. Please spend a bit of time calculating what these "cracking farms" do for factoring very large numbers. (Or even for cracking 3DES.) Look, no one has any doubt that NSA and probably other intelligence agencies have built gate-array-based DES-cracking machines. This was implicit in Diffie and Hellman's paper on cracking DES, a paper published twenty-some years ago. And of course people we know have built DES-cracking machines of their own. But a DES-cracker is not a 3DES-cracker. I hope the math of this is known to all readers. And it is especially not a machine for factoring 3000-digit numbers. Talking about SOS and ECL and 1 GHz and all is nonsensical. All of those technologies are as nothing when in comes to problems with work factors exponential in key length! The exact point at which brute force becomes economically infeasible depends on technologies, improvements in algorithms, etc., but the broad outlines remain as described. > >It should be noted that increasing the keyspace isn't a magic protection >implying the heat entropy of the universe prevents a crack - the NSA has >been playing with Feistel networks since before most cryptographers even >knew about DA, not to mention the possibilities of many other unknown >weaknesses in Feistel networks being known to the NSA. > >As for my own comments, I wrote layout and design tools used on these NSA >custom chips in the mid 80's, certified for use with the "NSA Standard Cell >Library" by their chip designers (they were just one of the customers of >the CAD/CAM/CAE software I worked on back then...) Then I'd have to say your analytical abilities are shallow. If you think one of these ciphers with work factors exponential in modulus size (or "key length," approximately) will fall to custom chips, you don't understand exponential time/space. > >I don't think its unreasonable to extrapolate that a sufficiently high >priority message can be cracked by the NSA in near realtime, regardless of >the cipher strength used, without significant knowledge of the nature of >the plaintext. And you believe this? >I'd imagine most attacks focus on key management, but >anyone serious about the game will have obscene numbers of gates chewing on >ciphertext. Please read up on work factors. Here's something from one of the PGP FAQs, http://www.uk.pgp.net/pgpnet/pgp-faq/faq-appendix2.html#2.5.1 --begin excerpt-- Here's a table from Applied Cryptography, referenced with an unpublished paper (as of Feb. 1995) by Andrew Odlyzko "Progress in Integer Factorization and Discrete Logarithms" Mips years required to factor a number with the GNFS: Bits Mips-years 512 30,000 768 2*10^8 1024 3*10^11 1280 1*10^14 1536 3*10^16 2048 3*10^20 --end excerpt-- Good luck with your PALs and gate arrays. Have fun. Near realtime cracking. Sure. Whatever. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From kerry at vscape.com Tue Oct 17 01:45:33 2000 From: kerry at vscape.com (Kerry L. Bonin) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:45:33 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> At 01:18 AM 10/17/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: >For a message encrypted (or signed, a related problem) with a PKS >cipher, recovering the plaintext involves factoring the modulus...so >far as we know. This factoring may be done with conventional >computers, special-purpose computers, or even exotic computers (tanks >of DNA computers, billions of Net-connected computers, >superconducting geodes orbiting around Neptune, quantum computers, >whatever.) [snip] >A look at the work factors (cf. Rivest's paper of circa 1993-4, or >Schneier's book, or any of several other books, or one's own >calculations) will show the pointlessness of throwing more computer >power at sufficiently large moduli. > >Absent a breakthrough in factoring (and I mean a _major_ >breakthrough, not a polynomial factor speedup), a modulus of >thousands of decimal digits will never be factored. The "RSA-129" >challenge becomes the "RSA-1000" challenge. Moore's Law won't do any >good, nor will using ASICs or gate arrays or even nanotechnology. > >A quantum computer _might_ make a difference (though this is unproven). Rivest and Schneier's work factor discussions assume brute force or streamlined brute force such as GNFS. These remain exponential in time. Now hypothesize the effect a new factoring or Feistel cipher attack would have on these tables. Too many crypto pundits spout extrapolations of exponential work factor as proof that these ciphers are unbreakable. These are merely postulates based on an assumption of a sort that has generally proven wrong throughout the history of science. "X requires Y, but Y is impossible, so X is impossible." Until Z comes along, and 20 years later its demonstrated in science or math classrooms as yet another example of bad logic. >Talking about SOS and ECL and 1 GHz and all is nonsensical. All of >those technologies are as nothing when in comes to problems with work >factors exponential in key length! > >The exact point at which brute force becomes economically infeasible >depends on technologies, improvements in algorithms, etc., but the >broad outlines remain as described. One of the points I believe is sorely missing in these discussions is how important "improvements in algorithms" can be. In the narrowest sense, I agree with your statements - but I have also seen what elegant alternative approaches can do to systems that were presumed to be vulnerable only to brute force, and I've also seen how nicely they may be placed into custom hardware. >Then I'd have to say your analytical abilities are shallow. If you >think one of these ciphers with work factors exponential in modulus >size (or "key length," approximately) will fall to custom chips, you >don't understand exponential time/space. I'm not stating that brute force silicon can be scaled to the point it can attack a 256 bit key in reasonable time today. What I do know is that alternative attacks, implemented in silicon or sapphire, are another matter. Your position is predicated on the assumption that because no such attacks are in the public domain, none must exist. I believe this is faulty logic, and advances a common, yet dangerous position. >>I don't think its unreasonable to extrapolate that a sufficiently high >>priority message can be cracked by the NSA in near realtime, regardless of >>the cipher strength used, without significant knowledge of the nature of >>the plaintext. > >And you believe this? Most people who have worked with military crypto systems do, off the record. The difference between what is public and what has been developed with decades of unlimited resources is staggering. How many cryptographers or discrete math experts work in the public domain? Now how many work for the NSA? That's how many orders of magnitude? And how many orders of magnitude difference in budgets, ect., even with bureaucratic and civil service overhead. Call it threat analysis - I think it is reasonable to assume they know a few tricks that aren't public yet. And any trick related to factoring or Feistel networks is sufficient to obsolete those "age of universe" extrapolations. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 17 02:14:47 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 02:14:47 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> References: <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> Message-ID: At 1:45 AM -0700 10/17/00, Kerry L. Bonin wrote: > > >Rivest and Schneier's work factor discussions assume brute force or >streamlined brute force such as GNFS. These remain exponential in time. > >Now hypothesize the effect a new factoring or Feistel cipher attack would >have on these tables. Like Nathan Saper, you are now altering the thrust of your arguments. You wrote at length about ECL and SOS and gate arrays and all that crap, and I said they wouldn't make a hill of beans difference for an exptime problem. ("Well, what if you put a _lot_ of them together?" is the refrain I expect now.) And I'm _quite_ aware of factoring algorithms and their importance! Several times I mentioned "absent factoring breakthroughs" and suchlike and I even went on to quote material on the best known factoring methods. Could a factoring breakthrough happen to convert this exptime problem to polynomial time? Maybe. I said as much. Is it likely? See discussions on progress toward proving factoring to be NP-hard (it hasn't been proved to be such, though it is suspected to be so, i.e., that there will never be "easy" methods of factoring arbitrary large numbers). You don't appear to be familiar with the literature. I suggest you do some reading. (BTW, one of the most important brute force breaks of RSA was done for the so-called Blacknet key. Cf. Leyland et. al. Irony abounds.) > >Too many crypto pundits spout extrapolations of exponential work factor as >proof that these ciphers are unbreakable. I made no claims that this was a proof of the unbreakability of RSA. I cited the work factors. The burden of proof is on you and on Nathan for your claims that such ciphers are in fact being broken by the NSA...you even claimed "near realtime," citing NSA VLSI capabilities. _This_ is the point being rebutted by me, not some "spouting" of a claim that RSA has been "proved" to be "unbreakable." > >These are merely postulates based on an assumption of a sort that has >generally proven wrong throughout the history of science. "X requires Y, >but Y is impossible, so X is impossible." Until Z comes along, and 20 >years later its demonstrated in science or math classrooms as yet another >example of bad logic. They laughed at Ludwig Plutonium, they laughed at Detweiler. And now they laugh at Kerry Bonin. "These are merely postulates," said the stuffed shirt. What happened to "near realtime" and "cracking farms"? > >One of the points I believe is sorely missing in these discussions is how >important "improvements in algorithms" can be. In the narrowest sense, I >agree with your statements - but I have also seen what elegant alternative >approaches can do to systems that were presumed to be vulnerable only to >brute force, and I've also seen how nicely they may be placed into custom >hardware. Repeat after me: polynomial improvements are of no use for solving exptime problems where the keylength can be increased trivially. Putting things into silicon is just a polynomial improvement...maybe a factor of 100, maybe even 100,000. Uninteresting. > >>Then I'd have to say your analytical abilities are shallow. If you >>think one of these ciphers with work factors exponential in modulus >>size (or "key length," approximately) will fall to custom chips, you >>don't understand exponential time/space. > >I'm not stating that brute force silicon can be scaled to the point it can >attack a 256 bit key in reasonable time today. What I do know is that >alternative attacks, implemented in silicon or sapphire, are another >matter. Your position is predicated on the assumption that because no such >attacks are in the public domain, none must exist. I believe this is >faulty logic, and advances a common, yet dangerous position. A lie, actually. I stated quite clearly that there may be factoring breakthroughs. I included an entire paragraph on this, and how big the breakthrough--either algorithmic or via a quantum computer, a la Shor's algorithm--would have to be to make a difference. Once again, it was _you_ who spoke of "near realtime" and "cracking farms." > >>>I don't think its unreasonable to extrapolate that a sufficiently high >>>priority message can be cracked by the NSA in near realtime, regardless of >>>the cipher strength used, without significant knowledge of the nature of >>>the plaintext. >> >>And you believe this? > >Most people who have worked with military crypto systems do, off the >record. So, these folks think RSA-2048 is being cracked in near realtime? Or even that the lowly 3DES is being cracked in near realtime? (It may be, for a few very, very, very high priority messages...but I doubt even this. The MIPS-years are enormous, and the peak compute capacity is unlikely to be available to handle a message in seconds to minutes, which is what I would call "near realtime.") >The difference between what is public and what has been developed >with decades of unlimited resources is staggering. How many cryptographers >or discrete math experts work in the public domain? Now how many work for >the NSA? That's how many orders of magnitude? And how many orders of >magnitude difference in budgets, ect., even with bureaucratic and civil >service overhead. This is a more debatable point. I think there's ample evidence that the non-NSA expertise in cutting-edge ciphers has exceeded the NSA expertise for the past decade or so. For every Brian Snow the NSA has, the universities have their share of Shafi Goldwassers and Adi Shamirs and Neal Koblitzs and David Wagners. The days when NSA was the main source of funding for math guys like Berlekamp and number theorists and algebraists are over. Hundreds of universities, dozens of crypto companies, massive competition. And for things like factoring, it is _unlikely_ that some GS-14 at the Fort has proved that P = NP or has proved that factoring is not hard. You may claim that this is "just an assumption" and that your spook buddies have told you "off the record" that they can factor 700-digit numbers in "near realtime." Whatever. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From nobody at remailer.ch Mon Oct 16 20:15:20 2000 From: nobody at remailer.ch (Anonymous) Date: 17 Oct 2000 03:15:20 -0000 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <35ef637b5c366a720f012b20c2beb949@remailer.ch> In , Jim Choate wrote: > What algorithm are you proposing to identify plain-text? There are key > managment issues, what is your proposal for this problem? There is the > increased complication of admining the box (think of resources to support > both the remailer operation as well as the encryption - consider that > scale carefuly). Pipe the message into GPG and test the output on STDERR. There was some perl code posted to the list not too long ago which does this. -- septic-admin From president at match.com Tue Oct 17 01:23:02 2000 From: president at match.com (president at match.com) Date: 17 Oct 2000 03:23:02 -0500 Subject: CDR: Letter from the President of Match.com Message-ID: <0a11702230811a0MASSMAIL4@onlymail4.oneandonly.com> Dear Match Member, As we worked to launch a new Match.com, our number one goal was to deliver a site that met the high expectations set by members like you. Despite careful planning, we were forced to move to the new Match sooner than desired as a result of serious technical problems with the old system. This prevented the important testing and perfecting necessary in the roll out of anything new. During the transition to the new site, we encountered some unanticipated difficulties. I sincerely apologize for the inconvenience and frustration these difficulties may have caused you. I would also like to thank you for your patience during the transition and express my sincerest gratitude to the many members that have provided invaluable feedback. Be assured that the entire Match Team is working around the clock to deliver the highest quality site possible. I think that it is equally important for me to address a collective sentiment felt by many members, which is �Why fix something if it isn�t broken?� In fact, the main impetus for this latest change was driven by two key challenges. First, the previous technical platform for Match was not stable and close to broken. This ultimately created serious limitations that would hamper our ability to serve you and the growing Match membership in the future. Secondly, in order to add exciting new features and functionality to the site, we had to move to a new platform. On a closing note, I am pleased to announce at the time of this letter, everything on Match.com should be fully functional. What does this mean to you the user: 1) We have your photos and are posting them to the site as quickly as possible. However, due to a backlog of approximately 19,000 photos, it may be early next week before all photos are visible. 2) All Member email correspondence is being delivered. At one point, our email processor did experience an interruption in service, but we�ve resolved all email issues. 3) Your Customer Care questions should be answered promptly. As you can imagine when the site experienced difficulties, many users sent in email to the Customer Care Team causing a large backlog that took a while to work through. 4) Matching now functions as it did before, returning the types of Matches you have come to expect. Again I thank you for your patience and understanding and wish you the best of luck in finding your perfect match. Sincerely, Cindy Hennessy President, Match.com From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 17 03:29:52 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 03:29:52 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> References: <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> Message-ID: >One of the points I believe is sorely missing in these discussions is how >important "improvements in algorithms" can be. In the narrowest sense, I >agree with your statements - but I have also seen what elegant alternative >approaches can do to systems that were presumed to be vulnerable only to >brute force, and I've also seen how nicely they may be placed into custom >hardware. When you are talking "heat death of the universe" time lengths, improvement is algorithms don't really add up to all that much time. In the real world (outside of Academentia) we have different threat models that we need Crypto for. To keep a credit card safe, we need only to make sure that a given undesired decrypt be more expensive than it's worth--and the encrypted credit card string has to last what? Three years? before it's worthless anyway. I'll take the risk that someone will improve factoring by what? 6 or 7 orders of magnitude? (that makes 1,000,000,000 years into 1000 years. I think my card will be expired by then). Other sorts of banking operations have an even short life--from minutes to months. They could take almost 9 orders of magnitude(unless I don't understand this order of magnitude thing)--does it really matter if a banking transaction falls to a break in 10 years? One would think that a bank would be wise enough to expire it's keys more regularly than that. Or military secrets--because of the nature of the military, keys can be expired even more rapidly 3 to 5 years ought to be plenty. And hey, if we do get a break through in factoring speed, it seems cheap enough to double our key size. Quantum computers are a different story--and may (may) make a shambles of our current crypto schemes--but as near as we can tell no one is close to a working system. >Call it threat analysis - I think it is reasonable to assume they know a >few tricks that aren't public yet. And any trick related to factoring or >Feistel networks is sufficient to obsolete those "age of universe" >extrapolations. There is a wide difference between "age of universe" and "age of man". The point of the whole "heat death of the universe" thing is that even if a given brute force decrypt can be made 1000 times faster, it's still going to take a *LONG* time. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 17 01:30:48 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 04:30:48 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001016205040.A2358@well.com> References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <20001016205040.A2358@well.com> Message-ID: At 8:50 PM -0700 on 10/16/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > I'm not claiming > to be stating facts. Ah. :-). Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 17 01:36:57 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 04:36:57 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001016220758.00a6ca10@idiom.com> References: <20001017004154.68612.qmail@web9102.mail.yahoo.com> <3.0.5.32.20001016220758.00a6ca10@idiom.com> Message-ID: At 10:07 PM -0700 on 10/16/00, Bill Stewart wrote regarding the "somebody oughta" problem: > You shouldn't have to search back more than a month.... ...at any point in time... :-). Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From powerpromotion-subscribe-conf-971753768.ommpnddifdbmladlbblp at smartgroups.com Mon Oct 16 20:37:00 2000 From: powerpromotion-subscribe-conf-971753768.ommpnddifdbmladlbblp at smartgroups.com (powerpromotion-subscribe-conf-971753768.ommpnddifdbmladlbblp at smartgroups.com) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 04:37:00 +0100 (GMT+01:00) Subject: CDR: fairyisis invites you to join the "Power Promotion" SmartGroup Message-ID: <7422176.971753820829.JavaMail.root@radium> * An Invitation fairyisis (fairyisis at hotmail.com) has invited you to join the "Power Promotion" SmartGroup. * JOINING To join the group and see the calendar of events, documents, pictures, questionnaires and group emails, go to our site at http://www.smartgroups.com/joingroup?gid=313442&p=4tbk6d9t&u=5154977 and register. -OR- Send a reply to this message if you only want to see the group emails. The following terms and conditions apply: http://www.smartgroups.com/text/en/legal.cfm * What is SmartGroups.com? SmartGroups.com is an effective tool for group communication. Each group has its own email address allowing members to post and receive messages from the group, as well as a calendar, an area for storing group documents, a voting facility and even its own database area. Managers of SmartGroups.com can customise the group's home page, and turn functionality on or off to suit their requirements. If you'd like to learn more about SmartGroups.com generally, you can take the tour on the website. * Unsubscribing Once you join the group, if you decide to leave, you can do so either from the group's homepage or by sending an email to powerpromotion-unsubscribe at smartgroups.com Yours sincerely The SmartGroups.com Team -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 2544 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fairyisis at hotmail.com Mon Oct 16 20:37:00 2000 From: fairyisis at hotmail.com (fairyisis at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 04:37:00 +0100 (GMT+01:00) Subject: CDR: I have invited you to join the "Power Promotion" SmartGroup Message-ID: <14363362.971753820388.JavaMail.root@radium> Hi, Please don't use any responders! Remember when you join an e-mail group you will recieve e-mails, this is not spam!!! (Please note if bouncing occures your membership will be delieted) I've discovered this great online community service called SmartGroups.com. I have created this group, 'Power Promotion', which I think you will also be interested in. I've asked SmartGroups.com to send you an invitation to join, which should be in your inbox just after this email. Email me back if you need any help on how to join, or what it's all about... Regards From anonymous at openpgp.net Tue Oct 17 03:10:52 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 06:10:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: cell phones Message-ID: <4c1112625a7391d161128b4b7d71ab9b@mixmaster.ceti.pl> >Can anyone help me on encrypting the numbers i punch and messages i have in a cell phone that is NOT WAP ennabled . > and can anyone tell me how is cell phone encryption dependent on wap ? The Fedz can watch who you call and what DTMF tones you press without the same warrant they need to listen to voice. Your cellphone location (ergo, yours) is 0wn3d by them too. As is your cellphone-stored address book, in practice. WAP encrypts data between your phone and the basestation, at which point it is cleartext, and may continue on as a new ssl session, and you trust your cell service provider dont you? Oh, and dont think GSL, which stands for voice encryption for gullible europeans, is going to help :-) Clearly cellphones need more low-power MIPS to do the crypto they really should be doing. And the OEMs need a few uncoercable paranoids on their design staff. Otherwise theyre just deceiving customers, or even making them more exposed than before. Ann Fibian -------- "You have no privacy. Now bend over and smile" ---Scott McNealy From jya at pipeline.com Tue Oct 17 04:24:29 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 07:24:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <200010171136.HAA05319@granger.mail.mindspring.net> Bruce Schneier, among others, argues that strength of algorithm is not a reliable determinant of security of information. That most successful attacks occur through more accessible weaknesses, the prime one being human. Bruce reviews several of these in his October 15 Crypto-Gram, and refers to his latest book for more cybersecurity threats that crypto cannot defend. Ross Anderson, among others (some here), claim that chips are readily vulnerable to tampering, and that poses a much greater risk than algo attacks. Programs and people which just grab info directly from your box and bunker through B&E software and black bag jobs cannot be stopped by mathematics, though encrypted info might remain inaccessible. Lifting electromagnetically emanated data, say, that from keyboard to cpu, before it is encrypted, is still a threat, not limited to classified technology, as demonstrated by Ross Anderson, Markus Kuhn and others, and reviewed here recently. Cryptanalysis may be the most crucial technology in the world today, as it has been well before mathematical encipherment. How it is being done is probably the most closely guarded secret, and part of that protection is zero information. Share encryption information, yes, but not decrypt, not even a hint. Blow sunshine about algo strength and unbreakability, yes, that would be in order. What intrigues is the national security benefit of fostering the growth of public encryption, despite the claims that it makes global surveillance more difficult. If a public encryption enterprise didn't exist it would have to be invented to divert the attackers from genuine threats and weaknesses, as well as embed in the public realm a technology for covert snooping inside the Medeco pretense. The question occurs: did PK crypto get leaked on purpose? How was it done? From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 17 08:24:47 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 08:24:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20001017002552.047815a0@shell13.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Kerry L. Bonin wrote: >Extrapolate capabilities from the EFF DES crack project and you are >somewhat closer (1536 ASIC w/ 24 cores/ASIC yielded 4.52 days/crack of 56 >bit keyspace), then take into consideration the advantages of using more >sophisticated semiconductor processes (ECL 15 years ago, GaAs on Sapphire >today) and the higher clock rates that go with that (40MHz to well > 1GHz), >and rerun your numbers. Instead of a small cabinet, fill floors of >buildings with these machines, and you have realtime cracking farms. You have realtime cracking farms for *some* ciphers. I have always figured it this way: They get two orders of magnitude for being "ahead of the curve" in knowledge and technique. They get five orders of magnitude of speed for custom hardware. They get seven orders of magnitude for massively parallel hardware. That totals 14 orders of magnitude (and I think that's generous). So use keys that are six bytes longer than a "reasonable" opponent could crack. problem solved. 2048-bit RSA is still way out of their league. >As for my own comments, I wrote layout and design tools used on these NSA >custom chips in the mid 80's, certified for use with the "NSA Standard Cell >Library" by their chip designers (they were just one of the customers of >the CAD/CAM/CAE software I worked on back then...) Interesting. I thought that was the sort of thing that you could tell the people who'd done it because they were the ones who weren't allowed to talk about it. Bear From anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net Tue Oct 17 05:58:30 2000 From: anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net (An Metet) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 08:58:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <784507150c2ff7baa4f5ed22aca62509@mixmaster.shinn.net> In , you write: > On 17 Oct 2000, Anonymous wrote: > > > Pipe the message into GPG and test the output on STDERR. > > > > There was some perl code posted to the list not too long ago which > > does this. > > So, now everyone has to use GPG. Why? How do you propose to answer > the increased attacks on the protocol now that you've made it the > monopoly? Who said anything about switching to GPG? My code uses GPG to determine if a message contains OpenPGP formatted data. In my tests the code is able to determine if a message contains data which has been encrypted/signed with PGP 2.6.3 _and_ GPG. I have not tested messages encrypted/signed with PGP 5.x or PGP 6.x. > I thought the point of anonymous remailers and commen crypto was to > enhance liberty rather than enforce (coerce) another standard. You obviously have not tried the code. Please do so. -- septic-admin From honig at sprynet.com Tue Oct 17 09:04:36 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:04:36 -0700 Subject: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <00f901c037a3$02eac0b0$e2dc3a9e@pdx.informix.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001017090436.0080c530@pop.sprynet.com> At 11:58 AM 10/16/00 -0700, Joshua R. Poulson wrote: > >Isn't utterly obvious that the NSA, just any decent person, >compartmentalizes its security so that if one system were >broken, the other systems would not necessarily be broken? Very well said. They also benefit from security via obscurity (to *some* extent) because they have nice men with fully automatic weapons to enforce said NDAs. From forgot at lga2.nytimes.com Tue Oct 17 06:51:58 2000 From: forgot at lga2.nytimes.com (NYTimes.com) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:51:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: NYT Account Request Message-ID: <200010171351.JAA19104@web79t.lga2.nytimes.com> You have requested your ID and password for The New York Times on the Web. Please follow the instructions below. If you have any questions or problems, write to forgot at nytimes.com. Please DO NOT REPLY to this message. 1. Please make a note of your subscriber ID: sciferpunk 2. Next, to change the password for this account, using your Web browser go to this unique URL: http://verify.nytimes.com/guests/forgot/forgot?key=108370463_16329707 This page will allow you to choose a new password. Make sure you have copied the address EXACTLY as it appears here. (If you're getting an "Error" page, the address was probably entered incorrectly. See "Help With Copying and Pasting" at the bottom of this e-mail.) 3. Follow the instructions on the screen to choose a new password. After you have entered a password you will automatically enter our Web site. The New York Times on the Web Customer Service forgot at nytimes.com ******************** Help With Copying and Pasting 1. Using the mouse, highlight the entire Web address, (e.g. http://verify.nytimes.com/guests/forgot/forgot?key=108370463_16329707) shown above in step 2. It's essential to highlight the entire address, even if it extends over two lines. 2. Under the Edit menu at the top of your screen, select "Copy". 3. Go into your Web browser (open it if it's not already opened). 4. Click in the "Netsite" or "Address" bar -- the place in your Web browser where it says what Web address you're currently looking at -- and delete the address that's currently there. 5. In the blank "Netsite" or "Address" bar, paste the address by selecting the "Edit" menu at the top of your screen and choosing "Paste". 6. Press Enter. 7. Follow the instructions to choose a new password. ******************** If you did not request your ID and password for your NYT Web registration, someone has mistakenly entered your e-mail address when requesting their password. Please simply ignore this message, or, if you wish, you may go to the address above to select a new password for your account. From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 17 06:53:37 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:53:37 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: > ---------- > Riad S. Wahby[SMTP:rsw at mit.edu] writes > >Nathan Saper wrote: >> > Huh? Tarquin Fintimlinbin-Whinbimlim-Bus Stop F'Tang F'Tang Ol=E9 >> > Biscuit-Barrel? >>=20 >> Uh, what? This is a reference to a Monty Python sketch. Tarqin Fintimlinbin-Whinbimlim-Bus Stop F'Tang F'Tang Ole Biscuit-Barrel was the candidate for the Silly Party. In case you're wondering, Kevin Philips BONG! was the Somewhat Silly Party candidate, and the Very Silly Party candidate's name is not possible to type. These being 'interesting times', life imitates art: http://freespace.virgin.net/raving.loony/ The Official Monster Raving Loony Party has actually run candidates in Britain, and obtained votes (but not won any seats, so far as I know). http://www.sillyparty.com/ The North American Silly Party Homepage. Doesn't look like this is a real one, but you could send mail to TarquinFintimlinbinwhinbimlimBusStopPoontangPoontangOleBiscuit-Barrel at sillyp arty.com, JethroQBunnWhackettBuzzardStubbleandBootWalrustitty at sillyparty.com, or RaymondLuxuryYacht at sillyparty.com to find out. For a real and extensive list of US parties, try http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm which includes such oddities as the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party (http://www.nazi.org/) Peter Trei From forgot at lga2.nytimes.com Tue Oct 17 06:58:51 2000 From: forgot at lga2.nytimes.com (NYTimes.com) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:58:51 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: NYT Account Request Message-ID: <200010171358.JAA04106@web80t.lga2.nytimes.com> You have requested your ID and password for The New York Times on the Web. Please follow the instructions below. If you have any questions or problems, write to forgot at nytimes.com. Please DO NOT REPLY to this message. 1. Please make a note of your subscriber ID: cipherpunk1b1a 2. Next, to change the password for this account, using your Web browser go to this unique URL: http://verify.nytimes.com/guests/forgot/forgot?key=34156941_15666217 This page will allow you to choose a new password. Make sure you have copied the address EXACTLY as it appears here. (If you're getting an "Error" page, the address was probably entered incorrectly. See "Help With Copying and Pasting" at the bottom of this e-mail.) 3. Follow the instructions on the screen to choose a new password. After you have entered a password you will automatically enter our Web site. The New York Times on the Web Customer Service forgot at nytimes.com ******************** Help With Copying and Pasting 1. Using the mouse, highlight the entire Web address, (e.g. http://verify.nytimes.com/guests/forgot/forgot?key=34156941_15666217) shown above in step 2. It's essential to highlight the entire address, even if it extends over two lines. 2. Under the Edit menu at the top of your screen, select "Copy". 3. Go into your Web browser (open it if it's not already opened). 4. Click in the "Netsite" or "Address" bar -- the place in your Web browser where it says what Web address you're currently looking at -- and delete the address that's currently there. 5. In the blank "Netsite" or "Address" bar, paste the address by selecting the "Edit" menu at the top of your screen and choosing "Paste". 6. Press Enter. 7. Follow the instructions to choose a new password. ******************** If you did not request your ID and password for your NYT Web registration, someone has mistakenly entered your e-mail address when requesting their password. Please simply ignore this message, or, if you wish, you may go to the address above to select a new password for your account. From fisherm at tce.com Tue Oct 17 08:06:40 2000 From: fisherm at tce.com (Fisher Mark) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:06:40 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: Kerry L. Bonin writes: > Most people who have worked with military crypto systems do, off the > record. The difference between what is public and what has > been developed > with decades of unlimited resources is staggering. How many > cryptographers > or discrete math experts work in the public domain? Now how > many work for > the NSA? That's how many orders of magnitude? And how many orders of > magnitude difference in budgets, ect., even with bureaucratic > and civil > service overhead. IMHO you haven't done much budgeting or defense work. I worked on a project secret enough that I still can't mention the name of the project (although the name itself is unclassified -- my association with the project was classified, however). Budgeting is still a factor in defense work. Your messages start to sound like the crypto that Tom Clancy uses in his novels, crypto that always annoys me because it is so fake. I agree that the NSA may have a few tricks up its sleeve on top of some pretty powerful specialized cracking hardware, but we are talking about needing heavy wizardry to do real-time cipher cracking, not just some parlor tricks that drop the work factor by 1000 or so. For the NSA to generally do what you propose, they would need some exponential-time methods, methods that would drop the work factor by 10^78 (or something like that). It is just a whole lot easier to do a black-bag job on a North Korean embassy (for example) than to directly attack their crypto. That is why defense companies do background checks, that is why some areas of military facilities are guarded by soldiers with guns, and that is why the NSA tried to conceal all evidence of their existence for a while. Crypto is just one part of a unified security policy -- sometimes not a very important part at that. ==================================================== Mark Leighton Fisher Thomson Consumer Electronics fisherm at tce.com Indianapolis, IN, USA "Display some adaptability." -- Doug Shaftoe, _Cryptonomicon_ From mdpopescu at geocities.com Tue Oct 17 07:08:18 2000 From: mdpopescu at geocities.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:08:18 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Think cash References: <4.3.1.2.20001012080516.01985378@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <00a001c03843$81655540$1d01a8c0@microbilt.com> From arevalos at pps.k12.or.us Tue Oct 17 10:16:34 2000 From: arevalos at pps.k12.or.us (Michael Arevalos) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:16:34 -0700 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001017101634.00795e50@pps.k12.or.us> From mdpopescu at geocities.com Tue Oct 17 07:17:47 2000 From: mdpopescu at geocities.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:17:47 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: A famine averted... References: Message-ID: <014201c03844$ea721310$1d01a8c0@microbilt.com> From kerry at vscape.com Tue Oct 17 10:22:10 2000 From: kerry at vscape.com (Kerry L. Bonin) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:22:10 -0700 Subject: CDR: RE: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: <3.0.32.20001017100710.047fb1d0@shell13.ba.best.com> At 10:06 AM 10/17/00 -0500, Fisher Mark wrote: >It is just a whole lot easier to do a black-bag job on a North Korean >embassy (for example) than to directly attack their crypto. That is why >defense companies do background checks, that is why some areas of military >facilities are guarded by soldiers with guns, and that is why the NSA tried >to conceal all evidence of their existence for a while. Crypto is just one >part of a unified security policy -- sometimes not a very important part at >that. I don't dispute this, my choice of words was "Sure, they devote significant resources to exploiting weaknesses in key management." "Rubber hose" and "black bag" cryptanalysis have a long history of being far more cost effective than brute force. From kerry at vscape.com Tue Oct 17 10:22:12 2000 From: kerry at vscape.com (Kerry L. Bonin) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:22:12 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: <3.0.32.20001017101934.048101c0@shell13.ba.best.com> At 08:24 AM 10/17/00 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: > > >On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Kerry L. Bonin wrote: > >>Extrapolate capabilities from the EFF DES crack project and you are >>somewhat closer (1536 ASIC w/ 24 cores/ASIC yielded 4.52 days/crack of 56 >>bit keyspace), then take into consideration the advantages of using more >>sophisticated semiconductor processes (ECL 15 years ago, GaAs on Sapphire >>today) and the higher clock rates that go with that (40MHz to well > 1GHz), >>and rerun your numbers. Instead of a small cabinet, fill floors of >>buildings with these machines, and you have realtime cracking farms. > >You have realtime cracking farms for *some* ciphers. I have always >figured it this way: > >They get two orders of magnitude for being "ahead of the curve" > in knowledge and technique. >They get five orders of magnitude of speed for custom hardware. >They get seven orders of magnitude for massively parallel hardware. > >That totals 14 orders of magnitude (and I think that's generous). > >So use keys that are six bytes longer than a "reasonable" opponent >could crack. problem solved. 2048-bit RSA is still way out of >their league. Unless their approach to factoring is radically different. I've seen some extremely clever ideas leak into the non-classified press, like holographic systems for realtime off-aspect optical pattern matching for targeting systems. Simple tricks that reduce the theoritical n-GFLOPS/MIPS of computing time to a few clocks. Factoring is such a fundamental operation, I can't accept that the NFS is the optimal attack. >>As for my own comments, I wrote layout and design tools used on these NSA >>custom chips in the mid 80's, certified for use with the "NSA Standard Cell >>Library" by their chip designers (they were just one of the customers of >>the CAD/CAM/CAE software I worked on back then...) > >Interesting. I thought that was the sort of thing that you could >tell the people who'd done it because they were the ones who weren't >allowed to talk about it. Under some circumstances, I guess they aren't. In my case, my employment NDA was conventional and very simple, and we regularily used our certification as a marketing point with defense contractors. In this case, I don't mind mentioning what I did, I just make sure I'm careful not to say more than we used in marketing. This doesn't violate anything I signed. From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 17 10:24:22 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:24:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: A helpful ruling on "anonymity" In-Reply-To: <86hf6b348o.fsf@strangepork.interhack.net> Message-ID: On 17 Oct 2000, Matt Curtin wrote: >With all of the people running around claiming that data which are >pseudonymous are actually anonymous, it's no wonder that there's so >much confusion. > >http://www.consumerreports.org/Special/ConsumerInterest/Reports/0005pri1.htm > >Trying to point out the property of pseudonymity and to highlight the >differences between privacy risks inherent to pseudonymous and >anonymous data is a great way to get yourself labeled a pedant, Basically, whether it's math or crypto, there are some ideas that people just aren't going to "get" because they always lump unfamiliar things together if those things violate the same assumption. In math, they used to look at me blankly when I explained that there was more than one kind of infinity -- Or about transfinite numbers that *weren't* an infinity -- because they only know finite mathematics. Anything outside that realm is, well, infinity, and one infinity, as far as the sheeple are concerned, is as good as another. Likewise, people who only understand speech and business mediated by absolute identities are going to have trouble with the "subtle" difference between anonymity and pseudonymity. It's a model where you are dealing with someone but don't know who they are, and as far as the sheeple are concerned, one not-knowing is as good as another. It violates the same assumption, therefore in popular view, it must be the same thing. *sigh.* Bear From announce at inbox.nytimes.com Tue Oct 17 07:30:35 2000 From: announce at inbox.nytimes.com (The New York Times on the Web) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:30:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Important Membership Information Message-ID: <200010171430.KAA24198@web79t.lga2.nytimes.com> Dear cryptopunk0, Welcome to NYTimes.com! We are delighted that you have decided to become a member of our community. As a member you now have complete access to the Web's premier source for news and information -- free of charge. NYTimes.com not only provides you with in-depth coverage of events happening around the world but also with a wealth of additional features and services. The site is updated regularly throughout the day by New York Times reporters and editors to give you greater insight into events unfolding throughout the day. No matter what the hour, you can look to NYTimes.com for the most trustworthy coverage available and unique perspective you won't find anywhere else. Please feel free to explore the other areas of NYTimes.com. Here are some starting points you may find useful: ** Get NYTimes.com headlines e-mailed directly to you. Choose from the day's top stories, breaking news alerts and your favorite sections: http://email.nytimes.com/email/email.jsp?welcome ** Search and retrieve articles from The New York Times Archives back to 1996. Searches and summaries of articles are free, but there is a small fee for full text. http://archives.nytimes.com/archives?welcome ** Explore the Help Wanted and other classified listings on the Web: http://classifieds.nytimes.com/hw?welcome ** Get a free photo screensaver from The New York Times Photo Archives Choose from Vintage New York, Classic Sports, Americana and more: http://www.nytimes.com/partners/screensaver/index.html?welcome ** Search our archive of 50,000 book reviews, listen to author interviews or sign-up for an exclusive weekly newsletter from our Books Editor: http://www.nytimes.com/books/home?welcome Thank you again for becoming a member. We hope that you will make a point of visiting the site often. Sincerely, Rich Meislin, Editor in Chief New York Times Digital P.S. Your opinions are important to us. Share your thoughts about the site with us by sending an e-mail to feedback at nytimes.com ************************************************************* Your account information is listed below for future reference: Your Member ID is cryptopunk0 You selected your password at registration. Your e-mail address is cypherpunks at cyberpass.net If you did not authorize this registration, someone has mistakenly registered using your e-mail address. We regret the inconvenience; please see http://www.nytimes.com/subscribe/help/cancel.html for instructions. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 17 10:33:04 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:33:04 -0700 Subject: CDR: RE: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20001017100710.047fb1d0@shell13.ba.best.com> References: <3.0.32.20001017100710.047fb1d0@shell13.ba.best.com> Message-ID: At 10:22 AM -0700 10/17/00, Kerry L. Bonin wrote: >At 10:06 AM 10/17/00 -0500, Fisher Mark wrote: >>It is just a whole lot easier to do a black-bag job on a North Korean >>embassy (for example) than to directly attack their crypto. That is why >>defense companies do background checks, that is why some areas of military >>facilities are guarded by soldiers with guns, and that is why the NSA tried >>to conceal all evidence of their existence for a while. Crypto is just one >>part of a unified security policy -- sometimes not a very important part at >>that. > >I don't dispute this, my choice of words was "Sure, they devote significant >resources to exploiting weaknesses in key management." "Rubber hose" and >"black bag" cryptanalysis have a long history of being far more cost >effective than brute force. Your main claim was that ciphers are crackable by the NSA (pace your various comments about "near realtime," "cracking farms," ASICs and silicon-on-sapphire, and your .mil/spook buddies who have confidentially told you so). Are you retracting this claim now? --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 17 10:35:32 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:35:32 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: A helpful ruling on "anonymity" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 10:24 AM -0700 10/17/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: > >Basically, whether it's math or crypto, there are some ideas that >people just aren't going to "get" because they always lump unfamiliar >things together if those things violate the same assumption. > >In math, they used to look at me blankly when I explained that there >was more than one kind of infinity -- Or about transfinite numbers >that *weren't* an infinity -- because they only know finite mathematics. >Anything outside that realm is, well, infinity, and one infinity, >as far as the sheeple are concerned, is as good as another. > >Likewise, people who only understand speech and business mediated >by absolute identities are going to have trouble with the "subtle" >difference between anonymity and pseudonymity. It's a model >where you are dealing with someone but don't know who they are, >and as far as the sheeple are concerned, one not-knowing is as >good as another. It violates the same assumption, therefore in >popular view, it must be the same thing. > Very well said. This is indeed what's happening. More reason not to trust the laws of man. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From declan at well.com Tue Oct 17 07:38:57 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:38:57 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001016214625.B2510@well.com>; from natedog@well.com on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:46:25PM -0700 References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <20001016205040.A2358@well.com> <20001016214625.B2510@well.com> Message-ID: <20001017103857.B28192@cluebot.com> On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:46:25PM -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: > Fine. My basis for my claim is that the NSA is the best funded and > best equiped electronic intelligence agency in the world, and they > have employed some of the smartest people in the world. Sorry, but this is hand-waving. There are smart people outside the NSA and there is money outside the NSA. > Fine, it's a claim made by the clueless. I'm not claiming to be > something other than clueless, but I am claiming to have not meant > what I sent to this list. Again, not a good proofreader. Again, sue me. No, you'll just be ridiculed instead. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and you have not provided it. Think of it from a longtime cypherpunk's perspective: We see people come in here and say the same thing as you every month or so, and offer much in the way of not-very-informed speculation but little in the way of proof. -Declan From declan at well.com Tue Oct 17 07:40:55 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:40:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: A helpful ruling on "anonymity" In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:16:15PM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20001017104055.C28192@cluebot.com> See also: http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/17/technology/17ONLI.html http://www.techserver.com/noframes/story/0,2294,500269480-500419504-502600227-0,00.html -Declan On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:16:15PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > > This is a helpful ruling. No kidding. No spoof. > > --fair use excerpt begins-0- > > Monday October 16 4:29 PM ET > Anonymous Net Posting Not Protected > > > By CATHERINE WILSON, AP Business Writer > > MIAMI (AP) - In a ruling that challenges online anonymity, a Florida > appeals court declared Monday that Internet service providers must > divulge the identities of people who post defamatory messages on the > Internet. > > Critics of the ruling say it could have a chilling effect on free > expression in Internet chat rooms. > > .... > Lauren Gelman, public policy director with the Electronic Frontier > Foundation, is concerned that other courts could follow the lead of > the 3rd District Court of Appeals in approving subpoenas. > > ``This kind of speech happens all the time in all kinds of chat > rooms,'' Gelman said. ``We don't want to see these subpoenas become > regularly used to cause people to self-censor themselves.'' > > ``The court had the potential to set an important precedent about the > right to speak anonymously on the Internet,'' Lidsky said. ``The > courts are eventually going to have to come to grips with this issue > and decide how broad free speech rights are in cyberspace.'' > > > --end excerpt-- > > Lidsky doesn't get it. There is no "right to speak anonymously on the > Internet" (or anywhere else). If Alice observes Bob make a comment, > and Alice chooses to speak about her observations, or is required by > a court to speak about her observations, Bob cannot assert some > "right to anonymity." > > Now, had the court said that all words must be traceable, must be > signed, and so on, then this would be a different kettle of fish. But > they didn't. The court just said, in this case, that the usual > process of discovery and production of evidence is not trumped by > some claim of a "right to anonymity." > > No surprises there. > > This is helpful because it pushed anonymity back into the > technological arena, where it belongs. > > > --Tim May > -- > ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- > Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, > ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero > W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, > "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. > From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 17 10:43:23 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:43:23 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20001017101934.048101c0@shell13.ba.best.com> References: <3.0.32.20001017101934.048101c0@shell13.ba.best.com> Message-ID: At 10:22 AM -0700 10/17/00, Kerry L. Bonin wrote: >At 08:24 AM 10/17/00 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: > > >That totals 14 orders of magnitude (and I think that's generous). >> >>So use keys that are six bytes longer than a "reasonable" opponent >>could crack. problem solved. 2048-bit RSA is still way out of >>their league. > >Unless their approach to factoring is radically different. I've seen some >extremely clever ideas leak into the non-classified press, like holographic >systems for realtime off-aspect optical pattern matching for targeting >systems. Simple tricks that reduce the theoritical n-GFLOPS/MIPS of >computing time to a few clocks. Factoring is such a fundamental operation, >I can't accept that the NFS is the optimal attack. You still don't get it, do you? A holographic system buys polynomial factors of improvement, not exponential factors. Shamir said as much, of course, with his optical tools he was writing about a few years back. You keep referring to these "tricks" for reducing exptime to "a few clocks." Paranoia is useful, but assuming that the NSA "must" have some selection of tricks which would astound and shake the world, absent any indications that this is so, is beyond paranoia and is into some weird kind of NSA-is-the-Great-Oz worship. As Declan said, extraordinary claims require extraoridinary proof. All you've done so far is to hand wave (and somethingelse-wave) about how custom silicon and unspecified tricks _must_ be useful. As another poster noted, where's the 10^78-fold improvement? (And the 10^200-fold improvement? Etc.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From cmcurtin at interhack.net Tue Oct 17 07:57:11 2000 From: cmcurtin at interhack.net (Matt Curtin) Date: 17 Oct 2000 10:57:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: A helpful ruling on "anonymity" In-Reply-To: Tim May's message of "Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:16:15 -0700" References: Message-ID: <86hf6b348o.fsf@strangepork.interhack.net> >>>>> "Tim" == Tim May writes: Tim> This is helpful because it pushed anonymity back into the Tim> technological arena, where it belongs. Indeed. With all of the people running around claiming that data which are pseudonymous are actually anonymous, it's no wonder that there's so much confusion. http://www.consumerreports.org/Special/ConsumerInterest/Reports/0005pri1.htm Trying to point out the property of pseudonymity and to highlight the differences between privacy risks inherent to pseudonymous and anonymous data is a great way to get yourself labeled a pedant, by the way. It never ceases to amaze me how some people will resist learning something, even when such learning would clearly be in their interest. -- Matt Curtin, Founder Interhack Corporation http://www.interhack.net/ "Building the Internet, Securely." research | development | consulting From jdimov at CIS.CLARION.EDU Tue Oct 17 07:59:15 2000 From: jdimov at CIS.CLARION.EDU (Jordan Dimov) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:59:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: >Could a factoring breakthrough happen to convert this exptime problem >to polynomial time? Maybe. I said as much. Is it likely? See >discussions on progress toward proving factoring to be NP-hard (it >hasn't been proved to be such, though it is suspected to be so, i.e., >that there will never be "easy" methods of factoring arbitrary large >numbers). Geee... Since when are problems "proven" to be NP-hard?? Go back to your favorite undergrad institution and take a course on computational complexity again. >You don't appear to be familiar with the literature. I suggest you do >some reading. Yeah, right. And you are familiar. From reinhold at world.std.com Tue Oct 17 08:03:39 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:03:39 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> Message-ID: At 4:37 PM -0700 10/16/2000, Ed Gerck wrote: >Borrowing from a private comment from Bob Jueneman, whatever the technical >community decides that non-repudiation means, it probably isn't what the legal >community means. So be it. Certainly the legal profession uses >ordinary English >words to mean other than their ordinary meaning in a particular >context, and so >do other professions. This is the nub of our argument. I believe the terms we use influence how our technology will be interpreted in a societal and legal context and we therefore have an obligation to be as clear as possible. This is particularly important with technology such as digital signatures and certs which may profoundly alter the way individuals interact with the economic system. > > >> No cryptographic technology that I am aware of can fairly be said to >> render the denial of an act impossible. > >Of course not, and we agree this much. That is why I wrote earlier that >non-repudiation is not a "stronger" authentication or a long-lived one. >In my view, a non-repudiation proof could be disqualifed by an authentication >proof. Non-repudiation does NOT trump authentication -- which is what this >original thread (First Monday article) proposed, based on some mythical >"trusted systems". To the extent we agree here, I would urge you to help insure that this message is crystal clear in all specs and documents whose content you can influence. And don't rely on which dictionary's definition of "protect" is correct. > >OTOH, some lawyers and lawmakers are oftentimes the first ones to use the term >"identifty theft" -- which simply is not a theft, it is >impersonation. I hope we >in crypto don't have to use "identity theft" as well. And, they can >continue to use it. > The problem goes beyond simple impersonation in that the victims subsequently find it difficult to convince large institutions that they are who they say they are. My understanding is that the term comes from victims' statements that they felt as if their identities had been stolen. See http://www.consumer.gov/idtheft/. The question is relevant here, not as just another parallel question of semantics, but because exactly how the legal system treats "non-repudiation" can make the identity theft problem much better or much worse. For what it's worth, when Congress responded to this problem by passing the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998, it did not define "identity theft" as a new crime, but merely amended 18 U.S.C. § 1028 "Fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents and information." The act includes provisions that appear to protect private keys, though they are not explicitly mentioned, while biometrics are (see 1028(d)(3)(C)). Arnold Reinhold From egerck at nma.com Tue Oct 17 11:21:31 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:21:31 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> Message-ID: <39EC98AB.827388D1@nma.com> "Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > To the extent we agree here, I would urge you to help insure that > this message is crystal clear in all specs and documents whose > content you can influence. And don't rely on which dictionary's > definition of "protect" is correct. Arnold, Yes. However, we live now in a post-modern society, where the emphasis is on local discourse and it is accepted that there are many truths and many ways of knowing. The cat is out of the bag and we need IMO to learn to cope with diversity rather than try to iron it out. Of course, there are many dictionaries and many languages and computer technology has not solved this problem -- in the contrary, we have maybe dozens of "computer languages" being born every year and a handful of them actually being used. So, if we look to the real world, what do we see? Do we see a uniform law rule, a uniform government and a uniform language? No, we see multiple relationships, multiple actors, heavy overload, intersubjective contexts. As Tony Bartoletti wrote, apologies for what seems a rant, but the "solid mathematical foundations" underlying digital signatures, "Qualified Certificates", unmistakable IDs, biometrics and so forth create in me a degree of "psychic and social backlash" as well. We create these instruments in the hope of ascertaining better measures of the constancy of authentication and identities. The central question that comes to mind is "to what degree we are artificially creating the constancy we intend these instruments to measure." > Ed Gerck wrote: > >OTOH, some lawyers and lawmakers are oftentimes the first ones to use the > >term "identifty theft" -- which simply is not a theft, it is impersonation. I hope > >we in crypto don't have to use "identity theft" as well. And, they can > >continue to use it. > > > > The problem goes beyond simple impersonation in that the victims > subsequently find it difficult to convince large institutions that > they are who they say they are. My understanding is that the term > comes from victims' statements that they felt as if their identities > had been stolen. See http://www.consumer.gov/idtheft/. The question > is relevant here, not as just another parallel question of semantics, > but because exactly how the legal system treats "non-repudiation" can > make the identity theft problem much better or much worse. No. The fact that people like to talk in dumbed down soundbites like "identity theft", instead of using well-established words like "impersonation", does not mean that any legally relevant conclusions can be drawn from the misuse of technical terms like "theft" in the soundbite. Otherwise, we seem to agree. Cheers, Ed Gerck From drt at un.bewaff.net Tue Oct 17 02:26:58 2000 From: drt at un.bewaff.net (Doobee R. Tzeck) Date: 17 Oct 2000 11:26:58 +0200 Subject: CDR: GEMA / tax Lars In-Reply-To: "Riad S. Wahby"'s message of "Mon, 16 Oct 2000 23:33:53 -0400" Message-ID: <87g0lves1z.fsf_-_@c0re.bewaff.net> I just checked the Legal Status of the GEMA - http://www.gema.de/eng/ GEMA is a "eingetragener Verein" (registered Club) and has no direct association with the state. But there is the "Urheberrechtswahrnehmungsgesetz", sometimes called Lex GEMA. It basically says that you have to proof to GEMA (it doesn't spell out GEMA) that you haven't played music registered with GEMA. If you don't they can sue you for royalities in court. They don't have to proof anything. drt -- DC hat so einen cryptischen Syntax, den muß man einfach lieben. ---Ingo Schwitters http://koeln.ccc.de/~drt/ From jimdbell at home.com Tue Oct 17 12:00:24 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:00:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com><3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> <200010171136.HAA05319@granger.mail.mindspring.net> Message-ID: <004001c0386c$81a87c20$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: John Young > The question occurs: did PK crypto get leaked on purpose? > How was it done? It may not be exactly what you had in mind, but I personally _observed_ the "leak" (to the public) of RSA, but I simply didn't recognize what it was at the time! I believe it was late January/early February 1977 (but I could be off a couple of months) and it was the beginning of my second semester of my freshman year at MIT. Due to the location of my dorm, "East Campus," I frequently walked by the mathematics department and its bulletin boards on the main floor. Usually bulletin boards like that are filled with grades, test results, problem set answers, and things like that. But at this point, they had something that wasn't identifiably of any of these categories. "Exponentiation", "modulo arithmetic," "prime numbers", etc. I wish I could see the thing again. I didn't spend a lot of time on it, at the time, but I would have if I'd known what it was. Jim Bell From declan at well.com Tue Oct 17 09:03:31 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:03:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Vanessa Lynch, still whining (an impressive feat) In-Reply-To: References: <20001017120908.A29784@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001017120149.00b3ef00@mail.well.com> If you're not already removed from the list, you should look at the message headers and find the Sender: line. Take that domain name (ssz.com or cyberpass.net or algebra.com or something) and send mail with "help" in the body to majordomo at thatdomainname.com. Or you could find the original message you received when you signed up, which is probably easier. -Declan At 11:55 10/17/2000 -0400, Vanessa Lynch wrote: >Hi Yes it is me again and I won't stop until someone can stop being >rude...The first emai I sent was very polite and a simple request to be >taken off. The response I received was very rude and thats why I responded >the way I did. My apologies if you are having a bad day or feel personally >attacked by my responses, however I recieve numerous emails unsolicted and >solicted and when I request to be taken off its never a problem. This list >is the only one that has responded in this manner. > >I hope you have a wonderful rest of the day and realize that this was not >about you ... I just wanted off the list. > >Thanks so much! > >-----Original Message----- >From: declan at cluebot.com [mailto:declan at cluebot.com]On Behalf Of Declan >McCullagh >Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 12:09 PM >To: vlynch at predictit.com >Cc: Cypherpunks Mailing List >Subject: Vanessa Lynch, still whining (an impressive feat) > > >Ah, Vanessa, it's you again. > >You've been clogging cypherpunks with drivel for days now, in an >apparent failure to understand the most basic mechanisms of mailing >lists, let alone any glimmering of netiquette. You've been rude and >obnoxious, threatening to report the cypherpunks list to the >authorities, whoever they are. > >A typical message: "i did NOT subscribe to this crap so u take me off >or im reporting site!!!!!!" > >I apologize, of course -- for being overly polite. > >Let me be more blunt this time: Bugger off. Stop whining, stop >frothing, and take your threats elsewhere. > >-Declan > > >At 11:37 10/17/2000 -0400, Vanessa Lynch wrote: > >Below is an email I received when requesting to be unsubscribed from a >specific list - It look like someone from your organization has sent the >latest email - please do whatever it takes to ensure I do not receive any >futher emails. Whoever this person is in dire of an ego check! I simply >requested to be taken off a list - no need for the organization/person to >take it personally & act like so childish. > >Thank you for your help! > > >-----Original Message----- >From: declan >Sent: Monday, October 16, 2000 10:33 PM >To: Jim Choate >Cc: vlynch at predictit.com; cypherpunks at cyberpass.net >Subject: Re: CDR: RE: take me off ur list thank you! > > >Allow me to be more uncharacteristically succinct (it's been a long day): > >Ms. Lynch, get a clue. Stop frothing. Until then, spare us the venting. > >Yours truly, >A friend From galt at inconnu.isu.edu Tue Oct 17 11:04:32 2000 From: galt at inconnu.isu.edu (John Galt) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:04:32 -0600 (MDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001016220758.00a6ca10@idiom.com> Message-ID: Cypherpunks is archived? Isn't that against what most cypherpunks stand for? I know it sets up a "style fingerprint" attack against anonymity... On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Bill Stewart wrote: > Cypherpunks works like any anarchy. *You're* running cypherpunks. > If you want something done the way you want it done, *do it* > and get other people to help you. > Also, given that the list has been around for almost a decade, > and has archives, you might consider seeing if it's been discussed. > You shouldn't have to search back more than a month.... > > > At 10:31 PM 10/16/00 -0400, Jordan Dimov wrote: > > > >That's shame indeed. Couldn't whoever's running cypherpunks setup a > >goddamn sendmail filter or something? > > > > > >On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, [iso-8859-1] Ing. Fausto C.G. wrote: > > > >> I dont now where did you get my e-mail, but I am > >> receiving spam from you. Stop it right now, please, I > >> didnt ask you for your spam. This time I am asking it > >> kindly, next time I wont ask it this way. > >> > >> Thank you. > >> > >> ===== > >> Ing. Fausto C. G. > >> > >> Empresa: INSYS (http://www.insys-corp.com.mx) > >> "Ipsa scientia potestas est" .-Francis Bacon. > >> > >> _________________________________________________________ > >> Do You Yahoo!? > >> Obtenga su direcci�n de correo-e gratis @yahoo.com > >> en http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com > >> > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > Bill > Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com > PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 > -- Galt's sci-fi paradox: Stormtroopers versus Redshirts to the death. Who is John Galt? galt at inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! From honig at sprynet.com Tue Oct 17 09:07:00 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:07:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> At 09:14 PM 10/16/00 -0400, Nathan Saper wrote: >When do cops take DNA at traffic stops? Not yet. But I believe the UK takes samples of everyone arrested (not necessarily guilty) of minor crimes, and some US states and cities do or periodically propose doing this or more. From honig at sprynet.com Tue Oct 17 09:07:00 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:07:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First In-Reply-To: <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001016192120.0080e420@pop.sprynet.com> At 07:37 PM 10/16/00 -0400, Ed Gerck wrote: >Borrowing from a private comment from Bob Jueneman, whatever the technical >community decides that non-repudiation means, it probably isn't what the legal >community means. So be it. For instance, the "acceptable" PK key length for non-refutability may have a legal defintion which is either liberal or conservative by e.g. cryptographic standards. Like the FBI's 12 coincidence (of topological feature) points on a fingerprint or N matches of polymorphic genes.. From honig at sprynet.com Tue Oct 17 09:12:30 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:12:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: another judge farts: anonymous speech Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001017091054.0080f630@pop.sprynet.com> Anonymous Net Posting Not Protected http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Internet-Defamation.html By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 4:29 p.m. ET MIAMI (AP) -- In a ruling that challenges online anonymity, a Florida appeals court declared Monday that Internet service providers must divulge the identities of people who post defamatory messages on the Internet. Critics of the ruling say it could have a chilling effect on free expression in Internet chat rooms. The ruling comes against the efforts of the American Civil Liberties Union to protect the identity of eight individuals who posted anonymous missives on a Yahoo! financial chat room about Erik Hvide, the former CEO of Hvide Marine Inc. Hvide alleges that personal attacks against him also caused damage to the company's image. Hvide's attorney Bruce Fischman hailed the ruling, saying it would force Internet users to ``think a bit before they speak.'' The ACLU had wanted the court first to rule on whether Hyde had actually been defamed before identifying the defendants, named in court papers only as John Doe. If there was no showing of defamation, the ACLU reasoned, the critics should remain anonymous. However, on Thursday, the court dissolved a stay freezing subpoenas for the records of Yahoo! Inc. and America Online Inc., whose service was used by one of the defendants in the defamation case. Lauren Gelman, public policy director with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, is concerned that other courts could follow the lead of the 3rd District Court of Appeals in approving subpoenas. ``This kind of speech happens all the time in all kinds of chat rooms,'' Gelman said. ``We don't want to see these subpoenas become regularly used to cause people to self-censor themselves.'' Both Internet companies took a back seat in the lawsuit, saying they would do whatever the judges said. Lyrissa Lidsky, who argued the case on behalf of the ACLU, called the decision a surprise and a setback. Nevertheless, she said, ``It's not a defeat for all the other John Does in the pipeline'' fighting Internet-related subpoenas because the court did not explain its legal reasoning. An appeal is being explored. ``The court had the potential to set an important precedent about the right to speak anonymously on the Internet,'' Lidsky said. ``The courts are eventually going to have to come to grips with this issue and decide how broad free speech rights are in cyberspace.'' The issue is largely untested in the nation's courts. A Virginia federal judge sided with a government subpoena request in a criminal case, but civil suits in California and Virginia have not settled the subpoena questions involving anonymous Internet users. From no at aol.com Tue Oct 17 05:23:30 2000 From: no at aol.com (no at aol.com) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:23:30 GMT Subject: CDR: $$$ chico.cablelan.net crazy.html (1/1) Message-ID: <39ec43af.0@139.142.84.10> begin 644 crazy.html M/"%$3T-465!%($A434P at 4%5"3$E#("(M+R]7,T,O+T141"!(5$U,(#0N,"!4 M6=O;&0O8W)A>GDN8V9M M/VED/3$W-S at W-2`M+3X-"CQ(5$U,/CQ(14%$/CQ4251,13Y#2!';VQD M(%!R:79A=&4 at 4')O9W)A;3PO5$E43$4^#0H\345402!H='1P+65Q=6EV/4-O M;G1E;G0M5'EP92!C;VYT96YT/2)T97AT+VAT;6P[(&-H87)S970]=VEN9&]W MGEG;VQD(&YA;64]075T:&]R M/@T*/$U%5$$@8V]N=&5N=#TB35-(5$U,(#4N-3`N-#$S-"XV,#`B(&YA;64] M1T5.15)!5$]2/CPO2$5!1#X-"CQ"3T19/@T*/$-%3E1%4CX\0CX\1D].5"!F M86-E/4%R:6%L+$AE;'9E=&EC83X\1D].5"!C;VQOF4]*S(^4U!%0TE!3"`-"D]04$]25%5.2519($9/4B!93U4 at +2`D-3`@ M04Y$(%E/55(@24X\+T9/3E0^/"]&3TY4/CPO1D].5#X\+T(^(`T*/$A2('=I M9'1H/2(Q,#`E(CX-"CQ"4CX\24U'('-R8STB8W)A>GDM1&%T96EE;B]C6)A;BYG:68B(&)O2!A2!';VQD)FYBF4]*S(^0VQI8VL@;VX@#0IE86-H(&]F('1H92!P6]U2`D-2!T;R!E86-H(&)E M;&]W.CPO1D].5#X\+T9/3E0^/"]&3TY4/CPO0CX\+T-%3E1%4CX-"CQ0/CQ" M4CX\0CX\1D].5"!F86-E/2)!6=O;&0O4&%Y,2YC9FT_ M:60],3F4]*S(^,RX at 4&%Y("0U('1O/$$@#0IH6=O;&0O4&%Y-"YC9FT_:60],32YC;VTO8W)A>GEG;VQD+U!A>34N8V9M/VED/3$W-S at W M-29A;7`[4&%Y-3TQ-38R.#`B/B`-"C$U-C(X,#PO03Y?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]? M7U]?7U]?7SPO1D].5#X\+T9/3E0^/"]&3TY4/CPO0CX@/$)2/CQ"/CQ&3TY4 M(`T*9F%C93TB07)I86P at 3F%RF4]*S(^-BX at 4&%Y("0U('1O/$$@#0IH2YC;VTO8W)A>GEG;VQD+U!A>3F4]*S(^."X at 4&%Y("0Q-2`-"G1O/$$@#0IH2!' M;VQD.CPO1D].5#X\+T),3T-+455/5$4^#0H\0DQ/0TM154]413X\1D].5"!F M86-E/4%R:6%L+$AE;'9E=&EC83Y4:&5R92!A2!';VQD(B`-"B`@ M+2!Y;W4@=VEL;"!B92!P;&%C960@:6YT;R!P;W-I=&EO;B!N=6UB97(@-RP@ M=VET:"`C-B!T:')U(",R(&UO=FEN9R!U<"!O;F4@#0H@('!O6=O;&0O4&%Y,2YC9FT_ M:60],37=H97)E(&EN(`T*("!T:&4@=V]R;&0@:6X at 86YY(&-O=6YT6]U(&YE960 at 86X@92UG;VQD(&%C8V]U;G0L(&-L:6-K(&AE6]U2!';VQD(%!A9V4B('-O('EO=2`- M"B`@=VEL;"!H879E(&$@9&]C=6UE;G0@=&\@6]U6=O;&0O6]U(&%L6]U(&%C=&EV871I;F<@>6]U thanx fucker > goddamn rude man > -- Galt's sci-fi paradox: Stormtroopers versus Redshirts to the death. Who is John Galt? galt at inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 17 12:34:14 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:34:14 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <200010171136.HAA05319@granger.mail.mindspring.net> References: <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> <200010171136.HAA05319@granger.mail.mindspring.net> Message-ID: At 7:24 AM -0400 10/17/00, John Young wrote: > > >The question occurs: did PK crypto get leaked on purpose? >How was it done? I'm not sure what your implication is, though I have some suspicion you are insinuating that the NSA and Company knew PK was somehow weak and so it leaked it. Well, several points: 1. The public part of the process (not counting the Brits and possible collaborators who may have invented something very similar some years earlier) included several folks many of us know quite well: Whit Diffie, Martin Hellman, and Ralph Merkle are all Bay Area folks from Stanford and Berkeley, then. And Rivest, Shamir, and Adleman are also well known. They have not hinted that they were fed information from NSA, or that key results mysteriously appeared on their desktops one night. Conclusion from this: a deliberate leak seems unlikely. 2. The ideas were "in the air" at the time. Merkle had done some interesting work on speculating about "puzzles" which might be used for encryption. I believe this work went back to around 1974-5, when he was a grad student at Berkeley. His notion was that some problems are easy to work out in one direction, but hard in the other direction. (Think of what we now routinely call one-way functions.) (By the way, there are comments from the 19th century along similar lines, even mentioning cryptography. I think some of the review articles on public key have mentioned these historical comments.) Merkle does not seem to be the kind of person who either would be working for the NSA or whom the NSA would pick to be a conduit for leaked secrets. 3. Ditto in spades for Whit Diffie. And Martin Hellman was, at that time, an active anti-war activist ("Beyond War"). Seems unlikely that NSA would pick them. 4. Once the Diffie-Hellman-Merkle early papers on the ideas of public key systems were out, Rivest-Shamir-Adleman worked on alternatives to the knapsack algorithm. The result was what we know of as RSA. At no point do I see persuasive evidence that PK and/or RSA were "leaked on purpose." Whit Diffie sometimes shows up at Bay Area Cypherpunk events, so someone could ask him. Though I expect he's tired of hearing conspiracy theories. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From pjcjr at us.ibm.com Tue Oct 17 09:38:56 2000 From: pjcjr at us.ibm.com (Peter Capelli/Raleigh/Contr/IBM) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:38:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Protecting Our Children Message-ID: Here is a link to the text: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c106:1:./temp/~c106Eno3vf:: Thanks! -p "Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin, 1759 Mac Norton @cyberpass.net on 10/16/2000 08:48:24 PM Please respond to Mac Norton Sent by: owner-cypherpunks at cyberpass.net From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 17 12:49:42 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:49:42 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: A famine averted... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 4:02 PM +0300 10/14/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > >On a similar vein, just about every somehow understandable version of free >market theory is based on the assumption of a steady state market. The >theory does not include a temporal element. If you want to study those, >you're bound for such a quagmire of stochastic nonlinear differential >equations that you would not believe. Hence, the global stability of any >reasonably realistic model of markets is practically impossible to >guarantee with current mathematical tools. It is quite possible for such >systems to behave badly enough to kill most of the participants in the >market, for instance. Besides, the basic continuity assumptions behind >mathematical economics practically guarantee that the theory does not take >such possibilities seriously - I know of no models which take into account >the discrete, limited number of people participating in the market. There's a _lot_ of work being done in this area. Some key words: computational economics, multi-agent systems, Swarm, evolutionary game theory, etc. It may be true that these are not the simple, econometric models which textbooks present with nice, neat graphs showing supply and demand and computing elasticity, but this is hardly surprising. In any case, the theory of free markets is a lot more than about proving theorems in continuous, steady-state models. > >Free market theory, though interesting, useful and absolutely much better >than most available alternatives simply does not cover it all. It is an >abstraction which probably should not be attained any more than the >socialist one. Saying that there is a "free market theory" is itself pretty misleading. There are economic models, there are viewpoints about the role of regulation and the advantages of non-interventionist policies, and so on. Those who believe that nominally free markets have certain practical and ideological benefits (vis-a-vis price discovery, signalling mechanisms, risk/reward, etc.) may adopt the short-hand of saying they are "free market theory" advocates. This doesn't mean there is some "theory of free markets" which is distinct from economics in general. In a nutshell, treat economic theory as just a common language for certain types of analysis. "Elasticity" has its place, but it is only a part of the bigger picture. Folks like Hayek and von Mises, and entrepreneurs taking advantage of free markets, don't need to solve differential equations! A Korean stall vendor deciding to offer pomegranates for sale doesn't need a "theory" of mathematical economics to practice free market strategies. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl Tue Oct 17 03:50:03 2000 From: mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl (Anonymous Remailer) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:50:03 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: smile all the time Message-ID: <00e877e12189682c0bea31eba67bd4fa@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Warning for German motorists FRANKFURT, Germany -- German motorists have been told to stop making rude gestures at traffic cameras or they could be charged with offending the police. A Bavarian court has ruled that a driver who held up his middle finger while passing a traffic camera was addressing police officers rather than the equipment itself, German auto association Automobil Club Europe said. The motorist in question had argued that he didnt think the camera was switched on. Germany is renowned for having no speed restrictions on many of its motorways but rigorously enforces limits on other roads, often with the help of speed monitoring equipment. From rsw at MIT.EDU Tue Oct 17 09:50:46 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:50:46 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from jdimov@CIS.CLARION.EDU on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:59:15AM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20001017125046.G8357@positron.mit.edu> Jordan Dimov wrote: > Geee... Since when are problems "proven" to be NP-hard?? Go back to your > favorite undergrad institution and take a course on computational > complexity again. Perhaps it is you who should do so. Showing a problem to be asymptotically Omega(N!) or Omega(N^N) (or Theta of either) is effectively proving it to be NP-hard--that is, it grows in non-polynomial time. -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 899 bytes Desc: not available URL: From declan at well.com Tue Oct 17 09:52:17 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:52:17 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Protecting Our Children In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001017125143.00b498f0@mail.well.com> No, that's a temporary URL that will become invalid in a few minutes. You need to send out the link to the summary, which I did. Or include it below. :) -Declan At 12:38 10/17/2000 -0400, Peter Capelli/Raleigh/Contr/IBM wrote: >Here is a link to the text: > >http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c106:1:./temp/~c106Eno3vf:: > >Thanks! > >-p > >"Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve >neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin, 1759 > > >Mac Norton @cyberpass.net on 10/16/2000 08:48:24 >PM > >Please respond to Mac Norton > >Sent by: owner-cypherpunks at cyberpass.net > > >To: Declan McCullagh >cc: Cypherpunks Mailing List >Subject: Re: Protecting Our Children > > > >Makes it a crime not to keep the cough medicine in the triple >lock gun cabinet it also mandates? Or just gives more money >to the DEA to seek Peace With Honor in the War On Drugs? >MacN > >On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > > To be voted on in the House tomorrow: > > (9) H.R. 5312 - Protecting Our Children From Drugs Act of 2000 > > > > It's not on Thomas, and I don't feel like dispatching my intern to get >the > > text, so your guess is as good as mine. > > > > -Declan > > > > > > From mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl Tue Oct 17 03:55:39 2000 From: mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl (Anonymous Remailer) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:55:39 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: SFBAY CP meat meet timeout handler Message-ID: <2348a0b6ae978b94ee476eddbe4a67b0@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Since no timely announcement from usual sources was detected, why not meet in San Francisco, Golden Gate Park, 9th and Lincoln, create an ad hoc agenda and beat it till dinner time. From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 17 12:57:22 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 12:57:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: RE: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: It occurs to me that the NSA may in fact have a much easier time of cracking most encrypted messages than is generally believed by the people who use them. We can rule out the idea that they may have computers capable of solving the ciphers by a brute force key search or modulus factoring -- basically, such a computer would be at least the size of jupiter, assuming complete mastery of nanotech. Since we can't see any such objects within five or six light-days, that pretty much cooks the "near real-time solving" of ciphers. However, we are forgetting what they do have. They've got Echelon. That means all kinds of intercepts, by and about the people communicating, most of them in plaintext. They keep dossiers on people that list vital statistics like birthdate, hometown, grade school and high school classmates, parents, siblings, neighbors, organizations, etc. They've got all our goofy quotes from our usenet posts, and of course everything that anyone's said on mailing lists like this one. Since most people use passwords and passphrases that are some chunk of personal information, their system may not have to crunch very long to come up with the password used by a particular target. Security sweeps are always finding people who used, eg, their college ID number, their first girlfriend's name, the street they lived on as a kid, their parents' address, names of countries or cities or fictional or historical characters, or even ghods help us their own drivers license number or SSN as a password. The spooks tend to have all of this info in a nice cross-indexed database, so they can start guessing on something a hell of a lot easier than random keys. If the NSA is using their resources effectively, and the key generator uses an input password or passphrase instead of random numbers, they may indeed be able to crack most 2048-bit RSA messages, in near realtime, just by knowing all the details about the people who sent them. This is not an attack on the cipher, but it could have the same effect against most opponents most of the time. Witness the case of Rashael Keavy, an enterprising businesswoman of San Francisco. In San Francisco, prostitution is considered about on a par with jaywalking. Technically it's illegal, but the cops, as a matter of policy, don't bother making arrests unless there's a "real" crime, either against the pro or against the john, involved. Ms. Keavy operated a ring of "outcall" prostitutes, and unlike most people in such businesses, treated her employees very well. Paid them $50K salaries, with bennies, a four month annual vacation, and a comprehensive health plan, according to the papers that covered the arrest. Anyway, when she expanded her business to the south, she encountered San Jose, where prostitution is actually considered a crime. A few months later, when the San Jose police were trying to raise money for something or other, she was arrested. She kept her business records encrypted on a laptop, and used a good cipher, and used some kind of file wipe utility -- so the cops figured they'd have to get one of her employees to testify against her -- but her employees, describing her as "a great woman", "an american hero", and generally the best thing ever to happen to them, flatly and unanimously refused to do so. This by the way is what attracted the attention of the press. Madams rarely inspire unconditional personal loyalty. So the cops called in a "data recovery" specialist from the FBI, and her laptop yielded up its secrets in short order. Ms. Keavy is now serving five to ten. (or heck, this was a couple years ago, she may be paroled by now). TANJ. Now I don't know what happened here -- there are any number of things that could have been done wrong in securing the laptop, especially since it was done by someone whose primary business was not cryptography. She may have forgotten to erase one time. She may have erased but failed to use her file wipe utility. The file wipe utility might have been one of those wimpy naive ones that just writes zeros over a file. The OS may have swapped the encryption program into the swapfile at a moment when the key was in memory, where they could just pick it off the disk later. But, it's also plausible that they just made a copy of the encrypted files, sent them off to the Fort, and let a million dollars worth of hardware running with a dossier about her whole damn life spend a few hours guessing her passphrase. Did they break the cipher? No. Did they break the message? You betcha. Bear From George at Orwellian.Org Tue Oct 17 10:06:30 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 13:06:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: NSA wants it all Message-ID: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> http://foxnews.com/vtech/101700/nsa_fox.sml [snipped] # # War of the Web # NSA prepares the U.S. for battle online # Tuesday, October 17, 2000 # # The U.S. National Security Agency wants to do battle in cyberspace. # # "Information is now a place," Air Force Lt. Gen. Michael Hayden told # a major computer security conference in Baltimore on Monday. "It is # a place where we must ensure American security as surely as land, sea, # air and space." # # And the NSA - the military agency responsible for intercepting # communications worldwide - doesn't just care about defense. # # Ultimately the NSA must become the "security statement" of the U.S. # telecommunications and computer industries, just as he views the Air # Force as the "military statement" of the aviation industry, he said. # "How else does our society develop the tools we need to do what it # is that our agency has been charged to do?" From gbroiles at netbox.com Tue Oct 17 13:18:55 2000 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 13:18:55 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment In-Reply-To: References: <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001011162925.00cb1630@mail.speakeasy.org> At 09:08 AM 10/11/00 -0400, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: >My concern is that the vast majority of informed lay people, lawyers, >judges, legislators, etc. will hear "non-repudiation" and hear "absolute >proof." If you doubt this, read the breathless articles written recently >about the new U.S. Electronic Signatures Act. I think it would be more sensible to worry that lawyers and judges will hear "non-repudiation" and stop paying attention to anything else the speaker has to say about law or evidence, as the concept of "non-repudiation" as discussed by technologists is fundamentally incompatible with the rules of civil & criminal procedure, the Constitution, and the rules of evidence, at least in the United States. If it were possible to reduce questions about facts to the results of math problems, we wouldn't need courts at all. That suggests two things to me - (a) that's a very, very difficult problem to solve, and we certainly won't solve it by handwaving away important questions like security of keying material, and (b) even if it were solved, it's very likely the established legal system would declare it unsolved in order to protect its continued existence. -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com From mmotyka at lsil.com Tue Oct 17 10:25:30 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (mmotyka at lsil.com) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 13:25:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Think Cash Message-ID: <39EC8C4A.74F3BD2B@lsil.com> Riddles ought to be tough for a machine to solve. Language and shades of meaning seem less easily rendered as mathematical problems than graphics. Mike From jdimov at cis.clarion.edu Tue Oct 17 10:25:32 2000 From: jdimov at cis.clarion.edu (Jordan Dimov) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 13:25:32 -0400 (EDT) Subject: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: >Perhaps it is you who should do so. Showing a problem to be >asymptotically Omega(N!) or Omega(N^N) (or Theta of either) is >effectively proving it to be NP-hard--that is, it grows in >non-polynomial time. Probelms are not asymptotically Omega(N!) or Omega(N^N). Solutions are. I don't believe anyone has ever proved that an NP-hard problem can not be solved in polynomial time. Not being able to solve a problem in polynomial time with current techniques does not make it unsolvable. MIT people always surprise me. From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 17 13:33:26 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 13:33:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, John Galt wrote: >Cypherpunks is archived? Isn't that against what most cypherpunks stand >for? I know it sets up a "style fingerprint" attack against anonymity... Do you imagine for an instant that a list like this could go out, be available to anonymous people, and *NOT* be archived? I guarantee various interested parties including Law Enforcement Agencies are archiving it, and would be whether or not anyone else did and whether or not any public archives were available. In fact, I'm betting that their archives are more complete than the ones on the web, and I wish we could restore some stuff from those records that's gotten lost from the web archives. In particular, I designed a digital-cash protocol once and discussed it on this list, and it's not in the web archives. I'd like to have that back, it would save me some design work when I go to implement it. We can't stop anybody who gets cypherpunks from archiving it. We can't stop anybody from getting cypherpunks. QED, there *are* archives. Some of them might as well be public. Occasionally they are useful, or contain worthwhile URL's. Bear From tharvey25 at melrun.org Tue Oct 17 12:02:51 2000 From: tharvey25 at melrun.org (tharvey25 at melrun.org) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:02:51 -0500 Subject: CDR: Save your credit before its too late!!!! Message-ID: <5so85y0kg28x33oypeg.7m6d5d2@mail.melrun.org> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 3419 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jya at pipeline.com Tue Oct 17 11:13:15 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:13:15 -0400 Subject: CDR: NSA Releases Reorg Reports Message-ID: <200010171825.OAA12654@granger.mail.mindspring.net> NSA released today on its Web site two reports on its reorganization, one by an external team of 27 page, another of 76 pages by an internal team. Both are big PDF files. We have converted the first to HTML: http://cryptome.org/nsa-reorg-et.htm (77KB) Here is an excerpt: "We interviewed about one hundred people in the Agency, including most senior leaders, and asked very specific questions about the way people operate and the embedded culture. We learned the Agency is a very bureaucratic government organization, and that most of the behavior patterns were established during the 1970s and 1980s when there was plenty of money to execute its mission. NSA appears to operate like an entitlement program. Most people in the Agency are highly motivated and work very hard, but a portion does not. We also found a leadership culture that appears most interested in focusing on their positions and protecting their people's jobs at the expense of accomplishing the mission. Most of the people at NSA are hired night out of college and spend their entire lives in the Agency. Regardless of their work performance and their job responsibility, the Agency promotes people roughly at the same rate. The institution encouraged people to get deeply involved in the promotion process, to the point that civilian personnel wrote their own promotion reports, and supervisors endorsed the reports even if they did not agree, mostly to prevent animosity. However, the most critical aspect of the people and culture in the institution was the mindset related to lack of empowerment and accountability. NSA's present culture overemphasizes loyalty to a particular function and its associated senior leadership, instead of full and frank discussions of problems, issues and concerns. This has created a culture that discourages sending bad news up the chain of command. The staff knows NSA is falling behind and is not properly addressing the inherent problems of the emerging global network, and the present management infrastructure does not appear to be supporting the required changes. In addition, we are concerned the present mindset fostered a society where people were afraid to express their own thoughts. Even though people spoke to us with true candor, they always wanted to avoid attribution because of the perception that the information was going to be used against them." From: External Team Report: a Management Review for the Director, NSA, October 22, 2000 http://www.nsa.gov/releases/nsa_external_team_report.pdf (2.7MB) Second report: http://www.nsa.gov/releases/nsa_new_enterprise_team_recommendations.pdf (6.4MB) From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 17 11:28:28 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:28:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA wants it all) In-Reply-To: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 3747 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tom at ricardo.de Tue Oct 17 05:30:10 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:30:10 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> Message-ID: <39EC4652.C5C51827@ricardo.de> Nathan Saper wrote: > Even if they do (which I haven't heard of, but I could be wrong), the > trend right now is more corporate power, less governmental power. As > I said before, we are already seeing this trend, what with > corporations able to circumvent countries' environmental codes and > whatnot. It will only get worse. it is not corporations *ignoring* government powers (or "circumventing" them, what a nice term in light of DMCA). it is corporations using government as their executive branch. take a look at DMCA, take a look at the european proposal I have in my hands (gotta search that link, it's document # 9512/00) - tell me they were NOT written by corporate lawyers. From tboyle at rosehill.net Tue Oct 17 14:33:35 2000 From: tboyle at rosehill.net (Todd Boyle) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:33:35 -0700 Subject: CDR: RE: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000301c03881$e7b613a0$e300a8c0@nwnexus.com> Mac Norton said > Oh and as to non-repudiation and lawyers throwing that term > around loosely: Most lawyers would probably tell you that, > for their purposes, whatever the parties *agree* to be > non-repudiation *is* non-repudiation as between *them*. Ed Gerck said > Borrowing from a private comment from Bob Jueneman, whatever > the technical community decides that non-repudiation means, > it probably isn't what the legal community means. So be it. Acknowledging the overwhelming victory of credit cards in B2C commerce, one could conclude that consumers prefer total wraparound repudiability to specific vendor warranties. Reading warranties takes so much time that the argument over definitions of non-repudation is academic. What's needed is a standard contract that emulates the protections provided by Visa and Mastercard --a virtual credit card. This would enable an unbundling of settlement services from "insurance" components. A diverse industry of payments and settlements providers, credit services, and risk underwriters would emerge. You need to achieve a plug-and-play environment to compete with banks and cc consortia, and equally bad "bundle propositions" emerging from alternative payments providers. SMBs and website operators are fed up with the cost of credit cards. Another industry is the webledger industry-- They would take immediate notice of such a contract, since any webledger can basically serve as a bank or settlement provider to its population of subscribers. For example, of the leading webledgers will soon announce an infrastructure for its users to submit intercompany transactions to each other; this makes the webledger a B2B host, and technically, enables any subscriber to offer settlement services to other subscribers. READ THIS: www.gldialtone.com/journalbus.htm In summary: what's missing from the payments environment isn't technology, but legal infrastructures, Todd From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Tue Oct 17 06:43:14 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:43:14 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <20001016205040.A2358@well.com> <20001016214625.B2510@well.com> Message-ID: <39EC5772.95FD8595@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Nathan Saper wrote: > Fine. My basis for my claim is that the NSA is the best funded and > best equiped electronic intelligence agency in the world, and they > have employed some of the smartest people in the world. And the NASA is the best funded and best equiped rocket-launching agency in the world, and they also have employed some of the smartest people in the world, but they can't make a spaceship that will go faster than light. Ot that could get humans to Saturn and back anytime in the next 20 years. Smart people and large funding don't repeal the laws of nature. Ken From azb at llnl.gov Tue Oct 17 15:04:48 2000 From: azb at llnl.gov (Tony Bartoletti) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 15:04:48 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39EC98AB.827388D1@nma.com> References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001017145434.00a9eba0@poptop.llnl.gov> > > The problem goes beyond simple impersonation in that the victims > > subsequently find it difficult to convince large institutions that > > they are who they say they are. My understanding is that the term > > comes from victims' statements that they felt as if their identities > > had been stolen. See http://www.consumer.gov/idtheft/. The question > > is relevant here, not as just another parallel question of semantics, > > but because exactly how the legal system treats "non-repudiation" can > > make the identity theft problem much better or much worse. > >No. The fact that people like to talk in dumbed down soundbites like >"identity theft", instead of using well-established words like >"impersonation", >does not mean that any legally relevant conclusions can be drawn from the >misuse of technical terms like "theft" in the soundbite. Other choices? Identity Theft Identity Pollution Identity Vandalism Identity Assault Identity Misappropriation (Slander in the First Person :) Would it matter if we substitute "reputation" for "identity". Is my identity (to others) any different than the reputation with which it is associated? Call it what you will. If institutions that once recognized me fail now to do so, I have lost something-in-general. Name that something-in-general. Cheers! ___tony___ Tony Bartoletti 925-422-3881 Information Operations, Warfare and Assurance Center Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, CA 94551-9900 From tom at ricardo.de Tue Oct 17 06:12:15 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 15:12:15 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Anonymous Remailers cpunk References: Message-ID: <39EC502F.740B7EA5@ricardo.de> Jim Choate wrote: > > Pipe the message into GPG and test the output on STDERR. > > > > There was some perl code posted to the list not too long ago which does this. > > So, now everyone has to use GPG. Why? How do you propose to answer the > increased attacks on the protocol now that you've made it the monopoly? > > I thought the point of anonymous remailers and commen crypto was to > enhance liberty rather than enforce (coerce) another standard. get a clue, jim. GPG/PGP was chosen in my perl code because it is both easy to recognize and widely distributed. other ciphers, methods, etc. can be added. and as always: it's my remailer. if you don't like the policy, then don't use it. From tom at ricardo.de Tue Oct 17 06:23:52 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 15:23:52 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> Message-ID: <39EC52E8.C075053B@ricardo.de> petro wrote: > Corporations have *NO* power over you that doesn't come from > the barrel of a government gun. but they're doing a good job ensuring that said gun is pointed where they want it point to. From rsw at MIT.EDU Tue Oct 17 12:36:16 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 15:36:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from jdimov@cis.clarion.edu on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 01:25:32PM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20001017153616.A9145@positron.mit.edu> Jordan Dimov wrote: > Probelms are not asymptotically Omega(N!) or Omega(N^N). Solutions are. Nitpick if you will; you and I both know what the statement means, hence your ability to respond to it. > I don't believe anyone has ever proved that an NP-hard problem can not be > solved in polynomial time. "NP-hard ... a complexity class of problems that are intrinsically harder than those that can be solved by a nondeterministic Turing machine in polynomial time" (Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook, 19--20). > Not being able to solve a problem in polynomial time with current > techniques does not make it unsolvable. While I agree that the limitations of current techniques do not dictate what is possible, it _is_ possible to show that a certain problem has a best-case order of growth (for something simple, think of gate-level addition; its best case is provably Theta(log(N)) ). In this case, what Tim means is that work is being done towards showing that the best-case order of growth for factorization is faster than polynomial, hence it is NP-hard. > MIT people always surprise me. Please, expound. -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 1411 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdpopescu at geocities.com Tue Oct 17 13:04:19 2000 From: mdpopescu at geocities.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 16:04:19 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Think Cash References: <39EC8C4A.74F3BD2B@lsil.com> Message-ID: <00d101c03875$4ccf7f90$1d01a8c0@microbilt.com> From jdimov at cis.clarion.edu Tue Oct 17 13:39:37 2000 From: jdimov at cis.clarion.edu (Jordan Dimov) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 16:39:37 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: thanx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: LOL. That was a masterpiece! Now if you could put all that divine inspiration and energy into something creative.... :-) On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, John Galt wrote: > > That was not rude. This is rude: it is my fervent wish that someone as > stupid as yourself under no circumstances breed. To be more exact, it is > my wish that you never become a "fucker" so to speak. Since you can't > look in a goddamn Loompanics catalog to get the Anarchist's Cookbook, you > have no hope of ever understanding it, and it would be even MORE rude of > me to actually give you a copy, since a good portion of the recipies > contained therein are almost certain to cause death or grave bodily > injury if followed as written. I really cannot see the down side in this, > but I also do not wish to have your moronic blood on my hands, even by > proxy, as I fear that idiocy such as yours might have some infectious > element. I have included cypherpunks in this thread again, as I'm pretty > sure that your idiocy should propagate on the off chance that somebody > actually wanted to send a copy of the AC to you. > > > > On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, diego wrote: > > > thanx fucker > > goddamn rude man > > > > -- > Galt's sci-fi paradox: Stormtroopers versus Redshirts to the death. > > Who is John Galt? galt at inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! > > > From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 17 17:24:48 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:24:48 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from petro@bounty.org on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 12:50:36AM -0700 References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> Message-ID: <20001017172448.A14253@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2312 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 17 17:24:53 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:24:53 -0700 Subject: CDR: "Cypherpunks is archived?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 1:33 PM -0700 10/17/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: >On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, John Galt wrote: > >>Cypherpunks is archived? Isn't that against what most cypherpunks stand >>for? I know it sets up a "style fingerprint" attack against anonymity... > >Do you imagine for an instant that a list like this could go out, >be available to anonymous people, and *NOT* be archived? I guarantee >various interested parties including Law Enforcement Agencies are >archiving it, and would be whether or not anyone else did and whether >or not any public archives were available. In fact, I'm betting that >their archives are more complete than the ones on the web, and I wish >we could restore some stuff from those records that's gotten lost from >the web archives. In particular, I designed a digital-cash protocol >once and discussed it on this list, and it's not in the web archives. >I'd like to have that back, it would save me some design work when I >go to implement it. > >We can't stop anybody who gets cypherpunks from archiving it. We >can't stop anybody from getting cypherpunks. QED, there *are* >archives. Some of them might as well be public. Occasionally >they are useful, or contain worthwhile URL's. Not only this, but it was a backburner project for several years to take the toad archives and convert them to a CD-ROM for distribution. So much for "against what most cypherpunks stand for." Cypherpunks don't believe that security comes through obscurity. Those who wish to protect their identities should take positive measures to do so. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 17 17:37:29 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:37:29 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EC4652.C5C51827@ricardo.de>; from tom@ricardo.de on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 02:30:10PM +0200 References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <39EC4652.C5C51827@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <20001017173729.B14253@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1510 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 17 17:39:13 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:39:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EC5772.95FD8595@ccs.bbk.ac.uk>; from k.brown@ccs.bbk.ac.uk on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 02:43:14PM +0100 References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <20001016205040.A2358@well.com> <20001016214625.B2510@well.com> <39EC5772.95FD8595@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Message-ID: <20001017173913.C14253@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1335 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 17 17:44:38 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:44:38 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001017103857.B28192@cluebot.com>; from declan@well.com on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:38:57AM -0400 References: <20001015143441.B5382@well.com> <20001016205040.A2358@well.com> <20001016214625.B2510@well.com> <20001017103857.B28192@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <20001017174438.D14253@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2060 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 17 17:50:43 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:50:43 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com>; from honig@sprynet.com on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 12:07:00PM -0400 References: <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1377 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jya at pipeline.com Tue Oct 17 14:51:11 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:51:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: Unified Cryptologic Architecture Message-ID: <200010172203.SAA05105@blount.mail.mindspring.net> The bibliography of another NSA reorganization report released today lists several entries under "Unified Cryptologic Architecture" as well as a "U.S. Cryptologic Strategy - Preparing for the 21st Century." There is also a citation of "SINEWS - GCHQ Modernization and Change Program." We would appreciate leads or pointers for getting these documents. Here's the main text second report: http://cryptome.org/nsa-reorg-net.htm From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 17 18:19:27 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 18:19:27 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> Message-ID: At 5:50 PM -0700 10/17/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > >On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 12:07:00PM -0400, David Honig wrote: >> At 09:14 PM 10/16/00 -0400, Nathan Saper wrote: >> >When do cops take DNA at traffic stops? >> >> Not yet. But I believe the UK takes samples of everyone >> arrested (not necessarily guilty) of minor crimes, and some >> US states and cities do or periodically propose doing this >> or more. > >The next question is: What do they do with this info? Insurance >companies and the like use it to justify discrimination against people >likely to develop certain medical conditions. Are you claiming that DNA collected by the police is then given to insurance companies? An audacious claim. Do you evidence to support this extraordinary claim? I will be very interested to hear which communities, which states, are doing this. So will many journalists, I hope. On the other hand, having heard that even getting a simple blood or saliva sample requires court action, I expect you are once again merely hand-waving. As for insurance companies "discriminating," this is what I hope for. Those of us who don't engage in certain practices--smoking, sky diving, anal sex, whatever--should not be subsidizing those who do. This is the beauty of "opt out" plans. But the first order of business is for you to support your claim that DNA is collected by the police and then shared with insurance companies. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 17 18:48:48 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 18:48:48 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001016220758.00a6ca10@idiom.com> References: <20001017004154.68612.qmail@web9102.mail.yahoo.com> <3.0.5.32.20001016220758.00a6ca10@idiom.com> Message-ID: > > >On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, [iso-8859-1] Ing. Fausto C.G. wrote: >> >>> I dont now where did you get my e-mail, but I am >>> receiving spam from you. Stop it right now, please, I >>> didnt ask you for your spam. This time I am asking it > >> kindly, next time I wont ask it this way. Do your best, you fucking twit. People like you who threaten us need to be taken out and shot. We are adding you to the special "high spam diet." Hope you like it, jerk. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From success at em118.net Tue Oct 17 19:10:30 2000 From: success at em118.net (success at em118.net) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 19:10:30 Subject: CDR: Re:Your Financial Independence Message-ID: <414.279626.851888@signal> Do Your Goals Include: -Controlling Your Financial Future? -Owning Your Time? -Feeling Good About What You Do And Helping Others? Are you: -Tired Of Working For Someone Else � For What "They" Feel You Are Worth? --Tired Of The MLM Scene? -Looking For A Legitimate Home-Based Enterprise That Will Generate $10k-20k And More Per Month? THEN HERE IT IS: -Free Enterprise In It's Purest Form...Not MLM Or Franchise. -No Personal Selling. -Full Training And Support In An Environment Of Utmost Integrity. -Lead Generation System That Brings Qualified Prospects to You. -A Multiple 6-Figure Income is Realistically Attainable in 1st Year. -2 to 4 year Retirement Program...Period! -This Program Is All About Money...How To � Make It, How To Keep It, And How to Make � It Work For You. CALL: 1-800-587-9046 ext. 5500 ���� (24 Hour Recorded Message) "Whatever The Mind Can Conceive And Believe, It Can Achieve." Napoleon Hill To be removed respond at takeoffplease100 at yahoo.com From dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu Tue Oct 17 16:51:00 2000 From: dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu (dmolnar) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 19:51:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Jordan Dimov wrote: > > > >Could a factoring breakthrough happen to convert this exptime problem > >to polynomial time? Maybe. I said as much. Is it likely? See > >discussions on progress toward proving factoring to be NP-hard (it > >hasn't been proved to be such, though it is suspected to be so, i.e., > >that there will never be "easy" methods of factoring arbitrary large > >numbers). > > Geee... Since when are problems "proven" to be NP-hard?? Go back to your > favorite undergrad institution and take a course on computational > complexity again. Um, "NP-hard" just means that it's polynomial time reducible to any problem in NP (or perhaps the other way around, I always get the directions mixed up). It is fairly straightforward to show this - you exhibit a reduction to another problem you already know to be NP-hard. The "original" such problem is bounded halting : given a TM description M, an input x, and a polynomial bound p(n), does M halt on input x in p(length(x)) time? The famous theorem of Cook consists exactly of a reduction relating SATISFIABILITY and bounded halting. That's annoying. But once it's done you can give reductions to SATISFIABILITY instead. See Garey & Johnson's book for more examples. Put another way, showing a problem is NP-hard doesn't actually show that it is "hard." It just shows that the problem is no easier than any problem in the class NP. It could still be the case that P = NP, in which case there is a rash of suicides in the crypto world... At the same time, it is believed unlikely that factoring is NP-hard. This is because "factoring" (the function problem 'find the factors of n'; not sure exactly how to formalize as a decision problem) is in NP intersect coNP. If factoring is NP-hard, then NP = coNP. This is believed to not be the case (but of course not proven). In addition, it's not at all clear how you could solve arbitrary SAT instances given an oracle for factoring. Try it and see. > > >You don't appear to be familiar with the literature. I suggest you do > >some reading. > > Yeah, right. And you are familiar. He has the outline right, if not all the details. -David From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 17 20:38:19 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 20:38:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 06:19:27PM -0700 References: <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> Message-ID: <20001017203819.A14683@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2468 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 17 20:41:57 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 20:41:57 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 06:48:48PM -0700 References: <20001017004154.68612.qmail@web9102.mail.yahoo.com> <3.0.5.32.20001016220758.00a6ca10@idiom.com> Message-ID: <20001017204157.B14683@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1226 bytes Desc: not available URL: From anonymous at openpgp.net Tue Oct 17 17:45:25 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 20:45:25 -0400 Subject: CDR: NSA into cyberwar soon Message-ID: <8281e9520df847ae98347b711b2bc3a8@mixmaster.ceti.pl> U.S. spy chief: Cyberspace a potential battlefield BALTIMORE, Maryland (Reuters) -- The head of the super-secret U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) said Monday that cyberspace had become as important a potential battlefield as any other and held out the prospect of attacking there as well as defending. "Information is now a place," Air Force Lt. Gen. Michael Hayden told a major computer security conference here. "It is a place where we must ensure American security as surely as ... and, sea, air and space." He cited moves to define the "legal structure into which we must fit" before offensive "information operations" -- cyberattacks -- were officially added to the arsenal that U.S. commanders can use against a foe. The NSA is the Defense Department arm that intercepts communications worldwide. The world of information "has taken on a dimension within which we will conduct operations to ensure American security," Hayden said, adding that the NSA had not been authorized to do "that attack thing," or go on the offensive in cyberspace. "But as the United States government begins to think about what it should or wants to do when it is under attack, it raises a really interesting question that we all have to work through in the context of our overall democracy," he said. A year ago Army Gen. Henry Shelton, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, disclosed that the United States tried to mount electronic attacks on Serbian computer networks during the NATO air campaign over the province of Kosovo. "We only used our capability to a very limited degree," Shelton told reporters at the time. Hayden said a key challenge to the NSA today was to protect U.S. telecommunications in a world where the adversaries might be "cyberterrorists, a malicious hacker or even a non-malicious hacker." "All can cause great harm" to the networked systems that tie the industrialized world together, he told the conference co-sponsored by the NSA and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, an arm of the Commerce Department. Hayden said the NSA, the Pentagons codemaking and codebreaking agency, was committed to developing its partnerships with industry to boost computer network security. "Weve done pioneering work to better protect e-commerce" as well as to develop biometrics, ways in which computers authenticate identities from unique traits such as fingerprints, iris scans and voice recognition, he said. Ultimately the NSA must become the "security statement" of the U.S. telecommunications and computer industries, just as he views the Air Force as the "military statement" of the aviation industry, he said. "How else does our society develop the tools we need to do what it is that our agency has been charged to do?" he asked. The NSA designs codes to protect the integrity of U.S. information systems and searches for weaknesses in foes systems and codes. http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/10/17/tech.internet.security.reut/index.html From mclow at owl.csusm.edu Tue Oct 17 20:51:41 2000 From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 20:51:41 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: At 10:20 PM -0500 10/17/00, Allen Ethridge wrote: >On Tuesday, October 17, 2000, at 08:19 PM, Tim May wrote: > >As for insurance companies "discriminating," this is what I hope for. >Those of us who don't engage in certain practices--smoking, sky >diving, anal sex, whatever--should not be subsidizing those who do. >This is the beauty of "opt out" plans. > >Yes, only the genetically pure deserve health care. And you are sure >that the insurance companies won't opt you out when they get a good >look at your DNA? Actually, that's not at all what he said. >But the first order of business is for you to support your claim that >DNA is collected by the police and then shared with insurance >companies. > >Actually, that's your claim. But I'm surprised that you'er so ignorant >of cooperation between government and corporations. Maybe you >don't actually work for a living. You are aware of drug testing in the >work place, aren't you? I can't speak for Tim, but I work for a living. I am aware of drug testing in the workplace, and have never chosen to work for a company that requires it. P.S. I too would be interested in documented cases where DNA collected by the police was given to insurance companies. -- -- Marshall "The era of big government is over." Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996 Marshall Clow MusicMatch From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 17 21:50:16 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 21:50:16 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>Could a factoring breakthrough happen to convert this exptime problem >>to polynomial time? Maybe. I said as much. Is it likely? See >>discussions on progress toward proving factoring to be NP-hard (it >>hasn't been proved to be such, though it is suspected to be so, i.e., >>that there will never be "easy" methods of factoring arbitrary large >>numbers). > >Geee... Since when are problems "proven" to be NP-hard?? Go back to your >favorite undergrad institution and take a course on computational >complexity again. Are you literate? -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 17 21:57:35 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 21:57:35 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >Cypherpunks is archived? Isn't that against what most cypherpunks stand >for? I know it sets up a "style fingerprint" attack against anonymity... It probably is, but it's also against what most cypherpunks stand for to tell them what to do with the bits that hit their network card. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 17 22:04:53 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:04:53 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> <200010171136.HAA05319@granger.mail.mindspring.net> Message-ID: > >Merkle does not seem to be the kind of person who either would be >working for the NSA or whom the NSA would pick to be a conduit for >leaked secrets. > >3. Ditto in spades for Whit Diffie. And Martin Hellman was, at that >time, an active anti-war activist ("Beyond War"). Seems unlikely >that NSA would pick them. Ah, but that's what /they/ WANT us to think... (yes, I'm joking.) (Or maybe I'm a NSA plant cleverly disguised to something that I can't explain or I'll have to kill myself...) -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 17 22:17:17 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:17:17 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001017172448.A14253@well.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <20001017172448.A14253@well.com> Message-ID: >> >Even if they do (which I haven't heard of, but I could be wrong), the >> >trend right now is more corporate power, less governmental power. As >> >I said before, we are already seeing this trend, what with >> >corporations able to circumvent countries' environmental codes and >> >whatnot. It will only get worse. >> >> Then you aren't paying attention. >> >> Corporations have *NO* power over you that doesn't come from >> the barrel of a government gun. > >That's like saying that the person with the power in a police >department is the street cop, because he's the one doing the actual >arrest. > >The one calling the shots is the one to be afraid of. No. The one *shooting* is the one to be afraid of. Without governments Companies (not corporations, corporations are inherently creatures of the state) would have to do their bullying directly and that would severely cut into the bottom line. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From aethr at earthlink.net Tue Oct 17 20:20:17 2000 From: aethr at earthlink.net (Allen Ethridge) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:20:17 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 3972 bytes Desc: not available URL: From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 17 22:20:23 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:20:23 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: <20001017204157.B14683@well.com> References: <20001017004154.68612.qmail@web9102.mail.yahoo.com> <3.0.5.32.20001016220758.00a6ca10@idiom.com> <20001017204157.B14683@well.com> Message-ID: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 06:48:48PM -0700, Tim May wrote: >> > >> > >On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, [iso-8859-1] Ing. Fausto C.G. wrote: >> >> >> >>> I dont now where did you get my e-mail, but I am >> >>> receiving spam from you. Stop it right now, please, I >> >>> didnt ask you for your spam. This time I am asking it >> > >> kindly, next time I wont ask it this way. >> >> Do your best, you fucking twit. >> >> People like you who threaten us need to be taken out and shot. >> >> We are adding you to the special "high spam diet." >> >> Hope you like it, jerk. >> >> > >Come on, lighten up. The guy's receiving spam, and like most people, >he gets pissed about it. So he sends a nasty email to the address in >the From: line of the spams. Can you blame him? He's not getting spam. He's been subscribed to the cypherpunks list by someone. And yes, I can blame him for being clueless. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 17 22:23:40 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:23:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: >P.S. I too would be interested in documented cases where DNA >collected by the police was given to insurance companies. It's (apparently) England where there is wide spread DNA collection for use in finding certain types of criminals. In England both the Police and the Health Care System are run by the government, so in a sense the "Insurance Company" already has it. They also can't do anything about it since they have to cover everyone. Note: I am not claiming that the Police share the DNA with the Health Care Providers, but once the database is there... -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From jamesd at echeque.com Tue Oct 17 22:38:53 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:38:53 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: <200010171136.HAA05319@granger.mail.mindspring.net> <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> <3.0.32.20001017014427.047cd3b0@shell13.ba.best.com> <200010171136.HAA05319@granger.mail.mindspring.net> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001017223357.01ad5cc8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 12:34 PM 10/17/2000 -0700, Tim May wrote: > 3. Ditto in spades for Whit Diffie. And Martin Hellman was, at that > time, an active anti-war activist ("Beyond War"). Seems unlikely > that NSA would pick them. To put this in simple terms. A smart person with a modest computer, familiar with the long history of code creation and code breaking, can create a code that a much smarter person with a vastly more powerful computer cannot break. The codes we are using were created by smart people. We know these people. They are unlikely to be part of a vast conspiracy to put something over us. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG HL2kYDppyJqeq3voMaoHBsK9A7bIEHXh3K/JS6d+ 4eN6Rd5zjWoFZUJ+lf+iltc3DF4g2a6Pa/Wt11mcc From pagre at alpha.oac.ucla.edu Tue Oct 17 22:53:47 2000 From: pagre at alpha.oac.ucla.edu (Phil Agre) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:53:47 -0700 Subject: [RRE]Al Gore and the Internet Message-ID: Who Invented "Invented"?: Tracing the Real Story of the "Al Gore Invented the Internet" Hoax Phil Agre http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/pagre/ 17 October 2000 An extraordinary article appears in today's Wired News. In this article, the Wired News reporter who gave rise to the flap about Al Gore and the Internet reviews the controversy. 10/17/00: This article is worth reviewing in depth because of the record of distortion and falsehood that it disingenuously glosses over. The flap arose from three articles in Wired News, dated 3/11/99, 3/15/99, and 3/23/99. These articles are worth reading in their entirety: 3/11/99: 3/15/99: 3/23/99: Gore's words in a CNN interview, as quoted by Wired News, were as follows: "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." Gore meaning, obvious to anyone who knew the record, was that he did the political work and articulated the public vision that made the Internet possible. No reasonable person could conclude that Gore was claiming to have invented the Internet in any technical sense. The first half of his sentence makes this clear: he is talking about work he did in the context of his service in the Congress. The creation of the Internet was a process that had several phases and took several years, and Gore is claiming the principal credit for the political side of that effort. It is a substantial claim, but an accurate one. The 3/11/99 Wired News article, however, is overwhelmingly hostile in its tone, and seeks to refute Gore's claim through several misleading strategies: (1) It suggests, first of all, that Gore could not have been involved in creating the Internet on the grounds that ARPANET was developed several years before Gore entered Congress. This is quite beside the point, of course, given that ARPANET and the Internet are different things. (2) It criticizes Gore for a vision of the Internet based mainly on supercomputers rather than personal computers, not mentioning that this was also the vision of the Internet's technical pioneers. (3) It claims that Gore could not have been involved in the Internet's creation because he was not a leader of its privatization. This is a non sequitur. (4) It insinuates that Gore lacks technical knowledge by claiming that he mispronounced the word "routers" as root-ers, even though this is a common and accepted pronunciation of the word among Internet architects. The article attempts to diminish Gore's credit for the Internet in other misleading ways. It says, for example, that: Gore has taken credit for popularizing the term "information superhighway" and around 1991 penned related articles for publications such as Byte magazine. But the term "data highway" has been used as far back as 1975, before Gore entered Congress. The second sentence, again, is a non sequitur, given that Gore is only said to have taken credit for popularizing the term, not for coining it. That Gore popularized the term is indisputable. The 3/11/99 article did not use the word "invented". Instead it spoke of Gore as claiming to be the "father of the Internet", already a stretch. But the Wired News article of 3/23/99 then amplifies the original accusation: WASHINGTON -- Al Gore's timing was as unfortunate as his boast. Just as Republicans were beginning to eye the 2000 presidential race in earnest, the vice president offered up a whopper of a tall tale in which he claimed to have invented the Internet. Gore's claim is once again inflated, and the word "invented" appears. Much happened between 3/11/99 and 3/23/99. On the very day that the original article appeared, 3/11/99, the office of House Majority Leader Dick Armey issued a press release mocking Gore's statement. This press release read in part as follows: If the Vice President created the Internet then I created the Interstate highway system. Both were begun during the Eisenhower Administration and I think Ike actually deserves a little credit here. http://www.politechbot.com/p-00285.html The press release does not use the word "invented". That word first appears in a Nexis search in a 3/13/99 news articles by Frank Bruni of the New York Times and Michelle Mittelstadt of the Associated Press, both of whom report on a statement by Trent Lott that they both quote as follows: During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the paper clip. and Paper clips bind us together as a nation. Lott does not use the word "invented", preferring to mimic Gore's exact words, but both of the articles do use the word "invented" to paraphrase Lott's claim (not Gore's). A similar article appears in the Washington Post on 3/14/99. The first Nexis article that uses the word "invent" to paraphrase Gore is an unsigned 3/15/99 USA Today commentary entitled "Inventing the Internet". It illustrates the general trend of press reports over this period: Gore's phrase "take the initiative in creating the Internet" is paraphrased as "created the Internet" and "created" is then glossed as "invented". The 3/15/99 Wired News article closely follows the pattern of these other publications. It is worth noting that the Associated Press and Washington Post articles both falsely state that the Internet was originally called the ARPANET and date it to 1969, citing this as evidence against Gore's assertion. Dick Armey's press release had simplified the original argument in Wired News somewhat by stating, misleadingly at best, that "scientists at ... DARPA, launched what is now the Internet in 1969". The Associated Press and Washington Post at least provide the name ARPANET, but again both of them treat it as identical to the Internet. The USA Today commentary embroiders this theme even further by stating that "[t]he Internet was invented in the 1960s when Gore was barely out of college". The same false information appears as part of a passing mention of the controversy in an 3/15/99 USA Today article by Paul Leavitt, Susan Page, and Steve Komarow: "The Internet dates to 1969, eight years before Gore was first elected to Congress." A similar statement appears in a harsh editorial in the 3/16/99 Detroit News. The first press reports, then, repeated the misleading argument in Wired News that was amplified by the Armey press release. It is likely, therefore, that Wired News and Armey, or third parties whose thinking derived from them, were the main sources for the initial mainstream press reports. The first, very forceful defenses of Gore's record by the Internet's scientific leadership (specifically Steve Wolff, with additional comments by Tony Rutkowski) appear only a couple of days later, in an article in the 3/18/00 New York Times by Katie Hafner. The word "invent" does not appear in this article. That same day there also appears the first article in Nexis to falsify Gore's quote, an Arizona Republic article by Sandy Grady that states: In a weekend interview, Gore, who prides himself as cyberhip, bragged, "I created the Internet". This is also the first article to connect the Internet theme to the recurring theme of Gore's supposedly rigid personality. The theme of Gore exhibiting a "pattern" of false statements first appears in a column by Jack Germond and Jules Whitcover the next day. Their point (at least overtly) is not that Gore exhibits such a pattern, but that he faces the danger that his opponents will discern such a pattern and hold it against him. They, too, repeat the false claim that the "the Defense Department began funding the Internet in 1969, eight years before Mr. Gore was elected to Congress". Note that this is actually a corruption of earlier formulations, which at least identified 1969 as the year when ARPANET began operation (not funding). An article by John Schwartz in the 3/21/99 Washington Post provides further heated commentary in support of Gore from the Internet's technical leadership, this time Dave Farber and Vint Cerf. Cerf in particular is quoted as saying this: I think it is very fair to say that the Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the vice president in his current role and in his earlier role as senator. On the other hand, Farber was also quoted as saying this: The guy used an inappropriate word. If he had said he was instrumental in the development of what it is now, he'd be accurate. This is the first, and to my knowledge the only, demurral from among the scientists who have expressed support for Gore's contributions. Katie Hafner of the New York Times, who cowrote a book about the history of the Internet, is also cited as an authority in support of Gore. Significantly, however, this article also provides the clearest statement to that point that Gore had claimed to be the inventor of the Internet. The statement comes from Dan Quayle: "if Gore invented the Internet, I invented spell-check". The "Internet" controversy is first connected to the then-developing "pattern" of supposed reinventions and exaggerations by Al Gore on 3/21/99. A commentary by Philip Gailey in the 3/21/99 St. Petersburg Times says this: Gore's recent statement that as a member of Congress he had taken the initiative in "creating the Internet" drew hoots of laughter, especially from Republicans. Gore has long been a promoter of the Internet, but he didn't invent it. Trying to keep a straight face, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott quickly issued a news release claiming that he invented the paper clip. This was not the first time Gore has over-reached. A year ago Gore told reporters that he and his wife, Tipper, at the time when they were college sweethearts, were the inspiration for the novel Love Story. That came as news to the befuddled author, Erich Segal. Gore's quote, having grown familiar, has now been reduced to a few words, without the context of the first half of the sentence. The phrase "took the initiative" is now outside of quote marks as well. The pattern of equating "creating" and "invent[ing]" has begun to settle in. Much more importantly, the Internet story is now coupled with another of the now-canonical "exaggeration" stories -- the "Love Story" story. The author's claim is false on two counts: Gore did not make such a claim about himself and Tipper (he only told reporters about a news article that mistakenly made such a claim), and Segal did not contradict Gore (who was in fact one of the models for the hero of Segal's book). The decontextualized and tendentiously paraphrased "Internet" story is now coupled with the multiply falsified "Love Story" story -- a pattern that will grow much more intense later on. Another example of the nascent pattern is found in a 3/21/99 article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel by Michael Ruby. This article is worth quoting at length: ... the vice president, long thought to be a bright fellow whose earnest public persona and wooden speaking style belied a private puckishness, has demonstrated in midlife a bizarre need to burnish his image. The first sign came a couple of years ago, when Gore revealed that he and wife Tipper were the star-crossed pairing Erich Segal had in mind when he wrote the 1970 weeper "Love Story". He should have wired this first with Segal, who later said it wasn't true. More recently, he placed himself up there with Edison and Bell, claiming to have invented the Internet. One small benefit of this curious fable Pentagon technocrats and university academics actually did the job three decades ago was a blizzard of one-liners from some normally unfunny guys. Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, for one, weighed in that he, in fact, invented the paper clips that "bind us together as a nation", and his office hinted that their man might be the fifth Beatle. House Majority Leader Dick Armey wanted everyone to know that he invented the interstate highway system. Then, last week on a visit to Iowa, the veep revealed other unknown facets of his past. He had been a small-business man and a home builder, Gore said, and he had lived on a farm learning to slop the hogs, to plow a "steep hillside" with mules and "take up hay all day long in the hot sun". Gore, the son of a senator, grew up in Washington, D.C., attended prep school there, went to Harvard and was, briefly, in the home-building business before becoming a reporter in Nashville in 1973. He was only 28 when he was elect ed to Congress in 1976 and has been in public life ever since. The "Gore as exaggerator" pattern is fully developed in this passage. It is the first of the "Internet" stories in Nexis to use harsh language -- "bizarre" -- and to engage in psychoanalysis -- "midlife". It states clearly (and, again, falsely) that Gore claimed to have "invented the Internet", and it repeats the false information that the Internet had been invented in 1969. It then sandwiches this misleading material between two other false entries in the "Gore exaggeration" canon -- the "Love Story" myth and the equally false claim that Gore had lied when he claimed to have performed onerous chores on the family farm in Tennessee. This is ten days out from Wired News' original report. Nexis records no further development of the story before Wired News' third report, on 3/23/99. This report begins as follows: WASHINGTON -- Al Gore's timing was as unfortunate as his boast. Just as Republicans were beginning to eye the 2000 presidential race in earnest, the vice president offered up a whopper of a tall tale in which he claimed to have invented the Internet. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,18655,00.html Here Wired News, following the pattern that had emerged in the media over the previous ten days, clearly states that Al Gore "claimed to have invented the Internet", and furthermore refers to this supposed claim as "a whopper of a tall tale" -- a lie. This article repeats the false story about Gore's having claimed credit for "Love Story", citing the Washington Times. It then repeats the false story that Gore had wrongly claimed to have worked on a farm, citing the New York Post. The 3/23/99 article does not mention any of the support for Gore that had been offered by the Internet's scientific leadership; the only supporting statement that it quotes, and then refutes, is Eleanor Clift's mistaken assertion that Gore had coined (as opposed to later popularizing) the phrase "information superhighway". In fact, nothing in the article is supportive of Gore, and its tone is well captured by the following sentence: Yet the Republicans missed a perfect opportunity to respond to Gore's fabrication. Against this background it becomes possible to judge Wired News' new article of 10/17/00. The Wired News reporter lay claims to being ... the first reporter to question the vice president's improvident boast, way back when he made it in early 1999. It quotes some of the subsequent mockery at Gore's expense, and then says this: ... Are the countless jibes at Al's expense truly justified? Did he really play a key part in the development of the Net? The short answer is that while even his supporters admit the vice president has an unfortunate tendency to exaggerate, the truth is that Gore never did claim to have "invented" the Internet. This is the first time that Wired News has made such a statement. It does not mention that its article of 3/23/99 had not only stated the contrary, but had characterized Gore's supposed claim as a lie. During a March 1999 CNN interview, while trying to differentiate himself from rival Bill Bradley, Gore boasted: "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." Observe that the loaded word "boast[ed]" has appeared twice. That statement was enough to convince me, with the encouragement of my then-editor James Glave, to write a brief article that questioned the vice president's claim. The original 3/11/99 article was no more brief than typical Wired News articles. In fact it provides extensive commentary on Gore's Internet record, some of which I summarized above. Republicans on Capitol Hill noticed the Wired News writeup and started faxing around tongue-in-cheek press releases -- inveterate neatnik Trent Lott claimed to have invented the paper clip -- and other journalists picked up the story too. As the record above shows, Trent Lott claimed (facetiously) to have "created" the paper clip. The word "invented" was introduced by reporters in glossing Lott's claim. Wired News thus continues to conflate "created" and "invented", even though it has just admitted the contrary. We have also seen how most of the "other journalists" repeated false and misleading information that probably came from the original Wired News article and the Republican press releases that were based on it. My article never used the word "invented", but it didn't take long for Gore's claim to morph into something he never intended. The original 3/11/99 article did not use the word "invented". That word first appeared two days later. But the Wired News article of 3/23/99, as already mentioned, did use the word. Wired News has not chosen to refute this false claim until 19 months after its original false and misleading articles, when the election is three weeks away, other commentators have come forward to refute the falsehood, and Al Gore's reputation has been nearly destroyed by the snowballing lie that Wired News -- despite what it now says -- is responsible for having set in motion. The terrible irony in this exchange is that while Gore certainly didn't create the Internet, he was one of the first politicians to realize that those bearded, bespectacled researchers were busy crafting something that could, just maybe, become pretty important. This passage is obscenely disingenuous, given that the three previous articles on the subject by this Wired News reporter are relentlessly negative and never gave Gore the slightest credit for creating the Internet. In January 1994, Gore gave a landmark speech at UCLA about the "information superhighway". The 3/11/99 and 3/23/99 articles had labored to deprive Gore of credit for this phrase. Many portions -- discussions of universal service, wiring classrooms to the Net, and antitrust actions -- are surprisingly relevant even today. ... The phrases "terrible irony", "landmark", and "surprisingly relevant" depart radically from the uniformly negative and polemical tone of the earlier articles. Despite all of this, the bulk of the 10/17/00 article is, like the earlier articles, principally concerned with criticizing Gore. Yet whereas those articles had been ferocious in denying Gore any credit on any front, the latest article ventures a much weaker thesis: But it's also difficult to argue with a straight face that the Internet we know today would not exist if Gore had decided to practice the piano instead of politics. This is not the position that Gore expressed, and Wired News does not indicate who does argue for it. It is, however, a fair gloss of the passage from Vint Cert quoted above from the 3/21/99 Washington Post: I think it is very fair to say that the Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the vice president in his current role and in his earlier role as senator. In a sense Wired News' new, downscaled contention is trivially true: in the alternate world where Gore played piano, a doppleganger might have arisen to see the new networking technology coming, appreciate its importance, popularize a theme such as "information superhighway", do the political groundwork to fund its development, and so on. But this scenario also makes clear why Wired News' new contention is so weak: as the statements of the various Internet scientific leaders have made clear, these were indispensible functions that someone had to serve. In this particular world that person was Al Gore. Wired News' campaign of distortions effectively deprived Al Gore of the substantial credit that he deserves in creating the most important technological invention of the last twenty years. The overall assessment of Wired News' performance on this story must be negative. Its original article was harshly polemical and misleading on several counts. Its second, short article was part of the emerging and misleading media consensus. Its third, much longer article was also harshly polemical, falsely asserts that Al Gore claimed to have invented the Internet, and wraps up this false assertion with two additional false assertions about Gore that it recycled from the conservative press. None of these articles was remotely balanced or fair, and none of them reported a single scrap of positive information about Gore's contribution, except to portray it in a negative light. Finally, Wired News' most recent article is misleading about the contents of the earlier articles and grossly disingenuous in the way that it supplies positive evaluations that were entirely missing from the earlier articles. Wired News' articles about Al Gore and the Internet did not simply contribute an urban myth to American culture. They were part and parcel of a hysterical campaign of character assassination against an innocent man based on lies and distortions. This campaign should bring disgrace to Wired News and all of the other media organizations that were part of it. It should also cause sober reflection on the corrupt state of public discourse in this country. end --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From njohnson at interl.net Tue Oct 17 21:06:29 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 23:06:29 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> Yes, I can see it now. "I'm sorry I have to tell you this Mr. & Mrs. May, but the genetic tests required by your insurance company have revealed that your unborn child has a 65% chance of developing an expensive to treat and possibly severely debilitating condition requiring many operations, doctor visits, therapy, special equipment, round the clock nursing. etc. Since we have already passed this information on to your insurance company as required by the terms of your policy, they are recommending and will pay you to terminate the pregnancy and to have both you and your husband sterilized. Otherwise they will not pay for your pre-natal care, the delivery, or any future treatment of your child. Of course you can opt for our "High Genetic Risk Policy" at $XXXXX thousands of dollars a month (which is probably equal to or more expensive than the cost of paying for the possible medical costs on your own IF the condition occurs. Which you would, since Medicare/Medicaid was ended in the last round of "Compassionate Conservatism"). We will be passing this information onto your brothers, sisters and other relatives insurance companies so they can require their sterilization. Frankly, your entire family tree needs to be "pruned" to coin a phrase. If you disagree with this decision you can appeal by our completely fair and unbiased arbitration process of course." Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC ----- Original Message ----- From: Allen Ethridge To: Cypherpunks Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 10:20 PM Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? On Tuesday, October 17, 2000, at 08:19 PM, Tim May wrote: At 5:50 PM -0700 10/17/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 12:07:00PM -0400, David Honig wrote: >> Not yet. But I believe the UK takes samples of everyone >> arrested (not necessarily guilty) of minor crimes, and some >> US states and cities do or periodically propose doing this >> or more. >The next question is: What do they do with this info? Insurance >companies and the like use it to justify discrimination against people >likely to develop certain medical conditions. Are you claiming that DNA collected by the police is then given to insurance companies? An audacious claim. Do you evidence to support this extraordinary claim? I will be very interested to hear which communities, which states, are doing this. So will many journalists, I hope. On the other hand, having heard that even getting a simple blood or saliva sample requires court action, I expect you are once again merely hand-waving. In the UK? I heard that in one community in the UK, in order to catch a rapist or somesuch, the police went around collecting DNA samples and arresting anyone who refused. After all, only someone with something to hide would refuse. Of course, this was television. As for insurance companies "discriminating," this is what I hope for. Those of us who don't engage in certain practices--smoking, sky diving, anal sex, whatever--should not be subsidizing those who do. This is the beauty of "opt out" plans. Yes, only the genetically pure deserve health care. And you are sure that the insurance companies won't opt you out when they get a good look at your DNA? But the first order of business is for you to support your claim that DNA is collected by the police and then shared with insurance companies. Actually, that's your claim. But I'm surprised that you'er so ignorant of cooperation between government and corporations. Maybe you don't actually work for a living. You are aware of drug testing in the work place, aren't you? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 6699 bytes Desc: not available URL: From declan at well.com Tue Oct 17 20:55:05 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 23:55:05 -0400 Subject: CDR: Gore and Bush during debate: Equal-opportunity censors? Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001017235452.00b4a9d0@mail.well.com> http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/18/042235&mode=nested Gore and Bush: Equal-Opportunity Censors? posted by cicero on Tuesday October 17, @10:58PM from the affirmative-action-for-censorhappy-politicos dept. There was something absent from this evening's presidential debate, and it wasn't Al's horn-blowing sighs or Dubya's runny-nosed sniffles. What was missing was an appreciation for the benefits of free speech, the perils of blocking software, and the hazards of blaming the world's woes on the Internet. In response to an audience question about "the morality of our country," both candidates talked up rating systems, blamed Hollywood, and recommended having the government help parents who have, allegedly, failed. Al Gore, who likes to talk about privacy, waxed downright Carnivorous over a "feature that allows parents to automatically check, with one click, what sites your kids have visited lately.. if you can check up on them, then you -- that's real power." Quoth Bush, who had similar ideas: "There ought to be filters in public libraries, and filters in public schools, so that if kids get on the Internet, there's not going to be pornography or violence coming in." Bush was talking about legislation currently before Congress that ties filtering to checks from the Feds. Relevant excerpt from transcript: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/18/042235&mode=nested From declan at well.com Tue Oct 17 21:00:07 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 00:00:07 -0400 Subject: CDR: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39301,00.html The Mother of Gore's Invention by Declan McCullagh (declan at wired.com) 3:00 a.m. Oct. 17, 2000 PDT WASHINGTON -- If it's true that Al Gore created the Internet, then I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story. I was the first reporter to question the vice president's improvident boast, way back when he made it in early 1999. Since then, the story's become far more than just a staple of late-night Letterman jokes: It's now as much a part of the American political firmament as the incident involving that other vice president, a schoolchild, and a very unfortunate spelling of potato. Poor Al. For a presidential wannabe who prides himself on a sober command of the brow-furrowing nuances of technology policy, being the butt of all these jokes has proven something of a setback. I mean, who can hear the veep talk up the future of the Internet nowadays without feeling an urge to stifle some disrespectful giggles? It would be like listening to Dan Quayle doing a please-take-me-seriously stump speech at an Idaho potato farm. Case in point: Mars Inc. lampoons the vice president in a hilarious new commercial for Snickers. In it, a cartoon Al brags that he, variously, invented the Internet, trousers, and when he wasn't busy elsewhere, "lots of other stuff too." When you're getting mocked by a candy company, you know your statesmanship rating has plummeted to a terrifying new low. No wonder one recent poll shows Gore to be solidly ahead of his Republican rival in only 11 states. It's simple: He's got no respect. Which brings us to an important question: Are the countless jibes at Al's expense truly justified? Did he really play a key part in the development of the Net? The short answer is that while even his supporters admit the vice president has an unfortunate tendency to exaggerate, the truth is that Gore never did claim to have "invented" the Internet. During a March 1999 CNN interview, while trying to differentiate himself from rival Bill Bradley, Gore boasted: "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." That statement was enough to convince me, with the encouragement of my then-editor James Glave, to write a brief article that questioned the vice president's claim. Republicans on Capitol Hill noticed the Wired News writeup and started faxing around tongue-in-cheek press releases -- inveterate neatnik Trent Lott claimed to have invented the paper clip -- and other journalists picked up the story too. My article never used the word "invented," but it didn't take long for Gore's claim to morph into something he never intended. The terrible irony in this exchange is that while Gore certainly didn't create the Internet, he was one of the first politicians to realize that those bearded, bespectacled researchers were busy crafting something that could, just maybe, become pretty important. In January 1994, Gore gave a landmark speech at UCLA about the "information superhighway." Many portions -- discussions of universal service, wiring classrooms to the Net, and antitrust actions -- are surprisingly relevant even today. (That's an impressive enough feat that we might even forgive Gore his tortured metaphors such as "road kill on the information superhighway" and "parked at the curb" on the information superhighway.) Gore's speech reverberated around Democratic political circles in Washington. Other Clinton administration officials began citing it in their own remarks, and the combined effort helped to grab the media's attention. Their timing was impeccable: In July 1993, according to Network Wizards' survey, there were 1.8 million computers connected to the Internet. By July 1994, the figure had nearly doubled to 3.2 million, a trend that continued through January 2000, when about 72 million computers had permanent network addresses. Small wonder, then, that as the election nears, Gore's defenders have been rallying to defend him. In a recent op-ed piece in the San Jose Mercury News, John Doerr and Bill Joy claim "nobody in Washington understands" the new economy as well as Gore does. Net-pioneers Robert Kahn and Vint Cerf, a Democratic party donor, have written an essay saying "no other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time" than the veep. Scott Rosenberg, in a recent Salon article, joined the fray: "The 'Gore claims he invented the Net' trope is so full of holes that it makes you wish there were product recalls for bad information." It's also true that, as a senator, Gore in the 1980s supported universities' efforts to increase funding for NSFNet, a measure that became law in the High Performance Computing Act of 1991. Gore's guest columns in Byte magazine at the time showed an appreciation of technology that was far from usual on Capitol Hill. But it's also difficult to argue with a straight face that the Internet we know today would not exist if Gore had decided to practice the piano instead of politics. By the time Gore took notice of the Net around 1987, the basics were already in place. The key protocol, TCP/IP, was written and the culture of the Net had blossomed through Usenet and mailing lists, as chronicled in Eric Raymond's Jargon File. At best, Gore's involvement merely hastened its development. Instead of the orderly interstate highway system that Gore had repeatedly used as metaphor, the spread of the Net has resembled something closer to a self-organizing, almost anarchic sprawl. Instead of a government/corporate-controlled system that might have looked like France's wretched Minitel system -- or, more charitably, a 500-channel interactive TV network -- the Net's popularity grew because of far more mundane applications like email and downloading porn. And it's fair to say that other Gore pet projects, like the Clinton administration's abandoned Clipper chip, are hardly ways to protect privacy and security online and promote the development of this technology. Then again, it's also true the Clipper chip was first concocted under a George Bush Sr. administration, and another Bush occupying the Oval Office might well have similar inclinations. We know that George W. Bush may not be any tech-savvier than Gore -- as anyone who caught the governor's the-Net-made-them-do-it comments about the Columbine High School killers can attest. But he seems to have successfully neutralized Gore's advantage on tech issues. In the first debate, Bush jabbed at Gore during a figure-rich discussion of HMO coverage. The delivery was wooden, but it was no joke: "Not only did (Gore) invent the Internet, but he invented the calculator," Bush said. The big surprise was not that Bush used the quip. It has, after all, also shown up in his stump speeches and Republican jibes. No, the surprise was that Gore remained silent. When he had a chance to respond, Gore only talked about prescription drugs: "You can go to the (Bush) website and look. If you make more than $25,000 a year, you don't get a penny of help under the Bush prescription drug proposal." At least he mentioned a website. ### From Ypolmeer at telus.net Wed Oct 18 00:09:29 2000 From: Ypolmeer at telus.net (Yvonne Polmeer Alexander) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 00:09:29 -0700 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <000a01c038d2$7cf51ce0$83cafea9@n8w0b3> What about freedom of speach of the public. Do you realise how huge we are? I'm on a roll. Princess calling. You will hear from me, do you know who? Y -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 662 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu Tue Oct 17 22:20:13 2000 From: dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu (dmolnar) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 01:20:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001017153616.A9145@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Riad S. Wahby wrote: > Jordan Dimov wrote: > > I don't believe anyone has ever proved that an NP-hard problem can not be > > solved in polynomial time. > > "NP-hard ... a complexity class of problems that are intrinsically > harder than those that can be solved by a nondeterministic Turing > machine in polynomial time" (Algorithms and Theory of Computation > Handbook, 19--20). Strictly speaking, this is a conjecture, which is what Jordan was pointing out in the original post. We do not have any proof for the above statement, just our long experience trying and failing to solve these problems. Different people give different weight to this experience. There really are people out there who think P = NP. I am NOT one of these. In any case, factoring is not known to be NP-hard, in the technical sense which I'll mention below. In fact, the following "evidence" indicates that factoring is in some sense easier than general NP-hard problems: the running time for GNFS is O(e^1.92 (log N) N^1/3) for a number with N bits while the running time for the best generic SAT solving algorithm I know of is in the neighborhood of O(1+something^N) -- there's a better algorithm known for factoring than for generic SAT. But that's nothing more than suggestive, especially since it doesn't involve algorithms for other NP-hard problems. Another example of a problem which is believed to be in NP - P and yet not NP-hard is graph isomorphism. There is an O(n^ln n) algorithm known, yet the problem is not known to be NP-hard. At the same time, that bound is just about polynomial... > > > Not being able to solve a problem in polynomial time with current > > techniques does not make it unsolvable. > > While I agree that the limitations of current techniques do not > dictate what is possible, it _is_ possible to show that a certain > problem has a best-case order of growth (for something simple, think > of gate-level addition; its best case is provably Theta(log(N)) ). > Yes, that's right, lower bounds *can* be proved. Unfortunately, they tend to be very *hard* to prove. Especially for general computations. A superpolynomial lower bound on the work required to solve a problem in NP would separate P from NP, so I don't think one such is known right now. So AFAIK the question is open. Different people have different attitudes towards its resolution. This is all very nice, but it runs a high risk of becoming based solely on feeling and assertion very quickly. Often you can get a very nice lower bound in a so-called "restricted model" in which only a few operations are allowed -- the n log n lower bound for sorting given in many CS algorithm classes is of this type. The bound is correct, but it says literally nothing about radix sort, bucket sort, etc. because those sorts use operations not in the model spoken about by the bound. The cryptographic analogue might be the so-called "generic group model" -- a model in which all you have is a group's generators, the ability to compose elements, and the ability to test for identity. You *can* prove that there is no algorithm in this model which solves discrete log in time better than about O(2^n/2) (I may be off by a bit). But for the particular group Z_p^*, there is a much much better algorithm for finding discrete logs which takes advantage of that group's special structure (i.e. GNFS). This should suggest some of the difficulty in acheiving lower bounds which we as cryptographers might care about. For more suggestion of such difficulty, a book on complexity theory like Papadimitriou might be worth looking at. > In this case, what Tim means is that work is being done towards > showing that the best-case order of growth for factorization is faster > than polynomial, hence it is NP-hard. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You want to say "Hence it is in NP - P". The term "NP-hard" has a technical meaning, namely that the problem can be "reduced" to all problems in NP. Here "reduced" is another technical term which in turn needs to be defined carefully. I've screwed up that definition before and it's too late to look it up, so I regret that I'll leave it as is unless someone really wants it. It is known that if NP != P, then there is a hierarchy of decision problems which are neither in P nor NP-hard; the proof unfortunately takes the form of a diagonalization style construction on Turing machines and so doesn't tell us anything about what the natural problems might be. The result *does* tell us, however, that it is *not* enough for a problem to have a superpolynomial lower bound on decision for it to be NP-hard -- there's more work which must be done to show NP-hardness. It's possible that factoring is neither NP-hard nor in P, but still hard enough to be useful for cryptography. Similarly, it is possible that graph isomorphism is not NP-hard, yet is so close to P as to be practically efficient (and not at all useful for cryptography). (BTW - as an aside, "NP-complete" means that a problem is both in NP and NP-hard ... a problem may be actually harder than NP, in EXP or something, and still be NP-hard. or we may not actually _know_ whether the problem is in NP or not). In any case, whether or not a problem is NP-hard is sort of irrelevant. As a general notion, NP-completeness seems disappointing for cryptography. There are a lot of known NP-complete problems, but few of these seem to be hard enough on average to build cryptosystems with. Even fewer can be used for public-key cryptography. Some more discussion of these points may be found in Russell Impagliazzo's paper on "A Personal View of Average Case Complexity," which is on his UCSD page. If you look at the major problems used for public key cryptosystems, you see the Diffie Hellman assumption, factoring, and RSA. None of these AFAIK is known to be NP-hard and no one expects them to be. There was even a theorem due to Brassard in 1979 which suggested that the problem of "breaking" public key cryptosystems cannot be NP-hard...but it only applies to deterministic cryptosystems, so it doesn't say that much. For more on that, see Oded Goldreich and Shafi Goldwasser "On the Possibility of Basing Cryptography on the Assumption P \neq NP", in the theory of cryptography library at UCSD, now eprint.iacr.org. Note that when they say "cryptography" they mostly mean "public key cryptography." On the other hand, this notion of _reduction_ , of showing that one problem is "as hard as" another, has been VERY useful. This is how you can prove that OAEP is a good padding scheme - you give a reduction between breaking an OAEP-padded RSA message and breaking RSA directly. You can prove that there aren't any stupid subtle padding mistakes... Anyway, that was a lot of silly detail. From what I can tell, the point is just this: as Tim pointed out, there are problems for which the best known algortihms cause growth which dwarfs any sort of cracking farm we can imagine. If the adversary builds a 1000x bigger machine, we add 200 bits to the key and he's back at spending 10 million years. But as Jordan pointed out, no one knows that these are the best algorithms or useful lower bounds on solving the problems. Now it becomes a discussion on what you believe the NSA can do or can't do, the relative smartness of mathematicians inside and outside the NSA, and all that other stuff. Fine, but it's a discussion which runs the risk of becoming quasi-theological very quickly...and frankly it's one which just isn't that interesting the way it is usually run. I think it is more interesting to figure out what kinds of expertise the NSA might have that the academic sector doesn't, and especially interesting to find some way of confirming or denying. A way which doesn't involve "a friend of a friend of a friend with a .mil address stationed in Saudi Arabia for 4 months during Desert Storm." Tamper-resistant hardware expertise has been mentioned here; we had that patent notice a few months ago about speech transcription for ECHELON; we have SKIPJACK, KEA, and now SHA-2 to play with; TEMPEST research is now quasi-legendary; there's likely more fun things to figure out about these guys. -David From MagnetCat at email.com Tue Oct 17 22:53:13 2000 From: MagnetCat at email.com (Dave London) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 01:53:13 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re:Your New E-Commerce Site Message-ID: <200010180546.BAA10368@scow.netquarters.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 18030 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 00:06:36 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 03:06:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: At 10:20 PM -0500 10/17/00, Allen Ethridge wrote: >On Tuesday, October 17, 2000, at 08:19 PM, Tim May wrote: > >As for insurance companies "discriminating," this is what I hope for. >Those of us who don't engage in certain practices--smoking, sky >diving, anal sex, whatever--should not be subsidizing those who do. >This is the beauty of "opt out" plans. > >Yes, only the genetically pure deserve health care. And you are sure >that the insurance companies won't opt you out when they get a good >look at your DNA? Insurers are bettors. They weigh all available information and then set a premium based on their expectations. Even those with "bad genes" can get insurance...they just have to pay more. Sounds fair to me. More to the point, "opt out" means that a person, call her Alice, can arrange for her own tests, done privately. For diseases to which she is not susceptable, she can "opt out." If she has vanishingly small expectation of contracting AIDS, for example, she can opt out. In an uncoerced society, yow else could it be. > >But the first order of business is for you to support your claim that >DNA is collected by the police and then shared with insurance >companies. > >Actually, that's your claim. Stop your lying. I was responding to the point made earlier that DNA is being collected by the police and is shared with insurers. >But I'm surprised that you'er so ignorant >of cooperation between government and corporations. Maybe you >don't actually work for a living. You are aware of drug testing in the >work place, aren't you? Those who won't piss in a jar don't have to work for Megatronic Corporation. Employment is not a "right." And none of _my_ employees are drug tested. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 00:07:25 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 03:07:25 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: At 11:06 PM -0500 10/17/00, Neil Johnson wrote: >Yes, I can see it now. > >"I'm sorry I have to tell you this Mr. & Mrs. May, but the genetic >tests required by your insurance company have revealed that your >unborn child has a 65% chance of developing an expensive to treat >and possibly severely debilitating condition requiring many >operations, doctor visits, therapy, special equipment, round the >clock nursing. etc. > >Since we have already passed this information on to your insurance >company as required by the terms of your policy, they are >recommending and will pay you to terminate the pregnancy and to have >both you and your husband sterilized. Otherwise they will not pay >for your pre-natal care, the delivery, or any future treatment of >your child. > >Of course you can opt for our "High Genetic Risk Policy" at $XXXXX >thousands of dollars a month (which is probably equal to or more >expensive than the cost of paying for the possible medical costs on >your own IF the condition occurs. Which you would, since >Medicare/Medicaid was ended in the last round of "Compassionate >Conservatism"). And what is wrong with this? Nothing that I can see. Alice the Insurer is free to set her rates as she wishes, and even to require tests. Bob the Prospective Insured is free to shop elsewhere. What has drawn so many of you socialist creeps to this list in the past few months? Did "Mother Jones" give out subscription information recently? Wait until you finally grasp the full implications of crypto anarchy. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From egerck at nma.com Wed Oct 18 00:08:25 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 03:08:25 -0400 Subject: CDR: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First References: Message-ID: <39ED4831.1A3FA61B@nma.com> Tony Bartoletti wrote: > > > The problem goes beyond simple impersonation in that the victims > > > subsequently find it difficult to convince large institutions that > > > they are who they say they are. My understanding is that the term > > > comes from victims' statements that they felt as if their identities > > > had been stolen. See http://www.consumer.gov/idtheft/. The question > > > is relevant here, not as just another parallel question of semantics, > > > but because exactly how the legal system treats "non-repudiation" can > > > make the identity theft problem much better or much worse. > > > >No. The fact that people like to talk in dumbed down soundbites like > >"identity theft", instead of using well-established words like > >"impersonation", > >does not mean that any legally relevant conclusions can be drawn from the > >misuse of technical terms like "theft" in the soundbite. > > Other choices? > > Identity Theft > Identity Pollution > Identity Vandalism > Identity Assault > Identity Misappropriation > (Slander in the First Person :) > > Would it matter if we substitute "reputation" for "identity". Is my identity > (to others) any different than the reputation with which it is associated? > > Call it what you will. If institutions that once recognized me fail now > to do so, I have lost something-in-general. > > Name that something-in-general. Well, you have not lost it nor has it has been "stolen". You are simply barred from using it. This is the result of impersonation, since now the other person is the one that has access to it. The use of "identity theft" instead of impersonation is thus utterly misleading, even though lawyers and lawmakers are the ones perpetrating such use. No legally relevant conclusions can be drawn from the misuse of the technical term "theft" in the soundbite. In comparison, defining non-repudiation in terms of protocol messages and only for protocol messages is, at most, a solipsistic endeavor. However, it is IMO a most useful one so that others, including lawyers and lawmakers, are prevented from using it in a perverted way just because RFCs are written in English. Cheers, Ed Gerck From petro at bounty.org Wed Oct 18 00:53:01 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 03:53:01 -0400 Subject: CDR: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First In-Reply-To: <39ED4831.1A3FA61B@nma.com> References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> Message-ID: >Tony Bartoletti wrote: >> >No. The fact that people like to talk in dumbed down soundbites like >> >"identity theft", instead of using well-established words like >> >"impersonation", >> >does not mean that any legally relevant conclusions can be drawn from the >> Other choices? >> Identity Theft >> Identity Pollution >> Identity Vandalism >> Identity Assault >> Identity Misappropriation >> (Slander in the First Person :) >> Would it matter if we substitute "reputation" for "identity". Is >>my identity >> (to others) any different than the reputation with which it is associated? >> Call it what you will. If institutions that once recognized me fail now >> to do so, I have lost something-in-general. >> Name that something-in-general. >Well, you have not lost it nor has it has been "stolen". You are >simply barred >from using it. This is the result of impersonation, since now the >other person >is the one that has access to it. > >The use of "identity theft" instead of impersonation is thus utterly >misleading, >even though lawyers and lawmakers are the ones perpetrating such use. No >legally relevant conclusions can be drawn from the misuse of the technical >term "theft" in the soundbite. I believe a more accurate term would be "credentials fraud", a more sound biteable term might be "credentials theft", which is fairly accurate. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From bill.stewart at pobox.com Wed Oct 18 01:47:43 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 04:47:43 -0400 Subject: CDR: cypherpunks archives: re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001018013117.00a6ad30@idiom.com> At 01:33 PM 10/17/00 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: >We can't stop anybody who gets cypherpunks from archiving it. We >can't stop anybody from getting cypherpunks. QED, there *are* >archives. Some of them might as well be public. Occasionally >they are useful, or contain worthwhile URL's. Not strictly true - Murphy says that the stuff you *really* wanted to find in the archives was in the bit that fell through the cracks when somebody's disk crashed or power went out for a day :-) One of the main cypherpunks archives is in Singapore, on inet-one.com . Also, cypherpunks is occasionally gatewayed to Usenet groups, which have been archived since the Dawn Of Time. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Wed Oct 18 02:24:30 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 05:24:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Think Cash In-Reply-To: <39EC8C4A.74F3BD2B@lsil.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001018022359.00ac5ad0@idiom.com> They're also tough for people with different language/culture backgrounds from the author to solve. At 01:25 PM 10/17/00 -0400, mmotyka at lsil.com wrote: >Riddles ought to be tough for a machine to solve. Language and shades of >meaning seem less easily rendered as mathematical problems than >graphics. > >Mike > > > > > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From reinhold at world.std.com Wed Oct 18 03:59:18 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 06:59:18 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39EC98AB.827388D1@nma.com> References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> <39EC98AB.827388D1@nma.com> Message-ID: At 11:21 AM -0700 10/17/2000, Ed Gerck wrote: >"Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > >> To the extent we agree here, I would urge you to help insure that >> this message is crystal clear in all specs and documents whose >> content you can influence. And don't rely on which dictionary's >> definition of "protect" is correct. > >Arnold, > >Yes. However, we live now in a post-modern society, where the emphasis >is on local discourse and it is accepted that there are many truths and >many ways of knowing. The cat is out of the bag and we need IMO to learn >to cope with diversity rather than try to iron it out. Of course, there are >many dictionaries and many languages and computer technology has not >solved this problem -- in the contrary, we have maybe dozens of "computer >languages" being born every year and a handful of them actually being >used. > >So, if we look to the real world, what do we see? Do we see a >uniform law rule, >a uniform government and a uniform language? No, we see multiple >relationships, >multiple actors, heavy overload, intersubjective contexts. The legal and societal significance of this technology is open to debate, and will be decided differently in different places, based on local values, economic interests and raw political power. All I am asking is that the debate be informed by accurate statements of what this stuff can and cannot do. >As Tony Bartoletti wrote, apologies for what seems a rant, but the "solid >mathematical foundations" underlying digital signatures, "Qualified >Certificates", >unmistakable IDs, biometrics and so forth create in me a degree of "psychic >and social backlash" as well. As well it should. There is a big difference between "can we do it?" and "should we do it?" One other point, and let me shift to upper case for this one: THERE ARE NO "SOLID MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS" FOR ANY OF THIS STUFF!!!!! THE DIFFICULTY OF BREAKING PUBLIC KEY SYSTEMS HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN MATHEMATICALLY. It is all hypothesis and empirical argument. A lone mathematician working in his attic could come up with an algorithm that would blow some or all of the existing systems out of the water. Who get to cover that financial risk? > >We create these instruments in the hope of ascertaining better measures >of the constancy of authentication and identities. The central question that >comes to mind is "to what degree we are artificially creating the constancy we >intend these instruments to measure." Well said. Arnold Reinhold From whgiii at openpgp.net Wed Oct 18 04:47:23 2000 From: whgiii at openpgp.net (William H. Geiger III) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 07:47:23 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200010181147.HAA17455@domains.invweb.net> In , on 10/17/00 at 08:08 PM, Tim May said: >On the other hand, having heard that even getting a simple blood or >saliva sample requires court action, I expect you are once again merely >hand-waving. Actually it is rather common practice for various jails/prisons to take blood samples from everyone who stays long enough to be "processed" (by processed I mean someone who is staying more than a couple of hours waiting for bail). This is done for health reasons (aids, hepatitis, name your disease here, testing), because of this the samples are taken from everyone regardless of the crime accused of or convicted. I do not know what the policy is with the storing and recording of DNA data but the specimens are being collected. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Data Security & Cryptology Consulting Programming, Networking, Analysis PGP for OS/2: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html E-Secure: http://www.openpgp.net/esecure.html --------------------------------------------------------------- From codewhacker at yahoo.com Wed Oct 18 05:47:30 2000 From: codewhacker at yahoo.com (Roy Silvernail) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 07:47:30 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: give me Message-ID: <002d01c03901$9675ffc0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> From: Bernie B. Terrado >please give me an encrypted value > >I need one. I'll use it as a key. 033653337357 Happy to help! _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From bear at sonic.net Wed Oct 18 08:07:55 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 08:07:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: give me In-Reply-To: <002d01c03901$9675ffc0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Roy Silvernail wrote: >From: Bernie B. Terrado >>please give me an encrypted value >>I need one. I'll use it as a key. >033653337357 >Happy to help! Okay, he was asking for it. But I still think that was excessively cruel. Bear From bear at sonic.net Wed Oct 18 08:29:41 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 08:29:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018101550.B12491@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Riad S. Wahby wrote: >Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >> I think addition is bounded by something more like o(n) - carry propagation >> limits it. Anyway, your point is accurate. There are proven NP-hard problems >> and there have even been attempts to find ones with easy inverses for use in >> crypto. I don't think any of them have succeeded. > >If you're talking about the carries actually falling through full >adders, there is a method called carry lookahead that computes carries >in a tree (with branching factor 2). Computing the sum bits from the >carries is a constant time independent of the number of bits in the >adder, so the process is overall Theta(log(N)). Actually, even that's not quite true. Carry lookahead guarantees worst-case performance on addition of O(log2 N) where N is the size of the numbers being addded. However, there is a "shortcut" available, on average, once per 2 bits in the addition where the carry can be determined fully even before carry-lookahead gets there. These are the "base cases" of carry lookahead, where both operand bits are equal to one, or both operand bits are equal to zero. You don't need to determine the carry into those places to determine the carry bits out of them. This means that you can build hardware, in practice, that does addition in an average case proportional to the log of the distance between (1,1)pairs in the operands. In the worst case, that's (log2 N) but in the average case it's (Log2 (log2 N)). The downside of this is that it involves an O((2^N)/N) number of gates, where conventional carry lookahead involves only O(N^2) number of gates, and that it makes the amount of time required to complete an addition depend on the arguments. Chip designers generally don't do this, more because of the second reason than the first. :-) Math, anyone? Bear From ichudov at Algebra.Com Wed Oct 18 06:56:05 2000 From: ichudov at Algebra.Com (Igor Chudov) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 08:56:05 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Anyone know easy symmetric cypher for perl? Message-ID: <200010181356.IAA21097@manifold.algebra.com> I need a perl module or a function that would perform symmetric key encryption/decryption. I need it to encode secret information in URLs. Thanks - Igor. From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 18 09:10:27 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 09:10:27 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> At 05:50 PM 10/17/00 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: >On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 12:07:00PM -0400, David Honig wrote: >> Not yet. But I believe the UK takes samples of everyone >> arrested (not necessarily guilty) of minor crimes, and some >> US states and cities do or periodically propose doing this >> or more. > >The next question is: What do they do with this info? Insurance >companies and the like use it to justify discrimination against people >likely to develop certain medical conditions. Discrimination in the good sense, like discriminating dangerous vs. safe. What do you think insurance companies *should* do, if not make various discriminations about risk? Are you against car insurers asking about your other genetic characteristics (e.g., sex)? >The point is, the government is being used to do corporations' dirty >work. What a government can legitimately do should be reigned in by a constitution. And no more. >And I'm much less afraid of a government that is (in theory, if >not always in practice) somewhat connected to the people What are you smoking? >(representatives want to get reelected, after all) than I am a >corporation that can do basically whatever the fuck it wants, with >little or no hope of punishment. Corps have to please their customers or go extinct. Real simple. Only govt can print money. You *should* be concerned about various individuals (legislators, their wives, cultists, etc.) trying to get the government to use its violence to accomplish their way. You *shouldn't* be concerned about the _mutually consensual interactions_ of the individuals (and voluntary associations thereof, like corps.) within your borders. Government should *only* be concerned with nonconsensual interactions. dh From drognan at tm.net.my Wed Oct 18 09:24:26 2000 From: drognan at tm.net.my (drognan at tm.net.my) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 09:24:26 Subject: CDR: Homeworker Needed Message-ID: <200010180454.VAA14521@cyberpass.net> Interested to earn $1200 or more? We're seeking people to assist in typing and data processing works at home. Only serious applicants need to apply. ************************************************************ This message is sent in compliance of the new e-mail bill: of S. 1618, further transmissions to you by the sender of this email may be stopped at no cost to you by sending a reply to this email address with the word "remove" in the subject line." From rsw at MIT.EDU Wed Oct 18 07:05:16 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 10:05:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: give me In-Reply-To: <8B6AE559367AD311B7090090273CEFAA8CFF5E@h203-176-54-164.ip.iphil.net>; from bbt@fiesta.com.ph on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 03:58:39PM +0800 References: <8B6AE559367AD311B7090090273CEFAA8CFF5E@h203-176-54-164.ip.iphil.net> Message-ID: <20001018100516.A12491@positron.mit.edu> "Bernie B. Terrado" wrote: > I need one. I'll use it as a key. If you promise to use it as a key, you can use the contents of the header X-rand-ascii at the top of this message. I promise, I don't keep copies of every message I send. -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 704 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rsw at MIT.EDU Wed Oct 18 07:15:50 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 10:15:50 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from ssyreeni@cc.helsinki.fi on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 12:23:08PM +0300 References: <20001017153616.A9145@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20001018101550.B12491@positron.mit.edu> Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > I think addition is bounded by something more like o(n) - carry propagation > limits it. Anyway, your point is accurate. There are proven NP-hard problems > and there have even been attempts to find ones with easy inverses for use in > crypto. I don't think any of them have succeeded. If you're talking about the carries actually falling through full adders, there is a method called carry lookahead that computes carries in a tree (with branching factor 2). Computing the sum bits from the carries is a constant time independent of the number of bits in the adder, so the process is overall Theta(log(N)). On the other hand, if you're talking about speed of propagation through traces, you're right for large gate size. However, as gates get smaller, the speed of propagation becomes less important, and the adder speed asymptotically approaches Theta(log(N)). -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 1188 bytes Desc: not available URL: From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 18 07:20:53 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 10:20:53 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: A helpful ruling on "anonymity" In-Reply-To: References: <86hf6b348o.fsf@strangepork.interhack.net> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001017191150.00804400@pop.sprynet.com> At 01:22 PM 10/17/00 -0400, Ray Dillinger wrote: >Likewise, people who only understand speech and business mediated >by absolute identities are going to have trouble with the "subtle" >difference between anonymity and pseudonymity. It's a model >where you are dealing with someone but don't know who they are, >and as far as the sheeple are concerned, one not-knowing is as >good as another. It violates the same assumption, therefore in >popular view, it must be the same thing. > >*sigh.* > > Bear I used to think so too, but there are a lot of hausfrau who use polynymy. They're not clued in to the subtleties of recognizing prose by style, because my informant has told me that they are recognizable. I doubt many cpunkly anonymous posters put their prose through a few cycles of 'the fish'. Perhaps short prose is their solution; what is *your* unicity distance? In a different but related thread, the whole point of 'human factors' studies and gui design is to use whatever the user brings with him --including metaphors from meatspace. Postcards = IP. Envelopes = crypto. Phone books = PKI directories. Multinyms = "doing business as". Reputation = reputation. dh From egerck at nma.com Wed Oct 18 10:23:52 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 10:23:52 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> <39EC98AB.827388D1@nma.com> Message-ID: <39EDDCA8.189CED40@nma.com> "Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > At 11:21 AM -0700 10/17/2000, Ed Gerck wrote: > >As Tony Bartoletti wrote, apologies for what seems a rant, but the "solid > >mathematical foundations" underlying digital signatures, "Qualified > >Certificates", > >unmistakable IDs, biometrics and so forth create in me a degree of "psychic > >and social backlash" as well. > > As well it should. There is a big difference between "can we do it?" > and "should we do it?" > > One other point, and let me shift to upper case for this one: THERE > ARE NO "SOLID MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS" FOR ANY OF THIS STUFF!!!!! > THE DIFFICULTY OF BREAKING PUBLIC KEY SYSTEMS HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN > MATHEMATICALLY. Yes, that is why Tony's remark was somewhat tongue-in-cheek and used "solid mathematical foundations" within quotes. > It is all hypothesis and empirical argument. A lone > mathematician working in his attic could come up with an algorithm > that would blow some or all of the existing systems out of the water. > Who get to cover that financial risk? The buyer. CAs (read Verisign's CPS or any CA's CPS, or bank contracts and -- above all -- see the US UCC) are not responsible for producing correct results but just for using correct methods. Where "correct methods" are what others consider correct -- even if they are proved wrong later on by a one mathematician working in his attic. > >We create these instruments in the hope of ascertaining better measures > >of the constancy of authentication and identities. The central question that > >comes to mind is "to what degree we are artificially creating the constancy we > >intend these instruments to measure." > > Well said. This paragraph was also Tony's contribution, not mine. It reflects a case I often make -- to what extent are we ironing out diversity and thus creating an artificial and useless model rather than a real-world model that would have real-world significance? "The emperor is nude", needs to be heard more often IMO, in e-commerce. Before, if possible, more of our economy and even lives depend on it. Cheers, Ed Gerck From rsw at MIT.EDU Wed Oct 18 07:24:08 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 10:24:08 -0400 Subject: CDR: Anyone know easy symmetric cypher for perl? In-Reply-To: <200010181356.IAA21097@manifold.algebra.com>; from ichudov@Algebra.Com on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 08:56:05AM -0500 References: <200010181356.IAA21097@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <20001018102408.A13296@positron.mit.edu> Igor Chudov wrote: > I need a perl module or a function that would perform symmetric key > encryption/decryption. I need it to encode secret information in > URLs. Thanks You can use Crypt::Blowfish, Crypt::DES, Crypt::IDEA, Crypt::TripleDES, Crypt::Twofish2, or Crypt::Solitaire (hehe). You probably want to choose one that works in conjunction with Crypt::CBC. All of these are available at www.cpan.org -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 846 bytes Desc: not available URL: From djcoones at berkshire.net Wed Oct 18 11:05:54 2000 From: djcoones at berkshire.net (DONALD J. COONES) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 11:05:54 -0700 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <000001c03932$511ee0a0$7772ba8c@0017337570> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 280 bytes Desc: not available URL: From s_z_eng at spidernet.com.cy Wed Oct 18 08:51:32 2000 From: s_z_eng at spidernet.com.cy (S-Z ENGINNERING) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 11:51:32 -0400 Subject: CDR: pick up diploma Message-ID: <000d01c03919$a52b0700$c5929ac2@spidernet.net> Send me more informations regarding cost and accreditation. Reply to toulounges at hotmail.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 477 bytes Desc: not available URL: From newsletter at edgar-online.com Wed Oct 18 11:14:27 2000 From: newsletter at edgar-online.com (EDGAR Online News) Date: 18 Oct 2000 12:14:27 -0600 Subject: CDR: IPO SECrets Newsletter 10.18.00 Message-ID: <20001018181427.2222.qmail@alpha.businesslink.net> EDGAR Online's IPO SECrets Newsletter Editor: Timothy Middleton, EDGAR Online Analyst mailto:editor at edgar-online.com ***INSIDE THIS ISSUE NEW & NOTEWORTHY IPO QUESTION OF THE WEEK: What is a warrant? IPO COLUMN OF THE WEEK: Leaving Money on the Table IPO COMPANY PROFILE: Watson Wyatt & Co. Holdings (WW) IPO MIDWEEK UPDATE COMPANIES MENTIONED IN THIS ISSUE PEOPLE MENTIONED IN THIS ISSUE /---------------------ADVERTISEMENT-------------------------------\ DON'T MISS OUT ON YOUR CHANCE TO WIN AN IBM THINKPAD 600X Register now for any of ITworld.com's weekly IT email newsletters, and enter our sweepstakes for your chance to win a powerful new IBM ThinkPad 600x. CLICK HERE! http://www.itworld.com/sweeps/sweepsim.html?impsite=9235 \-----------------------------------------------------------------/ ---------------------------------------- ***NEW AND NOTEWORTHY*** ---------------------------------------- EDGAR Online Launches "Fair Disclosure Express" Site In response to the SEC's Oct. 23rd adoption of the new Fair Disclosure regulation, we have launched "FD Express" (www.FD-express.com), to keep you abreast of the sweeping changes and the influx of new filings expected as a result of the new FD rule. In addition to real-time filings of Forms 8-K and 425, the new Web site provides an analysis of the new Fair Disclosure rule by the law firm Morrison & Foerster LLP, a selection of comment letters submitted to the SEC on the rule and glossary of FD-related terms. "Savvy market players and investors will be looking at the surge of new disclosure filings made as a result of the new Fair Disclosure rule. EDGAR Online is making all these filings available in one place --- FD Express," said Jay Sears, senior vice president for EDGAR Online, Inc. The volume of 8-K filings, disclosures of unscheduled material events, is expected to double over the next 12 months due to the new Fair Disclosure rule. "Form 8-Ks are the anti-press release, now more than ever." said Sears. "Question of the Week" Archive Now Searchable In light of numerous subscriber requests to search back issues of SECrets, our "Questions of the Week" are now searchable alphabetically and chronologically. Later this year, the full newsletter archive will be searchable. Click on the "SECrets Newsletter" button under "News" on the EDGAR Online home page http://www.edgar-online.com/secrets. The default view is alphabetical search. To find questions beginning with numbers - i.e. "13-D", click on the pound sign "#". -- HB ---------------------------------------- ***IPO QUESTION OF THE WEEK*** ---------------------------------------- QUESTION: What is a warrant? ANSWER: A warrant is a right to purchase stock in the future at a pre-set (premium) price. Warrants are often issued with preferred stock, or a bond, and function as a deal "sweetener"- i.e. the underwriters of an IPO that priced at $12, could receive warrants to purchase additional shares at $15 any time over the next five years. Unlike call options which are typically "in play" for less than a year, warrants tend to be longer term in scope - one to five years and sometimes into perpetuity. Warrants are typically offered at a premium to the offering price and may account for 10% of the offering. Warrants are sometimes transferable and often trade on the major exchanges. ---------------------------------------- ***IPO COLUMN OF THE WEEK*** ---------------------------------------- Leaving Money on the Table With the IPO market cooling off, less money is being left on the table. This expression refers to the gap between the price underwriters assign to a stock, and the price the market accords it when it's released for trading. Traditionally, Wall Street prices an IPO at 10% to 15% below the price the shares are expected to fetch in the public market. Issuers get a little less, but they harvest goodwill because the deal is reckoned a success. Underwriters reap a bonanza: Quick profits for favored customers, a reputation as a money maker, and better prospects for future deals. This summer, the amount left on the table was staggering -- in some instances netting the underwriters' customers more than the issuers got themselves. In July, for example, Corvis Corp. (CORV) was priced at $36 but began trading at $74. The pricing set the company's value at $1.14 billion. The market said it was worth $2.34 billion -- a difference of more than 100%. "Those deals were done in an environment of almost a casino mentality," says Eric Miller, a portfolio manager with Heartland Advisors, a money management firm in Milwaukee, Wis. "The whole tech market was vastly overvalued, and IPOs just sort of fed that mentality." That mentality's appetite was voracious: The Corvis deal is by no means the most extreme example of riches piling up on a groaning board. In August, McDATA Corp. (MCDT) was priced at $28 but began trading at $72 - an instant bonus to IPO investors of 157%. Last month, CoSine Communications (COSN) went out at $23 and on the first trade soared to $70, an instant gain of more than 200%. Then the Nasdaq began to melt again, as it did in the spring. The total value of IPOs filed in the third quarter of 2000 shrank to $18.3 billion from $32.8 billion in the second quarter, and was about even with the third quarter of 1999. This month, IPO investors have found considerably smaller bounties being placed on their investments. When Synplicity Inc., a maker of design software for integrated circuits, went public last week at $8, it opened at $8.47, a premium of only 5.9%. Regus PLC (REGSV), a British office-services firm, was priced Monday at $18.79 and opened Tuesday at $20, up 6.4%. Endwave Corp. (ENWV), a maker of components for broadband wireless communications, was priced Monday at $14 and opened the next day at precisely that amount. "People are beginning to recognize that in this type of market you're not going to get the big pop, and you might actually have to own these things for more than 10 or 15 minutes," says Miller. "That's bringing a little more realism to this type of IPO." Users of EDGAR-Online can track pricing and other trends at our IPO Express, http://www.edgar-online.com/ipoexpressn/ by clicking on IPO Express on the left-hand menu bar. /----------ADVERTISEMENT----------------------------------------\ Purchase Business/Credit Reports from Dun & Bradstreet on over 11 million U.S. businesses. Click on the "Resources" link when you look up SEC filings for any public company, or search by company name and state at http://www.edgar.telebase.com \----------------------------------------------------------------/ ---------------------------------------- ***IPO COMPANY PROFILE*** ---------------------------------------- Watson Wyatt & Co. Holdings (WW) With unemployment at a 30-year low, human resources consulting firms have emerged from the back office into the public eye. Watson Wyatt & Co. Holdings (WW) went public last week at $12.50 a share in a deal lead by Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown. This week, Watson Wyatt shares surged 36% to $17 per share. http://www.edgar-online.com/ipoexpressn/priced.asp "We've seen e-consulting firms losing so much of their value, it's quite a surprise to see this decades-old firm coming in and doing well in its IPO," says Delicia Yard, editor of Consultants News, an industry newsletter. Boston-based Viant Corp. (VIAN), for example, is trading around one-tenth of its 52-week high. Scient Corp. (SCNT), another Internet consulting firm, is down 85% from its high. "Watson Wyatt is the antithesis of these kinds of firms," Ms. Yard says. "It doesn't have a sexy business model -- it's not helping dot-com firms with their strategies." Rather, the 54-year-old company, the nation's fifth -largest HR consulting firm, advises Fortune 500 companies such as General Electric and General Motors on recruitment, personnel policies, salaries and benefits, pension regulations, global expansion and related matters. The Bethesda, MD-based firm's revenue in the fiscal year ended June 30 was $624.6 million, and net income was $18.5 million. The company and its affiliates have 5,800 employees in 85 offices worldwide, according to its most recent annual report. http://www.edgar-online.com/secrets.asp?d=A-892968-0000912057-00-042928 Watson Wyatt is a leader in an industry that is growing in overlap as well as size. Its competitors include other HR giants like William M. Mercer and Towers Perrin, accounting firms like Pricewaterhouse Coopers, benefits consultants like Buck Consultants and information technology firms like Andersen Consulting. Historically employee-owned, like many consulting firms are, Watson Wyatt sold 5.6 million shares -- half on its own behalf and half by selling shareholders. About 83% of the company's outstanding stock remains in the hands of insiders, most of them employees. --------------------------------------- *** IPO MIDWEEK UPDATE FROM IPO EXPRESS*** ---------------------------------------- Undone Deals: Friday the 13th Takes Its Toll AMComp Inc. (-TBA-) of North Palm Beach, FL http://www.edgar-online.com/ipoexpressn/company.asp?company=2961 EDGAR INSIGHT: AMComp Inc. filed Oct. 13 to withdraw its IPO. Donaldson Lufkin & Jenrette Inc. was the lead underwriter. The proposed offering was expected to raise $50 million. The company is Florida's fourth largest provider of workers' compensation insurance. The 175-employee company reported revenue of $108.6 million in 1997, and net income of $5.4 million, in an S-1 originally filed Nov. 12, 1998. Commerx Inc. (CMRX) of Chicago, IL http://www.edgar-online.com/ipoexpressn/company.asp?company=4162 EDGAR INSIGHT: Commerx Inc. filed Oct. 13 to withdraw its IPO. Goldman Sachs & Co. was the lead underwriter. The proposed offering was expected to raise $100 million. The company creates business-to-business electronic marketplaces for customers and sellers in the industrial processing industry. In the nine months ended Sept. 30, the 100-employee company had revenue of $800,000, and a loss of $8.1 million. Redone Deals MCE Companies Inc. (MCEI) of Ann Arbor, MI http://www.edgar-online.com/ipoexpressn/company.asp?company=4868 EDGAR INSIGHT: MCE Companies Inc. filed Oct. 13 to decrease its price to $11-$13 per share from $13-$15 per share, and to decrease its offering to 5.5 million shares from 8.7 million. Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown Inc. is the lead underwriter. The proposed offering is expected to raise $71.5 million. MCE sells products used in wireless broadband access, fiber optic networking, and radar and satellite applications. The company will have 26.6 million shares outstanding. The 643-employee company had revenue of $64.6 million in 1999, and a loss of $1.9 million. IPOs on Deck Peets Coffee & Tea Inc. (PEET) of Emeryville, CA http://www.edgar-online.com/ipoexpressn/company.asp?company=5092 EDGAR INSIGHT: Peets Coffee & Tea Inc. filed Oct. 13 for an IPO. WR Hambrecht & Co. is the lead underwriter. The proposed offering of 3.3 million shares is expected to raise $46.2 million. The company roasts and markets fresh whole bean coffee. The company will have 8 million post-offering shares outstanding. The 1,502-employee company had revenue of $67.8 million in 1999, with a loss of $0.1 million. /---------------------ADVERTISEMENT--------------------------\ EDGAR Online Corporate creates customized corporate applications that can be integrated seamlessly into your company's Intranet or Extranet. We meet the needs of our clients who require the business, financial, and competitive information derived from SEC filings delivered throughout their organization, tailored to their specifications. Find out more at http://www.edgar-online.com/corporate.asp \--------------------------------------------------------------/ ---------------------------------------- **COMPANIES MENTIONED IN THIS ISSUE*** ---------------------------------------- AMComp Inc Andersen Consulting Buck Consultants Commerx Inc Consultants News Corvis Corp CoSine Communications Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown Donaldson Lufkin & Jenrette Inc Endwave Corp General Electric General Motors Goldman Sachs & Co Heartland Advisors, McDATA Corp MCE Companies Inc Peets Coffee & Tea Inc Pricewaterhouse Coopers Regus PLC Synplicity Inc Towers Perrin Viant Corp Watson Wyatt & Co. Holdings William M. Mercer WR Hambrecht & Co ---------------------------------------- **PEOPLE MENTIONED IN THIS ISSUE*** ---------------------------------------- Miller, Eric Yard, Delicia ---------------------------------------- ABOUT THE EDITOR ---------------------------------------- IPO SECrets is edited by EDGAR Online Analyst Timothy Middleton. Timothy has covered business and financial topics for The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Dow Jones News Service and Crain's New York Business. Twice nominated for the Pulitzer Prize in investigative journalism, his weekly business reports can be heard on WCBS Radio and Microsoft MoneyCentral Radio. For press, syndication, and advertising inquiries, contact Group Publisher Hank Berkowitz at mailto:hberkowitz at edgar-online.com ---------------------------------------- Copyright 2000, EDGAR Online, Inc. http://www.edgar-online.com ---------------------------------------- DISCLAIMER: EDGAR Online's IPO SECrets contains observations of its editor Timothy Middleton, a consultant of EDGAR Online and is for informational purposes only. These statements and expressions are the sole opinions of Mr. Middleton and EDGAR Online does not endorse nor necessarily agree on such statements and expressions. Factual statements in this report are made as of the date stated and are subject to change without notice. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to be recommendations to buy, hold or sell securities nor shall it purport to be a complete analysis of the companies mentioned. While the information contained in this Report and the opinions contained herein are based on sources believed to be reliable, neither Mr. Middleton nor EDGAR Online have independently verified the facts, assumptions and/or estimates that may be contained in this Report. Accordingly, no representation or warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to, and no reliance should be placed on, the fairness, accuracy, completeness or correctness of the information and opinions contained in this Report. **************************************** UNSUBSCRIBE INSTRUCTIONS **************************************** You are receiving this newsletter because you are a registered user of EDGAR Online. To unsubscribe from the SECrets Newsletter, go to http://www.edgar-online.com/auth/updateinfo.asp and deselect the free newsletter option. If you need your user name or password, go to http://www.edgar-online.com/username.asp For help contact: mailto:support at edgar-online.com **************************************** Email Distribution Services for EDGAR Online provided by DoubleClick DARTmail. *#* cypherpunks at toad.com From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Wed Oct 18 04:20:12 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:20:12 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <39ED876C.C0CDBB1F@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Petro wrote: > >P.S. I too would be interested in documented cases where DNA > >collected by the police was given to insurance companies. > > It's (apparently) England where there is wide spread DNA > collection for use in finding certain types of criminals. The database exists but so far it is supposedly restricted to convicted criminals (all nearly a million of them), and DNA collection is not universal in criminal investigation in England. There is a move (which will possibly fall foul of the new Human Rights laws) by some bits of the Labour government to make it routine for people who are actually arrested, but not for a trawl through random members of the public . The opposition Conservative party says the proposals are too weak - they want to give the police even more powers. Presumably they want everyone on the database, convicted or not. They seem proud of their database (you can even pay them to "fingerprint" you) http://www.forensic.gov.uk/forensic/news/press_releases/10_04_00_2.htm > In England both the Police and the Health Care System are run > by the government, so in a sense the "Insurance Company" already has > it. > They also can't do anything about it since they have to cover everyone. > Note: I am not claiming that the Police share the DNA with > the Health Care Providers, but once the database is there... If they aren't keeping the DNA but just storing the results of the "profile" in the database then the data will *not* be generally useful for medical purposes. You have to know what you are looking for. If you suspect that a particular allele makes a disease more likely you have to look for that allele. The kind of stuff that is important here is the SNP lists coming out of the HGP - which is why annotations to them are getting bogged down in intellectual property squabbles between academics & drug companies. Also, as you pointed out, the UK National Health Service isn't an insurance system. Of course that doesn't mean that the doctors wouldn't be interested in DNA evidence for hereditary diseases or whatever. If anything leaks might be the other way - law enforcement might want to find confidential patient information from the NHS (which doesn't keep centralised patient records, yet - there is an interminable thread about this on the UKcrypto list which a few folks who are here also read - Ross Anderson has strong opinions on the competence of the NHS to keep centralised confidential records) A recent news item at http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid%5F906000/906538.stm and some background: http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid%5F541000/541529.stm http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/audio%5Fvideo/programmes/panorama/transcripts/transcript%5F15%5F11%5F99.txt From jimdbell at home.com Wed Oct 18 12:22:19 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:22:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <009201c03938$bbf4ac60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39301,00.html > > The Mother of Gore's Invention > by Declan McCullagh (declan at wired.com) [deletia uber alles] > Many portions -- discussions of universal service, wiring classrooms > to the Net, and antitrust actions -- are surprisingly relevant even > today. (That's an impressive enough feat that we might even forgive > Gore his tortured metaphors such as "road kill on the information > superhighway" and "parked at the curb" on the information > superhighway.) I'll stake my claim right here. Very shortly after Algore called the Internet the "Information Superhighway", I called FIDOnet "the Information Jeep-Trail." > But it's also difficult to argue with a straight face that the > Internet we know today would not exist if Gore had decided to practice > the piano instead of politics. > > By the time Gore took notice of the Net around 1987, the basics were > already in place. The key protocol, TCP/IP, was written and the > culture of the Net had blossomed through Usenet and mailing lists, as > chronicled in Eric Raymond's Jargon File. At best, Gore's involvement > merely hastened its development. I ask this, what I believe would be an excellent idea for an article: Why didn't the Internet develop even faster than it actually did? 9600 bps modems existed in 1986, not all that far in performance behind 28Kbps units. By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. Compare this with the breakout of the fax machines in the 1985-86 timeframe. I wish I had the numbers, but it seemed like at the beginning of 1985 few companies had faxes, while by the end of that year "every" company did. By the end of 1986 that had spread to individuals, as well. I'm not suggesting some sort of vast conspiracy to keep the Internet small. But I think it could be found that 3-4 years were effectively wasted. I really want to know what the impediments to the Internet were in the 1986-1993 time frame. Jim Bell From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Wed Oct 18 02:23:08 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:23:08 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001017153616.A9145@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Riad S. Wahby wrote: >While I agree that the limitations of current techniques do not >dictate what is possible, it _is_ possible to show that a certain >problem has a best-case order of growth (for something simple, think >of gate-level addition; its best case is provably Theta(log(N)) ). I think addition is bounded by something more like o(n) - carry propagation limits it. Anyway, your point is accurate. There are proven NP-hard problems and there have even been attempts to find ones with easy inverses for use in crypto. I don't think any of them have succeeded. >In this case, what Tim means is that work is being done towards >showing that the best-case order of growth for factorization is faster >than polynomial, hence it is NP-hard. Quite. However, there are some things that must be considered if we're really paranoid. For example, it is well known that the usual model of a deterministic Turing machine does not always bound the complexity of a problem 'nicely' even if current serial machines are used. Certain string matching algorithms, for instance, can be proved to be in Theta(n log n) if only binary comparison is used even while solutions exist in Theta(n (log n)^a) with a less than 1 when the full ordering properties of the problem can be exploited. That is the sort of stuff which makes one wonder whether using radically different basic operations (like the ones based on holography, which I do not think have been proven to be strictly equal to a serial, polynomial time computation) could perhaps make a difference more pronounced than simply taking care of a fixed number of orders in complexity. But I stray. Currently the extraordinary evidence simply isn't there. Even if one has to be careful about making overbroad conclusions based on today's theory of computation, it is highly unlikely that e.g. dramatically accelerated factorization would currently or even in the future exist. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 18 09:25:14 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:25:14 -0400 Subject: CDR: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA In-Reply-To: References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001018074632.00816480@pop.sprynet.com> At 02:30 PM 10/17/00 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >"Infowar" will be -- is being -- fought by business, because government >in this sphere is too damned slow -- too expensive -- to be of much use >there. > >Put another way, it won't be the NSA which does our computer security, >and, if any third party does it at all, it'll be firms like Counterpane >and L0pht/@Stake, operating like those fictional private protection >"rackets" in Vernor Vinge's anarcho-capitalist chestnut novella _The >Ungoverned_. For defense, yes. The @stakes of the world will show vulnerabilities in generic systems. They will have automated tools for this. Having found a hole, they mark it and move on. However the TLAs will invest in mapping these holes (and not notifying anyone, including the public about new vulnerabilities) and in developing a different and more aggressive strain of tools. Different needs (defense vs. offense) yield different tools. dh From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 18 09:25:47 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:25:47 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001018092333.00803210@pop.sprynet.com> [forking the DNA discussion slightly] On giving blood samples to police: I believe the supremes are going to hear a case about a hospital taking blood samples after delivery of a baby, running drug checks, and turning her over to the police immediately for child abuse. In a case within the last year, some local woman had her baby taken immediately after birth because they drug tested her and found a sedative that her doctor had given her, but wasn't recorded so they figured it was recreational. She should be suing their asses off but only wanted an apology in the broadcast I intercepted. Maybe her kid will sue in 18 years, one hopes. ..... [back to DNA] Recently read about a website where you can offer to donate your blood for a disease-oriented DNA bank. [No, I am not mixing this with the donate-cat-hair-for-feline-DNA-bank story of a month ago.] They are interested in a list of diseases you or your immediate family have had. Some scandanavian countries have complete health records on all their citizens and some are working on national DNA banks. Some of these will be made available for research after some form of anonymization. From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 18 09:31:49 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:31:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First In-Reply-To: <39ED4831.1A3FA61B@nma.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001018093009.00803bd0@pop.sprynet.com> >> Other choices? >> >> Identity Theft >> Identity Pollution >> Identity Vandalism >> Identity Assault >> Identity Misappropriation >> (Slander in the First Person :) >> >> Would it matter if we substitute "reputation" for "identity". I think it'd be clearer. >>Is my identity >> (to others) any different than the reputation with which it is associated? No. I suggest Reputation Hijacking, but don't expect the lexicon to change. From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 18 09:35:50 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:35:50 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <200010181147.HAA17455@domains.invweb.net> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001018093343.0080e5e0@pop.sprynet.com> At 07:47 AM 10/18/00 -0400, William H. Geiger III wrote: >In , on 10/17/00 > at 08:08 PM, Tim May said: > >>On the other hand, having heard that even getting a simple blood or >>saliva sample requires court action, I expect you are once again merely >>hand-waving. Remember that saliva samples can be sold to the public as 'as invasive as a fingerprint'. >Actually it is rather common practice for various jails/prisons to take >blood samples from everyone who stays long enough to be "processed" (by >processed I mean someone who is staying more than a couple of hours >waiting for bail). This is done for health reasons (aids, hepatitis, name >your disease here, testing), because of this the samples are taken from >everyone regardless of the crime accused of or convicted. What about the folks with religious aversions towards needles? Quarantine? From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 09:47:22 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:47:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001018092333.00803210@pop.sprynet.com> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: At 12:25 PM -0400 10/18/00, David Honig wrote: >[forking the DNA discussion slightly] > >On giving blood samples to police: I believe the supremes are going to >hear a case about a hospital taking blood samples after delivery >of a baby, running drug checks, and turning her over to the police >immediately for child abuse. > >In a case within the last year, some local woman had her baby taken >immediately after birth because they drug tested her and found a sedative >that her doctor had given her, but wasn't recorded so they figured >it was recreational. She should be suing their asses off >but only wanted an apology in the broadcast I intercepted. >Maybe her kid will sue in 18 years, one hopes. Maybe it's just me, but "suing their asses off" would hardly suffice...there's a long, and getting longer every day, list of abuses for which the only remedy I can imagine would be a car bomb incinerating one or all of the offenders. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 10:06:31 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 13:06:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: Reputation, Identity, and Belief In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001018093009.00803bd0@pop.sprynet.com> References: Message-ID: At 12:31 PM -0400 10/18/00, David Honig wrote: > >> Other choices? >>> >>> Identity Theft >>> Identity Pollution >>> Identity Vandalism >>> Identity Assault >>> Identity Misappropriation >>> (Slander in the First Person :) >>> >>> Would it matter if we substitute "reputation" for "identity". > >I think it'd be clearer. > >>>Is my identity >>> (to others) any different than the reputation with which it is associated? > >No. > >I suggest Reputation Hijacking, but don't expect the lexicon to change. And I think all of these examples/phrases miss the essential point. (I don't intend for this to sound too confrontational, though it is phrased bluntly. This is in fact an extremely interesting topic, and I thank David for making his points so that I can rebut them.) Here are the bold, but little-appreciated, points: Alice does not own her reputation. Alice does not own her identity. Alice does not own the trust others have in her various credentials. Alice does not own the various beliefs people and agents around her have. Even when those beliefs involve _her_, e.g., her identity, her age, her creditworthiness, her insurability, and her "reputation." The key issue is an ontological one. These are all beliefs that various others have in some attribute or credential referring to Alice. Bob believes Alice to be a trustworthy person. Charles believes Alice to be 25 years old. Dorenda believes Alice to actually be the person with the birthname "Alice B. Toklas." And so on. Sometimes other people act to change these beliefs. Hilda the Hijacker says "Do you know that Alice was actually born Ruthanne Rutledge?" Or Lenny the Lender says "Alice borrowed money from me and didn't pay it back. Watch out for her." Has Hilda the Hijacker actually "hijacked" Alice's name identity? Has Lenny the Lender stolen Alice's creditworthiness? Crypto and related tools offer Alice and others the means to make such casual "thefts" (aspersions, etc.) harder to do. Alice can digitally sign to "prove" mathematically she is the holder of certain credentials. And so on, for the obvious extensions to webs of trust, webs of doubt, webs of gossip, etc. Any talk of "theft" or "misappropriation" misses this key point. And, even more importantly than the crypto/signature part (ironically), such language misses the critical issue of "who owns a reputation?" As I have described above, Alice does not own her reputation: "her" reputation consists of a set of beliefs of varying degrees of certainty held by a set of people around her. "Where do I go to get my reputation back?" Think about it. The same point applies to identity, of course. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From phaedrus at sdf.lonestar.org Wed Oct 18 11:09:23 2000 From: phaedrus at sdf.lonestar.org (Phaedrus) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 13:09:23 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: ADL lists anarchy symbol as racist In-Reply-To: <1121faa9f428bc88e7310250dcb52abd@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: > http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/racist_anarchy_symbol.html Although the symbol is more often usedby Anarchists, an "A" in a circle is also a symbol used by individuals in the white supremacist movement who are violently anti-government because of their conspiratorial belief that Jews control he government. The symbol can also signify that an individual is part of the Aryan movement and disregard authority. Looks like an apt description to me -- they acknowledge that it isn't always a hate symbol but is more often used by Anarchists Ph. From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Wed Oct 18 10:10:33 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 13:10:33 -0400 Subject: CDR: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018074632.00816480@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <39EDD970.E9EC3197@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Speaking of "The Ungoverned", I've been looking for it, can't find it in libraries, Amazon, or Bibliofind, so I'm thinking that it was in a collection? Does anyone know which? -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 10:39:09 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 13:39:09 -0400 Subject: CDR: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA In-Reply-To: <39EDD970.E9EC3197@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: At 1:10 PM -0400 10/18/00, Harmon Seaver wrote: > Speaking of "The Ungoverned", I've been looking for it, can't find >it in libraries, Amazon, or Bibliofind, so I'm thinking that it was in a >collection? Does anyone know which? > It's in one of the two paperback collections of Vinge's short stories and novellas, either in "Threats and Other Promises" or "True Names and Other Dangers." Both are out of print. I have both, but not in locations known to me as I write, so I can't check which one has "The Ungoverned." The best bet has always been for folks to snap up Vinge novels as they are found in second-hand book shops. I bought several copies of "The Peace War," "Marooned in Realtime," and, of course, "True Names," in just this way. Vinge just won a second Hugo Best Novel for "A Deepness in the Sky," so maybe this means the long-delayed re-issue of "True Names" will finally happen. (Alas, my essay for it was written several years ago, so is even more out of date. From the instant publishing on the Net to several years' delay in publishing in pulpspace.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From mclow at owl.csusm.edu Wed Oct 18 10:58:08 2000 From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 13:58:08 -0400 Subject: CDR: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA In-Reply-To: <39EDD970.E9EC3197@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: > Speaking of "The Ungoverned", I've been looking for it, can't find >it in libraries, Amazon, or Bibliofind, so I'm thinking that it was in a >collection? Does anyone know which? It's in "True Names... and Other Dangers". -- -- Marshall "The era of big government is over." Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996 Marshall Clow MusicMatch From anonymous at openpgp.net Wed Oct 18 11:05:54 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 14:05:54 -0400 Subject: CDR: involuntary blood test Supremes ref Message-ID: <55018a17f3c9c33c8c76e7551205504a@mixmaster.ceti.pl> http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/previewglance_oct00.html What are the Limits on Warrantless Drug Testing of Pregnant Women? Ferguson v. City of Charleston Docket No. 99-936 From: The Fourth Circuit Case at a Glance This case involves a Fourth Amendment challenge to a drug-testing policy implemented at a South Carolina public hospital. Under the policy, pregnant women are tested -- without warrants or probable cause -- for cocaine use. Positive test results are shared with law-enforcement officials, and some women were arrested and threatened with prosecution if they did not complete drug treatment. Previewed by Richard W. Garnett, a professor of law at Notre Dame Law School in Notre Dame, Ind. Supreme Court Decision: Pending From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 11:12:55 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 14:12:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA In-Reply-To: References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: At 1:39 PM -0400 10/18/00, Tim May wrote: >At 1:10 PM -0400 10/18/00, Harmon Seaver wrote: >> Speaking of "The Ungoverned", I've been looking for it, can't find >>it in libraries, Amazon, or Bibliofind, so I'm thinking that it was in a >>collection? Does anyone know which? >> > >It's in one of the two paperback collections of Vinge's short stories >and novellas, either in "Threats and Other Promises" or "True Names >and Other Dangers." Both are out of print. I have both, but not in >locations known to me as I write, so I can't check which one has "The >Ungoverned." I checked. "The Ungoverned" is in "True Names and Other Dangers." However, one should buy either or both of these as they are found. There's also a very scarce compilation of "The Peace War" and "Marooned in Realtime" which is called "Across Realtime." It contains "The Ungoverned" in between the two novels. Good luck in finding it, though. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From mdpopescu at geocities.com Wed Oct 18 11:25:02 2000 From: mdpopescu at geocities.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 14:25:02 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anyone know easy symmetric cypher for perl? References: <200010181356.IAA21097@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <010701c03930$58b4ef00$1d01a8c0@microbilt.com> I wrote the RC4 algorithm in VBScript, and I think I even tried it in Perl (but it wasn't so important that I'd actually try to get something working - I still don't know much about Perl). Look for "cyphersaber" on the web for a description of RC4 - it shouldn't take you more than an hour. Mark ----- Original Message ----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: "Igor Chudov" To: "Multiple recipients of list" Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 10:00 AM Subject: Anyone know easy symmetric cypher for perl? > I need a perl module or a function that would perform symmetric key > encryption/decryption. I need it to encode secret information in > URLs. Thanks > > - Igor. > From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 14:55:43 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 14:55:43 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001018170949.00b315a0@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001018170949.00b315a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 5:12 PM -0400 10/18/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >At 12:22 10/18/2000 -0700, jim bell wrote: >>I ask this, what I believe would be an excellent idea for an article: Why >>didn't the Internet develop even faster than it actually did? 9600 bps >>modems existed in 1986, not all that far in performance behind 28Kbps units. >>By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. > >Internet deployment happened at a near-doubling every year starting >around 1993, coincident with the deployment of the web. > >Most computers in 1986 weren't up to it. Many of us were using Apple >II computers with something like 278x192 resolution (in single hi >res mode). Imagine such a beast doing networking. Ick. To Bell's point, by 1986 many people _were_ on the Internet. Modems were typically 1200. 2400-baud modems were available. 9600s may have existed (Racal-Vadic, others), but they were too expensive for casual use. My first ISP was (according to him) the first ISP to offer accounts to "civilians" (non-academic, non-company-paid, non-governmental). This was Portal Communications, out of Cupertino, CA. I got my account in '88 or so. A Mac Plus with a 1200 baud modem, replaced a year later with a Mac IIci and a 2400 baud modem. And so on. BTW, my little Mac Plus had more than adequate screen resolution to handle my mail program (pine), newsreader (tin), and misc. word processors, outline processors, and suchlike. (As a side note, John Little shut down his ISP service in the early 90s, due to obvious competition from Netcom and others. He re-started the company as a billing company...and his stake in Portal Software is into the billions of dollars, modulo the recent fall in prices of stocks. PRSF is the symbol.) Usenet and mailing lists were usable by the cognoscenti from the mid-80s up to the "modern age." Using gopher and Archie and anonymous ftp was for the cognoscenti only, though. Not much fun for ordinary folks. This obviously all changed around 1994, with Mosaic/Netscape. "Point and click" cleared the way. The illusion of "going to" a site (URLs) did the trick. Faster computers weren't important, in my view. Better screens were only slightly important. Modem speeds were more important. Ironically, I was using a 28.8K modem by around 1992. A big improvement over my 9600 modem. I say "ironically" because 28.8K is what I am now connecting at! Though I have a 56K modem, I cannot reliably connect at much better than 28.8, sometimes 33.3. (I live in a rural area. Can't get a cable modem because I don't have, or want, cable. Can't get DSL because I'm too far from the CO. This may change in a year or so. Don't want to spend $700/mo for a Tachyon rig. Satellite systems may be coming (Gideon, DirecTV), but are not here yet.) Friends of mine have DSL, cable modems, even their own T1s. Is there output any higher than mine? Mostly they just get pages loading in an instant, instead of the seconds or so it takes me to load a page. For actual reading of what's on a page, they have no speed advantages. 28.8 is still faster than people can read, typically. This is where I've been, mostly happily, for several years. My output on mailing lists and to newsgroups has not been insignificant. And I happily use Google, Deja, IMDB, and a hundred other sites. I even send and receive images. About all I cannot plausibly do is download movies, or hundreds of Napster songs, or host Web pages locally. No skin off my nose. The point: I get along fine at 28.8. The modern Web *experience* is what has changed dramatically, not modem speeds and screen resolutions. The very growth of the Web is what fed it. Prior to browsers and URLs, the Net just wasn't as interesting, and it was limited to the aforementioned cognoscenti. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From jimdbell at home.com Wed Oct 18 12:05:07 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:05:07 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <3.0.6.32.20001018092333.00803210@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <005701c03935$6a555100$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: David Honig > [forking the DNA discussion slightly] > > On giving blood samples to police: I believe the supremes are going to > hear a case about a hospital taking blood samples after delivery > of a baby, running drug checks, and turning her over to the police > immediately for child abuse. I seem to recall a news item which indicated that the arguments for this case have already been made. The claim was made by the cops that it was to protect the fetus' health, to which one SC Justice (female; don't recall which one) responded by. in effect, saying that by the time the test was made (presumably, shortly before birth) the damage, if any, had already been done. I think this practice will fail, for the predictable reasons. From jimdbell at home.com Wed Oct 18 15:07:00 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:07:00 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001018170949.00b315a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <01ef01c0394f$bdbdb520$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Declan McCullagh > At 12:22 10/18/2000 -0700, jim bell wrote: > >I ask this, what I believe would be an excellent idea for an article: Why > >didn't the Internet develop even faster than it actually did? 9600 bps > >modems existed in 1986, not all that far in performance behind 28Kbps units. > >By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. > > Internet deployment happened at a near-doubling every year starting around > 1993, coincident with the deployment of the web. That sounds fast to the non-computer-literate public. But I expect it was nothing compared to the (business) market penetration of fax machines in 1985 and 86. That, and the thousands (tens of thousands?) of computer bulletin-boards during that timeframe showed clearly that people wanted to communicate using computers, in whatever ways were made available. > Most computers in 1986 weren't up to it. Many of us were using Apple II > computers with something like 278x192 resolution (in single hi res mode). > Imagine such a beast doing networking. Ick. > -Declan Well, I didn't say that it would look as beautiful as it does today, with fancy graphics and all that, but a lot of what the internet does today (email, program transfer, some buying and selling) could still have been done then, albeit a bit slower. And it was; the problem is that 99+% of the population couldn't get it, and certainly not for a reasonable price. Imagine how many cars Detroit would sell if only 1% of the population had access to the roads. Other people have answered, and it sounds to me like the NSF (Insufficient Funds?) simply kept the Internet bottled up by limiting access to it to universities and government contractors. Only when they let go of the controls did things really take off. Typical government bureaucracy. Jim Bell From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 12:27:43 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:27:43 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <005701c03935$6a555100$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: At 3:05 PM -0400 10/18/00, jim bell wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >X-Loop: openpgp.net >From: David Honig >> [forking the DNA discussion slightly] >> >> On giving blood samples to police: I believe the supremes are going to >> hear a case about a hospital taking blood samples after delivery >> of a baby, running drug checks, and turning her over to the police >> immediately for child abuse. > >I seem to recall a news item which indicated that the arguments for this >case have already been made. The claim was made by the cops that it was to >protect the fetus' health, to which one SC Justice (female; don't recall >which one) responded by. in effect, saying that by the time the test was >made (presumably, shortly before birth) the damage, if any, had already been >done. > >I think this practice will fail, for the predictable reasons. I also heard coverage of this when it was being argued. The attorney for the woman also pointed out to the Court that the drug tests were not used to intervene AT THE TIME, so no possible causation issues were involved. The blood/drug test was done only FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROSECUTION. The authorities tested everyone, filed the results away, waited until the births had occurred, then filed drug charges. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Wed Oct 18 12:33:20 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:33:20 -0400 Subject: CDR: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: <39EDFAFE.A6825401@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Tim May wrote: > At 1:10 PM -0400 10/18/00, Harmon Seaver wrote: > > Speaking of "The Ungoverned", I've been looking for it, can't find > >it in libraries, Amazon, or Bibliofind, so I'm thinking that it was in a > >collection? Does anyone know which? > > > > It's in one of the two paperback collections of Vinge's short stories > and novellas, either in "Threats and Other Promises" or "True Names > and Other Dangers." Both are out of print. I have both, but not in > locations known to me as I write, so I can't check which one has "The > Ungoverned." > > The best bet has always been for folks to snap up Vinge novels as > they are found in second-hand book shops. I bought several copies of > "The Peace War," "Marooned in Realtime," and, of course, "True > Names," in just this way. Something I'm going to have to start looking for, I guess. Just did a Bibliofind search for True Names, found only 3 copies -- two were $100 each (one like new, the other "signed by author" ) and the other was $60. I buy a lot of used books, and those are pretty amazing prices for fairly recent paperbacks, and especially a high volume sci-fi. Sigh! I read his "Deepness In the Sky" and liked it. -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From melliott at ncsa.uiuc.edu Wed Oct 18 12:38:21 2000 From: melliott at ncsa.uiuc.edu (Matt Elliott) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:38:21 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: <009201c03938$bbf4ac60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: >I'm not suggesting some sort of vast conspiracy to keep the Internet small. >But I think it could be found that 3-4 years were effectively wasted. I >really want to know what the impediments to the Internet were in the >1986-1993 time frame. NSFnet acceptable use policy. From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Wed Oct 18 12:43:53 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:43:53 -0400 Subject: CDR: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: <39EDFD5C.CE51F2B@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Tim May wrote: > There's also a very scarce compilation of "The Peace War" and > "Marooned in Realtime" which is called "Across Realtime." It contains > "The Ungoverned" in between the two novels. Good luck in finding it, > though. Ah, thanx -- I did find that exact copy in one of the high school libraries in our consortium. -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Wed Oct 18 12:53:29 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:53:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <009201c03938$bbf4ac60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <39EDFF99.EF2DBEB6@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> jim bell wrote: > > I'll stake my claim right here. Very shortly after Algore called the > Internet the "Information Superhighway", I called FIDOnet "the Information > Jeep-Trail." > I had a fidonet node for awhile. The concept really needs to be revived -- and combined with more recent developments like Publius, freenet, and gnutella. Sort of an underground internet -- the Information Subway. Just remember I coined that one and it's copylefted. And for all I know, people are already doing it. A subterranean "fidonet" partially using the net, partially (or maybe totally for some groups) the old fidonet, middle of the night phone updates and downloads, coupled with pgpfone. Add in packet radio. And what with carnivore, et al, maybe it'll become the next big thing. -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From bbt at fiesta.com.ph Wed Oct 18 00:58:39 2000 From: bbt at fiesta.com.ph (Bernie B. Terrado) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:58:39 +0800 Subject: CDR: give me Message-ID: <8B6AE559367AD311B7090090273CEFAA8CFF5E@h203-176-54-164.ip.iphil.net> please give me an encrypted value I need one. I'll use it as a key. Bernie From williamr at vcny.org Wed Oct 18 12:59:04 2000 From: williamr at vcny.org (William R Rudek) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:59:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: FW: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story Message-ID: I couldn't give numbers, but it could be that the infrastructure wasn't in place at the Telco offices. Data hadn't yet been switched through their equipment in any kind of large quantity. And I imagine the thought of transmitting streaming video was only a laughable prediction. The only point of reference the phone company would have had for transmitting data was back when the signal info and the voice traffic both traveled over the the same channel on the wire. Keep in mind also that even (most) current day faxes and ATM machines still only transmit at 9600baud. So their proliferation in 1986 didn't leap them ahead any, they were transmitting at the same rate as the PC's. Jim Bell wrote: I ask this, what I believe would be an excellent idea for an article: Why didn't the Internet develop even faster than it actually did? 9600 bps modems existed in 1986, not all that far in performance behind 28Kbps units. By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. Compare this with the breakout of the fax machines in the 1985-86 timeframe. I wish I had the numbers, but it seemed like at the beginning of 1985 few companies had faxes, while by the end of that year "every" company did. By the end of 1986 that had spread to individuals, as well. I'm not suggesting some sort of vast conspiracy to keep the Internet small. But I think it could be found that 3-4 years were effectively wasted. I really want to know what the impediments to the Internet were in the 1986-1993 time frame. Jim Bell From azb at llnl.gov Wed Oct 18 16:12:56 2000 From: azb at llnl.gov (Tony Bartoletti) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 16:12:56 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39ED4831.1A3FA61B@nma.com> References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> <4.2.2.20001017145434.00a9eba0@poptop.llnl.gov> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001018152017.00a9bc70@poptop.llnl.gov> > > Other choices? > > > > Identity Theft > > Identity Pollution > > Identity Vandalism > > Identity Assault > > Identity Misappropriation > > (Slander in the First Person :) > > > > Would it matter if we substitute "reputation" for "identity". Is my > identity > > (to others) any different than the reputation with which it is associated? > > > > Call it what you will. If institutions that once recognized me fail now > > to do so, I have lost something-in-general. > > > > Name that something-in-general. > >Well, you have not lost it nor has it has been "stolen". You are simply >barred >from using it. This is the result of impersonation, since now the other >person >is the one that has access to it. This is a curious viewpoint. If someone makes off with my car, according to the DMV the car is still owned by me. Thus, it has not been stolen, I am simply barred from using it while the other person has access to it. (And if it has a hidden tracking device, it has not even been "lost".) >The use of "identity theft" instead of impersonation is thus utterly >misleading, >even though lawyers and lawmakers are the ones perpetrating such use. No >legally relevant conclusions can be drawn from the misuse of the technical >term "theft" in the soundbite. > >In comparison, defining non-repudiation in terms of protocol messages and >only for protocol messages is, at most, a solipsistic endeavor. However, it is >IMO a most useful one so that others, including lawyers and lawmakers, are >prevented from using it in a perverted way just because RFCs are written in >English. I appreciate your comments, but I still feel that "impersonation" is too general a term, and lacks important implications of the term "identity theft". It is one crime to impersonate an officer. The crime is not one that some officer finds their personal identity subverted or nullified. The term is often used when an "impersonal role" is assumed. In some venues, impersonation can be flattering. If I use a sledgehammer to smash a car's windshield, or someone's forehead, I am not charged in both cases with "sledgehammering". The name of the crime reflects the result more generally than the means employed, in this case either "destruction of private property" or "homicide". Granted that "theft" is most often associated with the physical removal of property. But the import of the term is both that (1) the legitimate owner finds they no longer have the use of the item, and (2) the "thief" profits by the misappropriation, as if they were the owner-possessor. It may not be a complete match, but "identity theft" is well characterized by points (1) and (2) above. That the "theft" is accomplished through the mechanism of impersonation seems at most a related issue. You might well point out that, unlike an ordinary theft, what was "taken" here cannot be simply returned. If, instead of impersonation, I were to access and modify records and accounts in your name, add police records, medical problems, and credit anomalies, what term would be appropriate for the crime? I consider perhaps "character assassination" to come rather close. Unlike a "theft", the perpetrator is not "assuming" the role corresponding to the now-polluted data. (Note: "Impersonation" also conveys no direct sense that, once the impersonation is halted, the significant damage remains. But this is true of "identity theft" as well. "Identity assault" captures this, but not the misappropriated use.) Sound-bites (memes) will only persist if they have utility. Time will tell. ___tony___ Tony Bartoletti 925-422-3881 Information Operations, Warfare and Assurance Center Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, CA 94551-9900 From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Wed Oct 18 08:17:44 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 16:17:44 +0100 Subject: CDR: Biological weapons control act a case of Russell's Paradox? References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: <39EDBF18.E329F8AF@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Cryptome has copies (http://cryptome.org/s3202.txt) of a speech by an elected US politician of some stripe about a proposed "Dangerous Biological Agent and Toxin Control Act of 2000" who makes this point: "Third, the legislation makes it unlawful to knowingly communicate false, but believable information, concerning an activity which would constitute a violation of this statute." So is the sentence "This sentence is a violation of the Dangerous Biological Agent and Toxin Control Act of 2000" true or false? Ken From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Wed Oct 18 13:28:35 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 16:28:35 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story Message-ID: > ---------- > From: Matt Elliott[SMTP:melliott at ncsa.uiuc.edu] > Reply To: Matt Elliott > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 3:38 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story > > >I'm not suggesting some sort of vast conspiracy to keep the Internet > small. > >But I think it could be found that 3-4 years were effectively wasted. I > >really want to know what the impediments to the Internet were in the > >1986-1993 time frame. > > NSFnet acceptable use policy. > To expand on this, in the early years, access was only for people doing DoD funded work - either defense contractors, or universities with DoD funding. It was even argued that non work-related email was forbidden (and the SF-Lovers Digest - the first large mailing list - existed only sub-rosa for it's early years). Usenet was a bit later - early to mid-80's I think. But there were a lot of earlier problems... In those days, there were no ISPs. You got access through a university or a contractor, or not at all. Around 1990, email portals were permitted to some of the large commercial BBS systems - BIX, Delphi, Compuserve, etc - later Usenet was also gatewayed (I date the 'death of the net' to this period). At this time, the typical user used a terminal emulation program (vt100) to dial into a Unix box, and then used Unix CLI tools to access net services from that point. If you wanted to get something from the Unix box to your PC, you used sneakernet or Kermit. Finally, NSF and DARPA got out of the net, and commercial backbone providers took over. ISPs started to appear. However, the net was still hard to use, and very much a geek's toy. If you doubt this, consider that until the early 90's, all access was still via command line interfaces - rn for news, ftp for file transfer, telnet for remote access, a variety of packages for mail (all flat text). Even if you owned a PC, you still had to buy and set up a modem, buy and install a TCP stack (not included in DOS or Windows), and obtain some initial tools (ftp clients most critically - with ftp you could bootstrap yourself). It was not until the WWW that 'the lights came on' and suddenly the net was something that non-geeks could expect to use and navigate effectively. Peter Trei From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 18 13:34:24 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 16:34:24 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <39EE0924.6ED205C9@acmenet.net> David Honig wrote: > Only govt can print money. I'll kick you right square in the nuts if Robert Hettinga doesn't beat me to it. Governmental tie-ins to money are largely the case now, but as anonymity and pseudonymity gain wider currency (pun intended), we'll see more private money with no relationship to Men with Guns. Or so I fervently hope and believe. (My first statement was a rhetorical device, not a direct threat. Disclaimers, waivers, blahblahblah.) SRF -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 18 13:39:55 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 16:39:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <3.0.6.32.20001018093343.0080e5e0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <39EE0A6D.670F916A@acmenet.net> > At 07:47 AM 10/18/00 -0400, William H. Geiger III wrote: > >In , on 10/17/00 > >Actually it is rather common practice for various jails/prisons to take > >blood samples from everyone who stays long enough to be "processed" (by > >processed I mean someone who is staying more than a couple of hours > >waiting for bail). This is done for health reasons (aids, hepatitis, name > >your disease here, testing), because of this the samples are taken from > >everyone regardless of the crime accused of or convicted. Data point: My mom is a deputy working as a county jail guard in upstate New York. New inmates are kept in isolation for a few days. They get a TB tine test as soon as the nurse gets to them, usually about a day, then stay in isolation for three more days until the test is done. They also have a medical history screen, but that's just paperwork. Blood is not drawn as part of in-processing. Female inmates also get a pregnancy test, but that's pure butt-covering; some NY county recently had legal trouble because a preggo wasn't identified; details unknown to me. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From baptista at pccf.net Wed Oct 18 13:43:29 2000 From: baptista at pccf.net (!Dr. Joe Baptista) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 16:43:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: <39EDFF99.EF2DBEB6@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Harmon Seaver wrote: > jim bell wrote: > > > > > I'll stake my claim right here. Very shortly after Algore called the > > Internet the "Information Superhighway", I called FIDOnet "the Information > > Jeep-Trail." > > > > I had a fidonet node for awhile. The concept really needs to be > revived -- and combined with more recent developments like Publius, freenet, > and gnutella. Sort of an underground internet -- the Information Subway. Just > remember I coined that one and it's copylefted. in a way it already has - http://www.dot-god.com/ and http://www.open-rsc.org/ regards joe -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster From declan at well.com Wed Oct 18 14:12:33 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:12:33 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: <009201c03938$bbf4ac60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001018170949.00b315a0@mail.well.com> At 12:22 10/18/2000 -0700, jim bell wrote: >I ask this, what I believe would be an excellent idea for an article: Why >didn't the Internet develop even faster than it actually did? 9600 bps >modems existed in 1986, not all that far in performance behind 28Kbps units. >By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. Internet deployment happened at a near-doubling every year starting around 1993, coincident with the deployment of the web. Most computers in 1986 weren't up to it. Many of us were using Apple II computers with something like 278x192 resolution (in single hi res mode). Imagine such a beast doing networking. Ick. -Declan From newsletters at worldwidelists.com Wed Oct 18 14:19:56 2000 From: newsletters at worldwidelists.com (newsletters at worldwidelists.com) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:19:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Cypherpunks, Recently Added Free Newsletters Message-ID: <200010182119.RAA27906@whbsd003.webhosting.com> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cypherpunks, this message is brought to you by Worldwidelists.com The E-mail Newsletter Network. We appreciate your subscription. This e-mail message is never sent unsolicited. You asked us to notify you when more Free newsletters were added to the online directory at http://www.worldwidelists.com/. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cypherpunks, the following Free newsletters were added to the Worldwidelists.com directory between September 1-15, 2000. MLMTRUTH Find Out What MLM Companies Don't Want You to know! Breaking MLM News & Learn How to Sort Through Hype and Make $$$. SAVE Money, Time and YOUR Reputation by discovering the MLMTRUTH! "I truly believe you have The Most Useful MLM Newsletter on the Internet" -- Jim Bryant. To get your hands on this revealing, politically incorrect, hard-hitting, insightful, and refreshing newsletter that has benefited MLMers since 1997, subscribe for Free now! Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ YOUR INTERNET SERVICE STATION NEWS A Newsletter *Full* of resources, tips, advice, articles, business opportunities, freebies and more. All new subscribers can receive a Free Ad. Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ ADVANCED RESOURCES/MARKETING NEWS Advanced Resources/Marketing News is a Free weekly Newsletter covering internet marketing ideas and sales strategies, website promotion, building your own web page and starting your own newsletter. Each issue packed with new, fresh articles and information you need to succeed. Join today! Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ INFO INSIGHTS POWERZINE Internet Newcomers! Be a home based publisher. Solid articles show you how to develop and sell your own high profit information products plus find info fast and manage info overload. Subscribe now! Bonus gift. Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ THE MOST EMBARRASSING MOMENT OF MY LIFE! Extremely embarrassing true stories that happened on blind dates, during sex, at work, and in college. Very funny! Find it in the Jokes & Humor category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/jokes-humor.html ~~~~~ BIZ SITE BIZ E-ZINE Biz Site Biz E-zine Gives you powerful weekly tips and concepts for marketing and promoting your business or e- zine. Get off to a fast start. Come on down and join us! Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ THE COUPON CLIPPER A weekly thrifty newsletter full of information that will save you money. Thrifty tips, food tips, gardening tips, featured articles, recipes and more. If you are thrifty, or want to be, this is the newsletter for you. Find it in the Home & Garden category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/home-garden.html ~~~~~ WOMEN'S ONLINE MARKETING AND ECOMMERCE NEWSLETTER Monthly newsletter for women in business with original articles, tips and resources to help grow or start your online business. Find it in the Women category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/women.html ~~~~~ SUCCESS SOLUTIONS GLOBALZINE Information Packed Weekly Opt-in Ezine dedicated to providing YOU Solutions for YOUR online business Success. FREE ad and gifts for all NEW subscribers. Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ THE OYESUCAN EZINE YES U CAN Ezine" is committed to delivering the very best in informative articles, tips and tools for the E- Commerce entrepreneur. A platform to exchange ideas, a storehouse of professional secrets and a vehicle to promote your product or service. Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ THE WEEKLY PUZZLER The famous Weekly Puzzler - we'll keep you puzzled! Once a week, we'll send you a sample of riddles, puzzles, trivia, and brain teasers - fun for all - free and always rated 'G'! Find it in the Entertainment category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/entertainment.html ~~~~~ SPOTLIGHT ON: WEB DESIGN RESOURCES Monthly e-mail reminder to view web-based newsletter with reviews of 3-5 new web design resources per month, plus HTML tips. DON'T MISS THIS ONE. Find it in the Computers category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/computers.html ~~~~~ PROFITSTATION NEWS ProfitStation News is THE resource to get the no-hype, straight scoop about Internet Marketing. Published by Mark D. Petersen-Overton, Mark gives you data supported FACTS about what it takes to succeed on the Internet. FREE ezine advertising, FREE mall advertising and FREE consultation to all NEW subscribers. Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ GET LIFE LINED UP! Achieve Your Highest Goals! Create Quality Relationships! Maintain Healthy Balance! SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE DO ALL THREE! Get LIFE LINED UP! A weekly ezine filled with insights, ideas and strategies for creating success on your own terms! Find it in the Self-Improvement category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/self-improvement.html ~~~~~ SPEAKING ABOUT WORK People Skills for a Competitive Edge in Today's Market! Information, tips, Q & A and articles. Communication, Team-Building, Managing Conflict & Difficult People, Building Trust, Achieve Goals, Balance--Skills Necessary to Healthy Workplaces AND Healthy Bottom Lines! Subscribe now! Published by Rhoberta Shaler, PhD, Creator of Get Life Lined Up! (tm) Find it in the Lifestyle category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/lifestyle.html ~~~~~ THE CREATIVE ADVERTISER Provide creative business and step-by-step marketing information to help your business run smoother. We'll show you how to generate unlimited prospects to your website - spam free; how to obtain $1,000 in publicity - using free ads; and how to find resources for your business - with out paying a dime! Subscribers receive FREE Bonuses! Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ HOMEBIZJUNCTION HERALD HomeBizJunction Herald is a weekly newsletter designed to help those who want to work from home. Filled with helpful resources, tips, success stories and more, HomeBizJunction Herald provides ongoing support for those wanting to earn their income from home. Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ THE INSIGHT NEWSLETTER OVERWHELMED? FRUSTRATED? UNMOTIVATED? Don't give up! Insight is the free weekly newsletter featuring practical, real-life advice on goal-setting, dealing with difficult people, overcoming obstacles, and getting what you want out of life. Find it in the Religion & Inspiration category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/religion-inspiration.html ~~~~~ THE HOTRODDER The Hotrodder is published free for hot rod and classic car enthusiasts. All original content featuring hot rod, street rod, and classic car news, interesting articles, hot rod history, tech tips, product reviews, hotrod site reviews, and cool hotrod-themed fonts, sounds and desktop backgrounds for "hotrodding" your computer. Find it in the Sports & Recreation category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/sports-recreation.html ~~~~~ KID KLICKS Kid Klicks by Spike the Wonder Dog. Let Spike send your kids daily e-mails full of great kid's web sites and fun. Spike especially likes to tell jokes sent to him by kids! Get Spike's Daily Giggle applet for FREE for your website. Find it in the Entertainment category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/entertainment.html ~~~~~ KINDER KLICKS Kid Klicks -- Spike The Wonder Dog reviews fun and interesting websites for kids (jokes too!) every Monday through Friday in "Kid Klicks!" INTRO and SAMPLE - SUBSCRIBE. Join Miss Rosalind, the poodle, in reviews of fun and interesting websites for parents of little kids (and dogs!) every Monday through Friday. Great fun and learning projects! Some of the web's best writing! Find it in the Children & Parenting category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/children-parenting.html ~~~~~ BACKYARD NATURE NOTES Take a nature break! Informative tips, articles, resources and web site reviews for the whole family! Enjoy and enhance your own backyard. Find it in the Home & Garden category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/home-garden.html ~~~~~ THE SENIOR CLASS Explore the rich tapestry of life with these two irreverent, fun-loving members of "the senior class"! Entertainment, news, health... you name it, you'll find great resources and loads of smiles! Find it in the Lifestyle category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/lifestyle.html ~~~~~ I'M NOT JULIA! Tips on entertaining, food, and fun for family get- togethers! Written by Merle O'Brien well known web author. Find it in the Food category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/food.html ~~~~~ SURPRISE PARTY! What's happening today? Famous and infamous Birthdays, People and Events... and lots of intriguing insight! Surprise Party tells you who did what when and why, you make up the party! Find it in the News & Media category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/news-media.html ~~~~~ SYMAN SAYS Start Your Day With A Smile... for the whole family! Syman Says it all with fun quips. stories and jokes. One of the best on the web! Find it in the Entertainmnt category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/entertainment.html ~~~~~ LEARNING LINKS A newsletter for parents and teachers interested in the best education on the web! Sections for parents, grades K-6, 7-12, and teachers. Find it in the Education category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/education.html ~~~~~ THAT REMINDS ME Eleanor Roosevelt II tells heartfelt and funny stories of the two most important women in her life, her mother and her Aunt Eleanor Roosevelt. ER II has been called one of the 'real treasures of the web.' Find it in the Humanities category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/humanities.html ~~~~~ JUKEBOX! DIGITAL MUSIC ON THE WEB Everything you wanted to know about the e-music revolution - how to get it, store it and play it. Written for everyone. Find it in the Entertainment category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/entertainment.html ~~~~~ EXPLORATIONS! Rediscover the Joy of Finding Things Out - Amateur Science on the web for everyone. Its hands on and fun! Find it in the Entertainment category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/entertainment.html ~~~~~ MAKE WORDS WORK MakeWordsWork is a gathering of people who want to promote and encourage reading and literacy. Our goal is to share new ideas and join together to combat literacy. Find it in the Education category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/education.html ~~~~~ LITERACY INSIGHT Discussing and sharing the opportunities of the publishing industry. This column is to help and support those interested in writing, marketing, publishing and distributing creative works. Find it in the Writing & Reading category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/writing-reading.html ~~~~~ THE DAILY SYNERGIZER Wake Up Each Day To A Piping *Hot* Business Tips, Tricks and Strategy. Delivered Right To Your Inbox *Steaming* and ready to be devoured! With the BEST in Motivation, Marketing and MORE! Tailored For The Small Business Entrepreneur. GET IT NOW. Find it in the Investing & Money category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/investing-money.html ~~~~~ PARTENON NEWSLETTER & 2BUCKS UPDATES Published once a week to give you selected articles on the home biz topic and lot's of ads in your search for the best BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES. On-Line since March 1998. 5 quality E-Books, FREE to new subscribers. Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ LANGUAGE TEACHING NETWORK A network for teachers and educators to connect. FREE access to international job bank, free e-mail account, software and lots of other resources. Online language school directory, and distance courses. Find it in the Education category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/education.html ~~~~~ XTREME MARKETING TIPS As Your Internet Marketing Specialist We Strive to Bring You Cutting Edge Internet Marketing Solutions for your Online Business. Just for subscribing you will receive 4 FREE E-Books including: Stealth Marketing, Search Engine Tactics and Guerilla Web Marketing, and 101 Free Marketing Tips. Plus as a Subscriber, you could Win 100,000 Ezine Ads! Subscribe Today! Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ WEDDING MAGIC Weekly newsletter from ADreamWedding.com with wedding etiquette tips. Also info on special deals for brides from ADreamWedding.com and elsewhere on the web. Find it in the Women category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/women.html ~~~~~ STRIDE, SELL, SOAR! Anyone that sells or markets ideas, products or services will enjoy the professional, inspirational and light-hearted environment. Empower and improve yourself through education, community and laughter. Sales and marketing tips, inspirational quotes and new and informative articles will help you sell more. Find it in the Religion & Inspiration category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/religion-inspiration.html ~~~~~ CASHPROMOTIONS CONTEST NEWS Unique multi-media promotions to drive prospects to your business or web site plus education and tips for conducting business online. Contest, Affiliate Programs, and more. Find it in the Contests & Sweepstakes category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/contests-sweepstakes.html ~~~~~ AARDVARK MARKETING & DEVELOPMENT Weekly Web Site Marketing and Promotion Newsletter. With more editorial than advertising, no hype - just informative articles, FREE STUFF, and the occasional humor to brighten the day. PLUS FREE ad for all new subscribers PLUS a FREE ad on the classified pages on our web site PLUS claim a FREE ebook - MASTERS OF MARKETING. Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ COM SOURCE Services as well as business opportunities. Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ CYBERCITY REPORTER Keeping tabs on what's doing in the hot CyberCities. Each week we provide you news on Local, Regional, National and Global levels that affect technology and the Internet. Networking and Educational events, job openings, tips, security and anything else we think may be of value to you. Find it in the Computers category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/computers.html ~~~~~ THE WIRE WORKER Start Your Own Jewelry Business!--We show you how to make your own jewelry from gold and silver wire. No torch or expansive machinery needed. Start right on your kitchen table with a few craft tools. Make money your first few weeks! Find it in the Arts category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/arts.html ~~~~~ CHATZONE NEWSLETTER WANT CELEBRITY NEWS WEEKLY? Britney Spears, 'N Sync, Madonna, Sisqo! Get Your Celebrity Gossip delivered FREE! Plus: - Exclusive Online Celebrity Chat Events and Insiders news on Music, Movies, and Books! Find it in the News & Media category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/news-media.html ~~~~~ CYBERPROFIT$ TODAY CyberProfit$ Today is a FREE newsletter stuffed with powerful wealth-building secrets, HOT traffic building tips, awesome tools and resources to help your online business make MONEY. As an added bonus, new subscribers receive a FREE online promotion package valued at over $199! Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ TWO SCOOPS The weekly lifestyle newsletter to build up your mind, body and spirit. Filled with informative articles with practical ideas and everyday wisdom, this is the one newsletter you'll read top to bottom. Find it in the Lifestyle category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/lifestyle.html ~~~~~ ACCESS2WEALTH MARKETING SECRETS Learn Internet marketing tricks, tips and tools. Information about online promotion and marketing, affiliate programs, resources to promote your online business, traffic, freebies and special offers. FREE. Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ OPT-IN LIST BUILDING TIPS Tips for anyone interested in building their online business by building a targeted, opt-in e-mail list or ezine. Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ WEIGHT LOSS & FITNESS Author and exercise physiologist Greg Landry publishes this newsletter that's loaded with weight loss and fitness inspiration and information. Find it in the Women category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/women.html ~~~~~ PARENTPRENEUR WEEKLY Find it in the Children & Parenting category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/children-parenting.html ~~~~~ PROMOTELINKS NEWS PromoteLinks News brings Internet Marketing alive and keeps YOU up-to-date on what is happening on the Internet. High-quality and professional newsletter. Highly Recommended! Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ COUNTRY MUSIC CLASSICS FREE weekly newsletter all about classic country music from the 1950's thru the 1980's. Stories Behind The Songs, Question & Answer Section and more... and subscribers win CD's & cassettes! Find it in the Arts category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/arts.html ~~~~~ COUCH POTATO MARKETING EZINE The Couch Potato Marketing ezine serves up a weekly plateful of practical online marketing advice and timely information. If you're serious about rolling up your sleeves to do the work necessary to grow on the World Wide Web, then this is the resource that will keep you fortified and fed with new ideas, tips, expert advice and news of interest to assertive online marketers. Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ OPPORTUNITIES UNLIMITED Proven marketing and promotion tips and tricks directly from successful Internet Marketers, We will keep you abreast with the latest marketing tips! Simply subscribe! Free e-books, marketing and promotion tools and courses, low-cost ezine advertising... ALL to assist you on your way to Internet Success! Subscribe NOW and get... Your FREE weekly ad, 3 e-books by TOP Marketers! Enter our Free sponsor ad contests! Your free ad in our Free AD- CO-OP! All this for FREE to YOU, Forever! Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ PENNIES2DOLLARS Discover strategies, methods and techniques for successful internet marketing, tips for building wealth through the Internet, advice on traffic building, e-mail marketing and web site promotion and much more! FREE 25-word ad every week for subscribers, FREE report and over $200.00 in FREE marketing tools and ebooks! Subscribe today! Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ HOLYPROFITS NEWSLETTER How to turn your website into an automated Cash Machine! How to Build an Internet City and create Multiple Streams of Income! We will show you the right Internet tools to lead you to Holyprofits! Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ SEEHEARTALKSHOW SeeHearTalkShow Newsletter - Learn All About the amazing new FREE cutting-edge Web-Based Multimedia Technologies that are rapidly improving and easing business/personal communication and marketing. Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ HUMOR-EXPREZZ Join us for a daily grownup laugh of jokes, toons, trivia, amusing news, funny links, and more. We'll never clutter your mailbox with hoaxes, get rich schemes, or rags to riches stories. Join now, it's free! Find it in the Jokes & Humor category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/jokes-humor.html ~~~~~ ALTACAN WEB TRIBUNE We will feature Internet marketing information such as software, tips, and tricks, that pertain to how to manage and promote a small online business successfully. Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ MAKE YOUR BUSINESS A WEB MAGNET We spend hours searching for online promotion tools and tips and we bring the best to your mailbox. JOINING BONUS: 50% off coupon. Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ DEAR ABBY America's Number One advice columnist has teamed up with MightyCool.com. Brighten your day, every day, with a tips and advice to your e-mail. Its Free! Find it in the Women category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/women.html ~~~~~ MAX'S WORLD Max's World is a hilarious daily jokelist which features much more than just jokes! You get links, cartoons and free stuff! This is suitable only for the adult mind since some jokes can be dirty! Find it in the Jokes & Humor category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/jokes-humor.html ~~~~~ VERTICAL BUZZ Vertical portals are major web sites or community destinations focused on specific topics, niches, or demographic affiliations. To keep on top of the latest news relating to vertical portals, their development, their successes and failures, and the communities they seek to connect with, try Vertical Buzz, a handy, hand-edited digest of vertical portal news. Find it in the Computers category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/computers.html P.S. Cypherpunks, forward this message to your friends so they don't miss out on these great newsletters! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To remove yourself from future Worldwidelists.com updates, click on the following link while connected to the Web: http://www.worldwidelists.com/cgi-bin/unsubs.cgi?51432=cypherpunks at toad.com/99999_updatenotify From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 18 17:38:29 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:38:29 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from petro@bounty.org on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:17:17PM -0700 References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <20001017172448.A14253@well.com> Message-ID: <20001018173829.A16756@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1651 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Wed Oct 18 14:44:22 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:44:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story Message-ID: > ---------- > Declan McCullagh[SMTP:declan at well.com] wrote: > At 12:22 10/18/2000 -0700, jim bell wrote: > >I ask this, what I believe would be an excellent idea for an article: Why > >didn't the Internet develop even faster than it actually did? 9600 bps > >modems existed in 1986, not all that far in performance behind 28Kbps > units. > >By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. > > Internet deployment happened at a near-doubling every year starting around > > 1993, coincident with the deployment of the web. > > Most computers in 1986 weren't up to it. Many of us were using Apple II > computers with something like 278x192 resolution (in single hi res mode). > Imagine such a beast doing networking. Ick. > > -Declan > Been there, done that, got the credit. I was one of the original developers of Apple Kermit (in 6502 assembler) at Columbia University. Amongst other things, I added pseudo lowercase support (Apple ]['s had only capital letters). Apple Kermit included a VT52 emulator (on a 24x40 screen :-). If you look in Frank daCruz's "The Kermit Book" you'll find my name buried in the acknowledgments. The Arpanet at 300 baud taught patience..... Actually, by 86, the Mac was out, as was the PC/AT and (I think) the Amiga. These were much more capable machines than the Apple ][. Peter Trei From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Wed Oct 18 14:45:18 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:45:18 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story References: Message-ID: <39EE19DC.55B73A6F@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> No, that's just alternative dns. Fidonet had most of what the internet has, other than speed and the web -- file repositories, email, newsgroups -- but it was all done privately. My node would call a higher node in the middle of the night and exchange files, mail, etc. Sometimes it was a little funky, like when someone up the line was too broke to make the long distance calls every night so the mail got stuck there, but generally it was pretty efficient. For privacy seeking groups, however, it certainly still has an application, with modifications to incorporate crypto. If packet radio were used, it could be totally anonymous, modeled after mixmaster, with key authentication, but pretty much untraceable, especially with burst broadcasting technology. "!Dr. Joe Baptista" wrote: > On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Harmon Seaver wrote: > > > jim bell wrote: > > > > > > > > I'll stake my claim right here. Very shortly after Algore called the > > > Internet the "Information Superhighway", I called FIDOnet "the Information > > > Jeep-Trail." > > > > > > > I had a fidonet node for awhile. The concept really needs to be > > revived -- and combined with more recent developments like Publius, freenet, > > and gnutella. Sort of an underground internet -- the Information Subway. Just > > remember I coined that one and it's copylefted. > > in a way it already has - http://www.dot-god.com/ and > http://www.open-rsc.org/ > > -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 18 17:48:27 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:48:27 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com>; from honig@sprynet.com on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 09:10:27AM -0700 References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2876 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 18 17:56:10 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:56:10 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: ; from petro@bounty.org on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:20:23PM -0700 References: <20001017004154.68612.qmail@web9102.mail.yahoo.com> <3.0.5.32.20001016220758.00a6ca10@idiom.com> <20001017204157.B14683@well.com> Message-ID: <20001018175610.C16756@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1700 bytes Desc: not available URL: From declan at well.com Wed Oct 18 14:58:23 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:58:23 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001018175644.02543340@mail.well.com> At 17:44 10/18/2000 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: >Been there, done that, got the credit. I was one of the original developers >of Apple Kermit (in 6502 assembler) at Columbia University. Amongst other Wow -- I'm impressed. I remember using that. >Actually, by 86, the Mac was out, as was the PC/AT and (I think) the >Amiga. These were much more capable machines than the Apple ][. True, and the IIgs was out in September '97. But it takes a while for folks to upgrade, which is why I said many of us were still using Apple IIs (I also had a Mac+ at the time). -Declan From marshall at athena.net.dhis.org Wed Oct 18 15:00:28 2000 From: marshall at athena.net.dhis.org (David Marshall) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:00:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: give me In-Reply-To: Ray Dillinger's message of "Wed, 18 Oct 2000 11:06:00 -0400" References: Message-ID: <84k8b524k6.fsf@athena.dhis.org> Ray Dillinger writes: > On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Roy Silvernail wrote: > > >From: Bernie B. Terrado > > >>please give me an encrypted value > >>I need one. I'll use it as a key. > > >033653337357 > >Happy to help! > > Okay, he was asking for it. But I still think > that was excessively cruel. I think it was natural selection. From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 18 18:01:33 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:01:33 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 11:53:36PM -0700 References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: <20001018180133.D16756@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2476 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rah at shipwright.com Wed Oct 18 15:11:27 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:11:27 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EE0924.6ED205C9@acmenet.net> References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: At 4:34 PM -0400 on 10/18/00, Steve Furlong wrote: > I'll kick you right square in the nuts if Robert Hettinga doesn't beat > me to it. Moi? Never. I can't reach that far... By the way, your fervent hope and belief has nothing to do with, or, for that matter, does anonymity. Risk-adjusted transaction cost, on the other hand... :-). Cheers, RAH, Who still believes, heretically in several fora, that internet bearer transactions are cheaper because they're strong enough to be anonymous, but that's beside the point... -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Wed Oct 18 15:14:29 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:14:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story References: Message-ID: <39EE20AD.31D2D263@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> "Trei, Peter" wrote: > Actually, by 86, the Mac was out, as was the PC/AT and (I think) the > Amiga. These were much more capable machines than the Apple ][. > Also there was a Tandy Model B with a "6000" conversion which consisted of a 6030 (? might have only been a 6010 or so, I can't remember) -- anyway, it ran SCO Xenix. I got a used one in '88, and it was seemed a good bit faster than the 286 I bought in '87. Multiuser, true multitasking unix. Very cool machine. Kinda' funky graphics tho. I think there was a better graphics board that I couldn't afford at the time. -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From anonymous at openpgp.net Wed Oct 18 15:20:30 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:20:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: ADL lists anarchy symbol as racist Message-ID: <1121faa9f428bc88e7310250dcb52abd@mixmaster.ceti.pl> http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/racist_anarchy_symbol.html From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 18 15:26:32 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:26:32 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <39EE2358.8F0B740C@acmenet.net> "R. A. Hettinga" wrote: > > At 4:34 PM -0400 on 10/18/00, Steve Furlong wrote: <> > By the way, your fervent hope and belief has nothing to do with, or, for > that matter, does anonymity. Anonymity comes into play because the Men With Guns won't like competition. If they can't find the bankers, they can't enjoin/arrest/shoot them. SRF -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 18:36:52 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:36:52 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018180133.D16756@well.com> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <20001018180133.D16756@well.com> Message-ID: At 6:01 PM -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > > > And what is wrong with this? Nothing that I can see. >> >> Alice the Insurer is free to set her rates as she wishes, and even to >> require tests. Bob the Prospective Insured is free to shop elsewhere. >> > >Where elsewhere? What alternative does Bob have? If it is cheaper >for companies to not insure him, they won't. And then we have a >public health crises. "What if nobody will sell Bob the food he wants for the price he is willing or able to pay? Then he'll starve to death!!!!!" Bob is seeking to pay less money in insurance premiums that he expects to receive in benefits. Insurers are seeking to get Bob to pay more in premiums than they pay out in benefits. Insurance is gambling. Get it through your thick skull. > >> What has drawn so many of you socialist creeps to this list in the >> past few months? Did "Mother Jones" give out subscription information >> recently? > >I came because I'm interested in (though admittedly naieve about) >cryptography, and I like debating with people who hold different >opinions than I do. Sadly, you don't know enough to actually carry on a debate. Warmed-over socialist platitudes have been your stock in trade. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From rah at shipwright.com Wed Oct 18 15:42:37 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:42:37 -0400 Subject: CDR: Phil Agre taking the initiative in creating Al Gore... Message-ID: Yeah, I know. I'm bad. But at least Phil Agre fights back well, and smartly, deconstructionist-liberal state-humping, um, hairsplitting, Coase-bashing genius that he is... Cheers, RAH (Rock-throwing flame-trollling name-caller? Moi?) (Clearly Phill Hallam-Baker taught Gort to say "root-ers". If you don't believe it, ask him. :-)) --- begin forwarded text From declan at well.com Wed Oct 18 15:49:28 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:49:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: House Passes Bipartisan Commercial Space Bill Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001018184913.00b44d60@mail.well.com> Committee on Science F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., CHAIRMAN Ralph M. Hall, Texas, Ranking Democrat www.house.gov/science/welcome.htm October 18, 2000 Press Contacts: Jeff Lungren (Jeff.Lungren at mail.house.gov) Jeff Donald (Jeffrey.Donald at mail.house.gov) (202) 225-4275 HOUSE PASSES BIPARTISAN COMMERCIAL SPACE BILL Bill Enhances U.S. Commercial Space Competitiveness By Extending Launch Indemnification WASHINGTON, D.C. - With broad bipartisan support, the House yesterday passed H.R. 2607, the Commercial Space Transportation Competitiveness Act, by a voice vote. The bill now goes to the President for final approval. H.R. 2607 extends launch indemnification to the U.S. commercial launch industry for four more years, through the end of 2004. The federal government first decided to indemnify commercial launch companies against catastrophic losses as a means of rebuilding a launch industry that was critical for national security. In addition, the bill authorizes funds for the Offices of Advanced Space Transportation and Space Commerce in the Departments of Transportation and Commerce. The bill's sponsor, Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Chairman Dana Rohrabacher, (R-CA) said, "Passage of H.R. 2607 signals continued congressional support of a highly competitive launch industry in today's global market. This legislation enables the U.S. Government to maintain a stable business environment so that the private sector can become more competitive. Moreover, by directing the Administration to examine more innovative legal approaches for indemnification, we begin a new chapter in U.S. space development in the 21st Century." House Science Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., (R-WI) added, "By extending commercial launch indemnification, this bill helps build a solid foundation for commercial launch companies. This foundation enhances our national security by encouraging private firms to invest in improving U.S. space launch capabilities and maintaining U.S. competitiveness with launchers from Europe, Russia, the Ukraine and China. I hope the President will quickly sign this important bipartisan legislation into law." Science Committee Ranking Minority Member Ralph M. Hall, (D-TX) said, "The Commercial Space Competitiveness Act was the top legislative priority for the American space launch industry. It is in our Nation's interest that we continue to be world leaders in the launch industry. This bill provides the framework of support and incentives the industry indicates they need to keep their premier status. I am pleased that the Science Committee could play a central role in moving this legislation to completion." Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Ranking Minority Member Bart Gordon, (D-TN), also an original co-sponsor of the bill, noted, "The key achievement of this bill is an extension of the commercial space indemnification provisions. Those provisions, first enacted in 1988, have provided a highly effective risk-sharing system that has helped our launch industry compete with the world. Since their enactment 12 years ago, these provisions haven't cost the taxpayer one dollar in claims." ### 106-164 Jeff Donald Deputy Communications Director House Science Committee 2320 Rayburn House Office Building 202-225-4275 (phone) 202-226-3875 (fax) From kitties at best.com Wed Oct 18 18:54:25 2000 From: kitties at best.com (Yardena Arar + Christian Goetze) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:54:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I almost never participate in this group, but here it's hard to resist. On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > At 6:01 PM -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > > > > > And what is wrong with this? Nothing that I can see. > >> > >> Alice the Insurer is free to set her rates as she wishes, and even to > >> require tests. Bob the Prospective Insured is free to shop elsewhere. > >> > > > >Where elsewhere? What alternative does Bob have? If it is cheaper > >for companies to not insure him, they won't. And then we have a > >public health crises. > > "What if nobody will sell Bob the food he wants for the price he is > willing or able to pay? Then he'll starve to death!!!!!" > > Bob is seeking to pay less money in insurance premiums that he > expects to receive in benefits. Insurers are seeking to get Bob to > pay more in premiums than they pay out in benefits. Insurance is > gambling. Get it through your thick skull. It's no longer gambling if the insurances get to see through the back of the cards. I think this is what the objection is about. -- cg From jburnes at savvis.net Wed Oct 18 15:55:11 2000 From: jburnes at savvis.net (Jim Burnes) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:55:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: ADL lists anarchy symbol as racist In-Reply-To: <1121faa9f428bc88e7310250dcb52abd@mixmaster.ceti.pl> References: <1121faa9f428bc88e7310250dcb52abd@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <00101818005406.03076@reality.eng.savvis.net> On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: > http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/racist_anarchy_symbol.html Wow. Runic alphabets are verboten also. Guess we ought to boycott Tolkein. jim From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 18:57:24 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:57:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> Message-ID: At 5:48 PM -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > >On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 09:10:27AM -0700, David Honig wrote: > > > Discrimination in the good sense, like discriminating dangerous vs. > > safe. What do you think insurance companies *should* do, if not >make various >> discriminations about risk? Are you against car insurers asking >> about your other genetic characteristics (e.g., sex)? >> > >No, because they do not deny coverage based upon gender. They can >(and, in many cases, do) deny coverage based on larger-than-average >chances of contracting heart disease, for example. Insurance rates are established according to many criteria. In many cases, higher-risk customers are sold insurance, but at higher rates. In some cases, they are denied insurance. (As when the costs are open-ended...) In any case, whether Alice sells insurance to Bob is not a matter for the state to interfere with. You, Nathan, may set up your own insurance company if you wish. Or you may offer to pay for the health care of those you think are not getting a fair deal. But you may NOT tell me I must sell insurance if I choose not to. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 19:00:40 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:00:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 6:54 PM -0700 10/18/00, Yardena Arar + Christian Goetze wrote: >I almost never participate in this group, but here it's hard to resist. > >On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > >> At 6:01 PM -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >> > >> > > And what is wrong with this? Nothing that I can see. >> >> >> >> Alice the Insurer is free to set her rates as she wishes, and even to >> >> require tests. Bob the Prospective Insured is free to shop elsewhere. >> >> >> > >> >Where elsewhere? What alternative does Bob have? If it is cheaper >> >for companies to not insure him, they won't. And then we have a >> >public health crises. >> >> "What if nobody will sell Bob the food he wants for the price he is >> willing or able to pay? Then he'll starve to death!!!!!" >> >> Bob is seeking to pay less money in insurance premiums that he >> expects to receive in benefits. Insurers are seeking to get Bob to >> pay more in premiums than they pay out in benefits. Insurance is >> gambling. Get it through your thick skull. > >It's no longer gambling if the insurances get to see through the back of >the cards. I think this is what the objection is about. Gambling is about assessing risk and rewards and payoffs. A person seeking insurance knows things about his or her health that the prospective insurer may not know about. Likewise, the prospective insurer may come to know things about the candidate. This is the way markets in general have always worked. Economists talk about "preference revealing" and "selective disclosure of information." In this context, if either side wishes to reveal less than required by the other side, it can walk away from the deal. I can see why you have tended to not participate in this group. Keep it that way. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 19:05:31 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:05:31 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: A way to discourage advertising In-Reply-To: <200008290220.TAA15402@sirius.infonex.com> References: <200008290220.TAA15402@sirius.infonex.com> Message-ID: At 6:23 PM -0700 10/18/00, jfanonymous at yahoo.com wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >Here's my idea of how to stop advertisers from using this mailing >list as an advertising channel: > >If everytime anyone saw junk mail here, they wrote to the address >of the sender and/or the address where you send an e-mail if >you're interested, and told them how annoyed you were. > >Just an idea. Gee, what an original idea. Better yet, sort all toad.com messages into its own folder and delete its contents regularly. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From egerck at nma.com Wed Oct 18 19:09:45 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:09:45 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> <4.2.2.20001017145434.00a9eba0@poptop.llnl.gov> <4.2.2.20001018152017.00a9bc70@poptop.llnl.gov> Message-ID: <39EE57E9.F190FD62@nma.com> Tony, Your examples were so bad! ;-) of course, I meant "good" as in that new IBM commercial where the IBM guy says that the IBM laptop is "bad" ;-) I appreciate your comments and, yes, very often society uses contrary words to mean another thing. But if we step aside a bit from the usefulness or not of dumbed down soundbites or current slang in technical documents that should be precise, I see this "identity theft" discussion mainly as a counterexample to those that like to require a legal context to every word -- whereas we do not even have a worldwide legal context. As we saw, lawyers and lawmakers are oftentimes the first ones to use the term "identifty theft" -- which simply is not a theft, it is impersonation. Of course, I continue to hope that we in crypto don't have to use "identity theft" as well. But, should they can continue to use it? Some lawyers don't think so, including Mac Norton in this list who wrote: Speaking as a lawyer, one of "they,", they should not continue to use it. Identity theft might be accomplishable in some scenario, one in which I somehow induced amnesia in you, for example, but otherwise the use of the term to cover what you rightly point is simply impersonation, does a disservice to my profession as well as yours. I also think that using "identity theft" for what actually is impersonation is a disservice to our profession. In the same way that I think we need to make sure lay people understand that non-repudiation in the technical realm is not an absolute authentication or undeniable proof. If we can only this, deny that non-repudiation means undeniable proof, it will be already very useful. Then, we may be able to apply the concept of non-repudiation as we feel the need for it in protocols -- and note that we did not invent it, rather we discovered it. Authentication is not sufficient to describe validity. Cheers, Ed Gerck From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 19:37:55 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:37:55 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: At 9:11 PM -0500 10/18/00, Neil Johnson wrote: >Two Things: > >1. It sounds like to me that there is no room for human compassion in >crypto-anarchy. > (Seems like we will all end up sitting in our "compounds" armed to the >teeth and if anybody comes along we either blow'em to bits or pay them >anonymous digital cash >to go away). Another socialist simp-wimp heard from. Lots of socialists to be dealt with and disposed of. I wonder who will stoke the furnaces? --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 19:56:30 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:56:30 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <016a01c03973$2296bbe0$0100a8c0@nandts> References: <016a01c03973$2296bbe0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: At 9:20 PM -0500 10/18/00, Neil Johnson wrote: >--- Original Message ----- >From: "Tim May" > > > This is the way markets in general have always worked. Economists >> talk about "preference revealing" and "selective disclosure of >> information." >> > >But the Bob has no control of his risk (genetics), or at least not yet :). >The insurance company does. The insurance company does NOT have any control over Bob's risks! Whatever gave you that idea? All the insurance company can do is to estimate the risks and costs of treatment as best they can and then make Bob an offer on how much they will charge to promise to treat him if and when he gets sick or is injured. I am unable to find any gentler way to say this: a lot of you (Neil, Yardena, Nathan, Robert, etc.) are woefully ignorant of economics, markets, and the nature of a free society. In this insurance debate, several of you seem to think that Bob has some "right" to insurance...at the price _he_ or some committee thinks is "fair." Please read up on some basic economics--preferably not Marxist economics. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From njohnson at interl.net Wed Oct 18 19:11:38 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:11:38 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> Two Things: 1. It sounds like to me that there is no room for human compassion in crypto-anarchy. (Seems like we will all end up sitting in our "compounds" armed to the teeth and if anybody comes along we either blow'em to bits or pay them anonymous digital cash to go away). 2. I think that it's funny that ultra-conservatives who are for letting "competition" improve health care are setting themselves up for more abortions. How does crypto-anarchy/libertarian/anarchy propose to deal with the "tragedy of the commons" where by doing what is best for each persons own interests they end up screwing it up for everyone (Overgrazing land with to many cattle is the example I've been given). The "prisoner's dilemma" is another example. Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim May" To: ; "Cypherpunks" Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 1:53 AM Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? > At 11:06 PM -0500 10/17/00, Neil Johnson wrote: > >Yes, I can see it now. > > > >"I'm sorry I have to tell you this Mr. & Mrs. May, but the genetic > >tests required by your insurance company have revealed that your > >unborn child has a 65% chance of developing an expensive to treat > >and possibly severely debilitating condition requiring many > >operations, doctor visits, therapy, special equipment, round the > >clock nursing. etc. > > > >Since we have already passed this information on to your insurance > >company as required by the terms of your policy, they are > >recommending and will pay you to terminate the pregnancy and to have > >both you and your husband sterilized. Otherwise they will not pay > >for your pre-natal care, the delivery, or any future treatment of > >your child. > > > >Of course you can opt for our "High Genetic Risk Policy" at $XXXXX > >thousands of dollars a month (which is probably equal to or more > >expensive than the cost of paying for the possible medical costs on > >your own IF the condition occurs. Which you would, since > >Medicare/Medicaid was ended in the last round of "Compassionate > >Conservatism"). > > And what is wrong with this? Nothing that I can see. > > Alice the Insurer is free to set her rates as she wishes, and even to > require tests. Bob the Prospective Insured is free to shop elsewhere. > > What has drawn so many of you socialist creeps to this list in the > past few months? Did "Mother Jones" give out subscription information > recently? > > Wait until you finally grasp the full implications of crypto anarchy. > > > --Tim May > > > -- > ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- > Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, > ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero > W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, > "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. > From njohnson at interl.net Wed Oct 18 19:20:21 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:20:21 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? References: Message-ID: <016a01c03973$2296bbe0$0100a8c0@nandts> --- Original Message ----- From: "Tim May" To: "Yardena Arar + Christian Goetze" Cc: "Nathan Saper" ; "Cypherpunks" Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 9:00 PM Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? > > Gambling is about assessing risk and rewards and payoffs. A person > seeking insurance knows things about his or her health that the > prospective insurer may not know about. Likewise, the prospective > insurer may come to know things about the candidate. > > This is the way markets in general have always worked. Economists > talk about "preference revealing" and "selective disclosure of > information." > But the Bob has no control of his risk (genetics), or at least not yet :). The insurance company does. I don't have a problem with insurance companies raising rates for people who smoke, are overweight (cough, cough), or have high cholesterol (cough, cough, cough). That's behavior that can be changed. Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC From nobody at noisebox.remailer.org Wed Oct 18 20:20:22 2000 From: nobody at noisebox.remailer.org (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:20:22 -0600 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) Message-ID: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> > 1. It sounds like to me that there is no room for human compassion in > crypto-anarchy. > (Seems like we will all end up sitting in our "compounds" armed to the > teeth and if anybody comes along we either blow'em to bits or pay them > anonymous digital cash > to go away). Crypto-anarchy is in fact not really anarchy, since it only addresses some kinds of authority, ie government, and only in certain situations. True anarchy involves the dissolution of other hierarchical relationships, including those that spring from private property. Get rid of private property and many of these problems disappear. > How does crypto-anarchy/libertarian/anarchy propose to deal with the > "tragedy of the commons" where by doing what is best for each persons own > interests they end up screwing it up for everyone (Overgrazing land with to > many cattle is the example I've been given). The "prisoner's dilemma" is > another example. I believe that the standard argument is "Eliminate the commons." (by auctioning off to the highest bidder perhaps) From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 18 21:27:13 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:27:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 06:57:24PM -0700 References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> Message-ID: <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2274 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 18 21:37:24 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:37:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 06:36:52PM -0700 References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <20001018180133.D16756@well.com> Message-ID: <20001018213723.C18002@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2754 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 18 18:42:45 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:42:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <20001018180133.D16756@well.com> Message-ID: <39EE515A.C27E19F2@acmenet.net> Nathan Saper wrote: > I came because I'm interested in (though admittedly naieve about) > cryptography, and I like debating with people who hold different > opinions than I do. Well, you came to the right place. Most of the posters on c-punks reject the notions of statism, redistributionism, and forced commercial compliance, and despise and lambaste those who hold them. If you don't have a thick skin, you might as well pull out now. Ignorance on crypto can be cured, if you have the brains to follow light math and protocols. I recommend _Applied Cryptography_ by Bruce Scheier for protocols, cyphers, and the like. Naivete is more problematic, as it often involves dearly-held notions. To bring the topic back to particulars (ie, you), you are going to have to dump some notions of how things "should" work. As Tim says, "Wait until you finally grasp the full implications of crypto anarchy." Some aspects of contemporary American life will not work in a world of widespread, strong crypto. See many of the recent posts for examples. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From njohnson at interl.net Wed Oct 18 19:43:49 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:43:49 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: <017801c03976$69f71ae0$0100a8c0@nandts> > (Seems like we will all end up sitting in our "compounds" armed to the > teeth and if anybody comes along we either blow'em to bits or pay them > anonymous digital cash > to go away). I should of added: "because they are afraid that person(s) is coming to collect their 'Assasination Betting Pool' Jackpot". Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 18:51:16 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:51:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: ADL lists anarchy symbol as racist In-Reply-To: <00101818005406.03076@reality.eng.savvis.net> References: <1121faa9f428bc88e7310250dcb52abd@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: At 6:55 PM -0400 10/18/00, Jim Burnes wrote: >On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: >> http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/racist_anarchy_symbol.html > >Wow. Runic alphabets are verboten also. "Verboten"? You just used a German word. I'm reporting you to the Zionist League. "Remember, children of Israel, "Eretz Israel" is not the same thing as "lebensraum," and the suppression of the ragheads in Eretz Israel is merely pest eradication, not the "Final Solution." War is peace, freedom is slavery, and Zionists are libertarians." --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From mclow at owl.csusm.edu Wed Oct 18 22:01:20 2000 From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:01:20 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> Message-ID: At 9:27 PM -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 06:57:24PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > > At 5:48 PM -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > > In any case, whether Alice sells insurance to Bob is not a matter for > > the state to interfere with. > > > > You, Nathan, may set up your own insurance company if you wish. Or > > you may offer to pay for the health care of those you think are not > > getting a fair deal. > > > > But you may NOT tell me I must sell insurance if I choose not to. > >Most insurance companies are worth millions, if not billions, of >dollars, and they make huge profits. Insuring all of the people that >they now deny based on genetic abnormalities would still allow them to >make decent profits. So? What authority gets to decide what "decent" profits are? Businesses _should_ always seek to maximize their profits in the long term. Many businesses fall into the "short term trap", which maximizes profits for a few years, which then fall off in the long term, leading to lower overall profits. Leaving "money on the table", as it were. It is my _opinion_ that insurance companies, by inserting themselves into the legal system, and seeking to make themselves a necessity, are well down that road. >And many people are denied coverage outright, therefore removing the >possibility of simply paying for their coverage. What is preventing them from simply paying for their treatment? -- -- Marshall "The era of big government is over." Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996 Marshall Clow MusicMatch From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 18 22:07:59 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:07:59 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from mclow@owl.csusm.edu on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 10:01:20PM -0700 References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> Message-ID: <20001018220759.A18195@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2210 bytes Desc: not available URL: From njohnson at interl.net Wed Oct 18 20:20:07 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:20:07 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <016a01c03973$2296bbe0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: <018c01c0397b$7bef12c0$0100a8c0@nandts> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim May" To: ; "Yardena Arar + Christian Goetze" Cc: "Nathan Saper" ; "Cypherpunks" Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 9:56 PM Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? > I am unable to find any gentler way to say this: a lot of you (Neil, > Yardena, Nathan, Robert, etc.) are woefully ignorant of economics, > markets, and the nature of a free society. > > In this insurance debate, several of you seem to think that Bob has > some "right" to insurance...at the price _he_ or some committee > thinks is "fair." > > Please read up on some basic economics--preferably not Marxist economics. As a matter of fact I'm studying it right now (for my Software Engineering Economics Class). Heaven forbid Here's a good quote even: "The use of dollar profit as the only criterion to be used in decision making often leads to decisions with good short-term profit properties, but poor social outcomes for the people involved (and often, as a result, poor long-term profit prospects)." . . . "The net value approach used in this book assumes that ALL [Author's emphasis, not mine] the relevant components of effectiveness--employee's need-fulfillment, customer's good will, users' information privacy, operator's ease of use--have been translated into dollar values and incorporated as such in the total value function". (p 212 - Software Engineering Economics by Barry W. Boehm) In other words the Alice should take into account more than just what it is going to risks/cost to treat Bob. But most companies are going to only consider their short-term interests (There's that "Tragedy of the commons" again) unless they are forced otherwise. Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC From mclow at owl.csusm.edu Wed Oct 18 22:23:25 2000 From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:23:25 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018220759.A18195@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <20001018220759.A18195@well.com> Message-ID: At 10:07 PM -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 10:01:20PM -0700, Marshall Clow wrote: > > At 9:27 PM -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > > >On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 06:57:24PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > > > > At 5:48 PM -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > > > > In any case, whether Alice sells insurance to Bob is not a matter for > > > > the state to interfere with. > > > > > > > > You, Nathan, may set up your own insurance company if you wish. Or > > > > you may offer to pay for the health care of those you think are not > > > > getting a fair deal. > > > > > > > > But you may NOT tell me I must sell insurance if I choose not to. > > > > > >Most insurance companies are worth millions, if not billions, of > > >dollars, and they make huge profits. Insuring all of the people that > > >they now deny based on genetic abnormalities would still allow them to > > >make decent profits. > > > > So? What authority gets to decide what "decent" profits are? > > Businesses _should_ always seek to maximize their profits > > in the long term. > >My point is, it wouldn't be death for the business if they were forced >to insure people with genetic abnormalities. You'd have to do more than blindly assert that before I would agree. Even if I was willing to concede that point, you still have skated around the "Who gets set up as arbiter of 'decent' profits" question. > > >And many people are denied coverage outright, therefore removing the > > >possibility of simply paying for their coverage. > > > > What is preventing them from simply paying for their treatment? > >Coverage is often cheaper than treatment. So these people are entitled to something for nothing? (or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)? Why? -- -- Marshall "The era of big government is over." Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996 Marshall Clow MusicMatch From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 18 19:26:04 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:26:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Reputation, Identity, and Belief In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.20001018093009.00803bd0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001018192401.0081c610@pop.sprynet.com> At 01:06 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: >At 12:31 PM -0400 10/18/00, David Honig wrote: >>I suggest Reputation Hijacking, but don't expect the lexicon to change. > >And I think all of these examples/phrases miss the essential point. ... >Alice does not own her reputation. >Alice does not own her identity. >Alice does not own the trust others have in her various credentials. ... >Crypto and related tools offer Alice and others the means to make >such casual "thefts" (aspersions, etc.) harder to do. Alice can >digitally sign to "prove" mathematically she is the holder of >certain credentials. And so on, for the obvious extensions to webs of >trust, webs of doubt, webs of gossip, etc. > >Any talk of "theft" or "misappropriation" misses this key point. Good point. Perhaps 'fraud by impersonation' is better. ... >"Where do I go to get my reputation back?" Think about it. I suppose a chick with a sullied reputation has to go to a different social clique where they haven't heard of her, won't recognize her, and don't communicate with the clique that implements the first reputation. You'll note I've phrased it so that the reputation is *distributed* amongst the former clique, which I think is your point: reputation (and the polymoderators thereof) is a private, nongovernmental matter. If you want to believe the council of rabbis or the better business bureau or the FTC its your choice. Of course, the maligned chick should have been using crypto to protect herself. Still, I'm aware of no protocol that will prevent malicious collaborators from claiming wrong things about her, e.g., if they restrict their libel to her and otherwise maintain trustworthy. PK sigs don't help. ALSO, infosec is a *system* property, and you may have to trust others that you don't control. E.G., your (nominally private and typically authenticating) SSID was leaked to the public; this could be used to harass you. Similarly with digitized fingerprints that the DMV owns a copy of, etc. Which reminds me that you can't change those; meatspace 'identity' has a problem in that fingers will be used as authenticators, so meat-identity can't be as... parallel... as fully informational identities, like nyms. Anyway, I don't think I ever claimed I "owned" my reputation (in the sense of being able to get the govt to coerce you to act that way). But I am bound to (I was going to write, "own") my 'responsibility to creditors', abuse of which by forging my meatspace-id is fraud, which the govt is reasonable in using violence to prevent. I suspect that you regard such impersonation-fraud as theft, as I do. I suspect we also both regard any violence-based (ie, govt) rules wrt linking meat to bits as unconstitional limits on freedom of speech. Both points need to be communicated to Joe Sixpack, Joeseph Merlot, and Johannes Bourbon III. dh From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 22:27:08 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:27:08 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> Message-ID: At 9:27 PM -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > >Most insurance companies are worth millions, if not billions, of >dollars, and they make huge profits. Insuring all of the people that >they now deny based on genetic abnormalities would still allow them to >make decent profits. Your true colors have now been revealed. Simply robbery. It looks like the "autumn crop" is in full bloom. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From njohnson at interl.net Wed Oct 18 20:36:22 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:36:22 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: <019901c0397d$c1545a80$0100a8c0@nandts> > Another socialist simp-wimp heard from. > > Lots of socialists to be dealt with and disposed of. I wonder who > will stoke the furnaces? > Not very many if enough of us "simp-wimps" gather enough e-cash to create our own "Imprisonment Betting Pool". I think languishing in jail with life-mate "Bubba" would be far better poetic justice than simple execution for those who display no compassion for their fellow man (I never said I was a socialist). Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC From njohnson at interl.net Wed Oct 18 20:39:16 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:39:16 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> Message-ID: <01a101c0397e$28fb6340$0100a8c0@nandts> > I believe that the standard argument is "Eliminate the commons." (by > auctioning off to the highest bidder perhaps) > So who gets the bid on the environment ? There are some commons that can not be eliminated so easily. Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 18 22:42:22 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:42:22 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net>; from sfurlong@acmenet.net on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 01:02:44AM -0400 References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <20001018224222.B18319@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 3702 bytes Desc: not available URL: From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 18 19:45:49 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:45:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: <009201c03938$bbf4ac60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001018194416.00799d70@pop.sprynet.com> At 03:29 PM 10/18/00 -0400, jim bell wrote: >I ask this, what I believe would be an excellent idea for an article: Why >didn't the Internet develop even faster than it actually did? 9600 bps >modems existed in 1986, not all that far in performance behind 28Kbps units. >By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. Its quite simple. In 1995 MS released a version of Windoze which included a TCP/IP stack by default. Previously you had to acquire one and figure out how to install it. While fortunes were made on this, the collection of routers known as the Net was unavailable to Joe Sixpack until then. From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 18 22:46:31 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:46:31 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from mclow@owl.csusm.edu on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 10:23:25PM -0700 References: <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <20001018220759.A18195@well.com> Message-ID: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2801 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 18 22:53:15 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:53:15 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EE850D.8E759B84@acmenet.net>; from sfurlong@acmenet.net on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 01:23:19AM -0400 References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <20001018180133.D16756@well.com> <20001018213723.C18002@well.com> <39EE850D.8E759B84@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <20001018225315.D18319@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 4599 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 20:05:28 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:05:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001018194416.00799d70@pop.sprynet.com> References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 10:45 PM -0400 10/18/00, David Honig wrote: >At 03:29 PM 10/18/00 -0400, jim bell wrote: >>I ask this, what I believe would be an excellent idea for an article: Why >>didn't the Internet develop even faster than it actually did? 9600 bps >>modems existed in 1986, not all that far in performance behind 28Kbps units. >>By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. > >Its quite simple. In 1995 MS released a version of Windoze which >included a TCP/IP stack by default. Previously you had to acquire >one and figure out how to install it. While fortunes were made >on this, the collection of routers known as the Net was unavailable >to Joe Sixpack until then. I don't buy this at all. Maybe there is some subtlety I am missing completely. As a Mac user, PPP and similar protocols were bundled early on. In 1993-4 the first talk of Mosaic was appearing. In 1994-5, Mosaic and its successor were readily available. Which caused which, a default TCP/IP stack in Windows 95 or Netscape 1.0? (By the way, friends of mine are happily surfing with Windows 3.1 and whatever MS- or aftermarket-based TCP/IP tools are needed. Most of them don't even know what a "TCP/IP stack" is...they simply download what the ISP tells them is needed, or they insert the CD-ROM and click to start.) As a Mac user, it was the availability of Mosaic and Netscape which altered the landscape. The TCP/IP stack junk was just behind the scenes machinery which various vendors were then racing to provide. Saying the modern Net age started when Microsoft provided a TCP/IP stack seems overly wonkish. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 18 20:38:18 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:38:18 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: Message-ID: <39EE6C6E.165880EA@acmenet.net> Tim May wrote: > > At 9:20 PM -0500 10/18/00, Neil Johnson wrote: > >But the Bob has no control of his risk (genetics), or at least not yet :). > >The insurance company does. > > The insurance company does NOT have any control over Bob's risks! > Whatever gave you that idea? At most, an insurance company would have some information Bob didn't have. Bob could reasonably demand a copy of the results of his DNA test. If the insurance company refused, he could shop elsewhere. Or self-insure, as many of us choose to do. > I am unable to find any gentler way to say this: a lot of you (Neil, > Yardena, Nathan, Robert, etc.) are woefully ignorant of economics, > markets, and the nature of a free society. If they're Americans, they've probably been socialistized by the public school system. In addition to the inculcation of a belief system the public schools seem to actively discourage critical thought and the use of, gasp, shudder, numerical data. (I'm speaking in broad terms, of course; there are many isolated exceptions.) Not that I don't contemn the ignorant. An adult must take responsibility for his education, no matter how badly mangled it was during his childhood. > In this insurance debate, several of you seem to think that Bob has > some "right" to insurance...at the price _he_ or some committee > thinks is "fair." You've probably noticed, Tim, that most of those who claim a right to affordable insurance are those who expect to _need_ a lot of insurance benefits. I'm not sure that those people realize it themselves, even when it's pointed out to them. (That may simply reflect on my skill at oratory, but I should think that a huge collection of data points speaks for itself.) I concluded long ago that medical insurance is a bad idea for society. It encourages irresponsible behavior to the extent that prices are spread to other people. And of course attempting to adjust premiums based on expectation of irresponsible behavior in well on its way to being labeled a crime against humanity. > Please read up on some basic economics--preferably not Marxist economics. Or Hillaryomics. Oh, wait, you already excluded Marxist economics. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From sc4tal19 at idt.net Wed Oct 18 20:55:13 2000 From: sc4tal19 at idt.net (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:55:13 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: <39EDFF99.EF2DBEB6@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <009201c03938$bbf4ac60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001018233632.00b15230@pop3.idt.net> At 03:53 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Harmon wrote: > I had a fidonet node for awhile. The concept really needs to be >revived -- and combined with more recent developments like Publius, freenet, >and gnutella. I _still_ have a running UUCP node (on a MickeySoft box, at that). Given that UUCP was designed to run arbitrary programs on remote hosts and route their output, it seems to me this is an ideal transport mechanism. -- Roy M. Silvernail [ ] sc4tal19 at idt.net DNRC Minister Plenipotentiary of All Things Confusing, Software Division PGP Public Key fingerprint = 31 86 EC B9 DB 76 A7 54 13 0B 6A 6B CC 09 18 B6 Key available from pubkey at scytale.com I charge to process unsolicited commercial email From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 18 20:59:53 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:59:53 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EE6C6E.165880EA@acmenet.net> References: Message-ID: At 11:38 PM -0400 10/18/00, Steve Furlong wrote: >Tim May wrote: >> >> At 9:20 PM -0500 10/18/00, Neil Johnson wrote: >> >But the Bob has no control of his risk (genetics), or at least not yet :). >> >The insurance company does. >> >> The insurance company does NOT have any control over Bob's risks! >> Whatever gave you that idea? > >At most, an insurance company would have some information Bob didn't >have. Bob could reasonably demand a copy of the results of his DNA test. "Bob, I see here that you are "demanding" a copy of this test that I paid for, that you voluntarily provided a sample for, or that you were careless enough to leave some skin flakes for on my sofa over there in the office. Well, you know what, Bob? Maybe I'll let you have a copy of the results, maybe I'll tell you to get the hell out of my office. But if you keep "demanding" something that isn't yours to demand, I may just have to take stronger measures." >If the insurance company refused, he could shop elsewhere. Or >self-insure, as many of us choose to do. Indeed. But let's drop the use of the word "demand." I was taught that a "demand" is a "demand," not a request. > > >> I am unable to find any gentler way to say this: a lot of you (Neil, >> Yardena, Nathan, Robert, etc.) are woefully ignorant of economics, >> markets, and the nature of a free society. > >If they're Americans, they've probably been socialistized by the public >school system. In addition to the inculcation of a belief system the >public schools seem to actively discourage critical thought and the use >of, gasp, shudder, numerical data. (I'm speaking in broad terms, of >course; there are many isolated exceptions.) > >Not that I don't contemn the ignorant. An adult must take responsibility >for his education, no matter how badly mangled it was during his >childhood. Indeed. And those who arrive here on this list and natter on about insurance as a right, about how corporations, not government, are the real danger, and who spout about the evils of capitalism should be rebuked. > >> In this insurance debate, several of you seem to think that Bob has >> some "right" to insurance...at the price _he_ or some committee >> thinks is "fair." > >You've probably noticed, Tim, that most of those who claim a right to >affordable insurance are those who expect to _need_ a lot of insurance >benefits. I'm not sure that those people realize it themselves, even >when it's pointed out to them. (That may simply reflect on my skill at >oratory, but I should think that a huge collection of data points speaks >for itself.) > >I concluded long ago that medical insurance is a bad idea for society. >It encourages irresponsible behavior to the extent that prices are >spread to other people. And of course attempting to adjust premiums >based on expectation of irresponsible behavior in well on its way to >being labeled a crime against humanity. And it increases overall costs by making people less sensitive to prices. Imagine what would happen if "dietary insurance" existed, with every person having state-funded budgets for food and restaurant meals. (Don't laugh: food stamps already work this way for a significant subpopulation.) The probable effect would be an overall rise in prices. This has happened with health care. Too many examples to even begin to list. The ultimate solution for dealing with all of these folks who demand money from me to pay for their insurance is to kill them. Crypto anarchy offers many interesting options. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From petro at bounty.org Thu Oct 19 00:24:01 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 00:24:01 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Anyone know easy symmetric cypher for perl? In-Reply-To: <200010181356.IAA21097@manifold.algebra.com> References: <200010181356.IAA21097@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: >I need a perl module or a function that would perform symmetric key >encryption/decryption. I need it to encode secret information in >URLs. Thanks I thought you were brighter than that Igor. http://search.cpan.org/search?mode=module&query=encrypt -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 18 21:26:25 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 00:26:25 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: Message-ID: <39EE77C3.4FF8114C@acmenet.net> Tim May wrote: > > At 11:38 PM -0400 10/18/00, Steve Furlong wrote: > >At most, an insurance company would have some information Bob didn't > >have. Bob could reasonably demand a copy of the results of his DNA test. ... > >If the insurance company refused, he could shop elsewhere. Or > >self-insure, as many of us choose to do. > > Indeed. But let's drop the use of the word "demand." I was taught > that a "demand" is a "demand," not a request. Yep, I wrote carelessly. I _said_ "demand" but I _meant_ that Bob would refuse to deal with the insurance company unless they share what they find. And I'm not so confident that the insurance company would be paying for the test, as you suggested in your (snipped) scenario. I have no experience with insurance plans which required you to get a physical before they take you on; I've always had HMOs (or self insurance) since I left the military. Who normally paid for the exams? > >I concluded long ago that medical insurance is a bad idea for society. ... > > And it increases overall costs by making people less sensitive to prices. Plus the overhead and profits of the insurance company. I've stumped several insurance salesmen, who claimed that I'd be saving money by going with them, by asking how the total costs would go down if salesmen and executives and other non-medical drones are getting paid. And the wasted staff time in the doctors' office, filling out the five hundred distinct insurance forms, contrasted with taking a handful of 20s and giving me a receipt. No satisfactory answer in a couple dozen contestants. The tax code in the US is the only thing which makes medical insurance cost less to consumers than self insurance. This is an argument, as if another were needed, against the five million page federal tax code, or whatever it's up to now. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From prsi_ct at yahoo.com Thu Oct 19 00:44:34 2000 From: prsi_ct at yahoo.com (Peter Johnson) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 00:44:34 Subject: CDR: Immediate Downline - 1000 Members Per Month - It's FREE!! Message-ID: <200010182248.PAA06231@cyberpass.net> CHECK IT OUT! IT'S FREE! 1000 MEMBERS A MONTH!! Get yourself an IMMEDIATE DOWNLINE ! ALL new members that come into the club COMPANY WIDE will go under YOU. A true VERTICAL downline. YOU can easily get 1000 members or MORE under YOU in a month! How would you like a GUARANTEED minimum commission every month? JOIN FREE!!!!!!! JOIN FREE!!!!!!! Join our FREE postlaunch program- You'll be then forwarded on to our main website where you can watch your downline grow right before your eyes ! Get started today and watch what happens ! http://www.angelfire.com/ab4/back4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You are receiving this message because my records indicate you are open to receiving information on how to make money on the internet. If you would like to be removed from future mailings please reply with "remove" in the subject line. Thanks and many prosperous blessings to you! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 18 22:02:44 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 01:02:44 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> Message-ID: <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net> Nathan Saper wrote: <> > Most insurance companies are worth millions, if not billions, of > dollars, and they make huge profits. Insuring all of the people that > they now deny based on genetic abnormalities would still allow them to > make decent profits. Hand-waving. Get some numbers and crunch them. (No, I don't have them at hand, either, but I'm not making claims about the ability of any corporation to profit under any arbitrary rules I wish to set.) > Also, people cannot simply create insurance companies. Breaking into > the healthcare business is damn near impossible This is the only thing you've written with which I agree. But it's an argument for _less_ government intervention rather than more. > And many people are denied coverage outright, therefore removing the > possibility of simply paying for their coverage. Eh? I've been uninsured for maybe half of my adult life. On such occasions as I need medical care, I simply pay for it. Cash or check, they'll take it all. Of course you said "coverage", not "care", but the alleged problem is that people can't get medical _care_. Who cares if they have _coverage_, so long as their medical needs are taken care of? As I wrote before (like, a couple of hours ago), most of the people who insist on a right to "affordable" medical insurance seem to expect to get a lot more out of the insurance company than they put into it. They should just be honest and go on welfare if they're looking for a handout, rather than attempt to claim the moral high ground. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 18 22:23:19 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 01:23:19 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <20001018180133.D16756@well.com> <20001018213723.C18002@well.com> Message-ID: <39EE850D.8E759B84@acmenet.net> Nathan Saper wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 06:36:52PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > > "What if nobody will sell Bob the food he wants for the price he is > > willing or able to pay? Then he'll starve to death!!!!!" > > > > Bob is seeking to pay less money in insurance premiums that he > > expects to receive in benefits. Insurers are seeking to get Bob to > > pay more in premiums than they pay out in benefits. > > Insurance is > > gambling. Get it through your thick skull. > > 1) Insurance is a very profitable business. I don't feel sorry for a > CEO of an insurance company making millions each year. They can > afford to insure people that MAY develop certain conditions later in > life. General Electric's Power Systems division is very profitable. Should it start giving away its stock in trade to poor nations which "need" an electric generation plant, regardless of the nation's prior mismanagement which led to its inability to pay? > 2) Notice the "MAY" above. Insurance companies consider even the > slightest risk grounds for denying coverage. Bull. The overweight still get coverage. > 3) Your food analogy above is flawed for several reasons. > a) If Bob has as much money as everyone else, he will be sold the > food. > b) If Bob, on the other hand, has a genetic abnormality that could > later lead to heart disease, he can be denied health coverage > regardless of his ability to pay the premium. > c) In the food example, charities, etc. can help Bob out. In the > insurance area, he has no such help to fall back on. In re b), Bob won't be denied health _care_, regardless of his genetic abnormalities or actual medical history, provided that he pays for it. Also, food and medical coverage are apples and oranges, to torture a metaphor. There is an upper limit to what people spend on food, even given unlimited resources. There seems to be _no_ upper limit on what people will spend on medical care. This is exacerbated when costs are shared. In re c), what, you've never heard of free clinics? Hell, I've donated piles (in terms of my net worth) of cash to clinics, on the premise that helping to control VD will have a societal benefit in excess of many other uses of the money. For that matter, when my son was born I noticed that I had been assessed about $400 to help cover the medical costs of the indigent. (Which pissed me off, since I wasn't notified beforehand that the hospital would do that, nor given a chance to opt out, but that's another topic.) > > Sadly, you don't know enough to actually carry on a debate. > > Warmed-over socialist platitudes have been your stock in trade. > > You haven't answered a single one of my emails without including a > personal attack of some sort. You're being an asshole, and that's not > necessary. Wow, you haven't been reading c-punks long. If Tim makes a personal attack on you, it'll usually involve an observation that you should be killed. I would say that Tim's comment, above, is more an observation than an attack. I agree with him completely, except that he doesn't go far enough. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Wed Oct 18 23:07:05 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 02:07:05 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story Message-ID: David, I am afraid your interpretation of the history of mass-market access to the Internet, as appealing as it may be to those blaming or praising Microsoft for all the ills and good things of the digital universe, is quite incorrect. The Internet did not reach mass market penetration in the 1980's due to a number of reasons, amongst them being that the average consumer didn't have: o a GUI's o cheap (or for that matter any) access to the Internet. o IP to the home. o a graphical web browser. In the very early 90', not even shell accounts were available to the general public. It wasn't until Netcom in the West and Pipeline and PSINet in the East started offering flat-rate shell account access to the lucky few that happened to live in the San Francisco Bay Area or NY that the average person there could get any Internet access (other than email via AOL) at all. But the VT100 renditions of gopher and even the marvelous lynx didn't exactly draw big crowds. Suddenly, the killer app Mosaic came about that was sufficiently compelling to make the consumer want IP to the home. Since Mosaic, unlike lynx, wouldn't work without an IP connection. Meanwhile, SLIP/PPP accounts had just become available at any price. Unfortunately, the USD 60 install and the USD 2 per hour charges proved discouraging to all but a few. And again, unless you happened to live in one of a few lucky areas, you didn't even have this rather pricey option. The drive for Internet access came from Mac users. Few consumers had access to Unix operating system based machines and Windows 3.1 lacked the Internet applications. A host of which was readily available for the Mac and came included on floppy in a book by Adam Engst that the novice Mac Internet user probably wanted to read anyway. Most of them did. Which left a single major barrier: $2/hour. This last and probably most crucial barrier went away literally during the course of a weekend when a Berkeley company called Cyberspace Development announced a revolutionary product: The Internet Adapter (TIA). TIA was a user level program that allowed the user to pull a SLIP connection out of a regular shell account. The program spread like wildfire through the Netcom Macintosh user community. Within that single weekend, dozens of people were using TIA. Everybody said the same thing: "it works"! Many shell providers banned TIA. Fortunately, Netcom did not. As one of TIA's first users that very weekend, I wrote the "TIA mini-FAQ" on the spot, explaining step-by-step in two pages how anybody with a Macintosh can get hooked up with real IP within 30 minutes. At flat-rate shell prices. My mini-FAQ was in stunningly high demand. Faced with this sudden flat-rate competition, within a few months the first SLIP/PPP provider went to a flat-rate model. Then another. Then a third. Providers started sprouting up all over the place. People began using Mosaic, which was quickly replaced by several other browsers that started showing up for the Mac within a couple of months. Most of the improvements in those new Mac browsers were copied by a new startup that was formed soon thereafter. That company was Netscape. The remainder of Internet history I presume most of us are aware of. Enjoy, --Lucky --Lucky Green "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 > -----Original Message----- > From: cypherpunks at openpgp.net [mailto:cypherpunks at openpgp.net]On Behalf > Of David Honig > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 19:46 > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story > > > At 03:29 PM 10/18/00 -0400, jim bell wrote: > >I ask this, what I believe would be an excellent idea for an article: Why > >didn't the Internet develop even faster than it actually did? 9600 bps > >modems existed in 1986, not all that far in performance behind > 28Kbps units. > >By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. > > Its quite simple. In 1995 MS released a version of Windoze which > included a TCP/IP stack by default. Previously you had to acquire > one and figure out how to install it. While fortunes were made > on this, the collection of routers known as the Net was unavailable > to Joe Sixpack until then. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From rsw at MIT.EDU Wed Oct 18 23:19:25 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 02:19:25 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018224222.B18319@well.com>; from natedog@well.com on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 10:42:22PM -0700 References: <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net> <20001018224222.B18319@well.com> Message-ID: <20001019021925.A20705@positron.mit.edu> Nathan Saper wrote: > Close. I am arguing that insurance companies shouldn't be allowed to > deny coverage based upon factors that the insuree does not have > control over. For example, I smoke, so I really can't blame an > insurance company for charging me extra, because that's a factor I > have control over. The fact that it's not the insuree's fault does _not_ mean that it's the insurer's fault. Said another way, the insurance company has no additional responsibility to (WLOG) me because I have a genetic defect. However, you're proposing that the insurance company endeavor to waste money on those who are known to be "losers" as far as insurance goes. You as a smoker should be the most outraged in such a situation; the strict standards that keep you from getting insurance at a good rate do not apply to me because my elevated risk for e.g. heart disease has a different source. It's not the cause of the risk that concerns the insurance companies, it's the existance of the risk. That's all they need judge upon, and any interference by the government saying otherwise is an unreasonable burden on private enterprise. > Fine. I'll try to find some numbers. I don't have any off the top of > my head, though. It just seems that because A) the insurance > companies make good profits and B) the number of people denied > coverage based upon genetic abnormalities is fairly small, it wouldn't > affect them too much. "It won't hurt them _that_much_ to lose a little money on these people; thus, they should be forced to do so." Preposterous. > Coverage is most often less expensive than care. Therefore, one may > be able to afford the coverage, but not afford the care, if it ends up > being required. Still not the insurance company's fault. They're not there to save my sorry, genetically defective ass, they're there to make money. > Isn't this the whole idea of insurance? You pay them x dollars, and > if you end up getting sick, they most likely have to pay more than x > dollars to treat you. The insurers are banking on the fact that the > majority of the people who have insurance don't get sick. Right. And if they're forced to insure people who are money sinks for them, everyone's rates go up, because the total amount of risk the insurance company takes (expressed as the amount of money they pay out as claims) plus their profit must equal the amount of money they make on premiums. -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 2122 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 19 02:19:54 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 02:19:54 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? (NP-Completeness, cracking speed) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001019021954.007a04e0@idiom.com> At Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:39:13 -0700 Nathan Saper wrote > Unless I'm mistaken, there is no essential physical law that > determines computing power, exploits of algorithms, etc. > The same cannot be said for speed-of-light travel. Data storage probably requires at least an atom, or at least one electron, or at least one quark. There are only so many spare ones of these in the universe. Speed's a fuzzier issue - Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle limits how closely you can know the velocity and location simultaneously, plus there are speed-of-light limits on how fast communications between particles can occur, given that the distances are non-zero. There have also been calculations on energy requirements for computation (don't remember the rationale; probably in Schneier 2nd Ed.) Quantum Black Magic may provide ways to cheat on this, by creating a set of problems for which the waveform has a high probability of collapsing in the correct state. (It's also possible to get wrong answers, but NP-hard problems are easy to verify quickly.) However, extracting the result from the system requires measuring to a precision corresponding to the number of bits you're trying to extract from the system - I'm not convinced there's a way to cheat Heisenberg, in which case you're limited to ~150 bits (compared to the current resolution of ~5 bits :-) There's no current mathematical proof that P!=NP, or that factoring is in the hard set of problems (unlike Linear Programming, which Karmarkar et al. showed could be done in big-ugly-polynomial time, though in practice the Simplex method almost always was fast enough.) Also, most symmetric crypto is based on the principle that it tweaks bits in sufficiently ugly ways that it breaks up any more efficient cracking methods other than exponential brute force. At 07:51 PM 10/17/00 -0400, dmolnar wrote: >Um, "NP-hard" just means that it's polynomial time reducible to any >problem in NP (or perhaps the other way around, I always get the >directions mixed up). It is fairly straightforward to show this - you It is the other way around. By showing that some known NP-complete problem is reducible to Your Problem (using polynomial work), you've shown that any polynomial-time solution to Your Problem solves the known NP-complete problem in (bigger) polynomial time, and therefore solves all NP-complete problems. To prove NP-completeness, you also have to prove that Your Problem is polynomial-time reducible to a (possibly different) known NP-complete problem (thence to all others). (There are also variants like P-Space Completeness, which came out after I left grad school, which are a bit broader than NP-completeness.) "NP-hard" is a fuzzy term - it includes NP-complete problems, plus things that aren't formulated as decision problems (like "find the optimum" as opposed to "determine whether X is optimum"), and some people use the term for problems that are at least as hard as NP-complete problems but might be also harder. So they might count something that solves an NP-complete problem without bothering to check if it's also reducible to an NP-complete problem, because they're satisfied with a result that says "look, this is at least as hard as NP-complete, so let's use some fast heuristics instead of going for the optimum." >Put another way, showing a problem is NP-hard doesn't actually show that >it is "hard." It just shows that the problem is no easier than any problem >in the class NP. It could still be the case that P = NP, in which case >there is a rash of suicides in the crypto world... No, that would be a *Great* *Thing* for academic crypto. Think of all the brand new exciting research papers that could be written, and all the searching for new problems that are hard enough, and kicking holes in new snake oil, and loads of fun in general. Particularly, anything that proved P=NP would provide lots of tools for exploring the boundaries between NP-complete problems and other currently-believed-hard problems such as factoring (and discrete logarithms, and elliptical curve variations on them.) We might find out that factoring is *harder* than NP-complete (:-), though I don't expect that. My own guesses are that of course P!=NP, but factoring might not be as hard as NP-complete, and in particular elliptical curves might or might not be safe using far fewer bits than regular RSA or DH (though the EC math is too deep for my current knowledge, so I'm just guessing.) For *practical* crypto, it would be a major pain to lose factoring, because most NP-complete problems (e.g. knapsack) don't have forms that are cryptographically useful - knowing that the right key lets you solve the problem in polynomial time doesn't mean that it's easy for the user to *find* a key like that in polynomial time except by using special subproblems that turn out not to need exponential time to solve them. So in practice, we'd have to go back to symmetric-key KDCs (Key Distribution Centers, for systems like Kerberos), and One-Time Pads for the really paranoid stuff (like shipping around master keys for the KDCs) for high security, plus medium security that's basically Highly Refined Snake Oil, where the cracker only needs to do polynomially more work than the users, so in practice it's good enough for your credit card number, but not good enough to keep anti-government secrets away from the NSA or secret-government-conspiracy secrets safe from Distributed.Net, so the convenient stuff risks spy-vs-spy and angry-mobs-with-pitchforks attacks. Also in practice, that kind of breakthrough isn't likely to mature for at least a decade (between how long it takes for the hypothetical breakthrough to occur and how long before the system really takes to adapt to it), and even if we haven't had the Great Mythical Nanotech Singularity by then, we'll have enough computer power and miniaturization technology that it'll be much easier to steal keystrokes right off your keyboard and screen, rather than cracking the crypto, close enough for government work, so black bag jobs will be common and we'll be back to a spy-vs-spy game. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From sfurlong at acmenet.net Wed Oct 18 23:30:40 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 02:30:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net> <20001018224222.B18319@well.com> Message-ID: <39EE94D4.A6F54184@acmenet.net> Nathan Saper wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 01:02:44AM -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: > > Nathan Saper wrote: > > > > < > to cover people at a rate to be set by someone other than the insurance > > company. Tim May objects to this plan.>> > > Close. I am arguing that insurance companies shouldn't be allowed to > deny coverage based upon factors that the insuree does not have > control over. For example, I smoke, so I really can't blame an > insurance company for charging me extra, because that's a factor I > have control over. Most of the genetic factors against which insurance companies _might_ discriminate are predispositions. The factors _tend_ to make one _more susceptible_ to heart blow-outs, for instance. Where do you draw the line between factors which the prospective insured can control and those he cannot? If all of your grandparents died of lung cancer, was it because they had a genetic flaw, because they smoked three packs a day, because they lived near a coal mine, or some combination of the above? How much responsibility for their deaths should they shoulder? > Fine. I'll try to find some numbers. I don't have any off the top of > my head, though. It just seems that because A) the insurance > companies make good profits and B) the number of people denied > coverage based upon genetic abnormalities is fairly small, it wouldn't > affect them too much. I'm strongly suspicious of any statement that contains "It just seems that". Every discipline from engineering to economics shows time and again that the "obvious" conclusions are often wrong. Usually wrong, I suspect, but I don't have numbers to back that up. > > > Also, people cannot simply create insurance companies. Breaking into > > > the healthcare business is damn near impossible > > > > > > This is the only thing you've written with which I agree. But it's an > > argument for _less_ government intervention rather than more. > > I don't really see it as an argument for either side. Breaking into > the medical industry is so difficult because there is an entire > infrastructure that is developed around the established corporations, > and this infrastructure isn't very flexible. In the absense of regulation, an insurance company could form by putting a pile of money in escrow and getting some customers. Yes, the practical need for a pile of money would shut out most people, but it would be a lower barrier than the current regulatory mess. In a free market the encrusting infrastructure could be blown away in one step by a single insurer. > Coverage is most often less expensive than care. Therefore, one may > be able to afford the coverage, but not afford the care, if it ends up > being required. ... > Isn't this the whole idea of insurance? You pay them x dollars, and > if you end up getting sick, they most likely have to pay more than x > dollars to treat you. The insurers are banking on the fact that the > majority of the people who have insurance don't get sick. > > So, yes, the whole idea of insurance is to get out more than you put in. The individual purchasing insurance is (a) betting that he'll have needs which cause him to draw out more than he put in, (b) concealing information from the insurer such that he _knows_ he'll be drawing out more than he put it, or (c) wanting or needing catastrophic coverage even though he expects to put in more than he takes out. Company-provided plans are a whole 'nother matter; ignore them for now. coverage for a given malady times the expected likelihood of that malady) had better be lower than the sum of the premiums paid, or they won't stay in business long. Forcing an insurer to accept an expected-high-cost customer at an "affordable" premium either drives up the premiums for everyone, causes a reduction in services for everyone (or a particular subgroup, but that would probably cause more trouble in the long run), or eats into insurer's bottom line. One expected-high-cost customer wouldn't break the insurer, but there's never just one. By the way, you don't need to email a private copy of messages you send to a mailing list. This isn't Usenet. The private copy and the list copy usually arrive within minutes of each other. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From sfurlong at acmenet.net Thu Oct 19 00:47:25 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 03:47:25 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net> <20001018224222.B18319@well.com> <39EE94D4.A6F54184@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <39EEA6E4.7F0DD7CE@acmenet.net> Steve Furlong wrote: Something seems to have gone wrong in transmission. The paragraph near the end which starts: > coverage for a given malady times the expected likelihood of that should read: coverage for a given malady times the expected likelihood of that malady) had better be lower than the sum of the premiums paid, or they won't stay in business long. Forcing an insurer to accept an expected-high-cost customer at an "affordable" premium either drives up the premiums for everyone, causes a reduction in services for everyone (or a particular subgroup, but that would probably cause more trouble in the long run), or eats into insurer's bottom line. One expected-high-cost customer wouldn't break the insurer, but there's never just one. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From sfurlong at acmenet.net Thu Oct 19 00:56:34 2000 From: sfurlong at acmenet.net (Steve Furlong) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 03:56:34 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net> <20001018224222.B18319@well.com> <39EE94D4.A6F54184@acmenet.net> <39EEA6E4.7F0DD7CE@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <39EEA8F9.2B8FB1F9@acmenet.net> Steve Furlong wrote: > > Steve Furlong wrote: > > Something seems to have gone wrong in transmission. The paragraph near > the end which starts: > > > coverage for a given malady times the expected likelihood of that > > should read: > > coverage for a given malady times the expected likelihood of that ... OK, this isn't funny anymore. Netscape Communicator 4.51 for FreeBSD or Linux or whatever seems to have a repeatable flaw. That paragraph was supposed to be (breaking lines differently to see what that changes) the sum of (the expected cost of coverage for a given malady times the expected likelihood of that malady) had better be lower than the sum of the premiums paid, or they won't stay in business long. Forcing an insurer to accept an expected-high-cost customer at an "affordable" premium either drives up the premiums for everyone, causes a reduction in services for everyone (or a particular subgroup, but that would probably cause more trouble in the long run), or eats into insurer's bottom line. One expected-high-cost customer wouldn't break the insurer, but there's never just one. -- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong at acmenet.net From serv at 04.com Thu Oct 19 06:50:15 2000 From: serv at 04.com (serv at 04.com) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 06:50:15 Subject: CDR: Will you do this? Message-ID: <520.359749.591492@payme.yourmoney.com> Dear Friend, You can earn $46,000 or more in the next 90 days sending e-mail. Seem impossible? Read on for details (no, there is no "catch")� "AS SEEN ON NATIONAL TV" Thank you for your time and Interest. This is the letter you've been reading about in the news lately. Due to the popularity of this letter on the Internet, a major nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of the program described below, to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved once and for all that there are, absolutely no Laws prohibiting the participation in the program. This has helped to Show people that this is a simple, harmless and fun way to make some extra money at home. The results of this show have been truly remarkable. So many people are participation that those involved are doing, much better than ever before. Since everyone makes more as more people try it out, it's been very exciting to be a part of lately. You will understand once you experience it. "HERE IT IS BELOW" *** Print This Now For Future Reference*** The following income opportunity is one you may be interested in taking a look at. It can be started with VERY LITTLE investment and the income return is TREMENDOUS!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make at least $46,000 in less than 90 days! Please read the enclosed program�THEN READ IT AGAIN!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come into contact with people, do any hard work, and best of all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. I f you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! This multi-level e-mail order marketing program works perfectly�100% EVERY TIME. E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this non-commercialized method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using e-mail. Get your piece of the action!!! MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, and both Stanford Research and the Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold through multi-level methods by the mid to late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 3,500,000 Millionaires in the WORLD, 20% (700,000) made their fortune in the last several years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show that over 100 people become millionaires everyday through Multi-Level Marketing. You may have heard this story before, but over the summer Donald Trump (A MULTI-DILLIONAIRE, ONE OF THE WEALTHIEST MEN IN THE WORLD) made an appearance on the David Letterman show. Dave asked him what he would do if he lost everything and had to start over from scratch. Without hesitating, Trump said he would find a good network marketing company and get to work. The audience started to hoot and boo him. He looked out at the audience and deadpanned his response "That's why I'm sitting up here and you are all sitting out there!" With network marketing you have two sources of income. Direct Commissions from sales you make yourself and commissions from sales made by people you introduce to the business. Residual income is the secret of the wealthy. It means investing time or money once and getting paid again and again and again. In network marketing, it also means getting paid for the work of others. This program is currently being utilized in more than 50 different countries across the world. The enclosed INFORMATION is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. My name is Johnathon Rourke. Two years ago, the corporation I worked at for the past twelve years downsized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life and I am writing to share the experience in hopes that this will change your life FOREVER FINANCIALLY!!! In mid December, I received this program via e-mail. Six month's prior to receiving this program I had been sending away for INFORMATION on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they would work or not. One claimed that I would make a million dollars in one year�it didn't tell me I'd have to write a book to make it! But like I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this program. I didn't send for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to start, without putting further into debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. But like most of you, I was still a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-752-2161 24-hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal! After determining the program was LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT." Initially I sent out 100,000 e-mails. It cost me about $15 for my time on-line. The great thing about e-mail is that I don't need any money for printing to send out the program, and because all of m orders are fulfilled via e-mail, the only expense is my time. I am telling you like it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost me. In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. Your goal is to "RECEIVE at least 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My fist step in making $46,000 in 90 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. You goal is to "RECEIVE AT LEAST 100+ ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, TH REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $46,000 GOAL." Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 1, of my e-mailing of 100,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much-needed new car. Please take time to read the attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER!!! Remember, it won't work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY1 Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won't work, you'll lose out on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you must meet your goal of 20+ orders For REPORT #1, and 100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $46,000 or more in 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!! If you are a fellow business owner and are in financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! Sincerely, Johnathon Rourke A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that an amateur could, not have created such a program, and one that is legal. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate� because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich", inflation will see to that. You have just received INFORMATION that can give you financial freedom for the rest of you life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months than you ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over 4 MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 1,600,000 programs. Now I have several offices that make this and several other programs here and over seas. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e-mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 100,000 more� and your name will be on every one of them! Remember though, the more you send out the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, INFORMATION, materials and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS UP TO YOU NOW! "THINK ABOUT IT" Before you delete this program fro you mailbox, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS! Jody Jacobs, Richmond, VA HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLAR$ INSTRUCTIONS: This method of raising capital REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could us up to $46,000 in the next 90 days. Before you say, "BULL�" please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what you do: As with all multi-level businesses, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Because of the global nature of the Internet, you will be able to recruit new multi-level business partners from all over the world, and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in you own home, store or office. This is the GREATEST Multi-Level Mail Order Marketing anywhere. This is what you MUST do: 1. Order all 5 reports shown on the list below (you can't sell them if you don't order them). a. For each report, send $5.00 CASH, the NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING, YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS, and YOUR NAME & RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a problem) to the person whose name appears on the list next to the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAIL PROBLEMS! b. When you place your order, make sure you order each of the five reports. You will need all five reports so that you can save them on our computer and resell them. c. Within a few days you will receive, via e-mail, each of the five reports. Save them on your computer so they will be accessible for you to send to the 1000's of people who will order them from you. 2. IMPORTANT-DO NOT alter the names of the people who are listed next to each report, or their sequence on the list, in any way other than is instructed below in steps "a" through "g" or you will lose out on the majority of your profits. Once you understand the way this works, you'll also see how it doesn't work if you change it. Remember, this method has been tested, and if you alter it, it will not work. a. Look below for the listing of available reports. b. After you've ordered the five reports, take this advertisement and REMOVE the name and address under REPORT #5. This person has made it through the cycle and is no doubt counting their $46,000! Also, change the name of the company, the address, and the REMOVE e-mail address on the top of this document to your own. c. Move the name and address under REPORT #4 down to REPORT #5. d. Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down to REPORT #4. e. Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down to REPORT #3. f. Insert your name/address in the REPORT #1 position. Please make sure you copy every name and address ACCURATELY! 3. Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names, and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to the instruction portion of this letter. Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing (surely you can afford $25). You obviously already have an Internet connection and e-mail is FREE! To assist you with marketing your business on the internet, the 5 Reports you purchase will provide you with invaluable marketing INFORMATION which includes how to send bulk e-mails, where to find thousands of Free classified ads and much, much more. In addition you will be provided with INFORMATION on the Internet Marketing Clubs such as INTERNET MARKETING RESOURCES (IMR): This is one of the Premiere Internet marketing clubs on the INTERNET. This club provides a forum on Internet Marketing. In addition, members of this club are provided free Internet marketing tools and services for the Do-It-Yourself-Internet-Marketer. They will provide you with free bulk e-mail software and up to 1,000,000 fresh email addresses each week. This club will provide you with hundreds of free resources which include: How to obtain free web sites, how to obtain top rankings in search engines for you web-site, how to send bulk e-mail into AOL and CompuServe, how to market your products on news groups, free classified ads, electronic malls, bulletin boards, banner ads and much more. There are two primary methods of building you down line: METHOD #1: SENDING BULK E-MAIL. Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we'll assume you and all those involved send out only 2,000 programs each. Let's also assume that the mailing receives a 0.3% response. Using a good list the response could be much better. Also, many people will send out hundred of thousands of programs instead of 2,000. But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a 0.3% response, that is only 6 orders for REPORT #1. Those 6 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 12,000. Out of that 0.3%, 36 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 36 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 72,000. The 0.3% response to that are 216 orders for REPORT #3. Those 216 send out 2,000 programs each for a 432,000 total. The 0.3% response to that are 1,296 orders for REPORT #4. Those 1,296 send out 2,000 programs each for a 2,592,000 total. The 0.3% response to that are 7,776 orders for REPORT #5. That's 7,776 $5 bill for you, CASH!!! Your total income in this example is $30 + $180 + $6,480 + $38,880 for a total of $46,650!!! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,994 OUT OF THE 2000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE, OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF 2,000. Believe me, many people will do just that, and more! By the way, your cost to participate in this is practically nothing. You obviously already have an Internet connection and e-mail is FREE!!! REPORT #2 and #5 will show you the best methods for bulk e-mailing, tell you where to obtain free bulk e-mail software and where to obtain e-mail lists and show you how to send out 100,000 e-mails for free. METHOD #2 - PLACING FREE ADS ON THE INTERNET 1. Advertising on the 'Net is very, very inexpensive, and there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Let's say you decide to start small just to see how well it works. Assume your goal is to get ONLY 6 people to participate on your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the Internet will EASILY get a larger response.) Also assume that everyone else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets ONLY 6 down line members. Follow this example to achieve the STAGGERING results below. 1st level-your 6 members with $5 (5 x 6)�������� $30 2nd level-6 members from those 6 ($5 x 36)������....$180 3rd level-6 members from those 36 ($5 x 216)����.�.$1,080 4th level-6members from those 216 ($5 x 216)�����.$6,480 5th level-6 members from those 1,296 ($5 x 7,776)���.$38,880 ______ $46,650 Remember friends; this assumes that the people who participate only recruit 6 people each. Think for a moment what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Many people will get 100's of participants! THINK ABOUT IT! For every $5.00 you receive, all you must do is e-mail them the report they ordered. THAT'S IT! ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS! This will guarantee that the e-mail THEY send out with YOUR name and address on it, will be prompt because they can't advertise until they receive the report! AVAILABLE REPORTS *** Order Each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME *** Notes: ALWAYS SEND $5 CASH (U.S. CURRENCY) FOR EACH REPORT CHECKS NOT ACCEPTED ALWAYS SEND YOUR ORDER VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL. Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in at least two sheets of paper. On one of those sheets of paper, include: (a) the number & name of the report you are ordering, (b) your e-mail address, and (c) your name & postal address. PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR THESE REPORTS NOW: REPORT #1 "The Insider's Guide to Advertising for Free on the Internet." ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: Jeremy Anderson 1603 E. Wilson Ave. Salt Lake City, UT 84105 REPORT #2 "The Insider's Guide to Sending Bulk E-mail on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: Gary Goldman 6476 Bellevue Drive Conyers, GA 30094 REPORT #3 "The Secrets to Multilevel Marketing on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: Richard R. Civil 1800 Laurel Road Apt# 1603 Lindenwold, NJ 08021 REPORT #4 "How to become a Millionaire utilizing the Power of Multilevel Marketing and the Internet" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: Shawn Thomas 2016 Huntingdon Chase Atlanta, Georgia 30350 REPORT #5 "How to SEND 1,000,000 e-mails for FREE" Order REPORT #5 FROM: Paul Bowen 1105 Amble Lane Clearwater, FL 33755 There are currently more than 175,000,000 people online worldwide! *******TIPS FOR SUCCESS******* *TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt, professional, and follow the directions accurately. *Send for the five reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have them when the orders start coming in because: When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the requested product/report. *ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THE YOU RECEIVE. *Be patient and persistent with this program. If you follow the instructions exactly, your results WILL BE SUCCESSFUL! *ABOVE ALL, HAVE FAITH IN YOURSELF AND KNOW YOU WILL SUCCEED! *******YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINES******* Follow these guidelines to guarantee your success: If you don't receive 20 orders for REPORT #1 within two weeks, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Then, a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT #2. If you don't, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you, and the cash will Continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. If you want to generate more income, send another batch of e-mails or continue placing ads and start the whole process again! There is no limit to the income you will generate from this business! Before you make your decision as to whether or not you participate in this program. Please answer one question. DO YOU WANT TO CHANGE YOUR LIFE? If the answer is yes, please look at the following facts about this program: 1. YOU ARE SELLING A PRODUCT, WHICH DOES NOT COST ANYTHING TO PRODUCE! 2. YOU ARE SELLING A PRODUCT, WHICH DOES NOT COST ANYTHING TO SHIP! 3. YOU ARE SELLING A PRODUCT, WHICH DOES NOT COST YOU ANYTHING TO ADVERTISE! 4. YOU ARE UTILIZING THE POWER OF THE INTERNET AND THE POWER OF MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING TO DISTRIBUTE YOUR PRODUCT ALL OVER THE WORLD! 5. YOUR ONLY EXPENSES OTHER THAN YOUR INITIAL $25 INVESTMENT IS YOUR TIME! 6. VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE INCOME YOU GENERATE FROM THIS PROGRAM IS PURE PROFIT! 7. THIS PROGRAM WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER. *******TESTIMONIALS******* This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rule of not trying to place your name in a different position, it won't work and you'll lose a lot of potential income. I'm living proof that it works. It really is a great opportunity to make relatively easy money, with little cost to you. If you do choose to participate, follow the program exactly, and you'll be on your way to financial security. Fred Dellaca, Westport, New Zealand My name is Mitchell. My wife, Jody and I live in Chicago, IL. I am a cost accountant with a major U.S. Corporation and I make pretty good money. When I received the program I grumbled to Jody about receiving "junk mail." I made fun of the whole thing, spouting my knowledge of the population and percentages involved. I "knew" it wouldn't work. Jody totally ignored my supposed intelligence and jumped in with both feet. I made merciless fun of her, and was ready to lay the old "I told you so" on her when the thing didn't work� well, the laugh was on me! Within two weeks she had received over 50 responses. Within 45 day she had received over $147,200 in $5 bills! I was shocked! I was sure that I had it all figured and that it wouldn't work. I AM a believer now. I have joined Jody in her "hobby." I did have seven more years until retirement, but I think of the "rat race" and it's not for me. We owe it all to MLM. Mitchell Wolf MD., Chicago, IL The main reason for this letter is to convince you that this system is honest, lawful, extremely profitable, and is a way to get a large amount of money in a short time. I was approached several times before I checked this out. I joined just to see what one could expect in return for the minimal effort and money required. To my astonishment, I received $36,470.00 in the first 14 weeks, with money still coming in. Sincerely yours, Pam Hedland Halmstad, Sweden Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my mind to participate in this plan. But conservative that I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that there was just no way that I wouldn't get enough orders to at least get my money back. I surprised when I found my medium size post office box crammed with orders! For awhile, it got so overloaded that I had to start picking up my mail at the window. I'll make more money this year than any 10 years of my life before. The nice thing about this deal is that it doesn't matter where people live. There simply isn't a better investment with a faster return. Dan Sondstrom, Alberta, Canada I had received this program before. I deleted it, but later I wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get another copy, so I had to wait until I was e-mailed another program, 11 months passed then it came� I didn't delete this one!� I made more than $41,000 on the first try!! Mohamed, Cairo, Egypt ORDER YOUR REPORTS TODAY AND GET STARTED ON YOUR ROAD TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM! NOW IS THE TIME FOR YOUR TURN DECISIVE ACTION YIELDS POWERFUL RESULTS!!!! e-WORK AT HOME USING YOUR COMPUTER!!! From iralee at ibpinet.com.br Thu Oct 19 02:01:20 2000 From: iralee at ibpinet.com.br (Ira Lee) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 07:01:20 -0200 Subject: CDR: Misantropia Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20001019064532.009eb3e0@ibpinet.com.br> Do you enjoy music? Do you enjoy culture? Do you like politics? Do you enjoy humor? Do you like Brazil? The big Christmas CD is at: http://www.mp3.com/misantropia “I love Misantropia.” ... OJ Simpson “Some of my best friends are misanthropes.” ... Eugenio Pacelli “I am not a misanthrope.” ... Richard Nixon “Misantropia is culture, and culture is glitzy.” ... Leonora Helmsley “After Auschwitz, Brazil is easy.” Josef Mengele “I’d do it in a minute with a REAL misantropope.” ... Madonna “Misantropia ist ein gemuchteleffhausen schiessen gräsengescüonckgestaampfer und ein grösser hausengeschanskteskopfen!” ... Heinrich Himmler http://www.mp3.com/misantropia The big Xmas CD is at: http://www.mp3.com/misantropia -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 1465 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tom at ricardo.de Thu Oct 19 04:04:15 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 07:04:15 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <009201c03938$bbf4ac60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <39EDFF99.EF2DBEB6@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Message-ID: <39EED3EC.618E3938@ricardo.de> Harmon Seaver wrote: > I had a fidonet node for awhile. The concept really needs to be > revived -- and combined with more recent developments like Publius, freenet, > and gnutella. Sort of an underground internet -- the Information Subway. yepp, old fido-times sometimes make me smile in nostalgia feelings. though the german fido burried its own grave when a couple of buerocrats took over. when switched off my node, I was ashamed of what fido had become. > And for all I know, people are already doing it. A subterranean > "fidonet" partially using the net, partially (or maybe totally for some groups) > the old fidonet, middle of the night phone updates and downloads, coupled with > pgpfone. Add in packet radio. And what with carnivore, et al, maybe it'll > become the next big thing. all you need to do is use the internet as a transport layer. it's there, so why use the phone? cops can possibly intercept your phone calls more easily than randomly routed IP packets. the technology is there. all you'd need to do is set up a network of nodes that rsync itself at regular intervals, preferably using at least ssh. From tom at ricardo.de Thu Oct 19 04:14:17 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 07:14:17 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story References: <39EE19DC.55B73A6F@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Message-ID: <39EED655.3C4610A4@ricardo.de> Harmon Seaver wrote: > No, that's just alternative dns. Fidonet had most of what the internet has, > other than speed and the web -- file repositories, email, newsgroups -- but it was > all done privately. and self-organized. instead of the gov coming in and telling us to install filters, we choose to have our newsgroups moderated or not, and if so by one of our own. note: fido moderation was far different from usenet or mailinglist moderation. there was no "approval" step, everything got posted without going by the mod. the mod just had authority to reprimand people to stay on topic and could, in extreme situations, have someone removed from the group. his powers were very limited. I remember successfully fighting moderators. From ace at tidbits.com Thu Oct 19 07:27:00 2000 From: ace at tidbits.com (Adam C. Engst) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 07:27:00 -0700 Subject: Mac created the modern Internet (was RE: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story) Message-ID: At 9:28 AM -0400 10/19/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >The drive for Internet access came from Mac users. Few consumers had access >to Unix operating system based machines and Windows 3.1 lacked the Internet >applications. A host of which was readily available for the Mac and came >included on floppy in a book by Adam Engst that the novice Mac Internet user >probably wanted to read anyway. Most of them did. > >Which left a single major barrier: $2/hour. This last and probably most >crucial barrier went away literally during the course of a weekend when a >Berkeley company called Cyberspace Development announced a revolutionary >product: The Internet Adapter (TIA). TIA was a user level program that >allowed the user to pull a SLIP connection out of a regular shell account. >The program spread like wildfire through the Netcom Macintosh user >community. Within that single weekend, dozens of people were using TIA. >Everybody said the same thing: "it works"! > >Many shell providers banned TIA. Fortunately, Netcom did not. As one of >TIA's first users that very weekend, I wrote the "TIA mini-FAQ" on the spot, >explaining step-by-step in two pages how anybody with a Macintosh can get >hooked up with real IP within 30 minutes. At flat-rate shell prices. My >mini-FAQ was in stunningly high demand. > >Faced with this sudden flat-rate competition, within a few months the first >SLIP/PPP provider went to a flat-rate model. Then another. Then a third. >Providers started sprouting up all over the place. People began using >Mosaic, which was quickly replaced by several other browsers that started >showing up for the Mac within a couple of months. Most of the improvements >in those new Mac browsers were copied by a new startup that was formed soon >thereafter. That company was Netscape. The remainder of Internet history I >presume most of us are aware of. This is close to correct, but not quite. In fact, along with bundling MacTCP with my Internet Starter Kit for Macintosh (which enabled Mac users to get MacTCP AND a book of instruction for $30 rather than pay Apple $60 for just MacTCP, if you could find it), the book also came with a flat-rate SLIP account from Northwest Nexus, my ISP in Bellevue, WA. What happened was that we'd gone around looking for a decent SLIP account to bundle with the book, but weren't able to find anything under $11 per hour. I casually mentioned this to Ed Morin, the owner of Northwest Nexus (which I'd always used for ISP service in Washington), and said that I assumed they didn't want to be bundled because the book would have international distribution and I thought they wanted to be only a local ISP. Ed said he could have such problems, and a 4 hour telephone call (which included several conference calls with Livingston technical support to configure Nexus's PortMasters for dynamic IP addressing, which had just appeared in the feature set) later, we had flat-rate SLIP working. That flat-rate SLIP account was tremendously popular, and Northwest Nexus attracted customers from all over the world who were willing to pay long distance charges to avoid the usurious rates for SLIP locally. That was the key event in pricing SLIP down, in my opinion, since TIA came quite a bit later. TIA was another moving force, without question, but not the first one. I wrote about it in the second edition of ISKM. And what I mostly remember about Netcom in those early days was that their technical support was almost totally non-existent. I helped many ISKM readers solve problems with Netcom because Netcom wouldn't respond to email or phone calls. And since I never had a Netcom account, it was mostly a matter of garnering the specific bits of setup information from some people so I could help others. cheers... -Adam PS: And to bring the story full circle, the person who introduced me to TIA before it was released so I could write about it in the second edition of ISKM was Drummond Reed of Intermind, who has subsequently been the driving force behind the just-released eXtensible Name Service (XNS) technology that I'm helping guide via the non-profit XNSORG. Ironically XNS is almost the complete opposite of TIA. Where TIA was a quick hack that was immediately useful, it also had a very short lifespan and disappeared entirely as soon as the hardware appeared for all ISPs to do PPP. In contrast, XNS is a broad technology platform that has relatively few immediate uses, but which, if it succeeds, will affect a vast number of things on the Internet for a long time to come. ______________________________________________________________________ Adam C. Engst #2 in MDJ Power 25 / #5 in MacDirectory Top 10 TidBITS Publisher XNSORG President =Adam Engst Computer Book Author Macworld Contrib. Editor --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From jamesd at echeque.com Thu Oct 19 07:53:19 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 07:53:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001019073833.02605560@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 09:20 PM 10/18/2000 -0600, Anonymous wrote: > Crypto-anarchy is in fact not really anarchy, since it only > addresses some kinds of authority, ie government, and only in > certain situations. True anarchy involves the dissolution of other > hierarchical relationships, including those that spring from private > property. Get rid of private property and many of these problems > disappear. Been tried. Without property rights to separate one man's plan from another man's plan, only one plan can be permitted, and any pursuit of alternate goals, or pursuit of the same goals through alternate methods is "wrecking", and must be crushed. Without property rights in the means of production there there can only be one plan, and one set of planners, to which all must submit. The alternative to private property rights in the means of production is a single plan, one plan for all, one plan that must be imposed on all, which necessitates unending terror, as we have invariably and uniformly seen in practice. > How does crypto-anarchy/libertarian/anarchy propose to deal with the > "tragedy of the commons" where by doing what is best for each > persons own interests they end up screwing it up for everyone > (Overgrazing land with to many cattle is the example I've been > given). Private ownership of the land by cattle ranchers, enforced by the shotguns of the ranchers. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG hSmIic5Al/w7hGtJlqTJKmNvQK/JiO7KTgxjLT1y 4Vq+KMdyYfiwbwRen/HFA5EAOV6jg0yxpm6Y+2Ub2 From bear at sonic.net Thu Oct 19 08:39:43 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 08:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Neil Johnson wrote: >Two Things: > >1. It sounds like to me that there is no room for human compassion in >crypto-anarchy. There is room for human compassion in any system. What is absent from crypto anarchy is a means to *compel* others to behave *as if* they were compassionate when in fact they are not. >2. I think that it's funny that ultra-conservatives who are for letting >"competition" improve health care are setting themselves up for more >abortions. ?? What has that got to do with anything? Are you saying that people who are the expectant parents of a child should be able to compel others to support the medical, educational, or other costs of having and rearing that child? Or that people who are the expectant parents of a child which they themselves are unable to raise should be compelled to carry to term? >How does crypto-anarchy/libertarian/anarchy propose to deal with the >"tragedy of the commons" where by doing what is best for each persons own >interests they end up screwing it up for everyone (Overgrazing land with to >many cattle is the example I've been given). First of all, it's not a proposal so much as it is a forecast. This is not something that we're fighting for, so much as something that is happening all around us and which we're looking ahead to the natural conclusion of. Morally, I don't defend it: I just think it's going to happen and we should be ready. Second, as far as I can see, there is no room for "commons" in the Keynesian sense in a fully crypto-enabled world. Everything will be owned. The best we can hope for is that ways to measure, charge, and pay for the benevolent effects of forests, grasslands, etc will be in place so that the free market can regulate these resources and keep them from overuse. Bear From sean at crenterprises.net Thu Oct 19 08:43:00 2000 From: sean at crenterprises.net (Sean Christopher) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 08:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: $1,000.00 for $10 - Would You Spend It? Message-ID: <19943672.886214@relay.comanche.denmark.eu> Friday, October 20th, 2000 Would you be willing to spend $10 dollars if I told you that you could have $1000 within 1 month? You send me $10 dollars and I will email you the way to financial freedom. You are spending less for this information than most people spend for lunch. And what you get is so much more. If you do not make at least $1000.00 within 30 days, I will send you a $100.00 back. Thats how much I know this works. Try it? What do you really have to loose? $10? What does $10 do for you anymore. But a GRAND, that can do something for you! Email me, sean at crenterprises.net for the address to mail your $10 today. It will be the best $10 you EVER spent. ---------------------------------------------------------- For additional information regarding the proposed United States Federal requirements for commercial e-mail: Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 618 . Please see: www.senate.gov / ~murkowski / commercailmail / EMailAmendText.html CR Enterprises P.O. Box 1847 Fredericksburg, TX 78624 830-990-2133 sean at crenterprises.net Per Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 618, further transmissions to you by the sender may be stopped at NO COST to you by forwarding this e-mail to REMOVE at crenterprises.net (1017pm) From bear at sonic.net Thu Oct 19 08:43:06 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 08:43:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <016a01c03973$2296bbe0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Neil Johnson wrote: >But the Bob has no control of his risk (genetics), or at least not yet :). >The insurance company does. Say What?! Sorry, no insurance company has the power to say who is and is not born with particular genetics. >I don't have a problem with insurance companies raising rates for people who >smoke, are overweight (cough, cough), or have high cholesterol (cough, >cough, cough). That's behavior that can be changed. You speak as though the insurance companies business where arbitration of morals rather than arbitration of risks. They can't make money arbitrating morals -- at least not without becoming religions. Bear From rah at shipwright.com Thu Oct 19 05:44:03 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 08:44:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: At 9:11 PM -0500 on 10/18/00, Neil Johnson wrote: > How does crypto-anarchy/libertarian/anarchy propose to deal with the > "tragedy of the commons" where by doing what is best for each persons own > interests they end up screwing it up for everyone (Overgrazing land with to > many cattle is the example I've been given). The tragedy of the commons is that nobody owns it. :-). Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From rah at shipwright.com Thu Oct 19 05:48:40 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 08:48:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> Message-ID: At 9:20 PM -0600 on 10/18/00, Anonymous wrote: > Crypto-anarchy is in fact not really anarchy, since it only addresses > some kinds of authority, ie government, and only in certain situations. > True anarchy involves the dissolution of other hierarchical relationships, > including those that spring from private property. Get rid of private > property and many of these problems disappear. Actually, in "cypherspace" you can private property without law. If it's encrypted and I have the key, it's my property. No, Virginia, property is not theft. :-). Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From whgiii at openpgp.net Thu Oct 19 05:57:04 2000 From: whgiii at openpgp.net (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 08:57:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: ADL lists anarchy symbol as racist In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200010191256.IAA06976@domains.invweb.net> In , on 10/18/00 at 07:51 PM, Tim May said: >At 6:55 PM -0400 10/18/00, Jim Burnes wrote: >>On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: >>> http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/racist_anarchy_symbol.html >> >>Wow. Runic alphabets are verboten also. >"Verboten"? >You just used a German word. I'm reporting you to the Zionist League. >"Remember, children of Israel, "Eretz Israel" is not the same thing as >"lebensraum," and the suppression of the ragheads in Eretz Israel is >merely pest eradication, not the "Final Solution." War is peace, freedom >is slavery, and Zionists are libertarians." Sorry Tim exactly when are you going to give up "Fortress May" and return the property to the Mexicans (who can then return it to the "Native" Indians that they stole it from)? Pot, Kettle, Black. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Data Security & Cryptology Consulting Programming, Networking, Analysis PGP for OS/2: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html E-Secure: http://www.openpgp.net/esecure.html --------------------------------------------------------------- From mcbride at countersiege.com Thu Oct 19 06:03:26 2000 From: mcbride at countersiege.com (Ryan McBride) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:03:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? (NP-Completeness, cracking speed) In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001019021954.007a04e0@idiom.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Bill Stewart wrote: > At Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:39:13 -0700 Nathan Saper wrote > Unless I'm mistaken, there is no essential physical law that > determines computing power, exploits of algorithms, etc. > The same cannot be said for speed-of-light travel. > > Data storage probably requires at least an atom, or at least one > electron, or at least one quark. There are only so many spare ones of > these in the universe. Yes, you do need at least one, but perhaps you _only_ need one. Check out the story in EETimes at http://www.eet.com/story/OEG20000831S0019 > There have also been calculations on energy requirements for > computation (don't remember the rationale; probably in Schneier 2nd > Ed.) People seldom read the errata for books. >From http://www.counterpane.com/ac2errv30.html: * Page 157: The section on "Thermodynamic Limitations" is not quite correct. It requires kT energy to set or clear a single bit because these are irreversible operations. However, complementing a bit is reversible and hence has no minimum required energy. It turns out that it is theoretically possible to do any computation in a reversible manner except for copying out the answer. At this theoretical level, energy requirements for exhaustive cryptanalysis are therefore linear in the key length, not exponential. -Ryan -- Ryan McBride - mcbride at countersiege.com Systems Security Consultant Countersiege Systems Corporation - http://www.countersiege.com From rah at shipwright.com Thu Oct 19 06:14:52 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:14:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: It's all property, folks (was Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?)) In-Reply-To: <01a101c0397e$28fb6340$0100a8c0@nandts> References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> <01a101c0397e$28fb6340$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: At 10:39 PM -0500 on 10/18/00, Neil Johnson wrote: > So who gets the bid on the environment ? There are some commons that can not > be eliminated so easily. I hate to disappoint you, bunky, but the "environment" is property. My lungs are property. If some one injures them, I have a tort. I don't even need legislation. My land, and that of others, is property, if someone pollutes it, I have a tort. If someone upstream pollutes a river running through my land, I have a tort. The nation-state itself is just a giant property owner, whose holdings *will* get smaller with the advance of Moore's law, geodesic networks and financial cryptography. Nation-states are the de facto owners of the rivers flowing through their borders, the lakes therein, vast tracts of forest, jungle, and desert wasteland, and the oceans around them out to 200 miles. They also own their air above them -- up to maximum missile range. :-). So-called "public" goods are merely goods which are transfer-priced, and, eventually, the use of financial cryptography on public internetworks allows not only the efficient and direct pricing and payment for, but the actual title to, all kinds of previously transfer-priced assets, in easily tradeable bearer form, on the net. With less transfer pricing and lower transaction costs, the smaller the property rights you can convey, and the smaller the owner of a given piece of property needs to be. So, folks, eventually, the very ocean, even intra-solar space itself, will also be property. Believe it, folks. Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From rah at shipwright.com Thu Oct 19 06:39:17 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:39:17 -0400 Subject: Bank Offers Virtual Safe Deposit Boxes (was Re: ip: SANS NewsBites Vol. 2 Num. 42) In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001018155649.0079ea60@mail.telepath.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001018155649.0079ea60@mail.telepath.com> Message-ID: At 3:56 PM -0500 on 10/18/00, The SANS Institute wrote: > --10 October 2000 Bank Offers Virtual Safe Deposit Boxes > FleetBoston Financial Corp. is offering online safe deposit boxes for > electronic documents; the virtual boxes are accessible with an ID number > and a password. > http://www.boston.com/dailynews/284/economy/Fleet_to_offer_Web_based_safe_P. > shtml > http://www.boston.com/dailynews/284/economy/Boston_bank_offers_Web_based_sP. > shtml -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From brflgnk at cotse.com Thu Oct 19 07:08:45 2000 From: brflgnk at cotse.com (brflgnk at cotse.com) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:08:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anyone know easy symmetric cypher for perl? Message-ID: <971964525.39ef006d383ae@webmail.cotse.com> At 12:24 AM 10/19/00 -0700, Petro wrote: >>I need a perl module or a function that would perform symmetric key >>encryption/decryption. I need it to encode secret information in >>URLs. Thanks > > I thought you were brighter than that Igor. > > http://search.cpan.org/search?mode=module&query=encrypt "No modules found matching 'encrypt' " http://search.cpan.org/search?mode=module&query=crypt , on the other hand... From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Thu Oct 19 07:11:34 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:11:34 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) cpunk Message-ID: Anonymous wrote: > > > I believe that the standard argument is "Eliminate the commons." (by > > > auctioning off to the highest bidder perhaps) > > > > > > > So who gets the bid on the environment ? There are some commons > > that can not be eliminated so easily. > > Generally, this would be water and air. If someone pollutes the air > over their land, that's ok. As soon as the pollution crosses into > your land, you sue for damages. People are concerned about the > long term value of their property, so they will have a disincentive > to pollute. > [...] While by default I hold libertarian positions, doing so sometimes requires uncomfortable contortions. Who, for example, should the inhabitants of Tuvalu sue for rising sea levels? Neighbouring territories for failing to prevent excess seawater from crossing their mid-ocean border? Arctic nations for sloppy handling of the runoff from their melting icecaps? The rest of the human race for burning too much stuff? Me for driving a Suburban? Sometimes ownership is so distant and diluted that individual responsibility is impossible to establish, yet the problems are real, and significant. [This is just an example, ok? Lets NOT fork into a debate over the reality (or lack thereof) of global warming.] Peter Trei From mclow at owl.csusm.edu Thu Oct 19 10:16:03 2000 From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:16:03 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) cpunk In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 10:11 AM -0400 10/19/00, Trei, Peter wrote: >While by default I hold libertarian positions, doing so sometimes >requires uncomfortable contortions. > >Who, for example, should the inhabitants of Tuvalu sue for rising >sea levels? Neighbouring territories for failing to prevent excess >seawater from crossing their mid-ocean border? Arctic nations >for sloppy handling of the runoff from their melting icecaps? The >rest of the human race for burning too much stuff? Me for driving a >Suburban? > >Sometimes ownership is so distant and diluted that >individual responsibility is impossible to establish, yet the >problems are real, and significant. > >[This is just an example, ok? Lets NOT fork into a debate over >the reality (or lack thereof) of global warming.] No problem. However, it illustrates another point that I wish to refute. --> Every time that something happens, someone is to blame. Who is to blame for hurricanes? Haiti, for not stopping them before they reach Florida? Who is to blame for a bee flying into your mouth while you are driving? (which, if you've never had it happen, leads quickly to a car crash) -- -- Marshall "The era of big government is over." Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996 Marshall Clow MusicMatch From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Thu Oct 19 07:33:46 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:33:46 -0400 Subject: CDR: Subway (was I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" ) References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <009201c03938$bbf4ac60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <39EDFF99.EF2DBEB6@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> <39EED3EC.618E3938@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <39EF062E.83BBA559@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Tom Vogt wrote: > > all you need to do is use the internet as a transport layer. it's there, > so why use the phone? cops can possibly intercept your phone calls more > easily than randomly routed IP packets. > > the technology is there. all you'd need to do is set up a network of > nodes that rsync itself at regular intervals, preferably using at least > ssh. At least -- but it's still subject to traffic analysis to discover who the perps are, on both ends. And yes, phones can be tapped too, but it's more difficult, takes more effort, warrants (at least here, so far). But I've been thinking more about this and realized that packet radio is really the best transport medium, done in burst modes on shortwave or even CB frequencies with big linear amps. A pirate packet network, with some stations just running scanners and gatewaying into the internet maybe. Or just design a easily built TNC to work with standard modems and running off AM or shorwave radio receivers, widely publish the schematics, and the code, so anybody, anywhere in the world could just listen in, and, if they dared (and had a transmitter) become a broadcast node as well. Bursts, especially on random frequencies, are pretty hard to pinpoint, but computer run scanners with a "tcp/ip" to reassemble fragmented packets can listen and gather. Here's what someone else was saying to me on this, altho he's pretty much concentrating on the net as a transport medium, while I think we might want soon want (and for places like China right now) to have something which might easily be monitored, but not easily stopped. And if it's all in strong crypto, who cares who monitors it -- while strong crypto in email could easily just become verboten on the net. > Anyway - combine the notion with stego and pseudo-stego techniques. > Tougher than people realize to embed stuff in mp3's - you might not know > its there, but it would be pretty detectable. Mp3's use psycho acoustics > to do bit allocation. So water marking can be difficult to preserve at > reasonable data rates. > > But now - the ability to propagate fragments universally - e.g. usenet, > email, web, etc., in encrypted and stego'd forms - that's interesting. I > think the issue here is universal availability - making it available > everywhere. Freenet (?) is interesting because it propigates data > towards the people who want it, but really - it needs to be everywhere. > > So a reader is something that can pull from usenet, email, web, etc - > hell its all just tcp ports etc anyway. And a server is something that > can serve up all those ports. Best to hide in plain site - so email, > instant messaging, web, etc. ['course some computer somewhere is reading > this email because it says cypherpunks and ya gotta track yer dissidents > der now donya?] > > Couple other notions - one - use multicasting to propagate fragments = > particularly allowing background collection of fragments in ways > difficult to track. > > The notion of back-channel is pretty interesting as well. Basically it > is comprised of means to obscure a particular service on any particular > machine. You knock at the door. You may or may not get an answer. > Sometimes that machine will contact a third machine with your request, > but without responding to it, or by responding for instance with 404 not > found headers, etc. But some other machine might serve up a fragment - > 'heard you needed this'. > > I'm not providing a very succinct description at the moment, but I think > you get the drift. Its about obscuring the origins of requests and > answers from casual and perhaps programmatic observation. Its not > downloading an encrypted web page from a single server. Its about > acquiring that page from a variety of places as encrypted fragments, > that might appear as casual requests. And going to a particular server > does not cause a particular piece of data to be delivered - from that > server, but it may be delivered later from another machine. > > So back channel is really about creating this virtual back channel using > the store and forward approach. The channel's packets are encrypted, and > the node is non-deterministic in its behavior. > > How this applies, is that you don't want someone figuring out (and there > are some statistical geniuses out there) that making this requesting > suddenly turns on that transmitter. Instead, data is handed around in a > "someone you may know may want this". No machine itself could ever > really know what end user wants even a fragment of data, because > everyone is storing and fowarding this data. > > Now - to go beyond this - there may be ways to create virtual networks > using routable packets or packet fragments - things that may be "out of > spec" to the point that they may or may not universally propagate, or > that may be discarded as a general rule. That's also interesting, as > firewalls etc may well filter out for general users... e.g. they may > appear as undesirable or erroneous packets. > > ANyway - the notion seems solid, I think governmentally unsanctioned > radio requires methodologies based on indeterminancy. And you need to > ensure that the storage points (e.g. usenet) can't differentiate a > request from an answer. Strikes me that someone is doing this already in > some form... its almost tradecraft, afterall - secret a request, post a > tell tale, someone that sees the telltale retrieves the request - but so > do a lot of other people, and the response is similar secret the > response, post a tell tale, and then ... > > SO 1st and foremost, you need to codify what you're trying to achieve > design parameter-wise. And lest someone think this all evil - look at > China's latest crackdown on the internet. We'd like to do a web service > for China - 15 Million on the web speak Mandarin - but most are in > China. This would be a great vehicle for publishing in lands without > liberty. Where's the voice of liberty/voice of america on the internet? > And what if, what if it were possible to obscure the recipients from the > eyes of tyranny? > > -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From jburnes at savvis.net Thu Oct 19 08:37:20 2000 From: jburnes at savvis.net (Jim Burnes) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:37:20 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: <00101910372001.04567@reality.eng.savvis.net> On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > At 9:11 PM -0500 10/18/00, Neil Johnson wrote: > >Two Things: > > > >1. It sounds like to me that there is no room for human compassion in > >crypto-anarchy. > > (Seems like we will all end up sitting in our "compounds" armed to > > the teeth and if anybody comes along we either blow'em to bits or pay > > them anonymous digital cash > >to go away). > > Another socialist simp-wimp heard from. > > Lots of socialists to be dealt with and disposed of. I wonder who > will stoke the furnaces? > Wow. The imagery! Actually the best way to deal with it is by a memetic vaccine (what would the equivalent be in memetics? mezzine? someone fluent in latin help me out here). I really think that humanity will discover that a lot of what humans call beliefs are really just widespread memetic plagues. When memetic engineering reaches the same stage in scientific development as biology has, much of the 'isms that regularly wipe out entire populations may be brought under control. And humanity can move on. (But not before memtic and nanotech warfare resurface the planet in some unpredicatable way, no doubt). jim -- Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 19 10:58:24 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:58:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Reading list In-Reply-To: <20001019125758.B26667@cluebot.com> References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> <4.3.1.2.20001019073833.02605560@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001019125758.B26667@cluebot.com> Message-ID: At 12:57 PM -0400 10/19/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 07:53:19AM -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >> Without property rights to separate one man's plan from another man's plan, >> only one plan can be permitted, and any pursuit of alternate goals, or >> pursuit of the same goals through alternate methods is "wrecking", and must >> be crushed. > >I might be tempted to agree with you, but I think David Friedman's >Machinery of Freedom (which I was reading last night) might have >something to say about the above. > >It should be required reading for all cpunx anyway (not saying you >haven't read it -- this is simply a general suggestion to the rest of >the list). Indeed. We used to have the reasonable expectation that nearly everyone on the list had some familiarity with the "classics." For example, Friedman's "Machinery of Freedom," Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson," Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom," Vinge's "True Names," Card's "Ender's Game," Rand's "Atlas Shrugged," Brunner's "Shockwave Rider," and maybe even some of the writings of Spooner, Benson, Von Mises, Tannehill, Hospers, and Rothbard. These works helped to establish a common vocabulary, a common set of core concepts. Not that everyone was a libertarian, let alone a Libertarian. But the core concepts were known, and those who didn't know about them were motivated to go off and look them up. We had fewer folks arguing for socialism in those days. Today, it's like, whoa, dude, like the insurance companies are, like, big meanies and they, like, have lots of money and so they should, like, be forced to help the little guys. And besides, like, socialism was never really given a good test. I mean, like, the stuff they're doing in Cuba is really rad. Like, they're _spanking_ private corporations! Of the half dozen or so clueless ranter who have appeared recently to argue that corporations are the real enemy, that government is just trying to do its job, that all crypto is broken anyway so why bother?, that free markets can't possibly work, and that crypto is for helping to force insurance companies to help the little guy, most of them are a waste of skin. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tom at ricardo.de Thu Oct 19 08:17:22 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:17:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Subway (was I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" ) References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <009201c03938$bbf4ac60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <39EDFF99.EF2DBEB6@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> <39EED3EC.618E3938@ricardo.de> <39EF062E.83BBA559@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Message-ID: <39EF0F4C.87150103@ricardo.de> Harmon Seaver wrote: > At least -- but it's still subject to traffic analysis to discover who the > perps are, on both ends. the idea would be to sync everything. that a) means lots of "innocent" traffic and b) gives you a deniability shield. "yeah, those subversive texts were on my node. but I had no control over that, since there is no way I could filter what comes in." > And yes, phones can be tapped too, but it's more difficult, > takes more effort, warrants (at least here, so far). But I've been thinking more > about this and realized that packet radio is really the best transport medium, done > in burst modes on shortwave or even CB frequencies with big linear amps. A pirate > packet network, with some stations just running scanners and gatewaying into the > internet maybe. give me the hardware for less than $1000 and I'll be the first to set up a node in germany's second-largest city. > monitored, but not easily stopped. And if it's all in strong crypto, who cares who > monitors it -- while strong crypto in email could easily just become verboten on the > net. here's a cookie: run a large file-sharing network as outlined above. every file has an associated key and signature. you can replace by signing the replacement with the same key. now you have a few gigs of data distributed around the world. chaff and winnow it or use stego on some of the images. downside: end-users with 28k modems are pretty much out of the picture since they can't move enough bytes around. From rah at shipwright.com Thu Oct 19 08:22:47 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:22:47 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Mac created the modern Internet (was RE: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story) Message-ID: For cypherpunks, net-thinkers is a list Vinnie started a looong time ago, with a bunch of, heh, hoary old mac-internet pioneers :-) on it, including Adam Engst. Clearly Adam means to quote Lucky, in the message forwarded below, and not me. Adam's right, obviously, and I'm proof. When I first got to cypherpunks, in May 1994, it was with a SLIP feed from The Internet Access Company (TIAC), in the Boston suburb of Bedford, using the first(?) edition of Adam's book, which Vinnie made me buy from Quantum Books in Cambridge. I was TIAC customer 640 or so, and they sold me a mostly flat rate (I never used all the hours they charged me a flat rate for) for a static IP address on their backbone. Or what became their backbone, anyway, as I remember an excited customer support person telling me so in a very excited voice some 3 years later when they had about 50,000 customers or so. TIAC has since merged up, but I don't remember who to, as by that time I was long gone... Cheers, RAH --- begin forwarded text From jburnes at savvis.net Thu Oct 19 08:24:29 2000 From: jburnes at savvis.net (Jim Burnes) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:24:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: ADL lists anarchy symbol as racist In-Reply-To: References: <1121faa9f428bc88e7310250dcb52abd@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <00101910273900.04567@reality.eng.savvis.net> On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > At 6:55 PM -0400 10/18/00, Jim Burnes wrote: > >On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: > >> http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/racist_anarchy_symbol.html > > > >Wow. Runic alphabets are verboten also. > > "Verboten"? > > You just used a German word. I'm reporting you to the Zionist League. Hehe. I was going to do the tiresome emoticon thingy after 'verboten', but I rightly assumed that someone would enjoy the irony in it without having to hammer it home. I was not dissapointed. The twist was actually unintentional. I usually use 'verboten' to mean, not just forbidden, but forbidden by the thought police. The irony is delicious. I mean, who would have thought that the usage drummed into me by all those Hollywood war movies would eventually be used to describe....oh never mind... jim -- Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From azb at llnl.gov Thu Oct 19 11:30:59 2000 From: azb at llnl.gov (Tony Bartoletti) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:30:59 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39EE57E9.F190FD62@nma.com> References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> <4.2.2.20001017145434.00a9eba0@poptop.llnl.gov> <4.2.2.20001018152017.00a9bc70@poptop.llnl.gov> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001019104803.00aac1f0@poptop.llnl.gov> At 07:09 PM 10/18/00 -0700, Ed Gerck wrote: >Tony, > >Your examples were so bad! > >;-) of course, I meant "good" as in that new IBM commercial where the IBM >guy says that >the IBM laptop is "bad" ;-) Thanks :) >"identifty theft" -- which simply is not a theft, it is impersonation. Of >course, I >continue to hope that we in crypto don't have to use "identity theft" as >well. But, >should they can continue to use it? > >Some lawyers don't think so, including Mac Norton in this list who wrote: > > Speaking as a lawyer, one of "they,", they should not continue to use > it. Identity theft might be accomplishable in some scenario, one in which > I somehow induced amnesia in you, for example, but otherwise the use of > the term to cover what you rightly point is simply impersonation, does a > disservice to my profession as well as yours. There is "my sense of my identity", which works for me in many ways. Short of amnesia or devious brainwashing, that identity cannot be lost, stolen, or even diminished or tarnished in any way without "my consent". There is "other's sense of my identity" which works also for me in important ways. It gets me recognized, allows me access, etc. When I am maliciously impersonated (impersonation itself not a crime I think) then the quantity we call "other's sense of my identity" has been polluted, vandalized, and in the most plain of terms, I have lost the facility of that identity needed in my relationship to others. And someone else has gained from its use. Technically, one can argue that this is not "theft" of one's identity. (Would you grant it is "misappropriation of one's identifying attributes"?) But "impersonation", while very accurate, describes a method more than it does the crime itself, much as "discharging a firearm" is accurate, but says nothing about the intent, the target, or the damages. The term "impersonation" can apply to a role, as in impersonating a police officer or a doctor. In such (ironically "impersonal") cases, no individual police officer's or doctor's identity (or character or reputation) is in any way involved. This being the case, how to distinguish (give a name) to the crime that DOES involve usurping the identifying attributes of a individual person, to the diminishment of their character or reputation? Even "identity impersonation", while more specific, does not carry the connotations of criminality. (If I am invited to the wedding of a distant obnoxious relative, and pay a friend of mine to impersonate me at that wedding, I may be guilty of poor ethics, but I don't believe I have violated any criminal statute.) So we come down to "unauthorized malicious identity impersonation". Doesn't quite roll off the tongue ... Cheers! ___tony___ Tony Bartoletti 925-422-3881 Information Operations, Warfare and Assurance Center Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, CA 94551-9900 From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 19 08:31:02 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:31:02 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EE0924.6ED205C9@acmenet.net> References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001018195001.00818df0@pop.sprynet.com> At 04:34 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: >David Honig wrote: >> Only govt can print money. > >I'll kick you right square in the nuts if Robert Hettinga doesn't beat >me to it. In the context of what I was writing, it should be clear that what I meant is corporations can't enforce fiat money like govt (the folks with the groovy guns & goons) can. dh From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 19 11:31:13 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:31:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Reading list In-Reply-To: References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> <4.3.1.2.20001019073833.02605560@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001019125758.B26667@cluebot.com> Message-ID: To expand on this point: At 10:58 AM -0700 10/19/00, Tim May wrote: > >Indeed. We used to have the reasonable expectation that nearly >everyone on the list had some familiarity with the "classics." For >example, Friedman's "Machinery of Freedom," Hazlitt's "Economics in >One Lesson," Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom," Vinge's "True Names," >Card's "Ender's Game," Rand's "Atlas Shrugged," Brunner's "Shockwave >Rider," and maybe even some of the writings of Spooner, Benson, Von >Mises, Tannehill, Hospers, and Rothbard. These works helped to >establish a common vocabulary, a common set of core concepts. > >Not that everyone was a libertarian, let alone a Libertarian. But >the core concepts were known, and those who didn't know about them >were motivated to go off and look them up. We had fewer folks >arguing for socialism in those days. The point is not that people must be indoctrinated into the correct ideology, but that these and similar books captured the Zeitgeist of our times vis-a-vis cyberspace, the collapse of borders, the internationalization of commerce, etc. Throw in "Moore's law and the geodesic network" if your initials are the same as Heinlein's. It's not important that everyone read _every_ one of these books. But it _is_ important that they read and internalize at least _some_ of them. One of the advantages we had in the early days of the list, circa 1992-4, was that people were already fairly Net-savvy, else they wouldn't have started coming to meetings in the Bay Area, wouldn't have subscribed, wouldn't have been reading the early issues of "Wired," and so on. And many of the early list activists were from the Extropians list, where issues of anarcho-capitalism, Friedman, technology, etc. had been discussed many, many times. Those arriving on the Cypherpunks list tended to be those who felt the palpable sense that Things Are About to Change. As time went on, we started getting more and more clueless kids and people who wandered in because they'd heard that Cypherpunks was cool. Predictably, many of these were script kiddies and hackerd00dz who had inculcated views from their socialist schools that capitalism was doomed. Some of them made the transition to absorbing the message of "uncoerced transactions," many left. That so many of the books cited above are libertarian is not too surprising. It's really hard to imagine a world where strong crypto is ubiquitous where state power is increased, where transactions are coerced, and where taxes are high. I know of no serious books, for example, which argue this point. Of course, as regards the implications of crypto, they could try to find treatments of a more leftist point of view, and then argue those points here on the list. Some vaguely left-leaning anarchist material on "temporary autonomous zones," TAZs, is available. And some of the usual lit-crit stuff on postmodernism, Neil Postman, Hakim Bey, etc. Some of the early Cypherpunks were quite knowledgeable about these viewpoints. They were, however, views which were much more finely nuanced than the claptrap about how corporations need to be forced to help the little guy, blah blah. By the way, I could add several more books to the list above: Stephenson's "Snow Crash," Bey's "TAZ," Benson's "The Enterprise of Law," and Kelly's "Out of Control." There are more, obviously. And the past discussions on the list. And even my own Cyphernomicon FAQ. And the essays of Eric Hughes, Hal Finney, Dean Tribble, Mark Miller, Nick Szabo, Robin Hanson, and many others. But I recommend folks at least start with the "classics." --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From auto9950013 at hushmail.com Thu Oct 19 09:34:52 2000 From: auto9950013 at hushmail.com (auto9950013 at hushmail.com) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:34:52 -0500 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Tim May's anti-semitic rants Message-ID: <200010191546.IAA27556@user3.hushmail.com> This list is no stranger to Tim May's sarcasm and anti-semitic rants. >You just used a German word. I'm reporting you to the Zionist League. >"Remember, children of Israel, "Eretz Israel" is not the same thing >as "lebensraum," and the suppression of the ragheads in Eretz Israel >is merely pest eradication, not the "Final Solution." War is peace, >freedom is slavery, and Zionists are libertarians." --Tim May From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 19 08:47:10 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:47:10 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: ADL lists anarchy symbol as racist In-Reply-To: <00101818005406.03076@reality.eng.savvis.net> References: <1121faa9f428bc88e7310250dcb52abd@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001019024056.009af2c0@idiom.com> At 06:55 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Jim Burnes wrote: >On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: >> http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/racist_anarchy_symbol.html > >Wow. Runic alphabets are verboten also. >Guess we ought to boycott Tolkein. Peace signs, too. War is Peace, I guess.... Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From ulf at fitug.de Thu Oct 19 08:53:44 2000 From: ulf at fitug.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ulf_M=F6ller?=) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:53:44 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Mac created the modern Internet Message-ID: <20001019175323.A13615@netestate.de> I'm sure that Mac users added to the momentum, but don't forget online services like AOL and CompuServe. They started offering Internet mail and Usenet access in 1993, and as people started sending URLs around, they inevitably had to offer online access as well. From alan at clueserver.org Thu Oct 19 11:54:42 2000 From: alan at clueserver.org (Alan Olsen) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:54:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Reading list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > > To expand on this point: > > At 10:58 AM -0700 10/19/00, Tim May wrote: > > > >Indeed. We used to have the reasonable expectation that nearly > >everyone on the list had some familiarity with the "classics." For > >example, Friedman's "Machinery of Freedom," Hazlitt's "Economics in > >One Lesson," Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom," Vinge's "True Names," > >Card's "Ender's Game," Rand's "Atlas Shrugged," Brunner's "Shockwave > >Rider," and maybe even some of the writings of Spooner, Benson, Von > >Mises, Tannehill, Hospers, and Rothbard. These works helped to > >establish a common vocabulary, a common set of core concepts. > > > >Not that everyone was a libertarian, let alone a Libertarian. But > >the core concepts were known, and those who didn't know about them > >were motivated to go off and look them up. We had fewer folks > >arguing for socialism in those days. > > > The point is not that people must be indoctrinated into the correct > ideology, but that these and similar books captured the Zeitgeist of > our times vis-a-vis cyberspace, the collapse of borders, the > internationalization of commerce, etc. Throw in "Moore's law and the > geodesic network" if your initials are the same as Heinlein's. > > It's not important that everyone read _every_ one of these books. But > it _is_ important that they read and internalize at least _some_ of > them. I find those lists useful because i find that a number of them I have not read. I prefer recomendations from sources that might share my interests than those that might be just a paid shill for a the book publishing company. (Like, say, the New York Times Best Seller List(tm).) Not all of us have the free time to research interesting book, or the exposure to the same sources. The lists are helpful. I also recommend a list of books that piss people off while reading. Things like "The ICSA Guide to Cryptography". (The most pro-GAK crypto book I have ever read. I keep it as a reminder of which libraries and products to avoid.) alan at ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys. "In the future, everything will have its 15 minutes of blame." From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 19 11:57:43 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:57:43 -0700 Subject: CDR: re:Tim May's anti-semitic rants In-Reply-To: <200010191814.LAA01497@user3.hushmail.com> References: <200010191814.LAA01497@user3.hushmail.com> Message-ID: At 2:05 PM -0500 10/19/00, auto9950013 at hushmail.com wrote: >Tim's anti Jewish sentiments are obvious in his current posts and in the >past. >If he had any guts he would admit what he really feels instead of using >sarcasm and obfuscation. > This anonymous poster complains that I haven't admitted what I really feel. Oh, the irony. Also, I've expressed my views quite plainly in many thousands of articles. As for Jews, I have nothing for or against them, per se. Ditto for Muslims, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Scientologists, Catholics, Lutheran, Jehovah's Witnesses, Wiccans, Baalists, or Baloneyians. As for Zionism, I despise it. A political system which says that people living in Schenectady or Dublin or Krakow should travel to Palestine and expel the owners of farms and shops because some desert prophet claimed to have heard a message from his desert god 3300 years ago that the land would be given to his followers...despicable. As for the modern state of Israel, it has some good and some bad. It has some forward-looking high tech companies. Unfortunately, many of them are essentially state-owned. It has some well-educated people. It also has some fascists. In the long run, I doubt Israel will survive in its present form. It's just packed-in too close to those with access to bombs, biological weapons, nerve gas, and so on. And some of those folks it expelled from farms and shops have long memories...and a martyr's sensibility. Some of those Palestinians will eventually decide to take out Tel Aviv with a suitcase nuke, or airborne Ebola, or any of the various Horsemen. Pouring out the vials, so to speak. And what will I think of millions of Zionists being incinerated or coughing out their last breaths? I'll think of it as the inevitable consequences of encouraging people in this modern age to migrate to someone else's land and forcibly expel them. I'll think of it as evolution in action. My biggest worry will be what will happen to my Intel stock if the Qiryat Gat wafer fab is destroyed. The former residents of the Palestinian village of Al Falujah, may return. So, Mr. Anonymous Hushmail, I've expressed my views a lot more publically than you have. Twit. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From gbnewby at ils.unc.edu Thu Oct 19 08:57:45 2000 From: gbnewby at ils.unc.edu (Greg Newby) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 11:57:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: ADL lists anarchy symbol as racist In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001019024056.009af2c0@idiom.com>; from bill.stewart@pobox.com on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 11:47:10AM -0400 References: <1121faa9f428bc88e7310250dcb52abd@mixmaster.ceti.pl> <00101818005406.03076@reality.eng.savvis.net> <3.0.5.32.20001019024056.009af2c0@idiom.com> Message-ID: <20001019115738.B6318@ils.unc.edu> On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 11:47:10AM -0400, Bill Stewart wrote: > > At 06:55 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Jim Burnes wrote: > >On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: > >> http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/racist_anarchy_symbol.html > > > >Wow. Runic alphabets are verboten also. > >Guess we ought to boycott Tolkein. > > Peace signs, too. War is Peace, I guess.... My favorite is Doc Martens boots, worn by "racist and non-racist skinheads." -- Greg From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 19 12:13:53 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:13:53 -0700 Subject: CDR: Declan should hope Bush is elected! Message-ID: I know Declan is libertarian-leaning, but it seems to me he has good reason to hope Bush wins. Look at Bush's latest stump speech: Thursday October 19 2:13 PM ET Bush Calls Gore Out of Step with New Economy Reuters Photo By Patricia Wilson FRASER, Mich. (Reuters) - Deriding Democrat Al Gore (news - web sites) for ''analog thinking in a digital age,'' Republican George W. Bush (news - web sites) on Thursday cast himself as a better steward of the new economy who would protect the Internet from ``the heavy hand of government.'' .... Bush touted the technology boom in Texas and pointed out that a Texan, Jack Kilby, won a Nobel Prize last week for inventing the integrated circuit in the 1950s. ``It was an amazing achievement, unrivaled in the annals of technology until 1986, when one senator from Tennessee, alone in his office, invented the Internet,'' Bush said. Competing Plans The reference to Gore and the Internet, drew hoots of laughter and prolonged applause. Gore, who while in Congress was credited with helping to push federal funding for research that brought about the Internet, has conceded one of his biggest mistakes was when he was seen as claiming credit for helping invent the Internet. --end excerpt-- Seems to me that if Bush wins, Declan will be quite welcome in the White House. He may even be able to influence Bush further in the direction of "hands off" approaches, especially in censorship and filtering. If Gore wins, I expect Declan will face a chilly reception. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Thu Oct 19 09:19:20 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:19:20 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: > ---------- > From: Ken Brown[SMTP:k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk] > David Honig wrote: > > [...] > > > Some scandanavian countries have complete health records on all > > their citizens and some are working on national DNA banks. Some of > > these will be made available for research after some form > > of anonymization. > > For values of "some" which are in the set of all nation-states known as > "Iceland". There is a lot of controversy about it over there (see > various news reports in Scientific American, Nature, New Scientist et.c > over the past couple of years). AFAIK it is going ahead. > > The point about Iceland is that almost all the population is descended > from a comparatively small number of Norse (& even fewer Irish) > colonists in historical times & they keep good > births-marriages-and-deaths records. So their traditional genetics is > well-known & some quite deep family histories are retrievable. So the > DNA data can maybe be matched with that to produce lots of interesting > test cases about hereditary diseases. > > Ken Brown > Assuming, of course, that the birth records accurately reflect parentage. If you take a course in human genetics you're likely to be astonished at the rate of fooling around that must occur to account for the appearence of traits within families - I've heard that as high as 10% of firstborns must have had a father different than the one on the birth certificate (no, I can't give you a cite). Peter From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 19 12:25:55 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:25:55 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001019122555.0081f7b0@pop.sprynet.com> At 05:48 PM 10/18/00 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: >So are you saying that there is nothing wrong with the government >doing the corporations' dirty work? A govt has an obligation to secure the data it has collected and not to share it. So perhaps we agree on this point: the govt must not give out (do 'dirty work') data on citizens that it holds. If an insurance (or bank or grocery or whatever) co. wants data, they can't expect it from the govt. [Hmm... I hadn't thought about the morality of terraserver.. where you can get pictures of your neighbors lots, taken by the govt] >The problem is, corporations also control the media, so most people do >not know about the bad shit some corporations are involved in. There is no obligation for media to tell the truth or all of what *you* deem the truth even when they *claim* to be telling the truth (e.g., news). The only thing they gamble is reputation. There is no obligation for Joe Sixpack to fund news sources he's not interested in, or viewpoints he doesn't subscribe to. The only relevent obligation is for *state* actors to do nothing. If you can't sell or distribute your bits to your satisfaction, blame the population. Similarly if you can't find what you want to buy: blame the population for not exerting sufficient demand. Round 'em up and send 'em to re-education camps. That oughta work. You may not like the results of living amongst this population who prefers football to deep reporting, but lack of coercion means none of your business. Finally, I asked, >> Are you against car insurers asking >> about your other genetic characteristics (e.g., sex)? And you replied: > No, because they do not deny coverage based upon gender. But they *do* vary your rate with your sex. I shouldn't have to spell it out, but: Given finite individual resources, varying the costs with sex amounts to refusing coverage for some, based on sex. Where's your (misplaced, because a Y chromo *does* mess up your driving skills when under 25 :-) sense of injustice about this genetic discrimination? From gil_hamilton at hotmail.com Thu Oct 19 05:38:12 2000 From: gil_hamilton at hotmail.com (Gil Hamilton) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:38:12 GMT Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: Nathan Saper gropes: >On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 01:02:44AM -0400, Steve Furlong wrote: > > Nathan Saper wrote: > > > < > to cover people at a rate to be set by someone other than the insurance > > company. Tim May objects to this plan.>> > >Close. I am arguing that insurance companies shouldn't be allowed to >deny coverage based upon factors that the insuree does not have >control over. For example, I smoke, so I really can't blame an >insurance company for charging me extra, because that's a factor I >have control over. So, by extension, people who are 98 years old should be able to purchase life or health insurance at the same rates as those who are 22 years old. After all, they have no control over their age. Your position is internally inconsistent as well as dishonest and unfair. If you believe that people are entitled to medical care simply because they exist, then at least admit that to yourself and advocate that government should provide it through tax collections. The "Big Rich Insurance Company Who Can Afford It" is simply passing the costs on to the rest of us anyway. But why should this burden be placed on the managers and stock holders of the insurance company? It isn't *their* fault that the prospective insured has a genetic predisposition to heart disease (or whatever). > > > Most insurance companies are worth millions, if not billions, of > > > dollars, and they make huge profits. Insuring all of the people that > > > they now deny based on genetic abnormalities would still allow them to > > > make decent profits. The poor old widow whose mutual fund owns the insurance company stock is being deprived of income thanks to your mandate. How is that fair? > > > And many people are denied coverage outright, therefore removing the > > > possibility of simply paying for their coverage. > > Of course you said "coverage", not "care", but the alleged problem is > > that people can't get medical _care_. Who cares if they have _coverage_, > > so long as their medical needs are taken care of? > >Coverage is most often less expensive than care. Therefore, one may >be able to afford the coverage, but not afford the care, if it ends up >being required. Again, this is being dishonest. Coverage is less expensive than care only because *someone else is paying for it*. It is the care that is needed, not "coverage". Mandated "coverage" is simply care that someone else is being required to provide. Any insurance company obviously prefers to minimize "coverage" that *it knows* is going to require care to be paid for. > > As I wrote before (like, a couple of hours ago), most of the people who > > insist on a right to "affordable" medical insurance seem to expect to > > get a lot more out of the insurance company than they put into it. They > > should just be honest and go on welfare if they're looking for a > > handout, rather than attempt to claim the moral high ground. > > > >Isn't this the whole idea of insurance? You pay them x dollars, and >if you end up getting sick, they most likely have to pay more than x >dollars to treat you. The insurers are banking on the fact that the >majority of the people who have insurance don't get sick. > >So, yes, the whole idea of insurance is to get out more than you put in. No. The idea of insurance is to *insure* yourself (and family, etc.) against unexpected catastrophic losses by pooling risk. This is why the current American system where virtually everyone's insurance pays for virtually every visit to the doctor is such a bad idea. People should be paying for their ordinary, year-in year-out health care. Insurance should only enter the picture if "large" unexpected expenses are incurred. This type of insurance would have a huge positive effect on health care prices in this country. Prices keep spiraling upward because the individual doesn't have any incentive to control costs. The individual's only motivation is, as you stated, "get out more than you put in". Since the individual is not motivated to control costs, neither is the doctor (excluding HMOs which are an effect of this whole issue). Given an unknown condition, the doctor is inclined to order any test or administer any treatment that *might* be beneficial, no matter how unlikely. After all, this covers his ass: the more tests or treatments tried, the less likely the doctor is to be sued for "negligently" failing to consider an option. - GH _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. From ichudov at Algebra.Com Thu Oct 19 10:40:39 2000 From: ichudov at Algebra.Com (Igor Chudov) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:40:39 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Kahn's _codebreakers_ Message-ID: <200010191740.MAA25390@manifold.algebra.com> It costs about $52... But the funny thing is that its Russian translation costs only $6.95... Guess which one I bought... - Igor. From anonymous at openpgp.net Thu Oct 19 09:45:39 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:45:39 -0400 Subject: CDR: declining sovereignty in the medistate Message-ID: <200e2f5e3f0d5175c454387dfc256dd3@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Oct 19, 2000 - 07:59 AM Court Says Forced Medication Allowed in Certain Cases By Andrew Welsh-Huggins Associated Press Writer COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - A mentally ill person involuntarily committed to a treatment center can be ordered by a court to take anti-psychotic drugs if it is in the patients best interest, the state Supreme Court ruled. The unanimous decision said a court also can order medication if a patient lacks the capacity to give or withhold informed consent regarding treatment, and if a less intrusive treatment is unavailable. Before Wednesdays decision, medical personnel could only forcibly medicate mentally ill people who posed an immediate danger to themselves or others. The court ruled in the case of Jeffrey Steele, who appealed a 1997 request by the Hamilton County Community Mental Health Board to forcibly give him psychotropic or mind-altering drugs. "We have attempted to craft a decision that acknowledges a persons right to refuse anti-psychotic medication, and yet recognizes that mental illness sometimes robs a person of the capacity to make informed treatment decisions," Justice Andrew Douglas wrote. Steele was judged mentally ill and involuntarily hospitalized in August 1997, according to court documents. Seeking a legal standard for such cases, his lawyer, Shannon Smith, appealed the order to the Supreme Court even though Steele voluntarily began taking the drugs in 1998. "Im disappointed in the decision. I am encouraged by the fact they took a good hard look at it and now we have a standard," Smith said. From casey.iverson at hushmail.com Thu Oct 19 09:46:13 2000 From: casey.iverson at hushmail.com (casey.iverson at hushmail.com) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:46:13 -0400 Subject: CDR: re:Tim May's anti-semitic rants Message-ID: <200010191639.JAA09148@user1.hushmail.com> --Hushpart_boundary_USSycvGtKLcphsVrEvgZKVPIClXMuuIp Content-type: text/plain Tim's position's are more anti-Isreal and pro Arab than anti-Jewish. Even if he is a closet anti-Semite, as some have alleged in the past, he has a right to his view. But is this the appropriate list for such views? At 12:34 PM 10/19/00 , auto9950013 wrote: > >This list is no stranger to Tim May's sarcasm and anti-semitic rants. > >>You just used a German word. I'm reporting you to the Zionist League. > > >>"Remember, children of Israel, "Eretz Israel" is not the same thing >>as "lebensraum," and the suppression of the ragheads in Eretz Israel >>is merely pest eradication, not the "Final Solution." War is peace, >>freedom is slavery, and Zionists are libertarians." > --Hushpart_boundary_USSycvGtKLcphsVrEvgZKVPIClXMuuIp-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: If you are not using HushMail, this message could have been read easily by the many people who have access to your open personal email messages. Get your FREE, totally secure email address at http://www.hushmail.com. From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 19 12:48:40 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:48:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001019122555.0081f7b0@pop.sprynet.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001019122555.0081f7b0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: At 12:25 PM -0700 10/19/00, David Honig wrote: >At 05:48 PM 10/18/00 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: >>So are you saying that there is nothing wrong with the government >>doing the corporations' dirty work? > >A govt has an obligation to secure the data it has collected >and not to share it. So perhaps we agree on this point: the >govt must not give out (do 'dirty work') data on citizens that it holds. >If an insurance (or bank or grocery or whatever) co. wants data, they can't >expect it from the govt. > >[Hmm... I hadn't thought about the morality of terraserver.. where you >can get pictures of your neighbors lots, taken by the govt] This issue has been discussed recently, in some newspaper articles. (Don't have a URL, as I was reading it casually, elsewhere.) It turned out that the government high-res photos were ideal for burglars to use to case properties for break-ins, to identify unsecured property in backyards, etc. And it's not a function of government to snoop like this, the Supreme Court's rulings notwithstanding. Ironically, when private actors do things like this, one can count on various government types to rush in with denunciations and lawsuits. Sort of the way the government cracks down on polluting vehicles while school districts and public bus agencies run the worst-polluting vehicles. Or the pension plans which Congress exempts itself from. Government always cracks own on others and exempts itself. Nothing surprising. We just shouldn't let it happen. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From lists at politechbot.com Thu Oct 19 09:51:19 2000 From: lists at politechbot.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:51:19 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: House Passes Bipartisan Commercial Space Bill In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001018184913.00b44d60@mail.well.com>; from declan@well.com on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 06:49:28PM -0400 References: <4.3.0.20001018184913.00b44d60@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20001019125119.A26667@cluebot.com> To do the poor-taste thing of following up on my own message: I'm sure glad the House did such a thing. Without government help, there would be no incentive for companies to go into space. -Declan On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 06:49:28PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > > Committee on Science > F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., CHAIRMAN > Ralph M. Hall, Texas, Ranking Democrat > www.house.gov/science/welcome.htm > > October 18, 2000 > > Press Contacts: > Jeff Lungren (Jeff.Lungren at mail.house.gov) > Jeff Donald (Jeffrey.Donald at mail.house.gov) > (202) 225-4275 > > > HOUSE PASSES BIPARTISAN > COMMERCIAL SPACE BILL > > Bill Enhances U.S. Commercial Space Competitiveness > By Extending Launch Indemnification > > WASHINGTON, D.C. - With broad bipartisan support, the House yesterday passed > H.R. 2607, the Commercial Space Transportation Competitiveness Act, by a > voice vote. The bill now goes to the President for final approval. > > H.R. 2607 extends launch indemnification to the U.S. commercial launch > industry for four more years, through the end of 2004. The federal > government first decided to indemnify commercial launch companies against > catastrophic losses as a means of rebuilding a launch industry that was > critical for national security. In addition, the bill authorizes funds for > the Offices of Advanced Space Transportation and Space Commerce in the > Departments of Transportation and Commerce. > > The bill's sponsor, Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Chairman Dana > Rohrabacher, (R-CA) said, "Passage of H.R. 2607 signals continued > congressional support of a highly competitive launch industry in today's > global market. This legislation enables the U.S. Government to maintain a > stable business environment so that the private sector can become more > competitive. Moreover, by directing the Administration to examine more > innovative legal approaches for indemnification, we begin a new chapter in > U.S. space development in the 21st Century." > > House Science Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., (R-WI) added, > "By extending commercial launch indemnification, this bill helps build a > solid foundation for commercial launch companies. This foundation enhances > our national security by encouraging private firms to invest in improving > U.S. space launch capabilities and maintaining U.S. competitiveness with > launchers from Europe, Russia, the Ukraine and China. I hope the President > will quickly sign this important bipartisan legislation into law." > > Science Committee Ranking Minority Member Ralph M. Hall, (D-TX) said, "The > Commercial Space Competitiveness Act was the top legislative priority for > the American space launch industry. It is in our Nation's interest that we > continue to be world leaders in the launch industry. This bill provides the > framework of support and incentives the industry indicates they need to keep > their premier status. I am pleased that the Science Committee could play a > central role in moving this legislation to completion." > > Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Ranking Minority Member Bart Gordon, > (D-TN), also an original co-sponsor of the bill, noted, "The key achievement > of this bill is an extension of the commercial space indemnification > provisions. Those provisions, first enacted in 1988, have provided a highly > effective risk-sharing system that has helped our launch industry compete > with the world. Since their enactment 12 years ago, these provisions > haven't cost the taxpayer one dollar in claims." > > ### > 106-164 > > > Jeff Donald > Deputy Communications Director > House Science Committee > 2320 Rayburn House Office Building > 202-225-4275 (phone) > 202-226-3875 (fax) > From declan at well.com Thu Oct 19 09:57:58 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:57:58 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001019073833.02605560@shell11.ba.best.com>; from jamesd@echeque.com on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 07:53:19AM -0700 References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> <4.3.1.2.20001019073833.02605560@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <20001019125758.B26667@cluebot.com> On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 07:53:19AM -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > Without property rights to separate one man's plan from another man's plan, > only one plan can be permitted, and any pursuit of alternate goals, or > pursuit of the same goals through alternate methods is "wrecking", and must > be crushed. I might be tempted to agree with you, but I think David Friedman's Machinery of Freedom (which I was reading last night) might have something to say about the above. It should be required reading for all cpunx anyway (not saying you haven't read it -- this is simply a general suggestion to the rest of the list). -Declan From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 19 10:12:17 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 13:12:17 -0400 Subject: CDR: FidoNet II In-Reply-To: <39EF062E.83BBA559@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 10:33 AM -0400 10/19/00, Harmon Seaver wrote: >Tom Vogt wrote: > > > all you need to do is use the internet as a transport layer. it's there, >> so why use the phone? cops can possibly intercept your phone calls more >> easily than randomly routed IP packets. >> >> the technology is there. all you'd need to do is set up a network of >> nodes that rsync itself at regular intervals, preferably using at least >> ssh. > > At least -- but it's still subject to traffic analysis to >discover who the >perps are, on both ends. And yes, phones can be tapped too, but it's >more difficult, >takes more effort, warrants (at least here, so far). First, if you're going to attempt a "FidoNet II," at least use link encryption at every stage. Since each node knows the next node it will be phoning (or linking to), it's a relatively easy matter to encrypt to the public key of that node. This makes each node a kind of remailer, as someone looking only at the internode traffic will only see encrypted bits. Second, so long as one has done the above, might as well make each node an actual remailer. With all of the usual mixing of in/out packets, packet size padding, etc. Third, the use of radio links has come up several times over the years. A couple of early Cypherpunks were involved in packet radio and addressed the issue. By the way, the FCC still has restrictions on encrption over the airwaves, as I understand things. (One can argue that a micropower transmitter, or a "Part 15" transmitter, is exempt or undetectable, but this may not be enough if the Feds really want a bust.) Fourth, given the speeds of the Net, given the move to put phone calls over the Net, given the many tools...why on earth would anyone want to revive FidoNet? Implement remailer protocols to do a virtual FidoNet, perhaps, but don't actually have machines phoning up other machines! Fifth, notwithstanding all these comments, go for it. >But I've been thinking more >about this and realized that packet radio is really the best >transport medium, done >in burst modes on shortwave or even CB frequencies with big linear >amps. A pirate >packet network, with some stations just running scanners and >gatewaying into the >internet maybe. Watch out for those trucks with the rotating antennas. > > > But now - the ability to propagate fragments universally - e.g. usenet, > > email, web, etc., in encrypted and stego'd forms - that's interesting. Spread-spectrum. > > > I'm not providing a very succinct description at the moment, but I think >> you get the drift. Its about obscuring the origins of requests and >> answers from casual and perhaps programmatic observation. Its not >> downloading an encrypted web page from a single server. Its about >> acquiring that page from a variety of places as encrypted fragments, >> that might appear as casual requests. And going to a particular server > > does not cause a particular piece of data to be delivered - from that > > server, but it may be delivered later from another machine. > > > > So back channel is really about creating this virtual back channel using >> the store and forward approach. The channel's packets are encrypted, and > > the node is non-deterministic in its behavior. Laudable. Sounds like you're recapitulating the early years of the Cypherpunks list discussions. Look to remailer networks and I think you'll find what you're looking for. Would radio offer advantages worth the effort of going to a different transmission mechanism? Wireless, a la Bluetooth and obviously via Ricochet, etc., is already here. A ham radio system, even one based around the "big linear amps" you speculated about earlier, would have a long uphill struggle. Still, a worthy outlet for your energies. Between your thinking above and your recent search for Vinge, sounds like you're moving squarely into the crypto anarchy camp. Maybe there's hope as well for Nathan Saper and all of the other commies on the list. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tom at ricardo.de Thu Oct 19 04:16:02 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 13:16:02 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <009201c03938$bbf4ac60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20001018233632.00b15230@pop3.idt.net> Message-ID: <39EED7F2.5EBF6A35@ricardo.de> "Roy M. Silvernail" wrote: > I _still_ have a running UUCP node (on a MickeySoft box, at that). Given > that UUCP was designed to run arbitrary programs on remote hosts and route > their output, it seems to me this is an ideal transport mechanism. I've been running a couple UUCP nodes ever since I withdrew from fido. it DOES have considerable shortcomings. like all tools, it's one answer, and whether or not it fits depends on the question. but an advanced UUCP replacement could be an interesting thing... From anonymous at openpgp.net Thu Oct 19 10:20:21 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 13:20:21 -0400 Subject: CDR: judges needing killing... Message-ID: <9c6d577b93017fad3e60049f341d10d2@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Oct 19, 2000 - 06:55 AM California Court Declines to Review Vehicle Forfeiture Law The Associated Press SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - The state Supreme Court has declined to review a ruling allowing police to seize vehicles suspected of use in crimes such as drug dealing or soliciting a prostitute. Without comment, a majority of justices Wednesday decided not to hear the American Civil Liberties Unions challenge to Oaklands 1997 vehicle seizure law. Under the law, a car can be confiscated even if the crime suspect using the vehicle is acquitted, or the cars owner was unaware of the crime. The measure exceeds state and federal standards. The ACLU argued that cities looking to profit from seizures would enact similar measures. So far, Sacramento has put a comparable law on its books but San Francisco lawmakers shelved the idea last month, concluding it was unconstitutional. Since passing the "nuisance abatement" act, Oakland has collected, sold and kept the profits from 300 cars. The impetus "was really complaints from certain communities which were essentially drive-thru sex-and-drug bazaars. People were sick of having lines of cars in their streets with this activity going on," said Oakland Deputy City Attorney Pelayo Llamas. http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAWJXNBIEC.html From k-elliott at wiu.edu Thu Oct 19 11:26:48 2000 From: k-elliott at wiu.edu (Kevin Elliott) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 13:26:48 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018224222.B18319@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net> <20001018224222.B18319@well.com> Message-ID: At 22:42 -0700 10/18/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >Coverage is most often less expensive than care. Therefore, one may >be able to afford the coverage, but not afford the care, if it ends up >being required. BAHHHHHHHHHHH....LOL.... God, that's the funniest thing I've ever read. BY DEFINITION, care is cheaper that coverage in the average case. You've already told us how the insurance companies have managed to aquire billions in profits. Where do you think they got them? They looked at the numbers and realized that for a sufficiently large group of people the cost of paying that groups medical bills will be less than the amount that groups members will be willing to pay on a monthly basis to own a safety net. -- "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Justice William O. Douglas ____________________________________________________________________ Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott ICQ#23758827 From steve3354 at UCSD.com Wed Oct 18 20:32:13 2000 From: steve3354 at UCSD.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 13:32:13 +1000 Subject: CDR: Check this out Message-ID: <016b534340213a0KNET@knet> HERE IS A PROGRAM NOT TO BE MISSED! It has now been out for 3 weeks, and is making people money faster than any other program on the www for one investment of US $5. The program uses e-gold.com, which is international, so everyone can have a go. Anyone can get an e-gold account. If you don't have one yet go to http://www.e-gold.com/e-gold.asp?cid=185289 "For only investing $5 I can't believe what my e-gold account looks like. I invested the $5 then sent 23 emails to friends and 4 days later I checked my e-gold account to find $245 more in it, after two weeks of being in this program I've made approximately $6300 and all it took was a small investment and about 15 minutes. I am now sending out more emails this is truly a fantastic program". Janine This is a 100% legal service. If you don't believe it check it out for yourself. This program has 5 platforms and moves VERY FAST so if you want money in your e-gold account faster than you can say BOO! give it a try. Don't stop any other program you are doing, because this one only takes about 15 minutes, then you can forget about it, or you can keep sending out more emails for even better results (the more you send out the better response you will get). OK! This is what to do: Follow these steps carefully. STEP 1: If you do not have an e-gold account go to http://www.e-gold.com/e-gold.asp?cid=164513 and then you need to fund your account by going to http://www.goldchanger.com STEP 2: Go into your e-gold account and click on SPEND, spend US $5 to the e-gold account on platform number 1. In the MEMO section type "Quick Gold" STEP 3: Retype the platform list by deleting Platform No. 1 completely, Move the Platform numbers up so that P2 becomes P1, P3 becomes P2 etc and then put your e-gold account number in Platform No.5 (Do not change any other part of this letter as it has been working very well as it is) STEP 4: Email as many copies of the letter as you can. Put Something like "NOT TO BE MISSED!!!" as the subject. STEP 5: Watch your e-gold account grow before your eyes (sometimes it only takes a few hours). PLATFORMS P1: 185289 P2: 148040 P3: 124304 P4: 176593 P5: 177025 Just think, when you get to platform No.1 there could be 1500 people or more putting $5 in your e-gold account. That's $4,500. It's only $5 to enter and that could easily be thrown away on the lotto or poker machines or betting on the horses, at least with this program you know you will easily get back what you put into it. Well, what are you waiting for? ----------------------------------------------- This is not spam. You are receiving this email because we are both members of the same opt-in list. To be removed from this list, reply to this message with 'Remove' in the subject. Thank you. From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 19 10:40:54 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 13:40:54 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Mac created the modern Internet In-Reply-To: <20001019175323.A13615@netestate.de> References: <20001019175323.A13615@netestate.de> Message-ID: At 11:53 AM -0400 10/19/00, Ulf Möller wrote: >I'm sure that Mac users added to the momentum, but don't forget online >services like AOL and CompuServe. They started offering Internet mail >and Usenet access in 1993, and as people started sending URLs around, >they inevitably had to offer online access as well. I support Lucky's version of things. AOL and CompuServe were dragged kicking and screaming into the modern age. A friend of mine was using AOL, against my advice, and finally dropped them in favor of Earthlink, around 1996. As of that time, they were still making promises on when their customers would be given real access to the Web. By the way, on a historical note, I was a Netcom customer when Netcom began offering their own proprietary Web browser solution. I don't even recall what they called it. It only ran under Windows, so we Mac users had to look elsewhere for our ISPs. (More's the pity for Netcom, as the general TIA/SLIP/PPP tools were available to let Mac users like me use Mosaic and other browsers. But Netcom hoped to become a browser company, I suppose. They later got absorbed into Mindspring, I think.) I wouldn't give a _shred_ of credit to AOL, and even less to CompuServe. They were drags, in fact. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 19 10:44:56 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 13:44:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: re:Tim May's anti-semitic rants In-Reply-To: <200010191639.JAA09148@user1.hushmail.com> References: <200010191639.JAA09148@user1.hushmail.com> Message-ID: At 12:46 PM -0400 10/19/00, casey.iverson at hushmail.com wrote: >--Hushpart_boundary_USSycvGtKLcphsVrEvgZKVPIClXMuuIp >Content-type: text/plain > >Tim's position's are more anti-Isreal and pro Arab than anti-Jewish. >Even if he is a closet anti-Semite, as some have alleged in the past, he >has a right to his view. >But is this the appropriate list for such views? First, Arabs are Semites. Amazing how often we hear pro-Arab views being characterized as being anti-Semitic. Second, Zionism is a political movement. It is usually correlated strongly with the Jewish religion, but is not identical to it. Most Zionists are Jews, some Zionists are not Jews, many Jews are not Zionists. Nowhere in my article did I mention Jews or Judaism. As for appropriateness, fuck off. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From jimdbell at home.com Thu Oct 19 13:47:13 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 13:47:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) cpunk References: Message-ID: <009501c03a0f$52f3be40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Trei, Peter > While by default I hold libertarian positions, doing so sometimes > requires uncomfortable contortions. > > Who, for example, should the inhabitants of Tuvalu sue for rising > sea levels? Maybe that problem is solved elsewhere. To the extent that rising CO2 levels lead to that problem, that could be solved by getting rid of the politicians who pass anti-hemp (burning hemp products merely re-cycles CO2 that was taken out of the atmosphere weeks/months ago, not millions of years ago) laws and the cops (term used generically) who enforce them. Naturally, with a functioning AP system, of course! And if you've been following science issues over the last few years, it is now shown that dumping iron ions (at nanomolar levels) in the south Pacific ocean greatly assists the growing of biota which sequester CO2 from the atmosphere. Sure, as easy as this may end up being, that's going to require SOME effort and thus some cost, but perhaps it's a cost that would be happily borne by the fossil-fuel users (being a tiny fraction of the cost of the fuel itself) if they want to avoid some of their number being occasionally and randomly bumped off by some Tuvalu-financed (Not to mention Venice!) death-squads. I think you'll find that what may start out by looking like "uncomfortable contortions" look less and less uncomfortable as we abandon unstated assumptions and dearly (or even subconsciously) held beliefs. > [This is just an example, ok? Lets NOT fork into a debate over > the reality (or lack thereof) of global warming.] From eagle at joinville.udesc.br Thu Oct 19 09:01:58 2000 From: eagle at joinville.udesc.br (Alan David Zoldan) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 14:01:58 -0200 Subject: CDR: vmware Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.20001019160158.00685690@joinville.udesc.br> Hello, Do you know how I can get a valid license for my vmware for linux? Alan. From auto9950013 at hushmail.com Thu Oct 19 12:05:10 2000 From: auto9950013 at hushmail.com (auto9950013 at hushmail.com) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 14:05:10 -0500 (EDT) Subject: CDR: re:Tim May's anti-semitic rants Message-ID: <200010191814.LAA01497@user3.hushmail.com> Tim's anti Jewish sentiments are obvious in his current posts and in the past. If he had any guts he would admit what he really feels instead of using sarcasm and obfuscation. Tim May writes >Nowhere in my article did I mention Jews or Judaism. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 19 14:45:34 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 14:45:34 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: [spam score 10.00/10.0 -pobox] Re: A way to discourage advertising In-Reply-To: References: <200008290220.TAA15402@sirius.infonex.com> <200008290220.TAA15402@sirius.infonex.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001019144534.009b8920@idiom.com> Yeah, right. Writing to network administrators sometimes works, or at least puts the spammer into "Whack-a-Mole" mode where they've got to keep switching their sucker-collection endpoints. (Unfortunately, free email accounts make that pretty simple, but you can at least reduce revenue collection from existing spams, and for spammers selling spamware rather than other scams, it's important to discourage new suckers from getting in the game.) A more appropriate response would be to subscribe them to the cypherpunks list (:-) Unfortunately, this is bad - the main impact of responding to spammer's "remove me" or complaint email addresses is that it confirms to the spammer that they had a valid address, so they can reuse it or resell it. So sending the list would make it easier for the spammers to spam you directly. There are more cypherpunkish approaches - the "teergrube" project (go search for the FAQ) or similar trap servers can absorb infinite quantities of spam, v....e....r...y....s...l...o...w...l..y, so you can reply with lots of "thank you" or "remove me" or "yes, send me spam, please, please" mail from teergrubed addresses. >At 6:23 PM -0700 10/18/00, jfanonymous at yahoo.com wrote: >>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> >>Here's my idea of how to stop advertisers from using this mailing >>list as an advertising channel: >> >>If everytime anyone saw junk mail here, they wrote to the address >>of the sender and/or the address where you send an e-mail if >>you're interested, and told them how annoyed you were. >> >>Just an idea. > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From alan at clueserver.org Thu Oct 19 12:06:56 2000 From: alan at clueserver.org (Alan Olsen) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 15:06:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... In-Reply-To: <9c6d577b93017fad3e60049f341d10d2@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: > Oct 19, 2000 - 06:55 AM > > California Court Declines to Review > Vehicle Forfeiture Law > The Associated Press > > SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - The state Supreme Court has > declined to review a ruling allowing police to seize vehicles > suspected of use in crimes such as drug dealing or soliciting > a prostitute. Portland, Oregon has a similar law. In practice, they take your car only as long as it has resale value. (In other words, it is done for revenue and not for "punishment".) Speaking of governmental seizures... Oregon has a balot initiative to tighten down the seizure laws. They are trying to add in that the property can only be seized if the owner is convicted of something. Interesting to see who is lining up against this one. The first few arguments against the initiative are from the animal shelters claiming that is will harm animals! The rest are from various law enforcement agencies and the like upset because they will have not have this hidden source of funding for toys. alan at ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys. "In the future, everything will have its 15 minutes of blame." From azb at llnl.gov Thu Oct 19 15:09:41 2000 From: azb at llnl.gov (Tony Bartoletti) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 15:09:41 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: References: <39EDDCA8.189CED40@nma.com> <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> <39EC98AB.827388D1@nma.com> <39EDDCA8.189CED40@nma.com> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001019143123.00a97210@poptop.llnl.gov> At 04:58 PM 10/19/00 -0400, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: >>Yes, that is why Tony's remark was somewhat tongue-in-cheek and used >>"solid mathematical foundations" within quotes. > >Eye twinkle doesn't come across in e-mail, I'm afraid. My apologies to >Tony. This is obviously one of my hot buttons. No problem. I often employ a quoted "x" to convey "so-called x", a shortcut that can lead to misunderstandings. >>>It is all hypothesis and empirical argument. A lone >>>mathematician working in his attic could come up with an algorithm >>>that would blow some or all of the existing systems out of the water. >>>Who get to cover that financial risk? >> >>The buyer. CAs (read Verisign's CPS or any CA's CPS, or bank contracts >>and -- above all -- see the US UCC) are not responsible for producing correct >>results but just for using correct methods. Where "correct methods" are >>what others consider correct -- even if they are proved wrong later on >>by a one mathematician working in his attic. > >I'm not sure those contracts would stand up in court if there were massive >public losses due to a collapse of the PKI. (Anyway CA CPS's stretch to >notion of a "mutual agreement" pretty far. I purchase a $10 cert and am >bound by over 100 pages of gobbldygook that only a handful of people on >the planet can be expected to fully understand?) > >But I am less concerned with CA legal liability then with who is left >holding the bag when a massive subversion of the banking system is >perpetrated, and how big that could be. I'll wager the taxpayer/consumer will foot the bill, one way or another. Derivative to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, it is easier to destroy wealth than it is to create it. So, on average, work/energy is required to create or recreate wealth. The collapse of a future global PKI, or of the integrity of banking transactions, would represent a huge shift from order into chaos, a decoherence of identities and orderliness amounting to a huge destruction of wealth. Recovery thus will require the recreation of wealth, in one form or another. This will require a correspondingly huge input of work. So, who does most of the work, in general? You know the answer ;) ___tony___ Tony Bartoletti 925-422-3881 Information Operations, Warfare and Assurance Center Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, CA 94551-9900 From nobody at remailer.privacy.at Thu Oct 19 06:30:01 2000 From: nobody at remailer.privacy.at (Anonymous) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 15:30:01 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) Message-ID: > > I believe that the standard argument is "Eliminate the commons." (by > > auctioning off to the highest bidder perhaps) > > > > So who gets the bid on the environment ? There are some commons > that can not be eliminated so easily. Generally, this would be water and air. If someone pollutes the air over their land, that's ok. As soon as the pollution crosses into your land, you sue for damages. People are concerned about the long term value of their property, so they will have a disincentive to pollute. Not only do you have people holed up in their bunkers, awaiting the arrival of the grim crypto-reaper, but everyone has a lawyer or 4 on staff. From George at Orwellian.Org Thu Oct 19 12:38:59 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 15:38:59 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: ECHELON under European criminal indictment! Message-ID: <200010191938.PAA28967@www6.aa.psiweb.com> AH HA HA HA HA http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/nb/nb4.htm 10/17/00- Updated 05:39 PM ET Criminal charges filed against 'Echelon' From: Newsbytes News Network By Steve Gold A Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from Berlin has filed criminal complaints in Germany against the international Echelon computer surveillance network. Unlike the recently vilified Carnivore Internet monitoring system installed on most U.S. Internet Service Provider (ISP) servers, the Echelon system is shrouded in secrecy. Thought to have been created in the 1940s by the U.S. and UK governments, the system is now known to monitor most voice and data traffic circulating in most West countries. Reports suggest that it can legally do this by side-stepping national anti-surveillance legislation by requiring, for example, the U.S. government's National Security Agency (NSA) to monitor UK comms traffic, and, similarly, using the UK's security agencies to monitor U.S. comms traffic. In her complaint, Ilka Schrvder, a Green Party Member of the European Parliament (MEP) cited "unknown suspects especially from the U.S. And Great Britain, as well as possibly the German Federal Government, for operating and tolerating the Echelon network." According to German media reports, Schrvder filed the complaints Monday with the German Federal chief public prosecutor, as well as public prosecutors' offices in Berlin and, perhaps significantly, in Traunstein. The Traunstein office covers the Bavarian town of Bad Aibling, where a monitoring station is generally reported as being operated by the NSA. Schrvder, who serves as a substitute member of the European Parliament committee which is investigating Echelon, referred to a report commissioned by the committee, which confirmed that Echelon is monitoring private and business telephone calls, faxes, and e-mail messages in Europe, including in Germany. This is not the first time that Echelon has come into the legal firing line. Back in February, reports suggested that the French government was considering lawsuits on privacy grounds, alleging that the international Echelon super-spy network monitored French companies, diplomats and ministers. The Echelon network has been talked about in security circles for several years, but its existence was most recently confirmed in November 1999, when the BBC reported that an Australian government official had confirmed the network actually existed. At the time, the BBC reported that Bill Blick, Australia's inspector general of intelligence, confirmed that his country's Defence Signals Directorate forms part of the Echelon network. "As you would expect there are a large amount of radio communications floating around in the atmosphere, and agencies such as the DSD collect those communications in the interests of their national security," Blick told the BBC. Asked if information is then passed on to the U.S. or the UK, Blick replied that "in certain circumstances" it was. The BBC report followed hard on the heels of an attempt on Oct. 22, 1999, to swamp the Echelon network with subversive e-mails. In that incident, Internet users from around the world launched an e- mail campaign against the NSA in an attempt to flood the agency's alleged computer surveillance system. Reports of the time suggested that the protesters were upset at NSA's apparent scanning of e-mails in an attempt to identify potential terrorists. In the United States, a recent CBS-TV report on the show 60 Minutes reported that the system may have been used to spy on the phone conversations of the late Princess Diana, at a time when she was spearheading an effort to ban landmines worldwide. Echelon's existence has been discussed in security circles for almost a decade, but its existence was only brought to public attention in early 1997 by Covert Action Quarterly (CAQ), a quarterly intelligence newsletter, which revealed details of the global telecommunications surveillance system. According to the newsletter, Echelon is a top secret alliance involving the NSA's telecoms surveillance system and other government networks that allows the bulk of the civilized world's telephone calls to be digitized and analyzed using intelligent text searching technology. CAQ said that Echelon monitors virtually all phone calls in the U.S. And Europe, including the UK, effectively making a mockery of the UK's Interception of Communications Act. The newsletter added that Echelon is used to keyword search e-mail, fax, telex and all types of voice communications, including analog and digital cellular phone calls. "Unlike many of the electronic spy systems developed during the Cold War, Echelon is designed primarily for non-military targets: governments, organizations, businesses, and individuals in virtually every country. It potentially affects every person communicating between (and sometimes within) countries anywhere in the world," the newsletter said. The newsletter added that the existence of Echelon was inadvertently revealed by the New Zealand government, which joined the Echelon network in the 1960s. The four other main members of Echelon are the U.S.' NSA, the UK's GCHQ, Canada's Communications Security Establishment (CSE) and Australia's Defence Signals Directorate (DSD). The newsletter said that Echelon started life as a UK-U.S. government co-operative initiative in the Second World War. After the war, the agreement was formalized in 1948, when the UK and the U.S. agreed to tackle intelligence gathering against the USSR. Central to Echelon are the Echelon dictionaries, which are compiled by the five main members' intelligence agencies. Each intelligence agency holds copies of all of the other members' dictionaries, which contain details of keywords that the respective intelligence agency is interested in. Each agency's computer system scans all available telecoms and data traffic in its region. Where another agency's keyword is found in the digital data stream, the relevant text or data is automatically forwarded to the appropriate agency's computer system. This means, the newsletter said, that the originating agency's staff never get to see the relevant data - only the agency with the appropriate keyword receives the transmission. CAQ claims that the relevant agencies' headquarters processing Echelon data surveillance files are located in Washington, Ottawa, Cheltenham, Canberra, and Wellington. ---- Also see: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2641902,00.html The above two items were found in Usenet. From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 19 12:43:42 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 15:43:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Note: I did not originate the title of this thread. I mention this because Certain Prosecutors have taken such things out of context and produced them in court documents as evidence that someone is planning to kill some judge, and as grounds for publishing the Social Security Numbers and home addresses of certain persons. I'd sue these criminals, except there would be no point. Hundreds of thousands in expenses, and in their rigged court rooms. Better to plot vengeance in other ways. At 3:06 PM -0400 10/19/00, Alan Olsen wrote: >On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: > >> Oct 19, 2000 - 06:55 AM >> >> California Court Declines to Review >> Vehicle Forfeiture Law >> The Associated Press >> >> SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - The state Supreme Court has >> declined to review a ruling allowing police to seize vehicles >> suspected of use in crimes such as drug dealing or soliciting >> a prostitute. > >Portland, Oregon has a similar law. In practice, they take your car only >as long as it has resale value. (In other words, it is done for revenue >and not for "punishment".) In Florida the Drug Army has seized million-dollar boats becaue a single marijuana roach (butt) was found in the seat cushions during a fishing expedition search. They sell these boats and exotic cars, or use them in their own operations. And they pocket some fraction of the cash they illegally seize. A couple of Mexicans were driving across the southern U.S. from Georgia to Texas. They were stopped in one of the common "shake down" stretches of highway. Their savings from a year's worth of labor on a farm were "seized." No charges filed, no drugs found (not that this would justify seizing their cash), no trial. They eventually got most of their money back after their employer in Georgia, a white woman, spent her own money travelling to Texas, hiring lawyers, calling reporters, and arguing their case. In thousands of "civil forfeiture" cases we never hear about, because nobody wrote stories about it, the narcs and corrupt deputies simply pocket the proceeds. Welcome to Amerika. As for the title of this thread, a lot more than some judges need to be dealt with. Some prosecutors, some Marshal's Service folks, some cops. Hundreds of thousands, overall. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From auto9950013 at hushmail.com Thu Oct 19 14:07:55 2000 From: auto9950013 at hushmail.com (auto9950013 at hushmail.com) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:07:55 -0500 (EDT) Subject: CDR: re:Tim May's anti-semitic rants Message-ID: <200010192016.NAA17977@user3.hushmail.com> Typical of May to wish that those who he hates be nuked, but please don'tt let it effect his portfolio. May Rants >And what will I think of millions of Zionists being incinerated or >coughing out their last breaths? I'll think of it as the inevitable >consequences of encouraging people in this modern age to migrate to >someone else's land and forcibly expel them. I'll think of it as >evolution in action. >My biggest worry will be what will happen to my Intel stock if the >Qiryat Gat wafer fab is destroyed. The former residents of the >Palestinian village of Al Falujah, may return. From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 19 13:16:21 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:16:21 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <016a01c03973$2296bbe0$0100a8c0@nandts> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001019125025.00815a20@pop.sprynet.com> At 10:34 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Neil Johnson wrote: >I don't have a problem with insurance companies raising rates for people who >smoke, are overweight (cough, cough), or have high cholesterol (cough, >cough, cough). That's behavior that can be changed. How silly. Weight and cholesterol (and intelligence and lifespan) have strong genetic factors, as does smoking and drinking, how you respond to stress, etc. You might start by looking up 'dopamine receptors' or 'self medication' From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 19 13:16:22 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:16:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001019124616.0081ac40@pop.sprynet.com> At 10:25 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Neil Johnson wrote: >Two Things: >1. It sounds like to me that there is no room for human compassion in >crypto-anarchy. Compassion doesn't come from the state. Compassion comes from individuals. I don't see what difference a cryptoworld makes. Philanthropists exist there too. Before the state, and before the welfare state you've lived your life in, there were social networks ---families, friends, guilds, etc. They will exist after the state, too. > (Seems like we will all end up sitting in our "compounds" armed to the >teeth and if anybody comes along we either blow'em to bits or pay them >anonymous digital cash >to go away). Well, how reasonable that is depends on the social environment at the time. Ever been in a rioting area? >2. I think that it's funny that ultra-conservatives who are for letting >"competition" improve health care are setting themselves up for more >abortions. Don't know what you mean by ultra-conservative, but its only the fundies who get their panties in a bind about abortion. If by ultraconservative you are trying to map cypherpunks' typical libertarianism into the demopublican left vs. right farce, you'll find you need a different dimension ---statism. [Of course, you could substitute religious authorities for state authorities, and there are some in the world who would consciously do that substitution. They are indistinguishable if they will also use violence to get their way. The only difference might be the noises they emit to justify it.] From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 19 13:16:52 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:16:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.20001018194416.00799d70@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001019131448.0081d280@pop.sprynet.com> At 11:05 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: >At 10:45 PM -0400 10/18/00, David Honig wrote: >>Its quite simple. In 1995 MS released a version of Windoze which >>included a TCP/IP stack by default. Previously you had to acquire >>one and figure out how to install it. >I don't buy this at all. Maybe there is some subtlety I am missing completely. No subtlety, just an observation that non-techies found it much easier to use the protocol since it came 'bundled'. Imagine all the online hausfrau trying to install a packet driver, shims, debugging it... >Which caused which, a default TCP/IP stack in Windows 95 or Netscape 1.0? My point is that MS made Netscape's life easier by having a stack already deployed. And clearly Netscape made the that stack (and the computer) more useful, at least easier to use. And clearly the NSF giving up control allowed the current mess. >As a Mac user, it was the availability of Mosaic and Netscape which >altered the landscape. The TCP/IP stack junk was just behind the >scenes machinery which various vendors were then racing to provide. > >Saying the modern Net age started when Microsoft provided a TCP/IP >stack seems overly wonkish. I'm well aware of the dangers of saying anything positive about MS in a public forum. Maybe they'll be charged under antitrust law by all those stack-vendors who went belly-up when MS bundled extra functionality into the OS. Just like when Weitek sues Intel for bundling their FP biz into Intel's CPUs. From cmcurtin at interhack.net Thu Oct 19 13:46:47 2000 From: cmcurtin at interhack.net (Matt Curtin) Date: 19 Oct 2000 16:46:47 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: "Cypherpunks is archived?" In-Reply-To: Tim May's message of "Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:24:53 -0700" References: Message-ID: <8666mor22w.fsf@strangepork.interhack.net> >>>>> "Tim" == Tim May writes: Tim> Those who wish to protect their identities should take positive Tim> measures to do so. Now there's an idea: using cypherpunk technology to enforce one's privacy. I momentarily thought that I was reading a thread on cypherpunks that was essentially advocating security through hand-waving and (a no-archive) policy. Whew. -- Matt Curtin, Founder Interhack Corporation http://www.interhack.net/ "Building the Internet, Securely." research | development | consulting From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Thu Oct 19 13:47:59 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:47:59 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: why should it be trusted? cpunk Message-ID: > ---------- > From: David Honig[SMTP:honig at sprynet.com] > Reply To: David Honig > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 4:16 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: why should it be trusted? > > At 10:34 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Neil Johnson wrote: > >I don't have a problem with insurance companies raising rates for people > who > >smoke, are overweight (cough, cough), or have high cholesterol (cough, > >cough, cough). That's behavior that can be changed. > > How silly. Weight and cholesterol (and intelligence and lifespan) have > strong genetic factors, as does smoking and drinking, how you respond to > stress, etc. You might start by looking up 'dopamine receptors' or 'self > medication' > Curiously, life and health insurance providers have conflicting goals. Life insurance providers profit most if you live a long, long, time, regardless of the quality of that life. Health insurance providers would much prefer that at some age just before you start needing large amounts of care, you die too rapidly to need any kind of treatment - a sudden coronary, or hit by the proverbial bus. I've heard that smokers actually cost the healthcare system less money than non-smokers, since they die comparatively rapidly once they start to deteriorate (no I can't give a cite on that one, either), and need less long-term care. Peter Trei > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Thu Oct 19 08:50:18 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:50:18 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <3.0.6.32.20001018092333.00803210@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <39EF183A.A23A1FD5@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> David Honig wrote: [...] > Some scandanavian countries have complete health records on all > their citizens and some are working on national DNA banks. Some of > these will be made available for research after some form > of anonymization. For values of "some" which are in the set of all nation-states known as "Iceland". There is a lot of controversy about it over there (see various news reports in Scientific American, Nature, New Scientist et.c over the past couple of years). AFAIK it is going ahead. The point about Iceland is that almost all the population is descended from a comparatively small number of Norse (& even fewer Irish) colonists in historical times & they keep good births-marriages-and-deaths records. So their traditional genetics is well-known & some quite deep family histories are retrievable. So the DNA data can maybe be matched with that to produce lots of interesting test cases about hereditary diseases. Ken Brown From reinhold at world.std.com Thu Oct 19 13:58:09 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:58:09 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: <39EDDCA8.189CED40@nma.com> References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> <39EC98AB.827388D1@nma.com> <39EDDCA8.189CED40@nma.com> Message-ID: At 10:23 AM -0700 10/18/2000, Ed Gerck wrote: >"Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > >> At 11:21 AM -0700 10/17/2000, Ed Gerck wrote: >> >As Tony Bartoletti wrote, apologies for what seems a rant, but the "solid >> >mathematical foundations" underlying digital signatures, "Qualified >> >Certificates", >> >unmistakable IDs, biometrics and so forth create in me a degree of "psychic >> >and social backlash" as well. >> >> As well it should. There is a big difference between "can we do it?" >> and "should we do it?" >> >> One other point, and let me shift to upper case for this one: THERE >> ARE NO "SOLID MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS" FOR ANY OF THIS STUFF!!!!! >> THE DIFFICULTY OF BREAKING PUBLIC KEY SYSTEMS HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN >> MATHEMATICALLY. > >Yes, that is why Tony's remark was somewhat tongue-in-cheek and used > "solid mathematical foundations" within quotes. Eye twinkle doesn't come across in e-mail, I'm afraid. My apologies to Tony. This is obviously one of my hot buttons. > >> It is all hypothesis and empirical argument. A lone >> mathematician working in his attic could come up with an algorithm >> that would blow some or all of the existing systems out of the water. >> Who get to cover that financial risk? > >The buyer. CAs (read Verisign's CPS or any CA's CPS, or bank contracts >and -- above all -- see the US UCC) are not responsible for producing correct >results but just for using correct methods. Where "correct methods" are >what others consider correct -- even if they are proved wrong later on >by a one mathematician working in his attic. > I'm not sure those contracts would stand up in court if there were massive public losses due to a collapse of the PKI. (Anyway CA CPS's stretch to notion of a "mutual agreement" pretty far. I purchase a $10 cert and am bound by over 100 pages of gobbldygook that only a handful of people on the planet can be expected to fully understand?) But I am less concerned with CA legal liability then with who is left holding the bag when a massive subversion of the banking system is perpetrated, and how big that could be. Arnold Reinhold From phil at 4smallbusiness.com Thu Oct 19 14:00:26 2000 From: phil at 4smallbusiness.com (phil at 4smallbusiness.com) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:00:26 -0400 Subject: CDR: Domain Registrar Message-ID: <200010191700875.SM00163@4smallbusiness.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4410 bytes Desc: not available URL: From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Thu Oct 19 09:05:55 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:05:55 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001018170949.00b315a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <39EF1BE3.4E6C316F@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Declan McCullagh wrote: > > At 12:22 10/18/2000 -0700, jim bell wrote: > >I ask this, what I believe would be an excellent idea for an article: Why > >didn't the Internet develop even faster than it actually did? 9600 bps > >modems existed in 1986, not all that far in performance behind 28Kbps units. > >By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. > > Internet deployment happened at a near-doubling every year starting around > 1993, coincident with the deployment of the web. I think the doubling started way before that but most people didn't notice. There was no sudden acceleration in the early 1990s, just a continuous exponential curve, the number of networked computers tracking the total number of computers (& slowly gaining on it - so that back in the 1970s it was about 2 or 3 years behind, but by abut 1997/8 it had caught up). I remember reading a history of computing in the early 1970s (authors named something like "Toothill and Hoillingsworth" IIRC)) that pointed out that the total numbers of computers in the world was doubling every 18 months and had been since the things were invented. IIRC they said that that obviously couldn't continue for much longer because if it did by some date they gave in the 1980s there would be over a million computers in the UK alone, & that was obviously absurd. Of course they were bang on target :-) > Most computers in 1986 weren't up to it. Many of us were using Apple II > computers with something like 278x192 resolution (in single hi res mode). > Imagine such a beast doing networking. Ick. Were we? Many of us were using IBM ATs or clones, which may have been clunky machines, but were perfectly capable of doing networking - remember the Netware explosion? PCs on every desk & all that? And people with both money and sense were on Macs (over here in UK they were never cheap enough to be sensible home computing option for anyone other than serious fans, I think the price point was different in the US). Xerox kept on dragging us off to presentations about Star and Parc and WIMPS and stuff. It worked, but it was too expensive. But PC clones & Netware were cheap, as modems were getting cheaper. Actually I was using 3-million-dollars a throw IBM mainframes myself & they could network as well... but not many people had terminals at home :-) Ken From jimdbell at home.com Thu Oct 19 14:21:57 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:21:57 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... References: <9c6d577b93017fad3e60049f341d10d2@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <00ab01c03a11$b1b10f80$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> From cmcurtin at interhack.net Thu Oct 19 14:25:28 2000 From: cmcurtin at interhack.net (Matt Curtin) Date: 19 Oct 2000 17:25:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Tim May's anti-semitic rants In-Reply-To: auto9950013@hushmail.com's message of "Thu, 19 Oct 2000 14:05:10 -0500 (EDT)" References: <200010191814.LAA01497@user3.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <861yxcr0af.fsf@strangepork.interhack.net> >>>>> "9950013" == auto9950013 writes: 9950013> Tim's anti Jewish sentiments are obvious in his current 9950013> posts and in the past. And your irrelevant drivel has earned you a place in my killfile. Congratulations! -- Matt Curtin, Founder Interhack Corporation http://www.interhack.net/ "Building the Internet, Securely." research | development | consulting From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 19 14:31:29 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:31:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? (DNA thread...) In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001018092333.00803210@pop.sprynet.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001019102137.007cf6d0@idiom.com> At 12:25 PM 10/18/00 -0400, David Honig wrote: >Some scandanavian countries have complete health records on all >their citizens and some are working on national DNA banks. Some of >these will be made available for research after some form >of anonymization. Specifically Iceland - the population is small, and hasn't had much mixing with other people since the decline of Viking raiding, and most of the mixing since then was with Norwegians who were relatively similar. There were Irish monks in Iceland when the Vikings got there, and there's some DNA evidence that many of the early women were from England and Ireland, presumably kidnapped in Viking raids. Also, while the earlier saga periods have mixed-quality record keeping, there's been enough history of land-ownership records and church and family records of births to make studies easier. Other Scandinavian countries would be much more difficult - larger populations, much more trade and travel and viking, lower literacy, nomadic Lapps in the north, etc. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 19 14:31:33 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:31:33 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Anyone know easy symmetric cypher for perl? In-Reply-To: <010701c03930$58b4ef00$1d01a8c0@microbilt.com> References: <200010181356.IAA21097@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001019103712.009db100@idiom.com> Check out the "rsa in N lines of perl" pages - there were also some short obfuscated RC4 and DES implementations. At 02:25 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Marcel Popescu wrote: >I wrote the RC4 algorithm in VBScript, and I think I even tried it in Perl >(but it wasn't so important that I'd actually try to get something working - >I still don't know much about Perl). Look for "cyphersaber" on the web for a >description of RC4 - it shouldn't take you more than an hour. > >Mark > >----- Original Message ----- >X-Loop: openpgp.net >From: "Igor Chudov" >To: "Multiple recipients of list" >Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 10:00 AM >Subject: Anyone know easy symmetric cypher for perl? > > >> I need a perl module or a function that would perform symmetric key >> encryption/decryption. I need it to encode secret information in >> URLs. Thanks >> >> - Igor. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From declan at well.com Thu Oct 19 15:36:55 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 18:36:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: Rep. Armey questions Justice Department review of Carnivore Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001019183652.00b498a0@mail.well.com> ******** And a Napster poll: http://freedom.gov/vote/vote5.asp ******** http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/19/2251239 Justice Department Carnivore Review a Sham? posted by cicero on Thursday October 19, @05:44PM from the say-could-it-be-an-election-year? dept. Dick Armey, House majority leader and Republican firebrand, is once again making trouble for the Clinton administration. Armey this afternoon sent a letter to Attorney General Janet Reno, saying that the Justice Department's review of Carnivore appears somewhat less than objective: "I have questioned the independence of this review. Several in the media have questioned this review. Several universities refused to submit review proposals because, in their opinion, the review process was unfair." Having the supposedly secret names of the government-affiliated reviewers revealed last month sure didn't help. Neither did the information in the Carnivore documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. (Armey's letter is below.) The letter: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/19/2251239 From bear at sonic.net Thu Oct 19 15:47:46 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 18:47:46 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... In-Reply-To: <00ab01c03a11$b1b10f80$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, jim bell wrote: >Naturally, a chemical solution (pun not directly intended...but I'll take it >anyway) becomes apparent. If the ultimate motivation of the car siezures is >to sell them and keep the money, what would happen if somebody acquired a >few ounces or gallons of PCB's (poly-chlorinated biphenyls; common in >20+year-old (non-electrolytic) capacitors), and sprayed them (only a very >tiny amount per car should be necessary, maybe 1 milliliter or so?) into >those siezed cars though a broken window (or injected through door seals). >Naturally, it would be important to anonymously call the local newspaper or >TV stations and report on what had occurred, possibly the EPA as well. That >car would suddenly change from a $10,000 asset into possibly a $100,000 >liability for the agency which siezed them.. > >Just a thought A thought, however, requiring people to handle PCB's -- which are no fun whatsoever, heavily regulated, hard to acquire (albeit relatively easy to synthesize), and all-around poisonous. That's damaging more than just the criminals in this case. That's damaging the planet. Instead, consider the possibilities of putrescine -- it's easier to synthesize, totally harmless ecologically speaking, legal to own (and legal to spill on your *own* property prior to seizure) and while it doesn't actually make the car into a 100K liability, it does make it so that nobody except a scrap metal dealer would ever pay any money for it. Don't inhale anywhere nearby after you open the vial though; If you do, you *will* puke. The stuff *NEVER* comes out, either. Bear From declan at well.com Thu Oct 19 15:51:14 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 18:51:14 -0400 Subject: CDR: Cypherpunkly convo on legal vs. tech protections of anonymity Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001019185052.00b53a90@mail.well.com> http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/19/1952214&mode=nested From njohnson at interl.net Thu Oct 19 16:52:06 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 18:52:06 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: It's all property, folks (was Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?)) References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> <01a101c0397e$28fb6340$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: <001901c03a27$9752dea0$0100a8c0@nandts> PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC ----- Original Message ----- From: "R. A. Hettinga" To: "Neil Johnson" ; Cc: "Digital Bearer Settlement List" ; Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 8:14 AM Subject: It's all property, folks (was Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?)) > At 10:39 PM -0500 on 10/18/00, Neil Johnson wrote: > > > > So who gets the bid on the environment ? There are some commons that can not > > be eliminated so easily. > > I hate to disappoint you, bunky, but the "environment" is property. > > My lungs are property. If some one injures them, I have a tort. I don't > even need legislation. > I'd rather not have my lungs injured in the first place. > My land, and that of others, is property, if someone pollutes it, I have a > tort. If someone upstream pollutes a river running through my land, I have > a tort. > Same deal. I'd rather it not be polluted in the first place. And how do I sue some one if there is no judicial system or government to enforce the decision. "Joe's International House of Justice" ? Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 19 19:46:08 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 19:46:08 -0700 Subject: CDR: RE: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001019194608.009b86e0@idiom.com> >> Most computers in 1986 weren't up to it. Many of us were using Apple II >> computers with something like 278x192 resolution (in single hi res mode). >> Imagine such a beast doing networking. Ick. I was using dumb terminals (initially HP; later AT&T VT100 clones). Much better resolution than PCs, and it wasn't till the late 80s that I could afford a machine for home use that was as good as a dumb terminal connected to a Vax 780. (Macs were arguably *better*, but that's a separate issue. They were friendlier, but Unix was much more powerful and usable.) I was a newcomer to Usenet - didn't get on until late 81 or maybe 82 :-) It was mostly universities (initially Duke and UNC) and gradually spreading into other places that had Unix machines, and eventually ported to support network environments other than uucp. It's arguable the extent to which that was public or private at first, because much of the critical mass of discussions was either at government-funded schools or The Phone Company. Ward Christiansen used to claim he had invented the BBS, but it wasn't till 1978 (I think it was XModem?), and I'd been using Plato Notesfiles several years before, while the Arpanet mailing lists had also been growing for a while. Eventually I got a PC at home. I mainly used Netcom's early ix.netcom.com IP service (with Trumpet Winsock on Win3.1), though I also tried out Twinsock on a shell account at work. At NCR our initial PC-based email was an appallingly ugly hacked-together Kermit thing - one reason I got the Netcom account was that the Kermit thing would choke and die if you got more than 200KB in one session, and the cypherpunks list was too much for it :-) Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From no.user at anon.xg.nu Thu Oct 19 18:04:44 2000 From: no.user at anon.xg.nu (No User) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:04:44 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: It's all property, folks Message-ID: <0fe585af27e9fb179b7f10c514af3983@anon.xg.nu> Neil asked: > Same deal. I'd rather it not be polluted in the first place. > And how do I sue some one if there is no judicial system or government to > enforce the > decision. "Joe's International House of Justice" ? Most EarthFirst! folks have figured out that you just have to forget about the government acting properly to protect Mother Earth. It takes direct, individual (or group) action to do it. Thus came about ELF - Earth Liberation Front -- and ALF, Animal Liberation Front. You probably recall some of their work -- Vail, for instance. My problem with them is that they try to not hurt humans, which is stupid. No, you don't sue -- you get a gun and/or a car bomb and kill some of the assholes. Kill the CEO of the polluting company. Park a car bomb outside the factory and detonate it in the midst of shift change. They'll get the message. And here's where crypto comes in -- read up on Jim Bell's Assassination Politics. People who don't like pollution can act anonymously and pay off the hit men. Sweet, savage, but sweet! Your neighbor pollutes your lungs or your land and you don't know what to do about it? Shit man, get real -- $5 bucks worth of gasoline and a midnight stroll takes care of his house, him, and his family. From billp at nmol.com Thu Oct 19 19:22:51 2000 From: billp at nmol.com (bill payne) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:22:51 -0600 Subject: CDR: zinni on wdms Message-ID: <39EFAC7A.B3C54F9F@nmol.com> cypherpunks I was looking-up one of my former phd students, Lou Banderet, on google and found http://www.inet-one.com/cypherpunks/dir.1998.03.02-1998.03.08/msg00025.html This former phd student of mine http://www.mhpcc.edu/general/john.html lives several miles away. Sobolewski help implement the hardware for Banderet's phd thesis work. Morales and I are going to attack tomorrow. I attach. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/ http://members.tripod.com/bill_3_2/ http://www.nmol.com/users/billp/ Did you hear Zinni predict a wdm terrorist attack on TV tonight? Zinni may be right. Keep up-wind THEY ARE PISSED! For between 1/8 to 3/4 million good reasons. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/buehlerpayne.html There are better things to do. And more fun too. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/load1.html I'm still smarting over looking up biru gomez on google. But I think it's true. Public key was broken in about 1990 without factoring. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/rsa2.htm nsa, I learned at sandia, started pulling-out public key from all its weapons products. Ron Kulju told me. best b -------------- next part -------------- SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF BERNALILLO STATE OF NEW MEXICO CASE NUMBER William H Payne Plaintiff v Sandia Corporation - Sandia National Laboratories American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation Lockheed Martin Corporation Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn John A. Bannerman R. C. Bonner Charles Burtner C. W. Childers M. B. Courtney R. B. Craner D. B. Davis R. L. Ewing Lorenzo F. Garcia W. R. Geer J. D. Giachino G. H. Libman Linda Vigil Lopez J. D. Martin J. J. McAuliffe D. S. Miyoshi Michael G. Robles Carol Lisa Smith A. M. Torneby Defendants Complaint for Relief from DEFAMATION [libel] and HARASSMENT 1 Citizen Richard Gallegos gives documents in Exhibit A to citizen Arthur Morales. Morales gives documents to Payne on Saturday March 22, 1997. Exhibit A 4 show that the documents clearly refer to plaintiff W. H. Payne since his signature is affixed to that document. Payne had not seen Exhibit A documents before March 22, 1997. The documents contain false and defaming information. Release of documents like those seen in Exhibit A without written consent is a criminal violation of the Privacy Act, 5 USC § 552a, Records Maintained On Individuals http://www.usdoj.gov/04foia/privstat.htm 5 USC 552a(b) , the Privacy Act, states, CONDITIONS OF DISCLOSURE - No agency shall disclose any record which is contain in a systems of records by any means of communications to any person, or to another agency, except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior written consent of, the individual to who the record pertains, ... 5 USC 552a(i)1 applies. CRIMINAL PENALTIES. - Any officer or employee of an agency, who by virtue of his employment or official position, has possession of, or access to, agency records which contain individually identifiable information the disclosure of which is prohibited by this section or by rules or regulations established thereunder, and who knowing that disclosure of the specific material is so prohibited, willfully discloses of the specific material is so prohibited, willfully disclosed the material in any manner to any person or agency not entitled to receive it, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000. Further, The Privacy Act provides a civil remedy whenever an agency denies access to a record or refuses to amend a record. An individual may sue an agency if the agency fails to maintain records with accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and completeness as is necessary to assure fairness in any agency determination and the agency makes a determination that is adverse to the individual. An individual may also sue an agency if the agency fails to comply with any other Privacy Act provision in a manner that has an adverse effect on the individual. An individual may file a lawsuit against an agency in the Federal District Court in which the individual lives, in which the records are situated, or in the District of Columbia. A lawsuit must be filed within 2 years from the date on which the basis for the lawsuit arose. http://www.epic.org/open_gov/citizens_guide_93.html EMPLOYMENT REFERENCES I. Generally In recent years the trend has become for employers not to give detailed or even meaningful employment references when asked to do so. Most employers today either give no employment reference information or merely confirm that the (former) employee worked for the employer during specified dates and at a certain rank or position. The rationale for the unwillingness to provide more complete or specific information is that employers must minimize their risk of exposure to workplace defamation liability. Generally, an employer is liable to an employee for defamation if the employer publishes a false statement about the employee that harms the employee's reputation and that is not privileged. Each element of a defamation action is examined briefly below. First, employers cannot make false statements about an employee. Employers can now be held liable for false statements only if they are responsible for the falsity. This means that the employer can be held liable for a false statements only if they were negligent in attempting to ensure the truthfulness of the statement. In other words, employers are not liable for a false statement if they were not negligent in their attempts to ensure that the statement was true before they published it. RISK-FREE HIRING: How to Interview, Check References and Use Pre- employment Testing without Triggering Liability PRESENTED TO: COUNCIL ON EDUCATION IN MANAGEMENT ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO JUNE 25, 1997 PRESENTED BY: DEBRA J. MOULTON, ESQ. KAREN KENNEDY & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 6400 UPTOWN BLVD., NE, SUITE 630-E ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO 87110 (505) 884-7887 _____ 7-1 Defamation Defined The test for defamation is not merely a statement that hurts one's reputation. Defamation is the publication of a defamatory statement of fact. When defamation occurs in written form it is called libel. When the defamation is an oral communication, it is called slander. In order to prove that one has been defamed, the New Mexico courts rely on proof of the following facts: 1. that there was a defamatory statement of fact concerning another (i.e. a statement, as opposed to an opinion, that tends to lower the employee in the esteem of the community or other respectable individuals); 2. the statement must be published; that is it must be spoken or otherwise communicated to at least one person, usually a "third party," other than the complaining party; 3. fault amounting at least to negligence (should have known it was false) on part of the publisher, or, if the employer is a public official, the statement must have been made with the knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth; and 4. that the statement was the proximate cause of actual injury to the employee. It is imperative that employers take action to stop all defamatory actions by their employees, even in the realm of horseplay, since there exists in New Mexico both criminal, and civil liability for such actions. LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT IN NEW MEXICO: A Complete Desktop Guide to Employment Law, ERIC SIROTKIN Butterworth, 1994. While it may seem obvious to readers of Exhibit A that both Sandia National Laboratories and the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission got caught in writing violating both the criminal and civil portion of the Privacy Act and should settle, the federal government decided to fight in federal court relying on cooperation of federal judges to protect it. However, in this case the federal judge violated New Mexico state law in by mounting a campaign of harassment instead of administering a fair jury trial his zeal to protect the US government from liability. Therefore, legal remedy reverts to state court. 2 Payne brought suit CIV 99-270 against defendants and others on March 12, 1999 in US District Court for the District of New Mexico for violation of the Privacy Act, 5 USC § 552a, Records Maintained On Individuals and pendant Defamation. Exhibit B page 9 docket entry 1. 3 Magistrate judge Lorenzo Garcia presides. 4 May 12, 1999 Payne moves in CIV 99-270 for summons service by US marshal for defendants Larry Trujillo, R A Polansacz, and C A Searles. Exhibit B page 8 docket entry 12. 5 Garcia denies service in CIV 99-270 May 24, 1999 claiming that Payne can only use US marshal service in a in forma pauperis case. Exhibit C, Exhibit B page 8 docket entry 18. Payne never claimed he filed in forma pauperis and can, in fact, use US marshal service if he pays about $25 per summons. Citizen Garcia harasses Payne. 6 On 8/4/99 in CIV 99-270 defendants Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn, Smith and Bannerman file MOTION by defts R A Poloncasz, C A Searls, and E Dunckel |to dismiss this action against them without prejudice| (rd) Re:MEMORANDUM, OPINION, AND ORDER dismissing defts E Dunckel, C A Searls and ... [87] Exhibit B page 7 docket entry 58. 7 On 11/12/99 in CIV 99-270 Garcia grants MEMORANDUM, OPINION, AND ORDER: by Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia granting defts' motion to dismiss this action against them without prejudice [59-1] dismissing defts E Dunckel, C A Searls and R A Poloncasz without prejudice (cc: all counsel*) (rd) (11k) Re: MOTION to dismiss this action against them without prejudice [59] Exhibit B page 3 docket entry 87. Garcia gives as reason that Dunckel, Searls and Poloncasz have not been properly served. Citizen Garcia harasses Payne. 8 Payne in CIV 99-270 files Docket entry 34 Exhibit D. Exhibit B page 7 docket entry 34. 6/8/99 34 AFFIDAVIT of William H. Payne to remove Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia from this action (rd) [Entry date 06/09/99] 9 Garcia falsely identifies Payne's AFFIDAVIT to remove Garcia as a "motion" and denies it. Exhibit B page 7 docket entry 35. 6/9/99 35 ORDER by Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia denying motion to disqualify (affidavit to remove Judge Garcia) [34-11 (cc: all counsel, electronically) (rd) [Entry date 06/10/991 Citizen Garcia harasses Payne. 10 Payne gives Garcia opportunity to correct AFFIDAVIT to remove Garcia. 6/16/99 37 MOTION by Payne to alter or amend order denying motion to disqualify (sl) Exhibit B page 7 docket entry 37. Garcia's refuses to obey law. 6/16/99 38 ORDER by Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia denying pltf's motion to alter or amend order denying motion to disqualify [37-1] (cc: all counsel, electronically) (rd) Citizen Garcia continues to harass Payne in violation of New Mexico state law, 11 May 25, 1999 Payne left for an extended business trip. Payne informed the court. Exhibit B page 8 docket entry 20. 12 On 06/02/99 in CIV 99-270 Defendants Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn, Smith and Bannerman file MOTION by Sandia defts |for sanctions due to violations of Rule 11(b)(2)| (rd) Re: RESPONSE [76] MEMORANDUM, OPINION, AND ORDER [52] MEMORANDUM [24] Exhibit B page 8 docket entry 23. 13 June 18, 1999 Payne files for Motion for time extension of 90 days to answer Exhibit B page 7 docket entry 39. 14 On 08/05/99 in CIV 99-270 Garcia files ORDER by Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia assessing costs in favor of Sandia defts and against pltf in the amount of $912.50 to be paid within twenty (20) days [55-1] (cc: all counsel, electronically) (rd) (8k) Re: NOTICE [55] Garcia was removed from CIV 99-270 on 6/8/99 and, therefore, has no authority to order sanctions against Payne. Citizen Garcia harasses Payne in violation of New Mexico state law. 15 On August 12, 1999 Payne files for writ of prohibition by certified mail with judge Antonin Scalia. Payne wrote I sued under the Privacy Act as a result of false and defaming documents about my self distributed by Sandia Labs and EEOC. These are seen at http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/congress/8327/robles.htm Exhibit B shows that magistrate judge Garcia dismisses my air-tight Privacy Act Defamation lawsuit. Exhibit C shows that judge Garcia has the gall to attempt to assess me with fees. 2 I ask that you issue a writ of prohibition to judge Garcia to stay his August 5 ORDER ASSESSING COST IN FAVOR OF SANDIA DEFENDANTS AGAINST PLAINTIFF WILLIAM H. PAYNE because written evident seen at http: //www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/robles.htm controverts Garcia' s claims. Scalia does not respond. Garcia, of course, was removed from case on June 8, 1999 and had no authority to rule. Citizen Garcia harasses Payne in violation of New Mexico state law. 13 Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn, Smith and Bannerman file lien again Payne's and wife property on January 19, 2000. Exhibit D. Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn, Smith and Bannerman, knowing that Garcia was removed by affidavit harass Payne by filing illegal lien. Rule 11(b)(2) states Rule 11. Signing of Pleading, Motions, and other Papers; Representations to Court; Sanctions (b) Representations to Court. By presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating) a pleading, written motion, or other paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances,-- (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law; Evidence in documents in Exhibit A clearly violate the both the criminal and civil provision of the Privacy Act. These documents are obviously defaming too. CIV 99-270 is not frivolous. Citizens Garcia, Smith and Bannerman law firm Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn harass Payne in violation of New Mexico state law. 14 Payne files DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL in CIV 99-270 on March 24, 1999. Exhibit B page 9 docket entry 3. On 03/17/99 paid the filing fee for this jury trial guaranteed him by the Constitution and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Garcia, however, judged case without a jury trial. Citizen Garcia denied Payne's right for jury trial and thereby harasses Payne in violation of New Mexico state law. 15 New Mexico state law, ARTICLE 3A, defines Harassment and Stalking 30-3A-2. Harassment; penalties. A. Harassment consists of knowingly pursuing a pattern of conduct that is intended to annoy, seriously alarm or terrorize another person and which serves no lawful purpose. The conduct must be such that it would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress. B. Whoever commits harassment is guilty of a misdemeanor. 17 15 Chief magistrate judge William Deaton is informed of Garcia's, Smith's and Bannerman's harassment acts by certified letter on February 26, 2000. Administrative settlement of these and other misconduct was proposed. Deaton is asked to respond by March 4, 2000. Deaton does not respond. WHEREFORE 18 Order Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn, Bannerman and Smith to pay Payne $912.50 to satisfy lien. 19 Payne asks for punitive damages of $300,000 from Garcia for disallowing service by US marshal, failure to remove himself from CIV 99-270 after affidavit was file, ordering Payne to pay $912.50 after Garcia was removed from case, and denying trial by jury which Payne paid for and was guaranteed by the Constitution and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Garcia is engaged in pattern and practice of harassment to deny rights due Payne under the Constitution and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Payne asks for punitive damages of $300,000 from Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn for allowing lawyers Smith and Bannerman to harass him. Smith and Bannerman have engaged in pattern and practice of harassing Payne. 20 Punitive damages of $1,000,000 each from Sandia Corporation - Sandia National Laboratories, American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation Lockheed Martin Corporation for the preparation and distribution of libelous and defaming false documents distributed without Payne's knowledge seen in Exhibit A. 21 Punitive damages of $50,000 each from citizens R. C. Bonner, Charles Burtner, C. W. Childers, M. B. Courtney, R. B. Craner, D. B. Davis, R. L. Ewing, W. R. Geer, J. D. Giachino, G. H. Libman, Linda Vigil Lopez , J. D. Martin, J. J. McAuliffe, D. S. Miyoshi, Michael G. Robles, and A. M. Torneby for authoring and distributing the false, libelous, and defaming documents seen in Exhibit A. 22 No one in the United States of America must be permitted to be above the law. Forward complaint to New Mexico Attorney General with recommendation for prosecution of citizens Lorenzo Garcia, John Bannerman, and Carol Smith, for violation of the New Mexico state laws on harassment. 23 Grant other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. I certify that I mailed a copy of this pleading to all defendants by certified - return receipt requested mail. _________________________________ _________________________________ Date William H Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 98111 505 292 7037 -------------- next part -------------- SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF BERNALILLO STATE OF NEW MEXICO CASE NUMBER Arthur R Morales William H Payne Plaintiffs v Robert J Gorence John J Kelly Manuel Lucero Jan Elizabeth Mitchell Don F Svet Defendants Complaint for Writ of REPLEVIN and Relief from HARASSMENT 1 Citizens Morales and Payne file pro se Freedom of Information Act lawsuit 97cv0266 against the National Security Agency in New Mexico District federal court on February 27, 1997. Magistrate judge Don J. Svet was assigned case. US attorney John J Kelly assigns assistant US attorney Jan Elizabeth Mitchell to defend National Security Agency. 2 FBI agents Moore and Kohl hand-deliver May 29, 1997 at 08:29 harassment letter authored by First Assistant US Attorney Robert J Gorence on May 19, 1997. Exhibit A. 3 01/28/98 Svet issues ORDER by Magistrate Don J. Svet granting defendant's motion to strike any and all of plaintiffs' first set of requests for admissions to various employees of the National Security Agency & to various employees of Sandia National Laboratory (see order for further specifics re sanctions & communication) [28-1] (cc: all counsel, electronically) (dmw) (7k) 4 02/09/98 Mitchell submits AFFIDAVIT of attorney fees by Jan Elizabeth Mitchell in accordance with court order [37-1] (dmw) BILL OF COSTS is submitted to US District Court on Jun 12, 1998. Exhibit B. On June 30, 1998 Mitchell places liens on both Payne's and Morales personal properties. Exhibit L. 5 Morales and Payne file WRIT OF PROHIBITION with judge Anotin Scalia on March 18, 1998 to halt attempted sanctions. Scalia does not reply. 6 On April 30, 1998 court order (docket #42) removes Morales as plaintiff in this case. 7 US Attorney John J Kelly orders initiates garnishment against Morales on February 2, 1999. Exhibit C1. 8 US Attorney John J Kelly and US Assistant Attorney Manuel Lucero file CERTIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS ON JUDGMENT DEBTOR with US District Court on February 2, 1999. Exhibit C2. Clerk notifies Morales of right to hearing in CLERK'S NOTICE OF POST-JUDGMENT GARNISHMENT AND INSTRUCTIONS TO DEBTOR. Exhibit D. 9 Morales notifies US Attorney John J Kelly and US District Court Clerk Robert March of his request for hearing on February 12, 1999 delivered by Payne. Exhibit E. 10 WRIT OF GARNISHMENT is received at Sandia National Laboratories on February 17, 1999. Exhibit G and H. 11 Morales notifies US Attorney John J Kelly, US Assistant Attorney Manuel Lucero, US District Court Clerk Robert March, and Sandia employee Mary Resnick on February 22, 1999 DEMAND that garnishment proceeding be held in abeyance pending requested hearing. Exhibit F. 12 $625 is garnished from Morales wages without due process in Sandia pay period 02/12/1999 to 03/25/1999 and 02/26/199 through 03/11/1999. Exhibit I. 13 Payne pays Morales $312.50 for his share of expenses in NSA lawsuit. 14 US Attorney John J Kelly and US Assistant Attorney Manuel Lucero file ORDER OF GARNISHMENT for $1,793.56 signed by magistrate judge Don F Svet on April 20, 1999. Exhibit J. There is no cause of action before the court for such order of garnishment. 15 Morales and Payne file WRIT OF PROHIBITION with judge Anotin Scalia on April 27, 1999 to halt attempted unwarranted garnishment. Scalia, again, does not respond. But no money has yet been garnished from Morales' wages by Sandia. 16 On July 21, 1999 Rio Grande Title refunds Morales' $625 [Exhibit M] which was taken from escrow account from property lien being held since November 25, 199. Exhibit L. 17 Chief magistrate judge William Deaton is informed of the these and other illegal acts on February 26, 2000. Morales and Payne offer administrative settlement of these and other misconduct. Deaton is asked to respond by March 4, 2000. Deaton does not respond. 18 Citizens John J Kelly, Manuel Lucero, Jan Elizabeth Mitchell, and Don F Svet have broken New Mexico state laws by garnishing $625 from Morales' wages without due process. Exhibits B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, K, L. ARTICLE 11 Magistrate Court; Replevin Sec. 35-11-1. Replevin; grounds. 35-11-2. Replevin; special provisions. 35-11-3. Judgment. 35-11-1. Replevin; grounds. Whenever any personal property is wrongfully taken or detained, the person having a right to immediate possession may bring a civil action of replevin for recovery of the property and for damages sustained from the wrongful taking or detention. However, in replevin actions, magistrate courts shall not issue any writs of replevin or any other orders providing for a seizure of property before judgment. 19 Citizens Robert J Gorence harassed William Payne by Sending FBI agents to Payne's home to deliver threatening letter in Exhibit A. Don F Svet, John J Kelly, and Manuel Lucero harassed Arthur Morales by attempting to garnish $1,793.56 from Morales wages when there was no legal cause of action for such writ. Exhibit J. ARTICLE 3A Harassment and Stalking 30-3A-2. Harassment; penalties. A. Harassment consists of knowingly pursuing a pattern of conduct that is intended to annoy, seriously alarm or terrorize another person and which serves no lawful purpose. The conduct must be such that it would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress. B. Whoever commits harassment is guilty of a misdemeanor. WHEREFORE 20 Morales and Payne ask for their $625 taken from them without due process. 21 Morales and Payne ask for the $1,793.56 since this can be taken from Morales wages or file an property lien at any time. 22 Payne asks for punitive damages $300,000 from Gorence for harassment for illegally sending FBI agents to family residence to deliver harassment letter. 23 Illegal garnishment of Morales' salary jeopardized Morales' security clearance and employment at Sandia National Laboratories. Morales and Payne ask for punitive damages from citizens John J Kelly $300,000, Don F Svet $300,000, Manuel Lucero $100,000, Jan Elizabeth Mitchell $100,000 , and so that citizens and federal employees are sent a message to obey the laws they are tasked to upheld rather than abuse. 24 No one in the United States of America must be permitted to be above the law. Forward complaint to New Mexico Attorney General with recommendation for prosecution of citizens Robert J Gorence, John J Kelly, Manuel Lucero, Jan Elizabeth Mitchell, and Don F Svet for violation of New Mexico state laws. 25 Grant other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. I certify that I mailed a copy of this pleading to all defendants by certified - return receipt requested mail. _________________________________ __________________________________ Date Arthur R Morales 1024 Los Arboles NW Albuquerque, NM 87107 505 3451381 William H Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 98111 505 292 7037 2 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Thu Oct 19 20:22:51 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:22:51 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001019073833.02605560@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001019202251.009b86e0@idiom.com> Both of those arguments are incorrect. Anonymous has no business telling us how anarchic we can be :-) If people want to voluntarily engage in hierarchical relationships, that's still anarchy. And you can still have leaders in anarchies - it's just that if they screw up and find there's nobody following them any more, they can't force their ex-followers to come back. There are versions of anarchist theory that accept private property and versions that don't, but both deal with types of "property" that can be taken or protected by physical force. "Intellectual Property" deals with the rather sillier concept that some ideas belong to some people and it's ok for them to hire guys in blue suits to beat up other people to protect it. Crypto anarchy creates different kinds of protection mechanisms for ideas, in ways that beating people up is neither necessary, useful, or possible, so you can limit most of your transactions to genuinely voluntary ones. This isn't perfect either - if somebody defrauds you, you can't sue them or beat them up, because your only contacts are a bunch of bits on the net. So reputations become important, and you've got to build more incremental transaction mechanisms, and you've got different tradeoffs of risk versus cost (for instance, credit's hard to do.) Crypto-anarchy isn't Sternerism or Kropotkinism. It doesn't say anything about whether you maintain traditional hierarchical relationships with your wives, though it does give you more options for sharing resources with people you like (whether you consider those resources to be property or not.) It doesn't mean that the government or mafia can't collect property taxes on your house - though it may mean they collect them from the resident rather than the "owner", and threaten to kick out the resident if they don't pay. It also doesn't mean your mother or work krewe or syndicate or commune or wives can't tell you to clean the bathroom - but it gives you more options for who "owns" the house, and more options for paying somebody to clean it without the government taking a piece of the action. James is right that getting rid of private property gives you other problems, but he's wrong that this means one huge centralized plan that rules everybody - such things are typically very hard to enforce and maintain, even with modern technology to make it easier. You can, and do, have lots of distributed economic decisionmaking even in most totalitarian states, between black markets, Russian jokes about "they pretend to pay us and we pretend we're working", favors, bribes, etc. And there are socialist alternatives like syndicates and small communes, and there are farming villages or hunter-gatherer villages out in remote areas, and lots of other alternative structures for societies besides just propertarianism and totalitarianism. Many of them don't work very well, or work fine but fall to outside invaders, but that's a separate problem. >At 09:20 PM 10/18/2000 -0600, Anonymous wrote: > > Crypto-anarchy is in fact not really anarchy, since it only > > addresses some kinds of authority, ie government, and only in > > certain situations. True anarchy involves the dissolution of other > > hierarchical relationships, including those that spring from private > > property. Get rid of private property and many of these problems > > disappear. > At 07:53 AM 10/19/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >Been tried. >Without property rights to separate one man's plan from another man's plan, >only one plan can be permitted, and any pursuit of alternate goals, or >pursuit of the same goals through alternate methods is "wrecking", and must >be crushed. >Without property rights in the means of production there there can only be >one plan, and one set of planners, to which all must submit. > >The alternative to private property rights in the means of production is a >single plan, one plan for all, one plan that must be imposed on all, which >necessitates unending terror, as we have invariably and uniformly seen in >practice. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From rah at shipwright.com Thu Oct 19 17:38:57 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:38:57 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: It's all property, folks (was Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?)) In-Reply-To: <001901c03a27$9752dea0$0100a8c0@nandts> References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> <01a101c0397e$28fb6340$0100a8c0@nandts> <001901c03a27$9752dea0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: At 6:52 PM -0500 on 10/19/00, Neil Johnson wrote: > I'd rather not have my lungs injured in the first place. Probably wouldn't be you, the first time. Legal precedent would keep it from happening again. See Friedman's Machinery of Freedom for details. > Same deal. I'd rather it not be polluted in the first place. > > And how do I sue some one if there is no judicial system or government to > enforce the > decision. "Joe's International House of Justice" ? Sure. Why not? Again, see Friedman. You don't need nations to have law. More to the point, financial cryptography will make private law cheaper, because the mechanical bits will be written in software. Bearer protocols like blind signatures point the way to this. Write software, not laws. It's cheaper. Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From jimdbell at home.com Thu Oct 19 17:48:28 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:48:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... References: Message-ID: <007401c03a2f$86634320$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: Ray Dillinger > On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, jim bell wrote: > > >Naturally, a chemical solution (pun not directly intended...but I'll take it > >anyway) becomes apparent. If the ultimate motivation of the car siezures is > >to sell them and keep the money, what would happen if somebody acquired a > >few ounces or gallons of PCB's (poly-chlorinated biphenyls; common in > >20+year-old (non-electrolytic) capacitors), and sprayed them (only a very > >tiny amount per car should be necessary, maybe 1 milliliter or so?) into > >those siezed cars though a broken window (or injected through door seals). > >Naturally, it would be important to anonymously call the local newspaper or > >TV stations and report on what had occurred, possibly the EPA as well. That > >car would suddenly change from a $10,000 asset into possibly a $100,000 > >liability for the agency which siezed them.. > > > >Just a thought > > A thought, however, requiring people to handle PCB's -- which > are no fun whatsoever, Sorta depends on your definition of fun, doesn't it? B^) > heavily regulated, True: These days most or all industrial uses are banned. > hard to acquire I beg to differ. Check the material I downloaded below. Acquiring PCB's requires little more than the will to do it. Believe me, I _know_. The following comes from the site: http://www.ohb.org/pcbs.htm#Why_did_the_EPA_ban (found by using altavista, searching for "polychlorinated biph*" AND "capacitor*" ----------------------------------------------- Where are PCBs found? PCBs were used mainly in electrical transformers and capacitors, heat transfer systems, and hydraulic systems. They were also used in inks and carbonless copy paper and for a variety of other purposes, but the EPA ban now prohibits almost all of these other uses. Nowadays, PCBs are found mostly in transformers and capacitors. These may be contained in industrial equipment (such as welding equipment), medical equipment (such as X-ray machines), and household appliances (such as refrigerators and microwave ovens). The ballasts of some fluorescent light fixtures contain PCBs. During normal operation of a fluorescent light, the PCBs are entirely enclosed, and you cannot be exposed to them. However, when the capacitor wears out, sometimes it may burn or break and leak PCBs. How can I tell whether a piece of equipment contains PCBs? Check for a manufacturer's label, which may give the date of manufacture and the trade name of the fluid. Some trade names that may refer to PCBs include Aroclor, Askarel, Eucarel, Pyranol, Dykanol, Clorphen, Clorinol, Chlorextol, Diaclor, Hyvol, Asbestol, Inerteen, Elemex, Saf-T-Kuhl, No-Flanol, Nepolin, EEC-18, and others. Equipment manufactured after 1979 usually does not contain PCBs. Most pre-1979 capacitors do contain PCBs, while many pre-1979 transformers do not. Transformers within buildings or vaults are more likely to contain PCBs. New equipment should be labeled "No PCBs." PCBs are clear, amber-colored, or dark oily liquids. They may have a faint smell like motor oil, and some contain chlorobenzenes which make them smell like mothballs. Fluorescent light ballasts may contain about an ounce of PCBs; a utility pole capacitor or transformer may contain much more. Usually what leaks from a burned-out light ballast is not PCBs but a black tarry material that is used to muffle noise from the capacitor. However, it is safest to assume that anything that leaks from a transformer, capacitor, or light ballast contains PCBs, unless there is a "No PCBs" label on the equipment. From dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu Thu Oct 19 18:10:38 2000 From: dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu (dmolnar) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:10:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Reading list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Alan Olsen wrote: > I also recommend a list of books that piss people off while reading. > Things like "The ICSA Guide to Cryptography". (The most pro-GAK crypto > book I have ever read. I keep it as a reminder of which libraries and > products to avoid.) I've only had occasion to flip through this in a bookstore. I remember thinking that it could have used another 2 or 3 re-edits. Also that its treatment of semantic security and probabilistic encryption was pretty bad. Must have missed the pro-GAK stuff. I think one of the books which made me wonder "what the hell" was _The Frozen Republic_ in the last part -- the author argues that separation of powers is an outmoded and silly concept, our government can't act fast enough, and wouldn't we be better off with a British style system for doing things which didn't have all these checks and balances? With due respect to British readers, I think the RIP act shows one of the reasons why we would not be better off. Not that our own equivalent isn't far behind; haven't there been murmurs for a while about making "the use of cryptography in committing a crime" a separate crime? :-\ -david From mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl Thu Oct 19 12:20:00 2000 From: mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl (Anonymous Remailer) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:20:00 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: re:Tim May's anti-semitic rants Message-ID: <1ad7b5e77dd29c9360849a52928e88d8@mixmaster.ceti.pl> > Tim's anti Jewish sentiments are obvious in his current posts and in the > past. > If he had any guts he would admit what he really feels instead of using > sarcasm and obfuscation. Tim hates most people. Don't take it personally. From commerce at home.com Thu Oct 19 18:23:17 2000 From: commerce at home.com (Me) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:23:17 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Reading list References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org><4.3.1.2.20001019073833.02605560@shell11.ba.best.com><20001019125758.B26667@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <01b601c03a34$54164570$0100a8c0@matthew> From: "Tim May" > Indeed. We used to have the reasonable expectation that nearly > everyone on the list had some familiarity with the "classics." For > example... Vinge's "True Names." True Names and the Opening of the Cyberspace Frontier: A study of True Names, Vernor Vinge's critically acclaimed novella that invented the concept of cyberspace, features that complete text of the novella, as well as articles by Richard Stallman, John Markoff, Hans Moravec, Patricia Maes, Timothy May, and others. (cough cough)royalties(cough cough cough) From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Thu Oct 19 19:30:55 2000 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:30:55 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Rep. Armey questions Justice Department review of Carnivore In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001019183652.00b498a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: well, is Armey opposed to Carnivore? Or not? MacN On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > ******** > And a Napster poll: > http://freedom.gov/vote/vote5.asp > ******** > > > http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/19/2251239 > > Justice Department Carnivore Review a Sham? > posted by cicero on Thursday October 19, @05:44PM > from the say-could-it-be-an-election-year? dept. > > Dick Armey, House majority leader and Republican firebrand, is once > again making trouble for the Clinton administration. Armey this > afternoon sent a letter to Attorney General Janet Reno, saying that > the Justice Department's review of Carnivore appears somewhat less > than objective: "I have questioned the independence of this review. > Several in the media have questioned this review. Several universities > refused to submit review proposals because, in their opinion, the > review process was unfair." Having the supposedly secret names of the > government-affiliated reviewers revealed last month sure didn't help. > Neither did the information in the Carnivore documents obtained under > the Freedom of Information Act. (Armey's letter is below.) > > The letter: > http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/19/2251239 > > > From jamesd at echeque.com Thu Oct 19 21:32:38 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:32:38 -0700 Subject: CDR: re:Tim May's anti-semitic rants In-Reply-To: <200010191814.LAA01497@user3.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001019213041.019a59c0@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 02:05 PM 10/19/2000 -0500, auto9950013 at hushmail.com wrote: > Tim's anti Jewish sentiments are obvious in his current posts and in the > past. > If he had any guts he would admit what he really feels instead of using > sarcasm and obfuscation. The suggestion that Tim does not say what he really feels is hilarious. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG F/C8lAR7aWuRz0VXp6ePyVrviYb9xPjNeleTwp5a 4H/8J+BbakMc+mUC0lwyODBCi/vG/WFSK7onLN8RE From rguerra at yahoo.com Thu Oct 19 19:02:45 2000 From: rguerra at yahoo.com (Robert Guerra) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:02:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: The end of privacy: Is technology making us transparent? References: Message-ID: Sent the message too quickly....sorry... the lecture is being held in Toronto (Canada) at the University of Toronto. I will try to tape the lecture and make it available in .mp3 format for those who are unable to attend. regards robert In article , cypherpunks at openpgp.net wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > Lecture Series on Privacy and New Technologies > > TOPIC: The end of privacy: Is technology making us transparent? > > SPEAKER: Reginal Whitaker > (author of The end of privacy: How total surveillance is becoming a > reality. (1999). New Press) > > > WHEN: Thursday, October 26 > > WHERE: 140 St. George, Rm. 307 (Faculty of Information Studies, > building adjacent to Robarts Library) > > TIME: 7pm to 8,30 pm > > FORMAT: 30 minute lecture and the rest of the time for questions. > > > For more info contact: > > Ana Viseu > Robert Guerra > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: PGP 7.0 > > iQA/AwUBOe+a+sKdCsHMpdeSEQKC1QCeOqZRnpEYpsl1FlB4QurPiK2icF8An04h > p+F+OkmDWCq6C0RKuO7f21sS > =uIde > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Robert Guerra , Fax: +1(303) 484-0302 WWW Page PGPKeys From njohnson at interl.net Thu Oct 19 20:31:22 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:31:22 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <20001018220759.A18195@well.com> Message-ID: <007301c03a46$3ae3c020$0100a8c0@nandts> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marshall Clow" To: "Nathan Saper" Cc: "Cypherpunks" Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 12:23 AM Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? > > So these people are entitled to something for nothing? > (or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)? > > Why? It's not a zero-sum game for the insurance companies. Most insurance companies make quite a bit of money investing premiums. In addition, they spread the risk. They are betting that more people will stay well than get sick. And I'm not talking about people "engaging in risky behavior". I'm talking about someone who has a genetic predisposition for a disease THAT THEY HAVE NO ABILITY TO MITIGATE. I have no problem charging someone who smokes, takes drugs, or over eats. THEY HAVE A CHOICE. I am also not saying that Mr. Insurance CEO can only make $XXX in profit. I'm sure they can make a profit. In fact they are making profits right now WITHOUT using genetic testing. Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Thu Oct 19 19:40:23 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:40:23 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Mac created the modern Internet Message-ID: Tim wrote: > AOL and CompuServe were dragged kicking and screaming into the modern > age. A friend of mine was using AOL, against my advice, and finally > dropped them in favor of Earthlink, around 1996. As of that time, > they were still making promises on when their customers would be > given real access to the Web. Yup. AOL and CompuServe came way late into the IP game. IIRC, well after TIA. > By the way, on a historical note, I was a Netcom customer when Netcom > began offering their own proprietary Web browser solution. I don't > even recall what they called it. It only ran under Windows, so we Mac > users had to look elsewhere for our ISPs. Net Cruiser. It was a logical step to take for Netcom, given the state of IP client software for Windows at the time, but made obsolete pretty much the moment it was released by TIA. --Lucky Green "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 From bear at sonic.net Thu Oct 19 23:37:07 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <007301c03a46$3ae3c020$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Neil Johnson wrote: >It's not a zero-sum game for the insurance companies. Most insurance >companies make quite a bit of money investing premiums. Yes, and so could their clients if not doing business with the insurance companies. >In addition, they spread the risk. They are betting that more people will >stay well than get sick. Yes. >And I'm not talking about people "engaging in risky behavior". I'm talking >about someone who has a genetic predisposition for a disease THAT THEY HAVE >NO ABILITY TO MITIGATE. Hey, I engage in risky behavior three times a week. I'm in an open relationship with a bisexual. I weigh nearly 400 pounds, eat lots of starchy and oily foods, and engage in rough sports. I had a broken foot a few years ago when I dropped a caber on my foot for example. I also go swimming naked in the pacific off the marin coast, where there are occasional sharks and the water is so cold that most normal people go into shock if they try it without a wetsuit. I could mitigate these risks, but I don't want to. But whether they're risks I could mitigate or not still has nothing to do with what level of risk is *REAL* in my life. Mitigable or not, these risks are real. So is the risk of someone who is born with a wonky gene that makes him or her susceptible to cancer. Why should that person, who has the same level of risk I do, get a substantially better deal than me? What financial motive would an insurance company have for offering two people with identical amounts of risk substantially different rates? If I am a bad risk because of a behavior I choose, then I am a bad risk and that affects the odds at which my health should be bet. If Alice is a bad risk because of a genetic predisposition to cancer, then she is a bad risk and that affects the odds at which her health should be bet. What's the disconnect here? Why do you think that the *causes* of risk are somehow more important in determining odds than the *fact* of risk? >I have no problem charging someone who smokes, takes drugs, or over eats. >THEY HAVE A CHOICE. We have a choice, but so what? Higher risk is higher risk. Choices have nothing to do with that. And there's no point in pretending that these "choices" are equally easy for everybody either. The biggest factor in determining risk for alcoholism is still heredity. If your parents were alkies, you're probably quite susceptible to it yourself. Likewise, neither of my parents was skinny nor celibate. Bear From tcmay at got.net Thu Oct 19 23:38:02 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:38:02 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Reading list In-Reply-To: <01b601c03a34$54164570$0100a8c0@matthew> References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org><4.3.1.2.200010190 73833.02605560@shell11.ba.best.com><20001019125758.B26667@cluebot.com> <01b601c03a34$54164570$0100a8c0@matthew> Message-ID: At 9:23 PM -0400 10/19/00, Me wrote: >From: "Tim May" >> Indeed. We used to have the reasonable expectation that nearly >> everyone on the list had some familiarity with the "classics." >For >> example... Vinge's "True Names." > >True Names and the Opening of the Cyberspace Frontier: >A study of True Names, Vernor Vinge's critically acclaimed >novella that invented the concept of cyberspace, features that >complete text of the novella, as well as articles by Richard >Stallman, John Markoff, Hans Moravec, Patricia Maes, Timothy May, >and others. > >(cough cough)royalties(cough cough cough) Royalties? Not even an up-front fee. Nothing. (Not that I care about such things...) The editor, Jim Frenkel, told me several years ago that the piece had to be done over my Xmas vacation. I told him I could maybe get it done by January 10th or so. He reluctantly agreed. Three or four years later, the book is still not out. As the nerds like to say, "Grumble." So, if my article appears curiously dated, look to this several-year delay. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 19 21:04:11 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:04:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: reverse engineering pedigrees (was Re: why should it be In-Reply-To: At 12:20 PM 10/19/00 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: >Assuming, of course, that the birth records accurately reflect parentage. >If you take a course in human genetics you're likely to be astonished at the > >rate of fooling around that must occur to account for the appearence of >traits >within families - I've heard that as high as 10% of firstborns must have had >a father different than the one on the birth certificate (no, I can't give >you a >cite). When I was reading about other nations' plans to do what Ken Brown pointed out only Iceland does now, it occurred to me that even with an anonymized database, you could infer parentage from the raw anonymized data -its a harder problem than testing a particular parenting hypothesis (is A likely descended from B + C, given samples of A,B,C?), but maybe possible. Maybe the EULA will have a no-reverse-engineering-pedigrees clause.. From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 19 21:04:15 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:04:15 -0400 Subject: CDR: re:Tim May's anti-semitic rants In-Reply-To: <200010192016.NAA17977@user3.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001019205433.00821490@pop.sprynet.com> At 04:18 PM 10/19/00 -0400, auto9950013 at hushmail.com wrote: >--Hushpart_boundary_WIoYstciRMrFMmoZmKueyEZopGecZvAX >Content-type: text/plain > >Typical of May to wish that those who he hates be nuked, but please don'tt >let it effect his portfolio. No, he's saying its legit if the aborigines take back australia, but full disclosure suggests he mention he's invested in european cultures. Stated as bluntly as possible, to bring you out of the woodwork. From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 00:12:32 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:12:32 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA In-Reply-To: References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: >At 1:10 PM -0400 10/18/00, Harmon Seaver wrote: >> Speaking of "The Ungoverned", I've been looking for it, can't find >>it in libraries, Amazon, or Bibliofind, so I'm thinking that it was in a >>collection? Does anyone know which? >> > >It's in one of the two paperback collections of Vinge's short >stories and novellas, either in "Threats and Other Promises" or >"True Names and Other Dangers." Both are out of print. I have both, >but not in locations known to me as I write, so I can't check which >one has "The Ungoverned." > >The best bet has always been for folks to snap up Vinge novels as >they are found in second-hand book shops. I bought several copies of >"The Peace War," "Marooned in Realtime," and, of course, "True >Names," in just this way. Last time I checked, "True Names" was going for over $100 on the auction sites (you can search through the biggest one at www.auctionwatch.com)--although one is at $23 right now, and another one at $57. I've seen them for over $100 at some of the used book dealers. >Vinge just won a second Hugo Best Novel for "A Deepness in the Sky," >so maybe this means the long-delayed re-issue of "True Names" will >finally happen. (Alas, That would be nice. As much as I like his writing, I cringe at spending more than cover price on a used book, when I know the author will never see a dime of it. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 00:14:53 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:14:53 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA In-Reply-To: References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: >At 1:39 PM -0400 10/18/00, Tim May wrote: >>At 1:10 PM -0400 10/18/00, Harmon Seaver wrote: >>> Speaking of "The Ungoverned", I've been looking for it, can't find >>>it in libraries, Amazon, or Bibliofind, so I'm thinking that it was in a >>>collection? Does anyone know which? >>> >> >>It's in one of the two paperback collections of Vinge's short stories >>and novellas, either in "Threats and Other Promises" or "True Names >>and Other Dangers." Both are out of print. I have both, but not in >>locations known to me as I write, so I can't check which one has "The >>Ungoverned." > >I checked. "The Ungoverned" is in "True Names and Other Dangers." >However, one should buy either or both of these as they are found. > >There's also a very scarce compilation of "The Peace War" and >"Marooned in Realtime" which is called "Across Realtime." It >contains "The Ungoverned" in between the two novels. Good luck in >finding it, though. I believe the Sunnyvale Public Library has a copy. IIRC that's where I checked it out--but returned it when I noticed that it seemed to be just Peace War and Marooned together in one book. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From whgiii at openpgp.net Thu Oct 19 21:26:48 2000 From: whgiii at openpgp.net (William H. Geiger III) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:26:48 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <007301c03a46$3ae3c020$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: <200010200426.AAA28675@domains.invweb.net> In <007301c03a46$3ae3c020$0100a8c0 at nandts>, on 10/19/00 at 09:31 PM, "Neil Johnson" said: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Marshall Clow" >To: "Nathan Saper" >Cc: "Cypherpunks" >Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 12:23 AM >Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? >> >> So these people are entitled to something for nothing? >> (or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)? >> >> Why? >It's not a zero-sum game for the insurance companies. Most insurance >companies make quite a bit of money investing premiums. >In addition, they spread the risk. They are betting that more people will >stay well than get sick. >And I'm not talking about people "engaging in risky behavior". I'm >talking about someone who has a genetic predisposition for a disease THAT >THEY HAVE NO ABILITY TO MITIGATE. >I have no problem charging someone who smokes, takes drugs, or over eats. >THEY HAVE A CHOICE. >I am also not saying that Mr. Insurance CEO can only make $XXX in profit. >I'm sure they can make a profit. >In fact they are making profits right now WITHOUT using genetic testing. So what? You do not have a *right* to insurance and you do not have a *right* to medical care the amount of profit a company is making is irrelevant. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Data Security & Cryptology Consulting Programming, Networking, Analysis PGP for OS/2: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html E-Secure: http://www.openpgp.net/esecure.html --------------------------------------------------------------- From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 00:30:47 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:30:47 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001018170949.00b315a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <...> >Usenet and mailing lists were usable by the cognoscenti from the >mid-80s up to the "modern age." Using gopher and Archie and >anonymous ftp was for the cognoscenti only, though. Not much fun for >ordinary folks. > >This obviously all changed around 1994, with Mosaic/Netscape. "Point >and click" cleared the way. The illusion of "going to" a site (URLs) >did the trick. > >Faster computers weren't important, in my view. Better screens were >only slightly important. Modem speeds were more important. I'd say the most important thing was content. The content that existed pre-94/95 was only interesting to those who liked their amusements with something vaguely resembling "intellectual" content, or the computer "cognoscenti". Mosaic/Nutscrape changed that. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 20 00:36:37 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:36:37 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA In-Reply-To: References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: At 12:14 AM -0700 10/20/00, petro wrote: >>At 1:39 PM -0400 10/18/00, Tim May wrote: >> >> >>There's also a very scarce compilation of "The Peace War" and >>"Marooned in Realtime" which is called "Across Realtime." It >>contains "The Ungoverned" in between the two novels. Good luck in >>finding it, though. > > I believe the Sunnyvale Public Library has a copy. IIRC >that's where I checked it out--but returned it when I noticed that >it seemed to be just Peace War and Marooned together in one book. Which is what I said, with the novella "The Ungoverned" in between. As for the Sunnyvale Library having it, isn't this a violation of the Children's Protection Act of 2000? I thought part of the FBI's Library Awareness Program was going around to public libraries to make sure those under 18 (under 21 in twelve states, under 24 in five states) are not being exposed to seditious and un-American influences. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 00:40:58 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:40:58 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018173829.A16756@well.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001015190808.0256bb68@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001015222619.A6392@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <20001017172448.A14253@well.com> <20001018173829.A16756@well.com> Message-ID: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 10:17:17PM -0700, petro wrote: >> >> >> >Even if they do (which I haven't heard of, but I could be wrong), the >> >> >trend right now is more corporate power, less governmental power. As >> >> >I said before, we are already seeing this trend, what with >> >> >corporations able to circumvent countries' environmental codes and >> >> >whatnot. It will only get worse. >> >> >> >> Then you aren't paying attention. >> >> >> >> Corporations have *NO* power over you that doesn't come from >> >> the barrel of a government gun. >> > >> >That's like saying that the person with the power in a police >> >department is the street cop, because he's the one doing the actual >> >arrest. >> > >> >The one calling the shots is the one to be afraid of. >> >> No. The one *shooting* is the one to be afraid of. >> >> Without governments Companies (not corporations, corporations >> are inherently creatures of the state) would have to do their >> bullying directly and that would severely cut into the bottom line. > >I'm sure the companies could do bullying themselves for far less than >they contribute to candidates in order to have the bullying done for >them. No, for several reasons: (1) Armies and police forces are expensive to maintain, especially given that for corporations they are needed in geographically diverse areas *occasionally*, and that by buying the government they get access to them, but *only* when they need them. (2) Private armies/mercenaries tend to be dangerous tools--they have the guns, and loyalty to the paycheck. They also can easily turn on you, or be bought. (3) If one engages in warfare, one takes the risk of getting shot. If companies were to engage directly in actions involving force, they would risk having some of their targets bypass shooting at the foot soldiers and go straight for the top of the chain of command. By buying themselves a government, that risk is averted. Try thinking outside your box a bit. When the rules are gone, there are no rules, and there are interesting ramifications there. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 00:44:59 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:44:59 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Stop spam! In-Reply-To: <20001018175610.C16756@well.com> References: <20001017004154.68612.qmail@web9102.mail.yahoo.com> <3.0.5.32.20001016220758.00a6ca10@idiom.com> <20001017204157.B14683@well.com> <20001018175610.C16756@well.com> Message-ID: >> >Come on, lighten up. The guy's receiving spam, and like most people, >> >he gets pissed about it. So he sends a nasty email to the address in >> >the From: line of the spams. Can you blame him? >> >> He's not getting spam. He's been subscribed to the >> cypherpunks list by someone. >> > >OK. Still, he's getting unwanted email, and it's not his fault (I assume). > >> And yes, I can blame him for being clueless. > >Clueless how? Because he hadn't heard of the cypherpunks list? Or is >there some other reason he's clueless? The Cypherpunks list is a mailing list. There is a very small variation in the ways one gets on and off mailing lists. If he doesn't realize he's on a mailing list, that is cluelessness. If he *does* realize this, he should be able to figure out relatively quickly how to get off the mailing list. That he can't is cluelessness. He is calling it spam. It is not spam. That is cluelessness. He is threatening people. People he doesn't know. That is clueless in a dangerous way. You are defending an ignoramus. That is also clueless. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 00:56:44 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:56:44 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: >Two Things: > >1. It sounds like to me that there is no room for human compassion in >crypto-anarchy. > (Seems like we will all end up sitting in our "compounds" armed to the >teeth and if anybody comes along we either blow'em to bits or pay them >anonymous digital cash >to go away). There is plenty of room for human compassion. Forcing me (with threats of violence) to pay for something I don't believe in, or disagree with is not compassion. It's theft. >2. I think that it's funny that ultra-conservatives who are for letting >"competition" improve health care are setting themselves up for more >abortions. Being "ultra-conservative" for certain values of that word, I think abortion laws ought to be changed. I don't think they should stop at birth, I think they ought to be allowed up until the tissue mass is willing and able to be self-sufficient. This would of course make it open season on many politicians. > >How does crypto-anarchy/libertarian/anarchy propose to deal with the >"tragedy of the commons" where by doing what is best for each persons own The "tragedy of the commons" is only possible where there is something held in common by all people. If everything is owned by an individual or company, then it isn't a "commons", and they have the power to deny access to those who would abuse it, and the responsibility (to themselves, their share holders whatever) to take care of it. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 00:58:06 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:58:06 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: >At 9:11 PM -0500 10/18/00, Neil Johnson wrote: >>Two Things: >> >>1. It sounds like to me that there is no room for human compassion in >>crypto-anarchy. >> (Seems like we will all end up sitting in our "compounds" armed to the >>teeth and if anybody comes along we either blow'em to bits or pay them >>anonymous digital cash >>to go away). > >Another socialist simp-wimp heard from. > >Lots of socialists to be dealt with and disposed of. I wonder who >will stoke the furnaces? Robots? -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From drt at un.bewaff.net Thu Oct 19 16:03:16 2000 From: drt at un.bewaff.net (Doobee R. Tzeck) Date: 20 Oct 2000 01:03:16 +0200 Subject: CDR: Type I Remailer Software. Message-ID: <87bswgjuwl.fsf@c0re.bewaff.net> Can anybody suggest a Unix package for a Type I (Cypherpunk) Remailer? To me it seems everybody just rolls its own. But a full featured remailer with blacklisting, helptexts, headerrewriting, key rotation, pool, delay, spam protection (?), stats and so on has a significant complexty. I don't want to duplicate work done already by others. freedom seems to be the package which once got the most maintance but there seem to be no active developed remailer software for Unix today. Any comments/hints? drt -- DC hat so einen cryptischen Syntax, den muß man einfach lieben. ---Ingo Schwitters http://koeln.ccc.de/~drt/ From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 01:04:16 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:04:16 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <019901c0397d$c1545a80$0100a8c0@nandts> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <02c901c038b8$cbb5c880$0100a8c0@nandts> <016601c03971$eb05fde0$0100a8c0@nandts> <019901c0397d$c1545a80$0100a8c0@nandts> Message-ID: >> Another socialist simp-wimp heard from. >> >> Lots of socialists to be dealt with and disposed of. I wonder who >> will stoke the furnaces? >> >Not very many if enough of us "simp-wimps" gather enough e-cash to create >our own >"Imprisonment Betting Pool". > >I think languishing in jail with life-mate "Bubba" would be far better >poetic justice than simple execution for those who display no compassion for >their fellow man (I never said I was a socialist). It's not about "justice", it's about getting them out of the way so productive people can produce and grow. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 01:15:55 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:15:55 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EE77C3.4FF8114C@acmenet.net> References: <39EE77C3.4FF8114C@acmenet.net> Message-ID: >Tim May wrote: >> >> At 11:38 PM -0400 10/18/00, Steve Furlong wrote: >> >At most, an insurance company would have some information Bob didn't >> >have. Bob could reasonably demand a copy of the results of his DNA test. >... >> >If the insurance company refused, he could shop elsewhere. Or >> >self-insure, as many of us choose to do. >> >> Indeed. But let's drop the use of the word "demand." I was taught >> that a "demand" is a "demand," not a request. > >Yep, I wrote carelessly. I _said_ "demand" but I _meant_ that Bob would >refuse to deal with the insurance company unless they share what they Anybody who would take such a test (assuming that it wasn't from "skin flakes left behind on the couch") without being able to see the results as a pre-condition would be lucky not to get what they disserved. >find. And I'm not so confident that the insurance company would be >paying for the test, as you suggested in your (snipped) scenario. I have >no experience with insurance plans which required you to get a physical >before they take you on; I've always had HMOs (or self insurance) since >I left the military. Who normally paid for the exams? For at least some plans, they send a nurse-like person around with a stethoscope and a sphygmomanometer to give you a health questionnaire and take certain vitals. It's amazing what can be inferred from some very basic measurements. i.e. you're 27, have high blood pressure, a high pulse rate, high respiration rate, are 5'9 and weigh over 200 pounds. I don't need to know all that much about your family medical history, or your individual one. You are a big risk for some *very* expensive treatments over the next 20 years, but will probably be fine for the next 5. I really think that DNA testing for insurance is being overblown--I don't believe that it's going to catch all that much that family history, and there are a *LOT* more environmental factors that lead to health problems. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From jamesd at echeque.com Thu Oct 19 22:18:25 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:18:25 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... In-Reply-To: <00ab01c03a11$b1b10f80$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: <9c6d577b93017fad3e60049f341d10d2@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001019213619.00baf8a8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 05:21 PM 10/19/2000 -0400, jim bell wrote: > Naturally, a chemical solution (pun not directly intended...but I'll > take it anyway) becomes apparent. If the ultimate motivation of the > car siezures is to sell them and keep the money, what would happen > if somebody acquired a few ounces or gallons of PCB's > (poly-chlorinated biphenyls; common in 20+year-old > (non-electrolytic) capacitors), and sprayed them (only a very tiny > amount per car should be necessary, maybe 1 milliliter or so?) into > those siezed cars though a broken window (or injected through door > seals). Naturally, it would be important to anonymously call the > local newspaper or TV stations and report on what had ccurred, > possibly the EPA as well. That car would suddenly change from a > $10,000 asset into possibly a $100,000 liability for the agency which siezed them.. Anti pollution laws do not apply to government or to government officials acting in the course of their duties. If the government spreads deadly pollutants everywhere, then the government is innocent, but all private businesses that somehow facilitated the action of the government, perhaps by supplying it with equipment, or by allowing it to confiscate the land which it polluted, or by having the pollution spread upon their property, are guilty. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 9qO4qcXdxr+shE+kiE9FnXoVOzEWw4xTaj6N07Dn 4lSq/V9XWC9MFUUXegHjuC1rXKf0JoeoSaMQ7+4tO From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 01:23:32 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:23:32 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> Message-ID: >Most insurance companies are worth millions, if not billions, of >dollars, and they make huge profits. Insuring all of the people that >they now deny based on genetic abnormalities would still allow them to >make decent profits. So? Where is it mandated that they cover those? In fact, display proof that they *DON'T*. Most children--which is where genetic "abnormalities" show up--are covered often sight unseen through their parents policies, and often before they are even conceived. >Also, people cannot simply create insurance companies. Breaking into >the healthcare business is damn near impossible, unless you have >established relationships inside the industry. No, you have to have (a) big chunks of assets, and (b) follow some *EXTREMELY* thick government rules. It's the government stupid. >And many people are denied coverage outright, therefore removing the >possibility of simply paying for their coverage. Huh? How does denial of coverage prevent them from paying? Oh, you must not have meant what you wrote. You must have meant "many people who are denied coverage are denied treatment since they don't have health care". Guess why? Government again. If I have a health care bill, and pay even a *TINY* bit on it--like $10 a month, the creditor cannot file negative reports against me, cannot come after me legally etc. even if I owed 20k in medical bills. (you do the math on how long it takes to pay off 20k at $10 a month). Therefore, the hospitals know that for anything less than life threatening treatment, it's a losing battle to provide treatment to those without the demonstrated means to pay. Medicine is not a commodity, but it's *still* a business. It has to be. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 01:36:25 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:36:25 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > >This is why the current American system where virtually everyone's >insurance pays for virtually every visit to the doctor is such a >bad idea. People should be paying for their ordinary, year-in >year-out health care. Insurance should only enter the picture if The system only works because employers are picking up a large chunk of the tab. And they only do it because of tax advantages. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 01:42:55 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:42:55 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Anyone know easy symmetric cypher for perl? In-Reply-To: <971964525.39ef006d383ae@webmail.cotse.com> References: <971964525.39ef006d383ae@webmail.cotse.com> Message-ID: >At 12:24 AM 10/19/00 -0700, Petro wrote: >>>I need a perl module or a function that would perform symmetric key >>>encryption/decryption. I need it to encode secret information in >>>URLs. Thanks >> >> I thought you were brighter than that Igor. >> >> http://search.cpan.org/search?mode=module&query=encrypt > >"No modules found matching 'encrypt' " > >http://search.cpan.org/search?mode=module&query=crypt , on the other hand... http://search.cpan.org/search?mode=module&query=encrypt got me: 4 modules found in 4 distributions matching 'encrypt' CGI-EncryptForm-1.02 by Peter Marelas Released 24th October 1999 CGI::EncryptForm - Implement trusted stateful CGI Form Data using cryptography. 1.02 GnuPG-0.07 by Francis J. Lacoste Released 15th August 2000 GnuPG::Tie::Encrypt - Tied filehandle interface to encryption with the GNU Privacy Guard. HTML-EP-0.2010 by Jochen Wiedmann Released 15th December 1999 HTML::EP::CGIEncryptForm - An EP interface to the CGI::EncryptForm module Tie-EncryptedHash-1.0 by Vipul Ved Prakash Released 2nd September 2000 Tie::EncryptedHash - Hashes (and objects based on hashes) with encrypting fields. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 02:07:49 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 02:07:49 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Neil Johnson wrote: > >>But the Bob has no control of his risk (genetics), or at least not yet :). >>The insurance company does. > >Say What?! Sorry, no insurance company has the power to say who >is and is not born with particular genetics. > >>I don't have a problem with insurance companies raising rates for people who >>smoke, are overweight (cough, cough), or have high cholesterol (cough, >>cough, cough). That's behavior that can be changed. > >You speak as though the insurance companies business where arbitration >of morals rather than arbitration of risks. They can't make money >arbitrating morals -- at least not without becoming religions. Sure they can. Moral!=religious. It is "immoral" to commit murder. Is this because God Says So, or because it's generally better for society if we can assume that the vast majority of people *won't* be trying to shoot us? It is "immoral" to steal. See above. When you look at many things that are "traditionally" immoral (by that I mean before modern socialism), they tend to have 1 thing in common. It is wrong to take what isn't yours (property, life etc.) without the blessing of the state. If we eliminate the state (Go state!, Go away!), we get "it is immoral to take what isn't yours". Consuming more than you produce is functionally the same thing. Short term illness and youth can be excused that in the long term you wind up either producing the same as you consume, or producing more. If it lasts long enough, illness can reverse that, as can things like certain addictions etc. Insurance companies--in a free market--would reward those who acted "morally"--those who took steps to minimize their non-productive times, and refuse to reward (or punish depending on your perspective) those who did things that tended to increase their non-productive times. Genetics plays only a small part in this. Most of the truly devastating genetic problems really are a drop in the bucket, and are often fairly educational in medical knowledge--which the medical establishment should pay for. The less obvious genetic problems are usually manageable if the individual knows about it, and is willing to do those things--or not do those things--as their condition demands. Case in point, I have a friend who is diabetic. Not a major issue with modern medicine. He can easily afford (given his profession) the insulin and medical checkups necessary. However he likes to drink, and drink heavily. This will bite him in the future. He knows this, and still drinks. Should the insurance companies be forced to support him? I say no. He knows what to do. He doesn't do it. As much as I like him, it's his life. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 02:14:58 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 02:14:58 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Tim May's anti-semitic rants In-Reply-To: <200010191546.IAA27556@user3.hushmail.com> References: <200010191546.IAA27556@user3.hushmail.com> Message-ID: >This list is no stranger to Tim May's sarcasm and anti-semitic rants. He's bashing a completely facist and dictatorial country of which a sizeable number of citizens are completely willing to commit genocide of the very same kind that was once waged against them. I cannot recall seeing him bash *jews*, rather he bashes Isreal. As they deserve. >>You just used a German word. I'm reporting you to the Zionist League. > > >>"Remember, children of Israel, "Eretz Israel" is not the same thing >>as "lebensraum," and the suppression of the ragheads in Eretz Israel >>is merely pest eradication, not the "Final Solution." War is peace, >>freedom is slavery, and Zionists are libertarians." > >--Tim May -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 02:23:26 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 02:23:26 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: FidoNet II In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: Tim May: >First, if you're going to attempt a "FidoNet II," at least use link >encryption at every stage. Since each node knows the next node it >will be phoning (or linking to), it's a relatively easy matter to >encrypt to the public key of that node. This makes each node a kind >of remailer, as someone looking only at the internode traffic will >only see encrypted bits. > >Second, so long as one has done the above, might as well make each >node an actual remailer. With all of the usual mixing of in/out >packets, packet size padding, etc. Given the following: (1) That the phone calls are made at given times of day. (2) Last a specifc length--i.e. always a multiple of 5 minutes etc. (3) All packets in/out are encrypted. Would it really matter? If traffic bound for a specific node were simply encrypted with that *nodes* public key, and every packet encrypted to with the next nodes key, would (2) Be enough? -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 02:30:14 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 02:30:14 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) cpunk In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >Who is to blame for hurricanes? "God", but so far he seems rather judgement proof. >Haiti, for not stopping them before they reach Florida? > >Who is to blame for a bee flying into your mouth while you are driving? >(which, if you've never had it happen, leads quickly to a car crash) If you are driving with your head out the window, you are. And yes, I know someone who had something similar happen (wasn't a bee), and he all but crashed. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From petro at bounty.org Fri Oct 20 02:45:47 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 02:45:47 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: It's all property, folks In-Reply-To: <0fe585af27e9fb179b7f10c514af3983@anon.xg.nu> References: <0fe585af27e9fb179b7f10c514af3983@anon.xg.nu> Message-ID: > Your neighbor pollutes your lungs or your land and you don't know >what to do about it? Shit man, get real -- $5 bucks worth of gasoline >and a midnight stroll takes care of his house, him, and his family. Burning someones house down is *REALLY* bad for the air and land around the site. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 20 00:27:22 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 03:27:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 6:47 PM -0400 10/19/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: >On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, jim bell wrote: > >>Naturally, a chemical solution (pun not directly intended...but I'll take it >>anyway) becomes apparent. If the ultimate motivation of the car siezures is >>to sell them and keep the money, what would happen if somebody acquired a >>few ounces or gallons of PCB's (poly-chlorinated biphenyls; common in >>20+year-old (non-electrolytic) capacitors), and sprayed them (only a very >>tiny amount per car should be necessary, maybe 1 milliliter or so?) into >>those siezed cars though a broken window (or injected through door seals). >>Naturally, it would be important to anonymously call the local newspaper or >>TV stations and report on what had occurred, possibly the EPA as well. That >>car would suddenly change from a $10,000 asset into possibly a $100,000 >>liability for the agency which siezed them.. >> >>Just a thought > >A thought, however, requiring people to handle PCB's -- which >are no fun whatsoever, heavily regulated, hard to acquire (albeit >relatively easy to synthesize), and all-around poisonous. That's >damaging more than just the criminals in this case. That's damaging >the planet. PCBs are as close as your nearest utility pole transformer. Are they as dangerous as reporters have led us to believe? My suspicion? No. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From prsi_ct at yahoo.com Fri Oct 20 03:41:26 2000 From: prsi_ct at yahoo.com (Peter Johnson) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 03:41:26 Subject: CDR: Immediate Downline - 1000 Members Per Month - It's FREE!! Message-ID: <200010200145.SAA01071@cyberpass.net> CHECK IT OUT! IT'S FREE! 1000 MEMBERS A MONTH!! Get yourself an IMMEDIATE DOWNLINE ! ALL new members that come into the club COMPANY WIDE will go under YOU. A true VERTICAL downline. YOU can easily get 1000 members or MORE under YOU in a month! How would you like a GUARANTEED minimum commission every month? JOIN FREE!!!!!!! JOIN FREE!!!!!!! Join our FREE postlaunch program- You'll be then forwarded on to our main website where you can watch your downline grow right before your eyes ! Get started today and watch what happens ! http://www.angelfire.com/ab4/back1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You are receiving this message because my records indicate you are open to receiving information on how to make money on the internet. If you would like to be removed from future mailings please reply with "remove" in the subject line. Thanks and many prosperous blessings to you! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From jimdbell at home.com Fri Oct 20 00:44:59 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 03:44:59 -0400 Subject: CDR: Revolutionary toll: (was: "judges needing killing...") References: Message-ID: <00a001c03a69$b8e58300$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: Tim May > > Note: I did not originate the title of this thread. I mention this > because Certain Prosecutors have taken such things out of context and > produced them in court documents as evidence that someone is planning > to kill some judge, and as grounds for publishing the Social Security > Numbers and home addresses of certain persons. I'd sue these > criminals, except there would be no point. Hundreds of thousands in > expenses, and in their rigged court rooms. Better to plot vengeance > in other ways. > deletia > > As for the title of this thread, a lot more than some judges need to > be dealt with. Some prosecutors, some Marshal's Service folks, some > cops. Hundreds of thousands, overall. The population of Revolutionary France (1793) was about 25 million. The death toll from The Terror, as I vaguely recall from reading it years ago, was about 19,000. Or, about 0.075% of the population, which is actually quite small when you think about it. The population of the US today is about 260 million. An equivalent per-capita death rate today would be 200,000 people: This is, as I recall, substantially less than the number of people who die early each year due to either alcoholism or tobacco-related diseases. It's probably not coincidence that the selective removal of 200,000 today would likely "do the job", despite the vast difference in today's society and 18th century France. Jim Bell From bill.stewart at pobox.com Fri Oct 20 02:31:05 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 05:31:05 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Mac created the modern Internet In-Reply-To: References: <20001019175323.A13615@netestate.de> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001020022933.009a6620@idiom.com> At 01:40 PM 10/19/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: >By the way, on a historical note, I was a Netcom customer when Netcom >began offering their own proprietary Web browser solution. I don't >even recall what they called it. It only ran under Windows, so we Mac >users had to look elsewhere for our ISPs. NetComplete - it had a browser, email, and a few other capabilities. You didn't have to use it; I tried it briefly and decided it was seriously lame but easy to ignore. The main effect it had on service was that you were more likely to get questions answered if you were using their wares than random other things, but that was around the time that calling Netcom technical support meant 45 minutes on hold to get some clueless newbie operator-trainee. >(More's the pity for Netcom, as the general TIA/SLIP/PPP tools were >available to let Mac users like me use Mosaic and other browsers. But >Netcom hoped to become a browser company, I suppose. They later got >absorbed into Mindspring, I think.) ICG ate Netcom, Mindspring ate ICG, and ate or merged with Earthlink. I've still got my all-you-can-eat dialup account; works fine, has good nationwide coverage, and has an 800 number that's useful from some hotels. They do periodically send mail saying "hey, be nice, you're in the top 3% of connect time", but that's the reason for buying full-time dialup service; if they change their pricing I'll change my connection habits. Also, some setup things are a bit different between Mindspring POPs and Netcom POPs. I should dump them for AT&T of course (:-), and I may do that when I get cable modem installed, but AT&T only gives you something like 100 hours before charging per hour. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 03:18:37 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 06:18:37 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: >Maybe it's just me, but "suing their asses off" would hardly >suffice...there's a long, and getting longer every day, list of >abuses for which the only remedy I can imagine would be a car bomb >incinerating one or all of the offenders. You live in a universe much more interesting than mine, I suppose... Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From mclow at owl.csusm.edu Fri Oct 20 06:25:11 2000 From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 06:25:11 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 2:11 PM +0300 10/20/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Marshall Clow wrote: > >>So these people are entitled to something for nothing? >>(or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)? >> >>Why? > >Because keeping people operable longer makes for net savings for the >society? That's a nice belief. Can you show it to be true? [ Don't forget to factor in the opportunity cost of such a program. ] >This perhaps isn't a reason for *private* companies to issue >insurance fairly, but is a clear incentive to the society to nevertheless >maintain a public health insurance infrastructure. Rather, I would say that individuals should be able to decide on the level of health care that they are willing to pay for. >Following the same line >of reasoning, it is beneficial for the society as a whole (whether through >the government or through concerted action of individuals) to pressure any >insurer to comply with this general goal. Even if I conceded your premise (which I don't), I certainly don't believe that this is true. This is basically equivalent to "the end justifies the means". How do you feel about forced sterilizations of mental patients and other "undesirables"? Society would benefit by not having them reproduce. On this side of the Atlantic, we get the pathetic wheeze "If it saves just one child....." [ Switching topics completely. ] >I think this can be accomplished without the Men with Guns as well. And now you've completely lost me. How would you compel people to pay taxes without a threat of violence? -- -- Marshall "The era of big government is over." Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996 Marshall Clow MusicMatch From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 03:52:44 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 06:52:44 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: >"Bob, I see here that you are "demanding" a copy of this test that I >paid for, that you voluntarily provided a sample for, or that you >were careless enough to leave some skin flakes for on my sofa over >there in the office. The first two parts: ok by all means. People simply shouldn't submit to such shitty treatment. It's too bad more of us do not refuse. About the last part: how is this different from the government using IR scanning to invade your privacy? This is about a reasonable expectation of privacy. And don't tell me the Men with Guns make a difference - the government could achieve its goals quite well purely through economic means. Zaibatsu-like company states offer prime examples of how to structure this. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Fri Oct 20 04:11:17 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 07:11:17 -0400 Subject: CDR: The "Ungoverned", or at least "Unprotected" (was Re: NSA References: <200010171706.NAA09349@www6.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: <39F0283E.62AB3C0C@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> petro wrote:> > >There's also a very scarce compilation of "The Peace War" and > >"Marooned in Realtime" which is called "Across Realtime." It > >contains "The Ungoverned" in between the two novels. Good luck in > >finding it, though. > > I believe the Sunnyvale Public Library has a copy. IIRC > that's where I checked it out--but returned it when I noticed that it > seemed to be just Peace War and Marooned together in one book. > There are at least two editions of this, from what I've seen thus far, the '86 edition doesn't have "The Ungoverned" in it, but the later ('92, I think) definitely does. I was lucky enough to find the latter in a local highschool library. From tom at ricardo.de Fri Oct 20 04:20:50 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 07:20:50 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: FidoNet II References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <39F02943.AD0CD99C@ricardo.de> Tim May wrote: > First, if you're going to attempt a "FidoNet II," at least use link > encryption at every stage. that goes without saying, doesn't it? > Second, so long as one has done the above, might as well make each > node an actual remailer. With all of the usual mixing of in/out > packets, packet size padding, etc. good one. yes, should be done that way. > Third, the use of radio links has come up several times over the > years. A couple of early Cypherpunks were involved in packet radio > and addressed the issue. By the way, the FCC still has restrictions > on encrption over the airwaves, as I understand things. I was thinking more in the direction of wireless LAN. > Fourth, given the speeds of the Net, given the move to put phone > calls over the Net, given the many tools...why on earth would anyone > want to revive FidoNet? Implement remailer protocols to do a virtual > FidoNet, perhaps, but don't actually have machines phoning up other > machines! course not! see my earlier mails - the internet is available as a transport layer, so let's use it. > Look to remailer networks and I think you'll find what you're looking for. maybe the existing remailer structure could even be utilized. all one has to do is a simple "email2file" translation. say "filename at mynode.com". From rah at shipwright.com Fri Oct 20 04:58:04 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 07:58:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: [spam score 10.00/10.0 -pobox] Re: A way to discourage advertising In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001019144534.009b8920@idiom.com> References: <200008290220.TAA15402@sirius.infonex.com> <200008290220.TAA15402@sirius.infonex.com> <3.0.5.32.20001019144534.009b8920@idiom.com> Message-ID: At 2:45 PM -0700 on 10/19/00, Bill Stewart wrote: > "teergrube" Cool. An email version of the spider-trap somebody built at Sandia 4 or 5 years ago. Teergrube means "tarpit", right? Marvellous, just marvellous. Hang out on this list, you learn something, even if everyone knows it before you do. :-). Cheers, RAH Who can't wait to find a teergrube application for 0SX someday... -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 04:58:31 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 07:58:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Subway (was I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" ) In-Reply-To: <39EF062E.83BBA559@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Harmon Seaver wrote: > At least -- but it's still subject to traffic analysis to discover who the >perps are, on both ends. And yes, phones can be tapped too, but it's more difficult, >takes more effort, warrants (at least here, so far). But I've been thinking more >about this and realized that packet radio is really the best transport medium, done >in burst modes on shortwave or even CB frequencies with big linear amps. I'd rather use continuous direct sequence spread spectrum. Practically impossible to jam as well, without the spreading sequence. I've been sort of waiting to see cryptographically secure spreading in commercial products... Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From drake at cais.com Fri Oct 20 04:59:21 2000 From: drake at cais.com (Drake) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 07:59:21 -0400 Subject: CDR: The end of privacy: Is technology making us transparent? References: Message-ID: <39F03399.34D45842@cais.com> FYI, for the sake of privacy, I always deny receipts unless they are from those I know, who aren't up to something. Re: your topic: Yes. Next question? cheers, -=d=- Robert Guerra wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Lecture Series on Privacy and New Technologies > > TOPIC: The end of privacy: Is technology making us transparent? > > SPEAKER: Reginal Whitaker > (author of The end of privacy: How total surveillance is becoming a > reality. (1999). New Press) > > WHEN: Thursday, October 26 > > WHERE: 140 St. George, Rm. 307 (Faculty of Information Studies, > building adjacent to Robarts Library) > > TIME: 7pm to 8,30 pm > > FORMAT: 30 minute lecture and the rest of the time for questions. > > For more info contact: > > Ana Viseu > Robert Guerra > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: PGP 7.0 > > iQA/AwUBOe+a+sKdCsHMpdeSEQKC1QCeOqZRnpEYpsl1FlB4QurPiK2icF8An04h > p+F+OkmDWCq6C0RKuO7f21sS > =uIde > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > -- > "...as we transfer our whole being to the data bank, privacy will > become a ghost or echo of its former self and what remains of > community will disappear"...Marshal McLuhan > -- > Robert Guerra , Fax: +1(303) 484-0302 > WWW Page , ICQ # 10266626 > PGPKeys From dan03 at trim-slim.com Fri Oct 20 07:03:24 2000 From: dan03 at trim-slim.com (dan03 at trim-slim.com) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 08:03:24 -0600 Subject: CDR: FREE TRAVEL & BIZ OPP!! Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 580 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jamesd at echeque.com Fri Oct 20 08:38:31 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 08:38:31 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Tim May's anti-semitic rants In-Reply-To: References: <200010191546.IAA27556@user3.hushmail.com> <200010191546.IAA27556@user3.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001020082823.00bab6c8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- > > This list is no stranger to Tim May's sarcasm and anti-semitic rants. At 02:14 AM 10/20/2000 -0700, petro wrote: > He's bashing a completely facist and dictatorial country of > which a sizeable number of citizens are completely willing to > commit genocide of the very same kind that was once waged > against them. > > I cannot recall seeing him bash *jews*, rather he bashes > Isreal. Last night I was channel surfing, I saw an interview with a prominent title "Profiles in terror". The anchorman was interviewing the Secretary General of the Hezbollah, an organization invariably described as terrorist in our press, even though it, unlike most Arab states, and unlike Israel, usually obeys the laws of war. The interviewer asked the Secretary General about the conditions under which the Israeli prisoners were being held. He did not answer. Instead he said (from memory, not his exact words) : : We have four Israeli soldiers prisoner (gives ranks and : : brief description). They were each captured on occupied : : Lebanese territory (gives location of capture). The : : Israelis hold nineteen Hezbollah soldiers prisoner, all of : : them captured in Lebanon, many of them taken in raids on : : their homes. Why is no one asking about these prisoners : : and the conditions under which they are held? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Lt0VaMb+41MyRGPEUTS6aV9HpxWpUqwytQrnAE0 4mE/Cq70vAsRpZIWGz/tmwEKrB84syXcD3lbv5eKK From jamesd at echeque.com Fri Oct 20 08:46:46 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 08:46:46 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: References: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001020084008.022f9400@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 01:42 PM 10/20/2000 +0300, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > Details, details. People use the term 'anarchy' a bit too casually > here, nothing else. Mostly what they mean is 'libertarian'. The > latter in no way excludes other hierarchical relationships, as we > all know hardcore anarchy does. Tim's favorite characterization of > this side of anarchy is something like socialist simp-wimp mumbo > jumbo. Anarcho socialism has been dead since 1938. (It had the misfortune of being actually tried in 1936, whereupon it instantly became apparent that socialism requires a vastly powerful state in order to apply ruthless terror.) Today's "anarcho" socialists, such as Chomsky, believe that the best way to arrange for the state to wither away is to first make it vastly powerful and all encompassing. Where have we heard that theory before? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG tD7Rz9+AcnJbU8ma1SUnADe5oj9i+3cuYAlz3GAo 46+a0dJNvfetkNC2myPgoVrhbdqK0GQ+hdsCVmGm/ From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 20 09:23:05 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:23:05 -0700 Subject: CDR: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 2:53 PM +0300 10/20/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > > >>People are concerned about the long term value of their property, so they >>will have a disincentive to pollute. > >Really? People have every incentive to pollute as long as they can either >keep it a secret or make sure they are not around the shit hits the >fan. Radioactive waste is a prime example of the latter approach. Nuclear waste is actually a _poor_ example of this. Nuclear waste is easy to track, easy to store, hard to hide. Most problems with storing nuclear waste come from irrational fears people have of anything having to do with "atoms." I could go on to educate you and others about the advantages of nuclear power over alternatives, and the ease of storing nuclear waste, but I expect this list is the wrong place for such education. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From declan at well.com Fri Oct 20 06:27:26 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:27:26 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... In-Reply-To: ; from alan@clueserver.org on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 03:06:56PM -0400 References: <9c6d577b93017fad3e60049f341d10d2@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <20001020094723.C5428@cluebot.com> My employer is running a deal right now in which we can wrap our car in ads in exchange for X shares of stock, strike price current price of the shares. Even if there's a modest $Y increase in share value, X*Y will amount to many times the cost of most cars. So what companies should do is try to get police agencies to seize such ad-wrapped cars, as long as they can guarantee the vehicles will be driven and not (gasp) repainted. :) -Declan On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 03:06:56PM -0400, Alan Olsen wrote: > On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: > > > Oct 19, 2000 - 06:55 AM > > > > California Court Declines to Review > > Vehicle Forfeiture Law > > The Associated Press > > > > SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - The state Supreme Court has > > declined to review a ruling allowing police to seize vehicles > > suspected of use in crimes such as drug dealing or soliciting > > a prostitute. > > Portland, Oregon has a similar law. In practice, they take your car only > as long as it has resale value. (In other words, it is done for revenue > and not for "punishment".) > > Speaking of governmental seizures... > > Oregon has a balot initiative to tighten down the seizure laws. They are > trying to add in that the property can only be seized if the owner is > convicted of something. > > Interesting to see who is lining up against this one. > > > The first few arguments against the initiative are from the animal > shelters claiming that is will harm animals! The rest are from various > law enforcement agencies and the like upset because they will have not > have this hidden source of funding for toys. > > alan at ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply > Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys. > "In the future, everything will have its 15 minutes of blame." > > From declan at well.com Fri Oct 20 06:43:22 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:43:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Tim May's anti-semitic rants In-Reply-To: <39F02BC0.F3AC6E7C@ricardo.de>; from tom@ricardo.de on Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 01:25:52PM +0200 References: <200010192016.NAA17977@user3.hushmail.com> <39F02BC0.F3AC6E7C@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <20001020094322.B5428@cluebot.com> Right. While I feel some sense of moral obligation to feel compassion for victims of genocide in Africa, the reality is that traffic in downtown Washington affects me more. To paraphrase: One person dying is a tragedy One million dying is a statistic One billion lost in NASDAQ value is a serious bummer -Declan On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 01:25:52PM +0200, Tom Vogt wrote: > auto9950013 at hushmail.com wrote: > > > > Typical of May to wish that those who he hates be nuked, but please don'tt > > let it effect his portfolio. > > > > so? in that respect he's a great relief from all the "houlier than thou" > "for the chiiildren" pseudo-moralists. > in the end, nobody cares if he's not affected. the effect may be > emotional. > From apoio at giganetstore.com Fri Oct 20 01:52:31 2000 From: apoio at giganetstore.com (apoio at giganetstore.com) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:52:31 +0100 Subject: CDR: A Giganetstore.com Recomenda Message-ID: <0b74732520814a0WWWNETSTORE@wwwnetstore> A Giganetstore.com Recomenda Para retirar o seu email desta mailing list deverá entrar no nosso site http://www.giganetstore.com , ir à edição do seu registo e retirar a opção de receber informação acerca das nossas promoções e novos serviços. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 7795 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Richard.Diamond at mail.house.gov Fri Oct 20 06:54:05 2000 From: Richard.Diamond at mail.house.gov (Diamond, Richard) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:54:05 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Rep. Armey questions Justice Department review of Carnivore Message-ID: <6BAA4FF604A4D2119AD10008C7A4EFBB05673A4C@hrm06.house.gov> If you'd like, forward this to the cypherpunks list (if it rejects submissions from non-members). Mr. Armey told the Washington Post that he thought Carnivore was illegal. That should answer the question quite sufficiently, I think. But I might as well add the justification: "The American people will not simply 'trust' that the Justice Department, which allowed 900 FBI files containing personal information about American citizens to be released into unauthorized hands (i.e. Craig Livingstone), will be more careful with their online privacy." http://freedom.gov/library/technology/reno3letter.asp "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." (4th amdt.) Seems to me there's no difference between my packets and my papers. If they're sniffing all the traffic on my ISP, they're sniffing my papers without a warrant. There are other ways to conduct surveillance on criminals that don't present this difficulty. From declan at well.com Fri Oct 20 06:55:39 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:55:39 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Declan should hope Bush is elected! In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 12:13:53PM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20001020095539.E5428@cluebot.com> Bush also seemed to criticize the MS antitrust lawsuit yesterday: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39570,00.html On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 12:13:53PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > I know Declan is libertarian-leaning, but it seems to me he has good > reason to hope Bush wins. Look at Bush's latest stump speech: [...] > Seems to me that if Bush wins, Declan will be quite welcome in the > White House. He may even be able to influence Bush further in the > direction of "hands off" approaches, especially in censorship and > filtering. > > If Gore wins, I expect Declan will face a chilly reception. I can't say (personally) I'm a fan of either candidate. But even if Gore were to win, I'd likely continue the working relationship with the White House staff that I have now. Apart from ideology, they have an incentive to do so: I write articles (such as one I'm doing today) in which they'd like their positions represented. -Declan From declan at well.com Fri Oct 20 06:57:38 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:57:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Rep. Armey questions Justice Department review of Carnivore In-Reply-To: ; from mnorton@cavern.uark.edu on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 09:30:55PM -0500 References: <4.3.0.20001019183652.00b498a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20001020095738.F5428@cluebot.com> Based on his previous press releases, I think it's fair to say so. But let's copy his aide and ask. -Declan On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 09:30:55PM -0500, Mac Norton wrote: > > well, is Armey opposed to Carnivore? Or not? > MacN > > On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > > > > ******** > > And a Napster poll: > > http://freedom.gov/vote/vote5.asp > > ******** > > > > > > http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/19/2251239 > > > > Justice Department Carnivore Review a Sham? > > posted by cicero on Thursday October 19, @05:44PM > > from the say-could-it-be-an-election-year? dept. > > > > Dick Armey, House majority leader and Republican firebrand, is once > > again making trouble for the Clinton administration. Armey this > > afternoon sent a letter to Attorney General Janet Reno, saying that > > the Justice Department's review of Carnivore appears somewhat less > > than objective: "I have questioned the independence of this review. > > Several in the media have questioned this review. Several universities > > refused to submit review proposals because, in their opinion, the > > review process was unfair." Having the supposedly secret names of the > > government-affiliated reviewers revealed last month sure didn't help. > > Neither did the information in the Carnivore documents obtained under > > the Freedom of Information Act. (Armey's letter is below.) > > > > The letter: > > http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/19/2251239 > > > > > > > From jya at pipeline.com Fri Oct 20 07:02:42 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 10:02:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: DoJ vs. Privacy Message-ID: <200010201414.KAA31020@granger.mail.mindspring.net> In 1998 Gore proposed a national justice information system which was implemented by AG Reno. The purpose of the program is to make criminal justice and other information easily available to many the parties involved; courts, prosecutors, law enforcement officers, local officials and so on. We ran across a presentation by a DoJ official in which he outlines progress of the program and how to address the conflict posed by information collection technology for privacy concerns of citizens and organizations: http://cryptome.org/doj-ji-pi.ppt (129KB) He advocates that despite the "tension between justice needs and privacy concerns," tools for information collection and sharing be provided the national justice system as soon as possible, while a campaign is initiated to address privacy concerns primarily by PR among US, Canadian, UN and other cooperating agencies. He observes that local parties are not always sensitive to privacy concerns and that they may need education -- but that is not to hold up getting them the tools they need to collect information on citizens. He also notes that current laws do not adequately cover today's and tomorrow's technology for collecting and sharing information. What technology besides Carnivore is outside the law? Here's a June 2000 information distribution technology status report by The Global Justice Information Network: http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/global/documents/is_report.htm And here are the member organizations of the Global Justice Information Network Advisory Committee: Administrative Office of the United States Courts American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators American Correctional Association American Probation and Parole Association Attorney General Advisory Committee Criminal Justice Information Services Advisory Policy Board Criminal Justice Information Services Federal Working Group Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Division International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) IACP, State and Provincial Police Division Interpol Major Cities Chiefs Association National Association of Attorneys General NASIRE (National Association of State Information Resource Executives), Representing the Chief Information Officers of the States National Center for State Courts National Criminal Justice Association National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges National District Attorneys Association National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System National Legal Aid and Defender Association National Sheriffs Association North Carolina Department of Justice Reno-Sparks Indian Colony Police Department SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs U.S. Department of Treasury U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Investigative Agency Policies From lists at politechbot.com Fri Oct 20 07:08:48 2000 From: lists at politechbot.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 10:08:48 -0400 Subject: CDR: I.R.S. Seeks Credit Card Slips Message-ID: <20001020100848.A5850@cluebot.com> http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/20/business/20BANK.html October 20, 2000 - New York Times (front page) Taking Aim at Tax Havens, I.R.S. Seeks Credit Card Slips By DAVID CAY JOHNSTON The Internal Revenue Service, struggling against Caribbean havens it suspects of draining away at least $70 billion a year in personal income tax revenue, has set its sights on a new target — the credit card slips of suspected tax evaders. The agency has asked a federal judge in Miami to issue summonses for two years' worth of records of MasterCard and American Express card transactions in the United States that were billed to bank accounts in Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas and the Cayman Islands. Using the Internet and other outlets, banks in those nations openly solicit tax evasion in ways that the I.R.S. says have proved attractive to corporate executives, business owners, doctors and other wealthy people in the United States. Americans can legally move their assets offshore but are required to notify the I.R.S. of those transactions and to pay taxes on their income worldwide. Some Caribbean countries offer an alluring tax haven, however, because they impose no income tax and do not generally cooperate with I.R.S. efforts to track down incomes. From honig at sprynet.com Fri Oct 20 08:05:17 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 11:05:17 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? (DNA thread...) In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001019102137.007cf6d0@idiom.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001018092333.00803210@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001020080334.0082a940@pop.sprynet.com> At 05:31 PM 10/19/00 -0400, Bill Stewart wrote: >At 12:25 PM 10/18/00 -0400, David Honig wrote: >>Some scandanavian countries have complete health records on all >>their citizens and some are working on national DNA banks. Some of >>these will be made available for research after some form >>of anonymization. > >Specifically Iceland - the population is small, and hasn't had >much mixing with other people since the decline of Viking raiding, Yes Ken Brown mentioned Iceland... I haven't been able to find the article wherein other countries were thinking of similar DB for their populations... I've been too busy getting my naif tech-history reworked by Lucky et al. :-) From rsw at MIT.EDU Fri Oct 20 08:22:56 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 11:22:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from ssyreeni@cc.helsinki.fi on Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 02:22:03PM +0300 References: <20001019021925.A20705@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20001020112256.A28839@positron.mit.edu> Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > Which speaks right into the socialist cause - we thus need an instance to > take care of the many genetically defective asses out there, without concern > for money. How so? In most cases, the genetic defects that we're discussing are not those that produce three heads and a heart the size of a watermelon; insurance companies don't need any tests to know they're not insuring such a person. The things we're concerned with are conditions such as a familial tendency towards heart disease or a possibility of developing diabetes later in life. For the most part, they're not things that prevent people from holding jobs and having money. I see a possibility for the equivalent of high-risk vehicular insurance for people who have genetic defects as genetic testing for insurance purposes becomes more common. Just as some companies specialize in insuring those who have showed themselves to have shitty driving records, health insurance companies who have high-rate, high-risk policies will become more common. Sure, it'll be more expensive for people who have serious genetic problems to get coverage, but it's certainly the case that it's more expensive to provide _care_, so the expense is not unjust. In light of this, my question is the following: Why do you believe that those who are born with genetic problems have additional entitlements that the rest of us don't have? Alternatively, attempt to justify placing the burden for healthcare of a particular person with genetic defects on any of the following: (a) that person (b) insurance companies (c) taxpayers > OK. So how about preventative care? It might well be that by insuring > everyone and keeping them in health, the total risk per dollars paid for > coverage actually goes down. Especially if infectious diseases can be kept > in check. Plus, the sum total of money paid by the insurees goes up as they > stay healthier for longer, thus giving more money for the insurance company > to invest into more profitable ventures. This is what governments do now. Even if it is the case that preventative care would be cheaper, then it's just stupidity on the part of the insurance company not to invest this way; this does not justify government intervention ("You're not running your business right; let us help!" would sound strange coming from the U.S. government, anyway). However, I reject that it is the case that additional preventative care would do anything. Currently, most insurance companies I know of will pay for flu shots and things along those lines. What else do you want? We could cover your arm in a cast so that it doesn't get broken, but I'm not sure if you'd really like that. I can't produce any hard figures on frivolous hospital visits, but my feeling (having lived in a family of medical people) is that any additional preventative care that the insurance companies attempted to provide would only end up encouraging hypochondriacs to go to their doctor or hospital on the slightest whim. -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 2544 bytes Desc: not available URL: From honig at sprynet.com Fri Oct 20 08:30:56 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 11:30:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: It's all property, folks In-Reply-To: <0fe585af27e9fb179b7f10c514af3983@anon.xg.nu> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001020082747.008207c0@pop.sprynet.com> At 10:05 PM 10/19/00 -0400, No User wrote: > Most EarthFirst! folks have figured out that you just have to forget about >the government acting properly to protect Mother Earth. It takes direct, ... >what to do about it? Shit man, get real -- $5 bucks worth of gasoline >and a midnight stroll takes care of his house, him, and his family. Unleaded gas, one hopes, or better ethanol from biomass :-) From anonymous at openpgp.net Fri Oct 20 08:31:56 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 11:31:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: if not part of the solution youre part of the precipitate Message-ID: If the ultimate motivation of the car siezures is >to sell them and keep the money, what would happen if somebody acquired a >few ounces or gallons of PCBs (poly-chlorinated biphenyls common in >20+year-old (non-electrolytic) capacitors), and sprayed them (only a very >tiny amount per car should be necessary, maybe 1 milliliter or so?) into >those siezed cars though a broken window (or injected through door seals). A better use involves a flare and, um, an appropriately deserving building :-) Aloha Plume From bjueneman at novell.com Fri Oct 20 10:50:04 2000 From: bjueneman at novell.com (Bob Jueneman) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 11:50:04 -0600 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) Message-ID: Let's put this problem in perspective, and try to avoid the "chicken little, the sky is falling" syndrome. It's quite unlikely that someone would come up with "Eureka!" type of solution to factoring large numbers that would end up completely breaking RSA, or that some way would be found to completely break the integrity of SHA-1. Instead, we would be much more likely to see a nibbling around the edges, and a gradually decreasing confidence in existing algorithms, with more than enough time to replace them. In fact, we have already seen that. MD2 is now deprecated, and MD5 is being pretty widely supplanted by SHA-1. Likewise, DES has been broken and people are recommending that triple-DES be used, and soon AES. And OAEP is recommended to get around some hypothetical million-question attacks. But the sky hasn't fallen, and the sun still comes up in the morning. Even if some catastrophic weakness were somehow revealed that any high school kid could take advantage of with a single PC, there are still checks and balances. The kid still has to have money in the bank to pay for the item, and all of the usual velocity checks, etc. that are used to combat fraud would still be in place and would work. And good old-fashioned detective investigations and forensics would still be applicable. Any good security system has defenses in depth, and is not subject to the balloon-popping problem. that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to make systems be as perfect as possible. But if they aren't (and they never are), that shouldn't be the end of the world as we know it. Let's not invent a hypothetical Y2K problem. Bob Robert R. Jueneman Security Architect Novell, Inc. -- the leading provider of Net services software. >>> Tony Bartoletti 10/19/00 04:09PM >>> At 04:58 PM 10/19/00 -0400, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: >>Yes, that is why Tony's remark was somewhat tongue-in-cheek and used >>"solid mathematical foundations" within quotes. > >Eye twinkle doesn't come across in e-mail, I'm afraid. My apologies to >Tony. This is obviously one of my hot buttons. No problem. I often employ a quoted "x" to convey "so-called x", a shortcut that can lead to misunderstandings. >>>It is all hypothesis and empirical argument. A lone >>>mathematician working in his attic could come up with an algorithm >>>that would blow some or all of the existing systems out of the water. >>>Who get to cover that financial risk? >> >>The buyer. CAs (read Verisign's CPS or any CA's CPS, or bank contracts >>and -- above all -- see the US UCC) are not responsible for producing correct >>results but just for using correct methods. Where "correct methods" are >>what others consider correct -- even if they are proved wrong later on >>by a one mathematician working in his attic. > >I'm not sure those contracts would stand up in court if there were massive >public losses due to a collapse of the PKI. (Anyway CA CPS's stretch to >notion of a "mutual agreement" pretty far. I purchase a $10 cert and am >bound by over 100 pages of gobbldygook that only a handful of people on >the planet can be expected to fully understand?) > >But I am less concerned with CA legal liability then with who is left >holding the bag when a massive subversion of the banking system is >perpetrated, and how big that could be. I'll wager the taxpayer/consumer will foot the bill, one way or another. Derivative to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, it is easier to destroy wealth than it is to create it. So, on average, work/energy is required to create or recreate wealth. The collapse of a future global PKI, or of the integrity of banking transactions, would represent a huge shift from order into chaos, a decoherence of identities and orderliness amounting to a huge destruction of wealth. Recovery thus will require the recreation of wealth, in one form or another. This will require a correspondingly huge input of work. So, who does most of the work, in general? You know the answer ;) ___tony___ Tony Bartoletti 925-422-3881 Information Operations, Warfare and Assurance Center Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, CA 94551-9900 From bjueneman at novell.com Fri Oct 20 10:50:04 2000 From: bjueneman at novell.com (Bob Jueneman) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 11:50:04 -0600 Subject: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) Message-ID: Let's put this problem in perspective, and try to avoid the "chicken little, the sky is falling" syndrome. It's quite unlikely that someone would come up with "Eureka!" type of solution to factoring large numbers that would end up completely breaking RSA, or that some way would be found to completely break the integrity of SHA-1. Instead, we would be much more likely to see a nibbling around the edges, and a gradually decreasing confidence in existing algorithms, with more than enough time to replace them. In fact, we have already seen that. MD2 is now deprecated, and MD5 is being pretty widely supplanted by SHA-1. Likewise, DES has been broken and people are recommending that triple-DES be used, and soon AES. And OAEP is recommended to get around some hypothetical million-question attacks. But the sky hasn't fallen, and the sun still comes up in the morning. Even if some catastrophic weakness were somehow revealed that any high school kid could take advantage of with a single PC, there are still checks and balances. The kid still has to have money in the bank to pay for the item, and all of the usual velocity checks, etc. that are used to combat fraud would still be in place and would work. And good old-fashioned detective investigations and forensics would still be applicable. Any good security system has defenses in depth, and is not subject to the balloon-popping problem. that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to make systems be as perfect as possible. But if they aren't (and they never are), that shouldn't be the end of the world as we know it. Let's not invent a hypothetical Y2K problem. Bob Robert R. Jueneman Security Architect Novell, Inc. -- the leading provider of Net services software. >>> Tony Bartoletti 10/19/00 04:09PM >>> At 04:58 PM 10/19/00 -0400, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: >>Yes, that is why Tony's remark was somewhat tongue-in-cheek and used >>"solid mathematical foundations" within quotes. > >Eye twinkle doesn't come across in e-mail, I'm afraid. My apologies to >Tony. This is obviously one of my hot buttons. No problem. I often employ a quoted "x" to convey "so-called x", a shortcut that can lead to misunderstandings. >>>It is all hypothesis and empirical argument. A lone >>>mathematician working in his attic could come up with an algorithm >>>that would blow some or all of the existing systems out of the water. >>>Who get to cover that financial risk? >> >>The buyer. CAs (read Verisign's CPS or any CA's CPS, or bank contracts >>and -- above all -- see the US UCC) are not responsible for producing correct >>results but just for using correct methods. Where "correct methods" are >>what others consider correct -- even if they are proved wrong later on >>by a one mathematician working in his attic. > >I'm not sure those contracts would stand up in court if there were massive >public losses due to a collapse of the PKI. (Anyway CA CPS's stretch to >notion of a "mutual agreement" pretty far. I purchase a $10 cert and am >bound by over 100 pages of gobbldygook that only a handful of people on >the planet can be expected to fully understand?) > >But I am less concerned with CA legal liability then with who is left >holding the bag when a massive subversion of the banking system is >perpetrated, and how big that could be. I'll wager the taxpayer/consumer will foot the bill, one way or another. Derivative to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, it is easier to destroy wealth than it is to create it. So, on average, work/energy is required to create or recreate wealth. The collapse of a future global PKI, or of the integrity of banking transactions, would represent a huge shift from order into chaos, a decoherence of identities and orderliness amounting to a huge destruction of wealth. Recovery thus will require the recreation of wealth, in one form or another. This will require a correspondingly huge input of work. So, who does most of the work, in general? You know the answer ;) ___tony___ Tony Bartoletti 925-422-3881 Information Operations, Warfare and Assurance Center Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, CA 94551-9900 From egerck at nma.com Fri Oct 20 12:08:38 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:08:38 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: FirstMonday August 2000) References: Message-ID: <39F09836.9C77B93B@nma.com> Bob Jueneman wrote: > Let's put this problem in perspective, and try to avoid the "chicken little, the sky is falling" syndrome. > > It's quite unlikely that someone would come up with "Eureka!" type of solution to factoring large numbers that would end up completely breaking RSA, or that some way would be found to completely break the integrity of SHA-1. Well said. SHA-1 works as a many-to-one function and this alone makes it impossible to break if well applied. Simply, no global inverse function exists for a many-to-one function (even though a local inverse may exist, but in this case SHA-1 would not have been well applied). This is a mathematical fact. Matters with RSA are still unproven, though, but it is not probable that it will be broken any time soon in a wide scale. However, this is not what concerns me at all. PKI is the problem. It does not work and it will not work on a global scale. E-commerce itself has moved away from PKI for no other reason. The problem then is the E-sign Act and state legislation following on its heels, which not only blurs IMO what a digital signature is but also does not deal adequately with the liability issues for the different parties involved. In this scenario, what if we see a blind push for a global PKI and also include non-repudiation as an "absolute authentication" based on some mythical "trusted machines" -- as has been suggested recently in the good name of e-commerce? Cheers, Ed Gerck From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Fri Oct 20 09:28:05 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:28:05 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: FidoNet II References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> <39F02943.AD0CD99C@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <39F0727E.36D190D0@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Tom Vogt wrote: > Tim May wrote: > > First, if you're going to attempt a "FidoNet II," at least use link > > encryption at every stage. > > that goes without saying, doesn't it? > > > Second, so long as one has done the above, might as well make each > > node an actual remailer. With all of the usual mixing of in/out > > packets, packet size padding, etc. > > good one. yes, should be done that way. > > > Third, the use of radio links has come up several times over the > > years. A couple of early Cypherpunks were involved in packet radio > > and addressed the issue. By the way, the FCC still has restrictions > > on encrption over the airwaves, as I understand things. All the wireless LAN/WAN stuff uses encryption, altho only 128bit AFAIK. However, do crypto-anarchists really care what the FCC says? When/if crypto email is outlawed on the net, will packet pirates give a rat's ass whether it's legal to broadcast spread spectrum encrypted data, usurping whatever band is optimal or they can afford the hardware for? > > > I was thinking more in the direction of wireless LAN. I'm working with wireless specs right now, but for WAN (although you can use the same hardware) and trying to do this with that tech is pretty limiting. If you want any distance at all (over about 800 feet) it's strictly point-to-point, true line of sight, which means no foliage in the way. You can do about 25-30 miles that way, and you can have repeaters, of course, but you have to get up over the tree tops. And you can get 11mbs over that distance with pretty cheap hardware, but the towers cost you at least $2500 each. Of course you can use existing towers. But, of course, this is all pretty obvious stuff -- easy to spot, easy to destroy, hardly a underground answer. And pretty expensive compared to say shortwave broadcast hardware. I was thinking more like converted mil surplus or cb or ham tech. > > > > Fourth, given the speeds of the Net, given the move to put phone > > calls over the Net, given the many tools...why on earth would anyone > > want to revive FidoNet? Implement remailer protocols to do a virtual > > FidoNet, perhaps, but don't actually have machines phoning up other > > machines! > > course not! see my earlier mails - the internet is available as a > transport layer, so let's use it. Especially in the early stages. Fido2 nodes all around the internet, set up and functioning with mirrors to packet radio units hidden away in the bunkers. 8-) And maybe played with occasionally. > > > > Look to remailer networks and I think you'll find what you're looking for. > > maybe the existing remailer structure could even be utilized. all one > has to do is a simple "email2file" translation. say > "filename at mynode.com". I think you'd want to meld mixmaster with something like CLX ( http://www.clx.muc.de/ ) the packet node software. -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From honig at sprynet.com Fri Oct 20 09:31:41 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:31:41 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001020091029.008279d0@pop.sprynet.com> At 05:08 AM 10/20/00 -0400, petro wrote: > It is "immoral" to commit murder. Is this because God Says >So, or because it's generally better for society if we can assume >that the vast majority of people *won't* be trying to shoot us? Neither are worthwhile reasons. Others' right to exist (whether good or bad for the gods or whoever claims to be speaking for society) is enough. From honig at sprynet.com Fri Oct 20 09:31:41 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:31:41 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Tim May's anti-semitic rants In-Reply-To: References: <200010191546.IAA27556@user3.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001020091818.0082f530@pop.sprynet.com> At 05:15 AM 10/20/00 -0400, petro wrote: >>This list is no stranger to Tim May's sarcasm and anti-semitic rants. > > He's bashing a completely facist and dictatorial country of >which a sizeable number of citizens are completely willing to commit >genocide of the very same kind that was once waged against them. > > I cannot recall seeing him bash *jews*, rather he bashes Isreal. > > As they deserve. It would also be legit to bash jews (voluntary adherents to a culture) just as its legit to bash a government (again, a cultural thing). Its not legit to bash semites (or any other ethnic group) individuals of which may or may not hold ideas worth slamming. IMHO. Substitute protestants, the UK, and anglo-saxons if you like. From honig at sprynet.com Fri Oct 20 09:31:41 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:31:41 -0400 Subject: CDR: It's all property, folks (was Re: Insurance (was: why In-Reply-To: At 07:51 AM 10/20/00 -0400, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > >>My lungs are property. If some one injures them, I have a tort. I don'tt >>even need legislation. > >Well, you are apparently the one doing the damage - who the fuck told you to >breathe in the first place? You *are* paying your Kyoto II Individual Carbon Dioxide Emission Tax to the UN, aren't you? From honig at sprynet.com Fri Oct 20 09:31:41 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:31:41 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001020090451.008299d0@pop.sprynet.com> At 04:00 AM 10/20/00 -0400, petro wrote: >>Lots of socialists to be dealt with and disposed of. I wonder who >>will stoke the furnaces? > > Robots? Amusing cross-language double-entendre there, Petro. Robot is from "slave", in Czech IIRC. From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 20 09:40:43 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:40:43 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... In-Reply-To: <20001020094723.C5428@cluebot.com> References: <9c6d577b93017fad3e60049f341d10d2@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: At 9:27 AM -0400 10/20/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >My employer is running a deal right now in which we can wrap our car >in ads in exchange for X shares of stock, strike price current price >of the shares. Even if there's a modest $Y increase in share value, >X*Y will amount to many times the cost of most cars. Imagine the repercussions of a tobacco company doing this... (In America, for you non-Americans, many forms of speech are forbidden. Speech which adovactes cigarette smoking is illegal in many contexts. Likewise for many other examples.) I just noticed that a Las Vegas casino operator, Harrah's, has "voluntarily agreed" to restrict its advertising so that children and "those with gambling disorders" will not be exposed to the advertising. Hmmmhhh. [My take on this is that the state is exerting continuous pressure on many market actors.] --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 20 09:49:16 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:49:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: FidoNet II In-Reply-To: <39F0727E.36D190D0@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 12:28 PM -0400 10/20/00, Harmon Seaver wrote: > > All the wireless LAN/WAN stuff uses encryption, altho only 128bit >AFAIK. However, do crypto-anarchists really care what the FCC says? When/if >crypto email is outlawed on the net, will packet pirates give a rat's ass >whether it's legal to broadcast spread spectrum encrypted data, usurping >whatever band is optimal or they can afford the hardware for? They care because part of the essence of crypto anarchy is to "fly under their radar," that is, to be undetectable to them. Broadcasting radio signals which they can use to order an arrest is not smart at all, especially when so many good alternatives exist. (Yes, I know about Part 15 exemptions. And reserved bandwidth.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From phaedrus at sdf.lonestar.org Fri Oct 20 11:03:22 2000 From: phaedrus at sdf.lonestar.org (Phaedrus) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:03:22 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: ADL lists anarchy symbol as racist In-Reply-To: <39F03D2D.9BD80F58@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Ken Brown wrote: > > > > Hmmm.... So are you a racist or a radical-left-babydyke hmm.. Ph. From tom at ricardo.de Fri Oct 20 04:25:52 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:25:52 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Tim May's anti-semitic rants References: <200010192016.NAA17977@user3.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <39F02BC0.F3AC6E7C@ricardo.de> auto9950013 at hushmail.com wrote: > > Typical of May to wish that those who he hates be nuked, but please don'tt > let it effect his portfolio. > so? in that respect he's a great relief from all the "houlier than thou" "for the chiiildren" pseudo-moralists. in the end, nobody cares if he's not affected. the effect may be emotional. From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Fri Oct 20 05:40:13 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:40:13 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: ADL lists anarchy symbol as racist References: <1121faa9f428bc88e7310250dcb52abd@mixmaster.ceti.pl> <00101818005406.03076@reality.eng.savvis.net> <3.0.5.32.20001019024056.009af2c0@idiom.com> <20001019115738.B6318@ils.unc.edu> Message-ID: <39F03D2D.9BD80F58@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Greg Newby wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 11:47:10AM -0400, Bill Stewart wrote: > > > > At 06:55 PM 10/18/00 -0400, Jim Burnes wrote: > > >On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: > > >> http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/racist_anarchy_symbol.html > > > > > >Wow. Runic alphabets are verboten also. > > >Guess we ought to boycott Tolkein. > > > > Peace signs, too. War is Peace, I guess.... > > My favorite is Doc Martens boots, worn by "racist and non-racist > skinheads." > > -- Greg Hmmm.... Ken From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 03:42:01 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:42:01 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <410650c18ae959a3a66af0504f5fa589@noisebox.remailer.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Anonymous wrote: >Crypto-anarchy is in fact not really anarchy, since it only addresses >some kinds of authority, ie government, and only in certain situations. >True anarchy involves the dissolution of other hierarchical relationships, >including those that spring from private property. Get rid of private >property and many of these problems disappear. Details, details. People use the term 'anarchy' a bit too casually here, nothing else. Mostly what they mean is 'libertarian'. The latter in no way excludes other hierarchical relationships, as we all know hardcore anarchy does. Tim's favorite characterization of this side of anarchy is something like socialist simp-wimp mumbo jumbo. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From natedog at well.com Fri Oct 20 13:43:24 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:43:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001019021925.A20705@positron.mit.edu>; from rsw@MIT.EDU on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 02:19:25AM -0400 References: <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net> <20001018224222.B18319@well.com> <20001019021925.A20705@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20001020134324.B3955@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 4032 bytes Desc: not available URL: From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Fri Oct 20 05:45:39 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:45:39 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: Message-ID: <39F03E73.8F4F0965@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> "Trei, Peter" wrote: > Assuming, of course, that the birth records accurately reflect parentage. > If you take a course in human genetics you're likely to be astonished at the > rate of fooling around that must occur to account for the appearence of > traits within families - I've heard that as high as 10% of firstborns must have had > a father different than the one on the birth certificate (no, I can't give > you a cite). > > Peter I'm taking a genetics course right now :-) I think the point is that as they will have sequence data as well as family history they can use them to validate each other. Ken From George at Orwellian.Org Fri Oct 20 10:48:08 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:48:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Encryption export rules finalized Message-ID: <200010201748.NAA19231@www9.aa.psiweb.com> See: http://www.pscu.com/Newsbytes/2000/156920.html http://www.nandotimes.com/technology/story/body/0,1634,500270563-500421503-502621147-0,00.html From natedog at well.com Fri Oct 20 13:54:11 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:54:11 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39EE94D4.A6F54184@acmenet.net>; from sfurlong@acmenet.net on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 02:30:40AM -0400 References: <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net> <20001018224222.B18319@well.com> <39EE94D4.A6F54184@acmenet.net> Message-ID: <20001020135411.C3955@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 5708 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 04:11:37 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:11:37 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Marshall Clow wrote: >So these people are entitled to something for nothing? >(or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)? > >Why? Because keeping people operable longer makes for net savings for the society? This perhaps isn't a reason for *private* companies to issue insurance fairly, but is a clear incentive to the society to nevertheless maintain a public health insurance infrastructure. Following the same line of reasoning, it is beneficial for the society as a whole (whether through the government or through concerted action of individuals) to pressure any insurer to comply with this general goal. I think this can be accomplished without the Men with Guns as well. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From bram at gawth.com Fri Oct 20 14:14:30 2000 From: bram at gawth.com (Bram Cohen) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:14:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: > I read the Massey and Maurer paper (One can find it at > http://www.isi.ee.ethz.ch/publications/isipap/umaure-mass-inspec-1993- > 1.pdf ) and I have a couple of comments on it. This is just silly. There's nothing wrong with Rijndael. -Bram Cohen From natedog at well.com Fri Oct 20 14:21:21 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:21:21 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from gil_hamilton@hotmail.com on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 12:38:12PM +0000 References: Message-ID: <20001020142121.D3955@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 6263 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 04:22:03 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:22:03 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001019021925.A20705@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Riad S. Wahby wrote: >Still not the insurance company's fault. They're not there to save my >sorry, genetically defective ass, they're there to make money. Which speaks right into the socialist cause - we thus need an instance to take care of the many genetically defective asses out there, without concern for money. >Right. And if they're forced to insure people who are money sinks for >them, everyone's rates go up, because the total amount of risk the >insurance company takes (expressed as the amount of money they pay out >as claims) plus their profit must equal the amount of money they make >on premiums. OK. So how about preventative care? It might well be that by insuring everyone and keeping them in health, the total risk per dollars paid for coverage actually goes down. Especially if infectious diseases can be kept in check. Plus, the sum total of money paid by the insurees goes up as they stay healthier for longer, thus giving more money for the insurance company to invest into more profitable ventures. This is what governments do now. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From natedog at well.com Fri Oct 20 14:23:29 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:23:29 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from k-elliott@wiu.edu on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 01:26:48PM -0500 References: <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <39EE803A.FC609802@acmenet.net> <20001018224222.B18319@well.com> Message-ID: <20001020142329.E3955@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1512 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rah at shipwright.com Fri Oct 20 11:24:31 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:24:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001020090451.008299d0@pop.sprynet.com> References: Message-ID: At 12:31 PM -0400 on 10/20/00, David Honig wrote: > Amusing cross-language double-entendre there, Petro. Robot is from > "slave", in Czech IIRC. Slave, being, of course, an Anglo-Latin(Italian?) derivation of, heh, Slav. ;-). Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From reinhold at world.std.com Fri Oct 20 11:26:05 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:26:05 -0400 Subject: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> References: <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: At 8:13 PM -0400 10/11/2000, John Kelsey wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >At 01:44 PM 10/10/00 -0400, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: > >... >>I was thinking it might be useful to define a "Paranoid >>Encryption Standard (PES)" that is a concatenation of all >>five AES finalists, applied in alphabetical order, all with >>the same key (128-bit or 256-bit). If in fact RC6 is the >>only finalist still subject to licensing by its developer, >>it could be replaced by DEAL (alphabetized under "D"). Since >>DEAL is based on DES, it brings the decades of testing and >>analysis DES has received to the party. > >This basic idea is discussed in Massey and Maurer's ``The >Importance of Being First'' paper. There are a couple >issues: I read the Massey and Maurer paper (One can find it at http://www.isi.ee.ethz.ch/publications/isipap/umaure-mass-inspec-1993- 1.pdf ) and I have a couple of comments on it. As I understand it, their argument goes like this: Let the concatenated cipher C1*C2 applied to plaintext P be C2(C1(P)). If C2 is subject to attack when the plaintext it gets has certain statistical properties, then it is possible for C1's ciphertext to have those properties and the concatenated cipher to be less resistant to statistical attack than either component. Massey and Maurer give a very simple example to show this can occur. Here is a bit more realistic example: Suppose C1 simply permutes the input bits and that in doing so it takes the high-order bit of each plaintext byte and moves it to the first two bytes of the cipher text. Suppose further plaintext blocks that have the first two bytes zeroed are weak for C2. Then if C1 is fed ordinary printable ascii text with no parity, the first two bytes of C1-ciphertext will be zero, exposing the weakness of C2. On the other hand, if C2 were used alone on the same ascii plaintext it would never see zeros as input bytes and thus would not be subject to attack. However in the case of a chosen-plaintext attack, Massey and Maurer's argument does not work. In fact the proof they give of their "Proposition" can easily be adapted to prove that a concatenated cipher C1*...*Cn is always at least as difficult to break by chosen-plaintext as *any* cipher in the concatenation. Here is an outline of the proof. Note, as they do, that the worst case is when you can easily determine the key to every cipher except one. In their case it is the first cipher, in ours say it is Ci, 1<=i<=n. Then any set of chosen plaintext, ciphertext pairs (PTj, CTj) that results in a break of the concatenated cipher C1*...*Cn can be converted in to a set of chosen plaintext, ciphertext pairs (PT'j, CT'j) that results in a break of Ci as follows (I'll use CCk to denote the inverse cipher of Ck): PT'j = (C1*...*Ci-1)(PTj) CT'j = (CCi+1*...*CCn)(CTj) One might ask why this proof works in the chosen-plaintext attack but not the statistical attack. The reason is that in the later, while you can still compute each PT'j, there is no reason to expect that they will have the same statistical properties as the original PTj. However PT'1 is always equal to PT1, so the proof does work for the first cipher in the statistical attack case. That is where "the importance of being first" comes from. My main question is how much weight should we give to this result in designing a crypto system by combining AES candidates? Remember that the AES candidates were designed to resist chosen-plaintext attack. Resistance to chosen-plaintext attack is a far more stringent demand on a cipher than resistance to statistical attack. And I have just shown that a concatenated cipher is at least as strong as any of its components against chosen-plaintext attack. So why should we even consider Massey and Maurer's result? The one argument I can think of goes like this: Suppose we are wrong and all the component ciphers are subject to chosen-plaintext attack and, even worse, so is the concatenated cipher. The component ciphers might still be resistant to statistical attack and often this is the best attackers can do, so we would like the extra insurance. But in the real world of AES candidates I claim even that argument should be discarded. Massey and Maurer worry about the possibility that the output of one cipher may have statistical properties that cause weakness when that output is fed into the subsequent ciphers. The AES candidates were designed to have outputs that appear uniformly random and have all undergone extensive statistical testing http://csrc.nist.gov/encryption/aes/round1/r1-rand.pdf. The have also been studied for weak inputs. Thus the first cipher in the concatenation can be expected to destroy patterns in the plaintext, not create them. While not a mathematical proof, the results of the AES candidate analysis and testing to date make it overwhelmingly more likely that the concatenation of AES-candidate ciphers will in fact be more resistant to statistical attack than any of the individual ciphers. > >a. The keys need to be independent. (Otherwise, imagine if >cipher #1 is DES encryption, and cipher #2 is DES >decryption.) I don't think it is quite that clear. It might well be easier to prove, say, that Twofish is not the inverse of MARS for the same key than it is to prove the same result for separately hashed keys. But again, the likelihood of two different ciphers being accidental inverses is even lower than the likelihood of guessing the key correctly (there are (2**n)! bijections on n-bit blocks). And NIST has just released SHA-2 which provides 256 bit hashes, so I suppose we might as well use it here. > >b. There order of the ciphers matters for the kind of >security proof you can do. If you do Twofish, then >Rijndael, you can prove that a known-plaintext attack on >this system = a known plaintext attack on Twofish and a >chosen-plaintext attack on Rijndael. (That is, the combined >system can be no easier to break than the easier of a >known-plaintext attack on Twofish or a chosen-plaintext >attack on Rijndael.) Is this the Massey and Maurer result or is there something specific about these two ciphers? > >A smarter way to do this is to do OFB-mode or counter-mode >with all N ciphers. That way, you can prove that breaking >the resulting cipher is equivalent to breaking OFB mode >encryption under all N of the ciphers. The problem with OFB is that what you get is a stream cipher and that, in turn, means a unique IV for each message is required. I have spent a lot of effort in my CipherSaber project teaching people how to do that, and the risk of implementors getting it wrong is high. I've even seen commercial products that claim to use RC4 but don't do IVs. Note that IV reuse is far more catastrophic in a stream cipher than it would be in a block cipher used in a feedback mode. Also OFB means that ciphertext is always bigger than plaintext (if you include the IV). That prevents encryption in place, for example. I'd rather have a block cipher if at all possible. So here is my draft proposal for the Paranoid Encryption Standard, PES: (P is a plaintext block and K is the user key.) PES(P) =Twofish(Serpent(MARS(DEAL(AES(P))))), where: the key for AES is SHA2(K||"Rijndael") the key for DEAL is SHA2(K||"DEAL") the key for MARS is SHA2(K||"MARS") the key for Serpent is SHA2(K||"Serpent") the key for Twofish is SHA2(K||"Twofish") The character string constants are 8-bit ascii with zero parity bit. The order of each cipher is determined alphabetically, except that I obviously could have chosen to put Rijndael under "R" instead of "A." By putting it first we can take advantage of Massey and Maurer's result and state the PES is at least as strong against statistical attack as AES. The second cipher, DEAL, is based on DES, which has received the most public scrutiny of any cipher. I am not aware of any statistical attack on DES inputs or any statistical weaknesses in DES output that might compromise MARS. And, as we have shown above, PES is at least as resistant to chosen plaintext attack as any of its components. PES is intended to address concerns that AES might have a design flaw or deliberate, hidden weakness. Confidence that neither exist can only come from additional years of testing and analysis. PES, because it is at least as strong as AES and incorporates the strengths of four other AES design teams and the decades of work on DES, might be a better choice for very high value messages, where encryption time is not an issue. Some other comments I have received urged the use of salt. Salt is very important is overall system design, but it is not part of the cipher per se. As I mentioned in my earlier post, RC6 is not being used because it still requires licensing. No criticism of RC6 or its owner's decision to retain commercial licensing rights is intended. FWIW Arnold Reinhold From natedog at well.com Fri Oct 20 14:28:35 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:28:35 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001019122555.0081f7b0@pop.sprynet.com>; from honig@sprynet.com on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 12:25:55PM -0700 References: <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001019122555.0081f7b0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <20001020142835.F3955@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 3185 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 04:44:16 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:44:16 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >> How does crypto-anarchy/libertarian/anarchy propose to deal with the >> "tragedy of the commons" where by doing what is best for each persons own >> interests they end up screwing it up for everyone (Overgrazing land with to >> many cattle is the example I've been given). > >The tragedy of the commons is that nobody owns it. The point is, there are certain things which cannot be exclusively owned without rendering the concept of rights, as most people understand them, for all practical purposes moot. Air is one. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 04:51:06 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:51:06 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: It's all property, folks (was Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >My lungs are property. If some one injures them, I have a tort. I don'tô >even need legislation. Well, you are apparently the one doing the damage - who the fuck told you to breathe in the first place? >My land, and that of others, is property, if someone pollutes it, I have a >tort. If someone upstream pollutes a river running through my land, I have >a tort. Hell no. You cannot claim to own the water before it enters your property. You can always not let it on your property. >They also own their air above them -- up to maximum missile range. :-). By which token they have every right to charge you for using the air. That's one way to view taxes. >So, folks, eventually, the very ocean, even intra-solar space itself, will >also be property. Yep. If crypto-libertarianism is allowed to spread. I think people won't. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 04:53:56 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:53:56 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Anonymous wrote: >> So who gets the bid on the environment ? There are some commons >> that can not be eliminated so easily. > >Generally, this would be water and air. If someone pollutes the air >over their land, that's ok. As soon as the pollution crosses into >your land, you sue for damages. By the same basic tenet you can sue for theft - it was your pollution, not the neighbour's. As you can see there is no causation because one cannot control the air. >People are concerned about the long term value of their property, so they >will have a disincentive to pollute. Really? People have every incentive to pollute as long as they can either keep it a secret or make sure they are not around the shit hits the fan. Radioactive waste is a prime example of the latter approach. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From natedog at well.com Fri Oct 20 15:00:22 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 15:00:22 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from petro@bounty.org on Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 01:23:32AM -0700 References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> Message-ID: <20001020150022.B4059@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2920 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Fri Oct 20 15:07:38 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 15:07:38 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted?' In-Reply-To: ; from melliott@ncsa.uiuc.edu on Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 04:14:29PM -0400 References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <20001018225315.D18319@well.com> Message-ID: <20001020150738.A4387@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 942 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jimdbell at home.com Fri Oct 20 15:33:27 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 15:33:27 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Word. References: <200010202029.QAA11411@www3.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: <00a501c03ae5$c44ee340$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 13:29 PM Subject: Word. > Of course all of us knew this. The article is > good for explaining to non-technical friends. > > http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB972002214791170991.htm > > October 20, 2000 > > Electronic Form of 'Invisible Ink' > Inside Files May Reveal Secrets > "Come here, you gotta see this," Mr. Hinds says he called out to fellow > campaign workers, who gathered around his computer. They started > searching through the previous e-mails. The first one said "Last Saved > by: Kinko's Customer" and listed "gunhus" as the author. They found > other names and more dates and times that the documents had been created > and stored. > > The Ciresi campaign alerted local authorities to its discoveries, which > were first reported by the Minneapolis Star Tribune. Naturally, statists always run to the government for backup (gun-wielding thugs) when they are in trouble. > The campaign > alleged that the masquerade wasn't just a political dirty trick but > a possible misdemeanor So why is this even called "a political dirty trick?" Don't they call this "opposition research"? >. A Minnesota law, which was designed to > discourage anonymous attacks on politicians, requires those involved > in election campaigns to disclose that fact in any political literature > they prepare or distribute. Obviously a 1st-amendment violation. [deletia flagrante] > County investigators, however, proceeded carefully, after learning > that anyone could easily have framed Ms. Gunhus by entering her name > in the properties box. "I could put in that 'William Shakespeare' is > the author," says Bryan Lindberg, the assistant attorney leading the > inquiry. "Plausible deniability is maintained!" > But then, Mr. Lindberg says, his team uncovered a more substantive > link. Subpoenaed phone and Internet-access records linked the "Katie > Stevens" Hotmail account used to send the attack e-mails to a Kinko's It seems there's a real problem with this. Even if we assume the "legality" of the anti-anonymous-attack law mentioned above, it seems to me that the police would have no probable cause to investigate an incident when they had no evidence that a crime had actually yet occurred. This would be particularly true if there was no other obvious crime being committed: A publication of true facts about a political candidate, even anonymously, would not necessarily trigger the law's $300 limit. Looks to me like the police were doing a political favor in looking into this case. > document-processing center and a phone line listed as belonging to > Ms. Gunhus's home, according to an affidavit filed by the county > attorney's office as part of its search-warrant request. "The telephone > number back to the Gunhus residence in Ham Lake gave us the probable > cause to look at her computers," Mr. Lindberg says. Actually, it probably DIDN'T _really_ give them genuine "probable cause." It gave them what should be best described as "possible cause": It indicated that Gunhus had POSSIBLY violated a (unconstitutional) law. (Or someone living with her, etc...) ("Probable cause" is one of the most seriously abused concepts in American law these days, even more then "beyond a reasonable doubt." IMNSHO, they can't possibly have "probable cause" if they can't prove at least a 51% probability that a crime has been committed and the location of the search contained evidence of the crime. They probably rarely have this.) > Mr. Ciresi lost his state's Democratic primary last month. Seems he deserved it. > The investigation into the e-mail messages continues. From forgot at lga2.nytimes.com Fri Oct 20 12:53:53 2000 From: forgot at lga2.nytimes.com (NYTimes.com) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 15:53:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: NYT Account Request Message-ID: <200010201953.PAA25670@web80t.lga2.nytimes.com> You have requested your ID and password for The New York Times on the Web. Please follow the instructions below. If you have any questions or problems, write to forgot at nytimes.com. Please DO NOT REPLY to this message. 1. Please make a note of your subscriber ID: sciferpunk 2. Next, to change the password for this account, using your Web browser go to this unique URL: http://verify.nytimes.com/guests/forgot/forgot?key=40177689_16329707 This page will allow you to choose a new password. Make sure you have copied the address EXACTLY as it appears here. (If you're getting an "Error" page, the address was probably entered incorrectly. See "Help With Copying and Pasting" at the bottom of this e-mail.) 3. Follow the instructions on the screen to choose a new password. After you have entered a password you will automatically enter our Web site. The New York Times on the Web Customer Service forgot at nytimes.com ******************** Help With Copying and Pasting 1. Using the mouse, highlight the entire Web address, (e.g. http://verify.nytimes.com/guests/forgot/forgot?key=40177689_16329707) shown above in step 2. It's essential to highlight the entire address, even if it extends over two lines. 2. Under the Edit menu at the top of your screen, select "Copy". 3. Go into your Web browser (open it if it's not already opened). 4. Click in the "Netsite" or "Address" bar -- the place in your Web browser where it says what Web address you're currently looking at -- and delete the address that's currently there. 5. In the blank "Netsite" or "Address" bar, paste the address by selecting the "Edit" menu at the top of your screen and choosing "Paste". 6. Press Enter. 7. Follow the instructions to choose a new password. ******************** If you did not request your ID and password for your NYT Web registration, someone has mistakenly entered your e-mail address when requesting their password. Please simply ignore this message, or, if you wish, you may go to the address above to select a new password for your account. From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 06:10:05 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:10:05 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39F03E73.8F4F0965@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Ken Brown wrote: >I think the point is that as they will have sequence data as well as >family history they can use them to validate each other. As a matter of fact, marker data is quite enough for that sort of application. Besides, the related pattern matching problem is surely a lot easier than the ones encountered in shotgun sequencing, which seem to be well managed nowadays. Once sequence data is available, I'm quite sure it is possible to reconstruct the genome of past generations of Icelanders upto considerable accuracy - random mutations in the timespan considered are negligible and more overlapping information (multiple children by a single parent) is available in the older generations. Perhaps Gattaca wasn't so far off base, after all... Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From melliott at ncsa.uiuc.edu Fri Oct 20 13:14:29 2000 From: melliott at ncsa.uiuc.edu (Matt Elliott) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:14:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018225315.D18319@well.com> References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> Message-ID: >As to care, as I've said a lot before, care is most often more >expensive than coverage. Clearly this can't be true or every health insurance company would be going out of business. Coverage has to be more expensive than care of they wouldn't be in the business of providing coverage. From jimdbell at home.com Fri Oct 20 16:24:43 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:24:43 -0700 Subject: CDR: Cost to "break" 1024-bit PGP (RSA) in 1997? References: <200010180320.UAA25338@scaup.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <20001018225315.D18319@well.com> <20001020150738.A4387@well.com> Message-ID: <012e01c03aec$ef721d60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> I need an estimate of the cost to break a 1024-bit PGP key in 1997, given then-existing algorithms and hardware, etc. Jim Bell From George at Orwellian.Org Fri Oct 20 13:29:18 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:29:18 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Word. Message-ID: <200010202029.QAA11411@www3.aa.psiweb.com> Of course all of us knew this. The article is good for explaining to non-technical friends. http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB972002214791170991.htm October 20, 2000 Electronic Form of 'Invisible Ink' Inside Files May Reveal Secrets By MICHAEL J. MCCARTHY Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ST. PAUL, Minn. -- For weeks this summer, Mike Ciresi's campaign staff was baffled by a strange series of e-mail messages slamming the U.S. Senate candidate. Sent to Minnesota Democratic Party officials, the messages were signed by a Katie Stevens. But after a failed attempt to track her down, Mr. Ciresi's staff began to suspect foul play. The first e-mail, which arrived in May, impugned the candidate's ethics and those of his Minneapolis law firm. It was accompanied by six pages of court cases, citations and footnotes. The attachments convinced Mr. Ciresi's staff that the e-mail was part of a well-funded "opposition research" effort. But two months and three negative e-mails later, his staff still had nothing to go on. Then in July, one tenacious Ciresi aide, playing a hunch, made a few mouse clicks and uncovered an intriguing clue: hidden text that seemed to link the e-mail to the campaign of the Republican incumbent. Tracking the Metadata It turns out there's more than meets the eye in the average word-processing document. A typical Microsoft Word file, for example, can include the author's name, the name of his or her company, the names of each person who has worked on the document and, depending on the options selected, deleted text and other revisions, all hidden from view, as if written in invisible ink. That's because Word, the dominant word-processing software, contains a lot of what Microsoft Corp. calls "metadata," information that doesn't appear on a user's screen simply because commands in the file tell computer monitors and printers to ignore it. But a savvy reader can peek at much of this behind-the-scenes fiddling by using widely available text-reader programs, such as Notepad, or by simply selecting the right word-processing options. Sometimes, depending on a computer's settings, Word revisions that weren't at all visible to the writer are obvious to the recipient. And when those documents get zapped through cyberspace as e-mail attachments, the inside information they contain can set the sender up for embarrassment or worse. 'Highlight Changes' One such e-mail snafu in Seattle sent both parties scrambling for fixes. In late 1998, Payne Consulting Group received an e-mail that included an attached contract prepared for it by its law firm, Davis Wright Tremaine. By clicking on the "highlight changes" option, Payne and the law firm say, Payne could clearly see revisions that revealed the contract had originally been drafted for another Davis Wright client. The law firm quickly devised security procedures for removing hidden text from its files. Payne, meanwhile, developed a free program called Metadata Assistant to purge any unseen, unwanted information from documents. The program can be downloaded from the firm's Web site, www.payneconsulting (www.payneconsulting.com). One reason Payne doesn't charge for it: "We can't guarantee everything is stripped out," says Robert Affleck, vice president of development. "The big concern is that people are sending around things they don't know they're sending around," says Steve McDonald, associate legal counsel at Ohio State University, who teaches a class in cyberspace law. Microsoft has "gotten few customer complaints" about the problem, says Lisa Gurry, a product manager for Microsoft Office. But she adds that those will be addressed in late spring in the next version of Microsoft Office, which will include a "privacy option" to allow a Word document's author to "remove all personal information with the click of one button and be warned if you're saving tracked changes and comments." For now, Microsoft offers a nine-page article through its Web site on "How to Minimize Metadata in Microsoft Word Documents." It was this kind of data that gave Ciresi campaign aides the first break in their investigation of the e-mails plaguing their candidate. The first in the series, titled "Who Is Michael Ciresi?", arrived May 19. It described the clients of law firm Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi as "a rogues' gallery of polluters, price fixers, tortfeasors, predators, civil-rights violators and frauds." A second searing e-mail arrived just before Minnesota Democrats convened in early June to endorse a candidate in the state's senatorial race. A third followed. Then, a fourth. "I was getting so frustrated trying to figure out where these came from," recalls Mark Hinds, the campaign's deputy field director. But as he sat thinking at his desk in the Democratic Party's offices here in early July, a light bulb clicked on. Mr. Hinds suddenly recalled how at a previous job he used to sort Word documents by using keywords and names in the program's "properties" box. With that in mind, he clicked on the Word attachment to the fourth and latest e-mail, OIL SPILL LOBBYISTS.doc. The properties box, which he found by using Word's file menu, instantly showed that the document was created July 8 and was "Last Saved by: Chris Gunhus." His thoughts immediately turned to Christine Gunhus, the political director and former chief of staff for Sen. Rod Grams, the Republican Mr. Ciresi had been hoping to unseat. "Come here, you gotta see this," Mr. Hinds says he called out to fellow campaign workers, who gathered around his computer. They started searching through the previous e-mails. The first one said "Last Saved by: Kinko's Customer" and listed "gunhus" as the author. They found other names and more dates and times that the documents had been created and stored. The Ciresi campaign alerted local authorities to its discoveries, which were first reported by the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The campaign alleged that the masquerade wasn't just a political dirty trick but a possible misdemeanor. A Minnesota law, which was designed to discourage anonymous attacks on politicians, requires those involved in election campaigns to disclose that fact in any political literature they prepare or distribute. The law exempts individuals who spend less than $300 on their activities and observe certain other limits. By late August, the Anoka County attorney's office had amassed enough evidence to persuade a judge to let it seize two computers and nine computer disks from Ms. Gunhus's Ham Lake, Minn., home. Asked if Ms. Gunhus was involved in writing or editing any of the e-mails under investigation, Doug Kelley, her attorney, wouldn't comment. "In the long run," he says, "she will be found not to have violated any laws." Ms. Gunhus declined to be interviewed. Sen. Grams's campaign denies that it produced or authorized the e-mails. But after discovering the names tucked deep inside the e-mail messages, Bob Decheine, the Ciresi campaign manager, believes otherwise. "We think we have found a smoking gun," he says. County investigators, however, proceeded carefully, after learning that anyone could easily have framed Ms. Gunhus by entering her name in the properties box. "I could put in that 'William Shakespeare' is the author," says Bryan Lindberg, the assistant attorney leading the inquiry. But then, Mr. Lindberg says, his team uncovered a more substantive link. Subpoenaed phone and Internet-access records linked the "Katie Stevens" Hotmail account used to send the attack e-mails to a Kinko's document-processing center and a phone line listed as belonging to Ms. Gunhus's home, according to an affidavit filed by the county attorney's office as part of its search-warrant request. "The telephone number back to the Gunhus residence in Ham Lake gave us the probable cause to look at her computers," Mr. Lindberg says. Mr. Ciresi lost his state's Democratic primary last month. The investigation into the e-mail messages continues. From commerce at home.com Fri Oct 20 13:43:26 2000 From: commerce at home.com (Me) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:43:26 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <20001018220759.A18195@well.com> <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> Message-ID: <011f01c03ad6$65e6f0e0$0100a8c0@matthew> From: "Nathan Saper" > > So these people are entitled to something for nothing? > > (or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)? > That's the whole idea of insurance, isn't it? The point of insurance is to pool resources and spread risk; it isn't a ponzi scheme. If we pool $500 each, I have a 25% chance of submitting a $1000 claim and you 100%, I'm buying a television instead. From brflgnk at cotse.com Fri Oct 20 13:54:16 2000 From: brflgnk at cotse.com (brflgnk at cotse.com) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:54:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: <972075027.39f0b01342885@webmail.cotse.com> It was said: -- begin quote -- >As to care, as I've said a lot before, care is most often more >expensive than coverage. Clearly this can't be true or every health insurance company would be going out of business. Coverage has to be more expensive than care of they wouldn't be in the business of providing coverage. -- end quote -- You've missed the essential gamble of insurance: care given to an individual insured party is usually more expensive than the premiums paid by that individual. The gamble is that the aggregate premium collected from all the insured in the pool will exceed the aggregate cost of care for those in the pool that collect benefits. That the insurance business is profitable proves the gamble usually pays off. From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 20 16:57:10 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:57:10 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 1:41 AM +0300 10/21/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > >>Nuclear waste is easy to track, easy to store, hard to hide. > >Self-evidently the problem is *not* in the kind of waste in the containers, >but the enormous timespans - uranium is a metal, nothing else. What *is* a >problem is that you cannot secure *anything* for more than about a couple of >hundred years with any certainty. The only real problem specific to >radioactive materials is that ionizing radiation of any kind accelerates the >formation of active radicals which eat away the containers. This is >something which can be guarded against through proper engineering. 1. Yes, uranium is a metal. So? 2. What is this "active radicals which eat away the containers" theory? Vitrification (mixing with glass) of waste is an established technology...those glass beads don't get "eaten away" by these mysterious "active radicals." 3. Radiation levels are quite low for most wastes of interest in the debate. Your theory above suggests some kind of Cerenkov blue glow around the waste! 4. Taking the vitreous beads and BACKFILLING THE URANIUM MINES would result in a situation which is: a) less likely to leach radioisotopes into the environment that was see with the original yellowcake and pitchblende mineral forms. (Think about it. Compute the solubilities in water of the various urananites and thoriated suphates and all versus a glass bead.) b) no more overall radioactivity than had been in the mine area before. (There may be some increased _concentration_, especially of so-called "high-level waste," but low-level waste is either a mix of uranium and other fissiles, or is lightly-contaminated medical waste and suchlike. The overall activity will not be greater per unit volume than was pulled from the mine in the first place. Further, such mines have no other use and can be backfilled and then sealed shut.) 5. Not that this is necessarily the best option. The domes in deep caves are perfectly fine. And there is much to be said for the Pournelle/Hogan solution: put the vitreous beads in concrete-filled drums, load them onto pallets, then park the pallets in neat rows and columns in the center of a 10 km by 10 km fenced area in the Mojave Desert of California. Very little rain (geological records and fossil lakes show this); certainly no significant flash flooding. Then erect signs, in many languages, and with skull-and-crossbones, saying: "This area is poisoned." Even the most bizarre devolution-to-savagery scenarios are unlikely to have wandering savages in the waterless Mojave trying to scavenge stuff out of sealed drums marked with skulls and crossbones! (I mention this because the Greens and other tree huggers make much of the fanciful notion that "radioactive waste lasts FOREVER!!" and that once civilization collapses, the Mad Max types will wander in to radioactive storage areas and be poisoned. I never saw the big deal of a few "mutants" becoming even more mutated...) > >>I could go on to educate you and others about the advantages of >>nuclear power over alternatives, and the ease of storing nuclear >>waste, but I expect this list is the wrong place for such education. > >Again, everybody with half a clue knows that nuclear energy is pretty clean, >if not very cheap. Not as inexpensive as it _could_ be, had engineering work not been effectively frozen because of U.S. government standards, but still less expensive than the alternatives. Yes, really. California's Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant accounts for _most_ of the profits of Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E). It's a much better moneymaker than are the fossil-fuel-fired plants. Without Diablo Canyon, the precarious power situation here in California would instead be in a crisis situation. Most of the reputed "bad economics" of nuke plants come from the usual sources: tens of years of lobbying are needed before a plant can be even started under construction, another ten years before all of the delays and appeals and stalls unfold, then various shut-downs on specious grounds, then an absurd "decommissioning" procedure. Small wonder that no new nuclear plants are being planned in the U.S. Countries which have less of a tradition of citizen-units using their fears to block things they are afraid of have been building new plants. France, for example, which has dozens of nuclear plants. (And better designs than the "frozen-in-place" designs the U.S. industry was pretty much forced to stick to. The French took the basic 1950s design, the Westinghouse and GE designs, and then improved them.) >This simply means that all of the alternatives are quite >bad. Spending less energy does not seem to be in vogue, anymore. I still put >the lights of, spin down my harddrive whenever possible and never intend to >own a car... Spinning down your hard drive should be done sparingly. It usually makes no sense, for reasons dealt with by others. As for your not owning a car, whatever floats your boat. Just don't confuse your personal choice as somehow changing the world. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 20 17:02:50 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 17:02:50 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 1:31 AM +0300 10/21/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Riad S. Wahby wrote: > >>not insuring such a person. The things we're concerned with are >>conditions such as a familial tendency towards heart disease or a >>possibility of developing diabetes later in life. For the most part, >>they're not things that prevent people from holding jobs and having >>money. > >Which is precisely why there is no reason these people should not have their >insurance at precisely the same rate as everybody else - you cannot foresee >whether any particular individual will get the disease. You need to brush up on "probabalistic reasoning." If you think "you cannot foresee..." when a family history or genetic test suggests one _can_ make money by betting, then you simply have a very poor intuition about odds, statistics, and gambling. As with Saper, the rest of your stuff is not even worth replying to. ---Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From reinhold at world.std.com Fri Oct 20 14:32:11 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 17:32:11 -0400 Subject: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:50 AM -0600 10/20/2000, Bob Jueneman wrote: >Let's put this problem in perspective, and try to avoid the "chicken >little, the sky is falling" syndrome. > >It's quite unlikely that someone would come up with "Eureka!" type >of solution to factoring large numbers that would end up completely >breaking RSA, I don't know of any solid basis for this claim. There have been unexpected mathematical breakthroughs of that magnitude in the recent past. Schönhage and Strassen algorithm for multiplication, the Fast Fourier Transforms, formulas that compute outer digits of 1/pi without computing the earlier ones, etc. >or that some way would be found to completely break the integrity of SHA-1. > >Instead, we would be much more likely to see a nibbling around the >edges, and a gradually decreasing confidence in existing algorithms, >with more than enough time to replace them. That is already happening. > >In fact, we have already seen that. MD2 is now deprecated, and MD5 >is being pretty widely supplanted by SHA-1. Likewise, DES has been >broken and people are recommending that triple-DES be used, and soon >AES. And OAEP is recommended to get around some hypothetical >million-question attacks. > >But the sky hasn't fallen, and the sun still comes up in the morning. > >Even if some catastrophic weakness were somehow revealed that any >high school kid could take advantage of with a single PC, there are >still checks and balances. The kid still has to have money in the >bank to pay for the item, and all of the usual velocity checks, etc. >that are used to combat fraud would still be in place and would >work. And good old-fashioned detective investigations and forensics >would still be applicable. > >Any good security system has defenses in depth, and is not subject >to the balloon-popping problem. Well, that is the the big question mark as I see it. There are many choices in designing financial systems based on public key technology. If people use conservative approaches then you may well be right, but if they buy the PKI party line we could face some very serious problems. In particular, systems that depend on the security of one or a few master keys should be treated with suspicion. For example, a bank could keep its own customer's public key fingerprints on file or rely on the fact that all customers' certs are all signed. > >that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to make systems be as >perfect as possible. But if they aren't (and they never are), that >shouldn't be the end of the world as we know it. If we throw out existing systems and base our entire financial system on public key crypto without enough independent backups, an algorithmic breakthrough could lead the the end of the world as we know it. Algorithm compromise should be treated as an explicit risk. > >Let's not invent a hypothetical Y2K problem. > Let's not forget 2038. Arnold Reinhold From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 15:45:13 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 18:45:13 -0400 Subject: CDR: It's all property, folks (was Re: Insurance (was: why In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001020092159.00829d00@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: >>Well, you are apparently the one doing the damage - who the fuck told you to >>breathe in the first place? > >You *are* paying your Kyoto II Individual Carbon Dioxide Emission Tax to >the UN, aren't you? Oh, I'm waiting anxiously for the opportunity. I so *love* multinational two letter agencies. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From whgiii at openpgp.net Fri Oct 20 17:01:34 2000 From: whgiii at openpgp.net (William H. Geiger III) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:01:34 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: defaulting on US Dept Ed. school loans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200010210001.UAA02853@domains.invweb.net> In , on 10/20/00 at 02:29 PM, "Tito Singh" said: >Any suggested parameters or "recipes" for ducking under the govt's radar >regarding school loan collection....minimal property holdings, shift >belongings to spouses name, cousins name, liquidize and hide....etc... Why don't you just pay your bills or did all they teach you in school is to be a bum. -- --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Data Security & Cryptology Consulting Programming, Networking, Analysis PGP for OS/2: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html E-Secure: http://www.openpgp.net/esecure.html --------------------------------------------------------------- From SavedbyMicrosoftInternetExplorer5 Fri Oct 20 12:24:04 2000 From: SavedbyMicrosoftInternetExplorer5 (SavedbyMicrosoftInternetExplorer5) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:24:04 +0100 Subject: CDR: KJOC lists anarchy symbol with occult Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 3872 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 14226 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 351 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 4070 bytes Desc: not available URL: From singh_tito at hotmail.com Fri Oct 20 13:29:24 2000 From: singh_tito at hotmail.com (Tito Singh) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:29:24 GMT Subject: CDR: defaulting on US Dept Ed. school loans Message-ID: Any suggested parameters or "recipes" for ducking under the govt's radar regarding school loan collection....minimal property holdings, shift belongings to spouses name, cousins name, liquidize and hide....etc... singh_to_me _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. From sdoggg at msn.com Fri Oct 20 20:54:55 2000 From: sdoggg at msn.com (sdoggg at msn.com) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:54:55 Subject: CDR: Save on your TAXES! Message-ID: <60.706673.51815@msn.com> I have saved thousands on my taxes with this enterprise, and now you can too! For more information call 415-273-6123 Call TODAY! the longer you wait the more you lose. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Fri Oct 20 22:38:53 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 22:38:53 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? (insurance) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001020223853.009938e0@idiom.com> At 06:25 AM 10/20/00 -0700, Marshall Clow wrote: >At 2:11 PM +0300 10/20/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >>On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Marshall Clow wrote: >>>So these people are entitled to something for nothing? >>>(or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)? >>>Why? >> >>Because keeping people operable longer makes for net savings for the >>society? >That's a nice belief. Can you show it to be true? >>This perhaps isn't a reason for *private* companies to issue >>insurance fairly, but is a clear incentive to the society to nevertheless >>maintain a public health insurance infrastructure. So it's a clear call for charity. Charity is a Good Thing. Insurance works by letting people pool risks - most people in an insurance plan pay more in premiums than they collect, and a small number collect more, sometimes far more, than they paid, and the participants consider it a good deal because the potential costs they're risking are higher than they can afford, compared to the guaranteed small loss of the premium. Most health care "insurance" plans in the US aren't primarily insurance - they're employer-paid benefit plans that cover routine costs as well as covering premiums for shared risk. Mixing the two systems leads to lots of policy confusion. The tax advantages primarily come out of social policy during the World War 2 government interference in the economy and the industry and public attitudes gradually adapting to it. The other cost advantage of employer-paid routine health costs are that the employer may be able to negotiate a better price by buying in large volume, whether directly or through an insurance company that also negotiates better prices by buying in large volume. In return, there's the extra cost of bureaucracy, though in much of the US, the extra hostility of bureaucracy reduces use of the system :-) Employers do also benefit from higher productivity of healthy workers with healthy families, and they need to do something to manage the costs of care for work-related injuries. Without massive employer-funded health care, most people would be more likely to pay for their routine costs directly and buy insurance for excessive costs. Before the institutionalization of the insurance and banking businesses a century ago, large numbers of Americans belonged to mutual benevolence groups - unions, Masons, Moose Lodges, farmers' granges, the Chinese Mutual Benevolence Association, and churches. They provided a number of services to their members in addition to social interaction, typically including money-lending (new immigrant comes to the country, needs loan to start business) and also help for sick and injured members and support for people who couldn't find work. Medical costs themselves don't really correspond, because medicine was different; nursing was something your family or friends generally did, and modern medicine hadn't quite emerged except for fixing some injuries. The main exception was tuberculosis, and TB sanatoriums were often run by fraternal organizations, though some were government-funded. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From bill.stewart at pobox.com Fri Oct 20 23:10:18 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 23:10:18 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: defaulting on US Dept Ed. school loans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001020231018.02659100@idiom.com> At 08:29 PM 10/20/00 GMT, Tito Singh wrote: >Any suggested parameters or "recipes" for ducking under the govt's radar >regarding school loan collection....minimal property holdings, shift >belongings to spouses name, cousins name, liquidize and hide....etc... Yup. Quit your job at the police force and go join the French Foreign Legion. See the world, meet exciting and interesting people, and kill them. C'mon, Joe, you can always change your name. Declaring bankruptcy is another popular approach. Of course, the way my generation dealt with the problem was to have low-interest student loans which the Carter and Reagan governments inflated into pocket change. Kids these days have to go back to the old-fashioned way of financing them, like working hard for a long time to pay them back. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Fri Oct 20 21:18:54 2000 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 23:18:54 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Word. In-Reply-To: <200010202029.QAA11411@www3.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: don't know what version of Word these guys are running, but "Track Changes" works astoundingly often for me on outside mail, to general hilarity at my law office, not "Properties." Sorry he's letting the secret out, in any event:) Purely as an intellectual exercise, of course, some of us have occasionally kicked around MS's potential liability for this egregious security hole, notwithstanding its "as is, where is, nowhere, nohow" set of warranties. MacN From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Fri Oct 20 20:35:38 2000 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 23:35:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: defaulting on US Dept Ed. school loans In-Reply-To: <200010210001.UAA02853@domains.invweb.net> Message-ID: Uh, let's see now, the "student" gets the below response on a list where just a few hours ago we were considering killing judges? Yeah, you fuckers are bad. MacN On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, William H. Geiger III wrote: > In , on 10/20/00 > at 02:29 PM, "Tito Singh" said: > > >Any suggested parameters or "recipes" for ducking under the govt's radar > >regarding school loan collection....minimal property holdings, shift > >belongings to spouses name, cousins name, liquidize and hide....etc... > > Why don't you just pay your bills or did all they teach you in school is > to be a bum. > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net > Geiger Consulting > > Data Security & Cryptology Consulting > Programming, Networking, Analysis > > PGP for OS/2: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html > E-Secure: http://www.openpgp.net/esecure.html > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > From declan at well.com Fri Oct 20 21:54:14 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 00:54:14 -0400 Subject: CDR: Congressmen spar over police administrative subpoena-snooping bill Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001021005404.00ac1ec0@mail.well.com> [Also Rep. Bill McCollum, hardly a friend of privacy, has been defending it in the House. --Declan] http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/20/2341243&mode=nested Congressmen Duel Over Police Snooping Bill posted by cicero on Friday October 20, @11:31PM from the with-friends-like-these dept. Privacy defenders and privacy invaders spent this week sparring over a bill called the Presidential Threat Protection Act of 2000. Already approved by the Senate, it's set to be voted on by the House shortly. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the wiretap-happy senator who likes to pose as an occasional friend of civil liberties, is a sponsor, as is Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican who's been trying to buff his image among geeks. Rep. Bob Barr (R-Georgia) may be on a campaign to ban abortion and indict Democrats, but at least he's usually a reliable ally when limiting government surveillance; he opposes the measure. The bill would allow police to obtain records on you from third parties (think ISP, telephone company) without a search warrant. It's designed to be used against violent criminals, but it sets a dangerous precedent. See letters below. Letters from Barr opposing and McCollum supporting: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/20/2341243&mode=nested From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 15:09:46 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 01:09:46 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Marshall Clow wrote: >>Because keeping people operable longer makes for net savings for the >>society? > >That's a nice belief. Can you show it to be true? In a society where a significant part of an individual's life is spent nonproductively and high productivity generally means high education and learned skills, extension of the individual's life significantly beyond the time required to learn these skills is a must in order for the average individual to break even with the cost of education and upbringing. Of course, this perhaps does not imply care of the elderly. This is not at issue here. >>This perhaps isn't a reason for *private* companies to issue >>insurance fairly, but is a clear incentive to the society to nevertheless >>maintain a public health insurance infrastructure. > >Rather, I would say that individuals should be able to decide on >the level of health care that they are willing to pay for. Quite. I argue that should hold beyond their individual capability to pay for the care. >>Following the same line >>of reasoning, it is beneficial for the society as a whole (whether through >>the government or through concerted action of individuals) to pressure any >>insurer to comply with this general goal. > >Even if I conceded your premise (which I don't), I certainly don't believe that >this is true. How is this? If the premise holds, it is beneficial to make health care ubiquitously available. This cannot be achieved if some people are allowed to opt out of the gamble. >This is basically equivalent to "the end justifies the means". Which is pretty much what I'm after. >How do you feel about forced sterilizations of mental patients and >other "undesirables"? Society would benefit by not having them reproduce. It is far more effective to not put money into their sustenance early on. >>I think this can be accomplished without the Men with Guns as well. >And now you've completely lost me. >How would you compel people to pay taxes without a threat of violence? By making sure the people are completely dependent on the state, probably through some pretty unfair engineering of contracts you cannot avoid if you are to stay alive. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 15:31:26 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 01:31:26 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001020112256.A28839@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Riad S. Wahby wrote: >not insuring such a person. The things we're concerned with are >conditions such as a familial tendency towards heart disease or a >possibility of developing diabetes later in life. For the most part, >they're not things that prevent people from holding jobs and having >money. Which is precisely why there is no reason these people should not have their insurance at precisely the same rate as everybody else - you cannot foresee whether any particular individual will get the disease. What can you say, it's unfair and I hold fairness in high regard. In addition, I'm certainly not saying we should make this happen legislatively. I just think people should boycott unfair insurance companies and perhaps shun their clientele and employees for behaving badly. Maybe refuse to treat them when they have a stroke... >I see a possibility for the equivalent of high-risk vehicular >insurance for people who have genetic defects as genetic testing for >insurance purposes becomes more common. Here the concept of variable rates based on belonging to risk groups is, if not unheard of, nevertheless much rarer than in the States. Hence, I see no value in the parallel. >Why do you believe that those who are born with genetic problems have >additional entitlements that the rest of us don't have? And my counter is, why do you think equal cost of health care is in any way 'additional'? I do think the end justifies the means. >Alternatively, attempt to justify placing the burden for healthcare of >a particular person with genetic defects on any of the following: >(b) insurance companies It's really too bad they didn't know what sort of business they were getting into when they started... >(c) taxpayers They should have made damn sure genetic defects are rare... >Even if it is the case that preventative care would be cheaper, then >it's just stupidity on the part of the insurance company not to invest >this way; Not true, if the company only controls part of the market - in this case the added expense can easily exceed the benefit. Consider the case with market taken as the globe. >this does not justify government intervention ("You're not running your >business right; let us help!" would sound strange coming from the >U.S. government, anyway). Who said anything about governments? >However, I reject that it is the case that additional preventative >care would do anything. In the context of genetic defects, eugenics is pretty effective. If it can be detected, it can be aborted. >Currently, most insurance companies I know of will pay for flu shots and >things along those lines. Which is pretty much feel good medicine - in a couple of decades, constant vaccination of people against flu may cause it to start killing people. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 20 15:41:12 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 01:41:12 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: >Nuclear waste is easy to track, easy to store, hard to hide. Self-evidently the problem is *not* in the kind of waste in the containers, but the enormous timespans - uranium is a metal, nothing else. What *is* a problem is that you cannot secure *anything* for more than about a couple of hundred years with any certainty. The only real problem specific to radioactive materials is that ionizing radiation of any kind accelerates the formation of active radicals which eat away the containers. This is something which can be guarded against through proper engineering. >I could go on to educate you and others about the advantages of >nuclear power over alternatives, and the ease of storing nuclear >waste, but I expect this list is the wrong place for such education. Again, everybody with half a clue knows that nuclear energy is pretty clean, if not very cheap. This simply means that all of the alternatives are quite bad. Spending less energy does not seem to be in vogue, anymore. I still put the lights of, spin down my harddrive whenever possible and never intend to own a car... Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From theboyz24 at zeststore.com Sat Oct 21 04:46:00 2000 From: theboyz24 at zeststore.com (theboyz24 at zeststore.com) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 06:46:00 -0500 Subject: CDR: Are your bills too high?...we can help!!! Message-ID: <54ep5i863g5et.wkgt7@mail.melrun.org> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 3419 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mischief at lanesbry.com Sat Oct 21 03:49:55 2000 From: mischief at lanesbry.com (Ben Wallis) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 06:49:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: defaulting on US Dept Ed. school loans In-Reply-To: ; from mnorton@cavern.uark.edu on Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 11:35:38PM -0400 References: <200010210001.UAA02853@domains.invweb.net> Message-ID: <20001021214607.B64486@lanesbry.com> You prefer "Students who don't repay their school loans need killing"? Geiger held back because govt loans are statist bullshit. (And because he hasn't upgraded his HDD encryption to rijndael. Yet. Ninja, now's your window....) .bw PS what's with "CDR:" without a space??? I'll have to retrain my procmail. Some of the list admins - hint WHGiii - better update their scripts. On Friday, 20 Oct 2000 at 23:35, Mac Norton wrote: > Uh, let's see now, the "student" gets the below response on a > list where just a few hours ago we were considering killing > judges? > > Yeah, you fuckers are bad. > MacN > > On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, William H. Geiger III wrote: > > > On 10/20/00 at 02:29 PM, "Tito Singh" said: > > > > >Any suggested parameters or "recipes" for ducking under the govt's radar > > >regarding school loan collection.... > > > > Why don't you just pay your bills or did all they teach you in school is > > to be a bum. From jya at pipeline.com Sat Oct 21 04:34:55 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 07:34:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: Killing Judges Message-ID: <200010211146.HAA22075@smtp10.atl.mindspring.net> What has happened lately in the killing judges world? There was a spate of cases and a couple of jokers got vised, but any recently? I mean in the US, not elsewhere it's acceptable culling. Is Jeff still here hoping for another gold star, is Tim still being bullseyed for "he's gone too far, make him an example." Crypto-assassin CJ's still emitting judicial mock, with filthy, disgusting heavals from Three Rivers, TX. Course, the flung bung wads could be Jeff's plying your honor. From farber at cis.upenn.edu Sat Oct 21 04:35:50 2000 From: farber at cis.upenn.edu (Dave Farber) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 07:35:50 -0400 Subject: IP: Zero-Knowledge Conference on Privacy Compliance & Business Message-ID: > > >Zero-Knowledge Systems >Presents > >PRIVACY BY DESIGN > The Future of Privacy Compliance and Business > November 19-21, 2000 > Le Chateau Montebello, Quebec > >Sponsored by IBM, Royal Bank Financial Group, Merrill Lynch, >and PricewaterhouseCoopers > >See http://www.zeroknowledge.com/privacybydesign.html > > >Strong privacy and data protection practices are vitally important >from a legal, economic and ethical perspective. > >You know that you must have a comprehensive privacy strategy in place >to address these issues, and in many cases, comply with national and >international privacy laws. > >The 'Privacy by Design' conference will advise you on how to develop, >execute and market a successful privacy strategy to avoid regulatory >breaches and differentiate yourself in the marketplace with a >demonstrable commitment to privacy. > >Attendees will learn how to: > > - Understand current privacy issues from a theoretical, legal > and technological perspective > - Comply with privacy legislation and codes > - Design and implement effective privacy policies > - Integrate privacy-enhancing technologies and processes into > business operations > - Market privacy protection achievements to foster customer > trust and long-term relationships > - Handle privacy disasters > - Differentiate themselves in the marketplace with a demonstrable > and value-added commitment to privacy protection > >Zero-Knowledge Systems has assembled a group of world-class privacy >experts drawn from the business, privacy and government communities >to share their expertise with participants at a luxurious retreat at >Le Chateau Montebello, Quebec. The two-day plenary sessions cover a >broad range of privacy topics, and will be preceded by parallel >pre-conference workshops. The first is a workshop on the technology >of privacy protection. The second is a comprehensive "how-to" >workshop on how to design and implement a privacy program compliant >with global privacy laws. > >Featured speakers include: > > - Jason Catlett, President & CEO, Junkbusters > - Ann Cavoukian, Information and Privacy, Commissioner for the > Province of Ontario > - Lorrie Faith Cranor, Senior Technical Staff Member, Secure > Systems Research, AT&T Labs-Research > - Carl Ellison, Senior Security Architect, Intel > - Stephanie Perrin, Chief Privacy Officer, Zero-Knowledge Systems > - Jules Polonetsky, Chief Privacy Officer, DoubleClick > - Marc Rotenberg, Executive Director, Electronic Privacy > Information Center > - Mozelle Thompson, Commissioner, US Federal Trade Commission > - Alan Westin, Editor, Privacy and American Business > >Participation is limited to 100 persons. > >For complete information about 'Privacy by Design', visit >http://www.zeroknowledge.com/privacybydesign.html, call >toll-free 1-866-286-6545; or email: conference at zeroknowledge.com > > -- Good Privacy is Good Business -- --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From rah at shipwright.com Sat Oct 21 04:56:49 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 07:56:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: IP: Zero-Knowledge Conference on Privacy Compliance & Business Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From krburmeister at hotmail.com Sat Oct 21 07:55:53 2000 From: krburmeister at hotmail.com (Karen) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 10:55:53 -0400 Subject: CDR: Hey! Message-ID: <200010211455.HAA25116@toad.com> Dear Friend, Thanks for your time and interest, this e-mail contains the ENTIRE PLAN of how YOU can earn a whole lot of money in the next 90-120 days by simply sending e-mail! Seem impossible? Just read on and see how easy it really is. . . This really works! Have the faith, don't miss this opportunity, get involved also and it will work for you as it does for us!!! Due to the popularity of this letter on the Internet, a major nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of the program described below to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved that there are absolutely no laws prohibiting participation in the program. This has helped to show people that this is a simple, harmless and fun way to make some extra money at home on the Internet. The results have been truly remarkable. So many people are participating that those involved are doing much better than ever before. Since everyone makes more as new people try it out, its been very exciting to say the least. You'll understand completely once you try it for yourself! **********THE ENTIRE PLAN IS HERE BELOW********** ----------Print This Now For Future Reference---------- $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to earn at least $50,000 in less than 120 days, please read this program. . . THEN READ IT AGAIN!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY!!! E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this virtually free method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business ahead of you using e-mail. Get your piece of this action NOW!!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ TESTIMONIAL Hello - My name is Johnathon Rourke, I'm from Rhode Island. The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. Two years ago, the corporation I worked for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life. I am writing to share the experience in hopes that this could change your life FOREVER TOO. In mid December, I received this program in my e-mail. Six months prior to receiving this program I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they would work. But as I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this program via e-mail. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list of some kind. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly. I couldn't believe my eyes! Here was a MONEY MAKING MACHINE I could start immediately without any debt. Like most of you I was still a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office - 1 (800) 725-2161, 24-hrs and they confirmed that it is indeed not illegal to participate in the program. After that I decided "WHY NOT!?!?!??." Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. It cost me about $15 for my time on-line. The great thing about e-mail is that I don't need any money for printing to send out the program, and because I also send the product (reports) by e-mail, my only expense is my time. In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. Your goal is to RECEIVE at least 20 orders for REPORT #1 within 2 weeks. If you don't - SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. My first step in making $50,000 in 90-120 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. Your goal is to RECEIVE at least 100 + orders for REPORT #2 within 2 weeks. If not - SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO! Once you have 100 orders, the rest is easy, relax, you will make your $50,000 goal! Well I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 1, of my e-mailing of 10,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL MY DEBTS and bought a much needed new car! Please take the time to read this plan - IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER$!!! Now remember, it can't work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY, especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won't work and you'll lose out on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you must meet your goal of 20 + orders for REPORT #1, and 100 + orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in the first 90-120 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!! If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry for you, it really is a great opportunity with little cost and no risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program exactly and you will be on your way to financial security. If your a fellow business owner and are in financial trouble like I was, or you just want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! $$ Sincerely, Johnathon Rourke ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that such a program, and one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about what happened to me. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate... because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich." Inflation will see to that. You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months and following years than you have ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have retired from the program after sending thousands and thousands of programs. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e-mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000... and your name will be on every one of them! Remember though, the more you send out, the more potential customers you will reach. Just follow the instructions, and you will make money. It does NOT require you to come into contact with people or make or take any telephone calls. This simplified e-mail marketing program works perfectly 100% EVERY TIME!!! HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS$$$$!!!! I am sure that you could use up to $50,000 or more in the next 90-120 days. Before you say "BULL. . ." Please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter but a perfectly legal money making business. As with all multilevel businesses, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multilevel business partners, and we sell and deliver a product for EVERY dollar received. YOUR ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the EASIEST marketing plan anywhere! It is simply order filling by e-mail! The product is informational and instructional material, keys to the secrets for everyone on how to open the doors to the magic world of E-COMMERCE, the information highway, the wave of the future! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ P L A N S U M M A R Y : (1) You order the 4 reports listed below - $5 (US) each. They come to you by e-mail. (2) Save a copy of this entire letter and put your name after Report #1 and move the other names down. (3) Via the Internet, access Yahoo.com or any of the other major search engines to locate hundreds of bulk e-mail service companies (search for "bulk e-mail") and have them send 25,000 - 50,000 e-mails for you - about ($49+). (4) Orders will come to you by postal mail - simply e-mail them the Report they ordered. Let me ask you - isn't this about as easy as it gets? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ Oh, by the way, there are over 50 MILLION e-mail addresses with millions more joining the Internet each year, so don't worry about "running out" or "saturation." People are used to seeing and hearing the same advertisements every day on the radio and TV. How many times have you received the same pizza flyers on your door step? Then one day you are hungry for pizza and you order one. Same thing with this program. I received this letter many times - then one day I decided it was time I tried it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ YOU CAN START TODAY - JUST DO THESE EASY STEPS: STEP #1. ORDER THE FOUR REPORTS Order the four reports shown on the list below (you can't sell them if you don't order them). For each report, send $5 (US) CASH, the NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING, YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS, and YOUR NAME & RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a post office delivery problem) to the person whose name appears on the list below the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAIL PROBLEMS! Within a few days you will receive, via e-mail each of the four reports. Save them on your computer so you can send them to the 1,000's of new prospects who will order them from you. STEP #2 ADD YOUR MAILING ADDRESS TO THIS LETTER a. Look below for the listing of the four reports. b. After you've ordered the four reports, delete the name and address under REPORT #4. This person has made it through the cycle. c. Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down to REPORT #4. d. Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down to REPORT #3. e. Move the name and address under REPORT #1 down to REPORT #2. F. Insert your name and address in the REPORT #1 position. Please make sure you COPY ALL INFORMATION, every name and address, ACCURATELY! STEP #3 SAVE THIS LETTER Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to these instructions. Now you are ready to use this entire e-mail to send via e-mail to new prospects. Report #1 will tell you how to download bulk e-mail software and e-mail addresses so you can send it out to thousands of new prospects while you sleep! Remember that 50,000 + new people are joining the Internet every month. Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing - surely you can afford $20 (US) and initial bulk mailing cost. You obviously already have a computer and an Internet connection and e-mail is FREE! PRIMARY METHODS OF BUILDING YOUR DOWNLINE: METHOD #1 SENDING BULK E-MAIL Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes and we'll presume you and all those involved e-mail out only 2,000 programs each. Let's also presume that the mailing receives a (0.5%) response. The response could be much better. Also, many people will e-mail out hundreds of thousands of programs instead of just 2,000 - why stop at 2,000? But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a (0.5% ) response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of those (0.5%) 100 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000 total. The (0.5%) response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That's 10,000 FIVE DOLLAR BILLS for you. CASH!!! Your total income in this example is $50 + $500 + $5,000 + $50,000 for a total of $55,550. REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF THE 2,000 PEOPLE YOU E-MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE, OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF JUST 2,000. You can believe many people will do just that, and more!!! METHOD #2 PLACING FREE ADS ON THE INTERNET Advertising on the Internet is very, very inexpensive, and there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Let's say you decide to start small just to see how well it works. Presume your goal is to get ONLY 10 people to participate on your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the Internet will EASILY get a larger response.) Also, assume that everyone else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets ONLY 10 downline members. Look how this small number accumulates to achieve the STAGGERING results below: ... 1st level - your first 10 send you $5 $50 ... 2nd level - 10 members from those 10 ($5 X 100) $500 ... 3rd level - 10 members from those 100 ($5 X 1,000) $5,000 ... 4th level - 10 members from those 1000 ($5 X 10,000) 50,000 $$$$$$$$$$ THIS TOTALS -------$55,550 $$$$$$$$$$ AMAZING ISN'T IT? Remember friends, this assumes that the people who participate only recruit 10 new people each. Think for a moment what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Most people get 100's of participants and many will continue to work this program, sending out programs WITH YOUR NAME ON THEM for years!!! JUST THINK ABOUT IT!!! People are going to get e-mails about this program from you or somebody else and many will work this plan. The question is, don't you want your name to be on the e-mails they will send out? "You can't win the lotto unless you have a ticket." ***DON'T MISS OUT!!! *** JUST TRY IT ONCE!!! *** **SEE WHAT HAPPENS!!! ** YOU'LL BE AMAZED!!!** ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ GET STARTED TODAY - PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR THE FOUR REPORTS NOW. Notes: ALWAYS SEND $5 CASH (U.S. CURRENCY) FOR EACH REPORT. CHECKS NOT ACCEPTED. Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in two sheets of paper. On one of those sheets of paper write: a) the number & name of the report you are ordering b) your e-mail address, and c) your name & postal address. REPORT #1 "The Insider´s Guide to Advertising for Free on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: Karen Burmeister PO Box 520049 Longwood, FL 32752-0049 REPORT #2 "The Insider's Guide to Sending Bulk E-mail on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: Richard A. Endicott W 180 Insels Rd. Shelton, Wa 98584 REPORT# 3 " The secrets of Multilevel Marketing on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: JIM G. BURGESS 14830 OLDE HWY.80 FLINN SPRINGS, CA 92021-2807 REPORT #4 "How to become a Millionaire utilizing the Power of Multilevel Marketing and the Internet" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: Lars Pedersen Skejbygaardsvej 7, 1, 10 8240 Risskov Denmark **********TIPS FOR SUCCESS ********** TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt, professional, and follow the directions accurately. Send for the four reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have them when the orders start coming in because, when you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the requested product/report. It is required for this program to qualify as a legal business, not to mention they need the reports to send out their letters (with your name on them!) ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THE ORDERS YOU RECEIVE. Be patient and persistent with this program - If you follow the instructions exactly - SUCCESSFUL results will follow.. $$$$$ ********** YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINES ********** Follow these guidelines to guarantee your success: If you don't receive 20 orders for REPORT #1 within two weeks, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Then, a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT #2. If you don't continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you, and the cash will continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER; Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which reports people are ordering from you. To generate more income simply send another batch of e-mails or continue placing ads and start the whole process again! There is no limit to the income you will generate from this business! ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? Before you make your decision as to whether or not you participate in this program, please answer one question, ARE YOU HAPPY WITH YOUR PRESENT INCOME OR JOB? If the answer is NO, then please look at the following facts about this super simple MLM program: ... 1. NO face to face selling, NO meetings, NO inventory! NO telephone calls, NO big cost to start, NOTHING to learn, NO skills needed! (Surely you know how to send e-mail?) ... 2. No equipment to buy - you already have a computer and Internet connection - so you have everything you need to fill orders! ... 3. You are selling a product which DOES NOT COST ANYTHING TO PRODUCE OR SHIP! (e-mailing copies of the reports is FREE!) ... 4. All of your customers pay you in CA$H! This program will change your LIFE FOREVER!!! Look at the potential for you to be able to quit your job and live a life of luxury you could only dream about! Imagine getting out of debt and buying the car and home of your dreams and being able to work a super high paying leisurely easy business from home! $$$$$ FINALLY MAKE SOME DREAMS COME TRUE! $$$$$ ACT NOW! Take your first step toward achieving financial independence and personal freedom for you & your family. Order the reports and follow the program outlined above - SUCCESS will be your reward. PLEASE NOTE: If you need help with starting a business, registering a business name, learning how income tax is handled, etc., contact your local office of the Small Business Administration (a Federal Agency) at 1 (800) 827-5722 for free help and answers to questions. Also, the Internal Revenue Service offers free help via telephone and free seminars about business tax requirements. Your earnings are highly dependent on your activities and advertising. The information contained in this program constitutes no guarantees stated nor implied. In the event that it is determined that this program constitutes a guarantee of any kind, that guarantee is now void. The earnings amounts listed in this program are estimated only. If you have any questions of the legality of this program, contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices, Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Consumer Protection in Washington, DC. ================================================== Under Bill s. 1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th US Congress this letter cannot be considered spam as long as the sender includes contact information and a method of removal. This is a one time e-mail transmission. No request for removal is necessary. From vin at shore.net Sat Oct 21 09:23:33 2000 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 12:23:33 -0400 Subject: RC4 - To license or not? Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001020110901.00d47d80@shell1.shore.net> Stefan Arentz wrote: > [...] I do not want to buy a complete BSAFE license. > It is too expensive and I only need RC4. This is apparently a common misconception -- at least it keeps popping up among people discussing WAP, SSL, CDPD, and PPTP-compatible products, even IEEE-compatible embedded systems -- so (in the spirit of All Souls Day) I thought to double back and post a correction here. Boo! If your business plan (or your boss, or your investors, or your customers, etc.) requires, or makes it useful and valuable, for your firm to license RSA-branded RC4 implementation code -- as opposed using to one of the many copyleft "ARC4" implementations in wide circulation -- you should ask RSA for a quote on a RC4 license for your intended app. RSA licenses RC4 code separately, upon request. Always has, AFAIK. (RC4 is, of course, MIT Professor Ron Rivest's widely trusted, widely adopted, defacto standardized, variable key-length stream cipher. "RC" was initially only Rivest's personal designation for crypto project in development, as in "Ron's Code." The best known Rivest ciphers are RC2, RC4, RC5, and RC6. (RC4 was reverse engineered and anonymously published on the Net in September, 1994. The same thing subsequently happened to RC2. RSA Security, the company Rivest co-founded to market the RSA public key cryptosystem and his other cryptographic wares, later chose to patent RC5 and RC6. Patents for crypto remain controversial, at least on the Net.) The idea of paying to use a cryptosystem -- and particularly Rivest's RC4 -- is scary, heretical, and painful to some... but others reportedly find RSA's BSAFE implementation code stable and dependable, and RSA's prices and T&Cs reasonable and flexible. YMMV, but RSA does a huge business selling "high assurance" code to OEMs and other firms seeking to implement various crypto protocols and both proprietary and public ciphersuites. See: Trick or treat? Apparently, even among IT professionals, it is necessary to occasionally announce that RSA does NOT require an OEM or an enterprise customer to license all the BSAFE ciphers and protocols -- there are, mind you, eight distinct and specialized BSAFE crypto toolkits from RSA -- when all a poor Developer wants is RC4. Such is the depth of the FUD piled up around RC4 -- like tinder and faggots stacked at the feet of a condemned witch no one hates enough to burn. Goblins, gallows, and gibbets, oh yeah! (All Hallows Eve is celebrated in the US as Halloween, an annual children's festival held after dark on the last day of October. Children who participate are urged to distinguish between horrors that are real and unreal. The participation of adults in the rituals, unfortunately, is frowned upon.) RC4 has become doubly famous as "the cipher none dare name." Clank, rattle, clink in the Crypt. Oh yeah! While many can now copy the robust simplicity of Rivest's RC4 logic -- and ARC4 ("Apparently RC4") code is widely deployed -- RSA still claims and defends its registered "RC4" trademark (and the copyright on its BSAFE implementation code.) Which is, of course, why RSA-branded RC4 code is still so often bought and sold. Personally, I don't think that is demonic or even undeserved -- but then, I'm biased. I've been a consultant to RSA for years. (And I'm a wicca'd man at heart. I think the poor witches got a bad rap from all the jealous priests.) Happy Halloween, _Vin Vin McLellan * The Privacy Guild * Chelsea, MA USA From popkin at nym.alias.net Sat Oct 21 07:53:22 2000 From: popkin at nym.alias.net (D.Popkin) Date: 21 Oct 2000 14:53:22 -0000 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: (message from Sampo A Syreeni on Sat, 21 Oct 2000 01:09:46 +0300 (EEST)) References: Message-ID: <20001021145322.24007.qmail@nym.alias.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 659 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mkooner at nightmail.com Sat Oct 21 16:00:47 2000 From: mkooner at nightmail.com (mkooner at nightmail.com) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 16:00:47 Subject: CDR: P/E 4.9, No Debt, 30% Growth Rate, adds up to huge upside with low risk Message-ID: <140.815609.697239@prserv.net> I am very pleased to let you know about a currently under followed stock which has experienced large increases in revenue and earnings in the last 3 years but very little rise in stock price ! This is due to manangement, which has been quiety growing the company but not promoting it. A company website is in the works by January. Check out for yourself The Churhill corporation (It is fully reporting exchange listed company not OTC BB) 6 month results 2000 - earnings up over 100% - http://www.msnusers.com/churchillcorporation/files/first_half_2000.html The Churchill Corporation - symbol CUQ - traded on Canada's largest exchange the TSE Current price 1.60 cnd or 1.07 US Currrent price target based on a 15 X P/E multiple last 12 months earnings: 4.95 Cnd or 3.31 US ( *** a possible gain of 209 % ***) earnings fully diluted taken from 1999 annual report and june 2000 quaterly 1996: $0.04 - 1997: $0.17 - 1998: $0.23 - 1999: $0.29 12 month period to jun 30, 2000: $0.33 Current book value 1.94 cnd or 1.30 US !! A chart from stockmaster.com - You can contact the Churchill Corporation at 780-454-3667 Bill Mackenzie handles investor inquiries and is the CFO. Shares in Churchill can be purchased from your favorite broker ( In the US allot of brokers require you to place orders over the phone for TSE stocks so if your favorite online broker doesn't have CUQ online you can still get CUQ over the phone) ***************************************************************** If you wish to remove yourself from this email list, please respond to this email or send an email to donaldmkooner at yahoo.com with unsubscribe in the subject line. Disclaimer: This email is for informational purposes only. The information contained within this email should not be construed as offering investment advice. Those seeking direct investment advice should consult a qualified, registered, investment professional. This is not a direct or implied solicitation to buy or sell securities. Readers are advised to conduct their own due diligence prior to considering buying or selling any stock. The author(s) may have positions in the stocks in the stocks mentioned. No stock exchange has approved or disapproved of the information contained herein. P/E 4.9, No Debt, 30% Growth Rate, adds up to huge upside with low risk From anonymous at openpgp.net Sat Oct 21 14:19:02 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 17:19:02 -0400 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <440745709cdd07e31e8dcca6a89b14e3@remailer.ch> Subject: Photograph alteration CPUNK Last week a cannabis legalisation activist handed a posy of said plant, wrapped as if it had been bought in a florists' shop to Her Majesty the Queen. HRH accepted it as just another bunch of flowers, and the photographs hit the newsstands the next morning. As expected, all the papers had a different spin. However, none of the front page photographs showed a plant with flower. It would make no sense to hand HRH a handful of ugly weeds, and the guy who claimed responsibility referred to it as 'a pretty yellow flower'. This sent my bullshit meter into overdrive. Had the photos been doctored to distort the message of the activist? or merely "pruned" by the editor for one that doesn't advertise such horticulture to the masses? Is there anyone on the internet who is actively tracking forged/spun photographs, Photopunks if you will? I remember the storm here over *that* Elian pic. Perhaps this is in Declan's sphere of interest? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/ From anonymous at openpgp.net Sat Oct 21 14:40:37 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 17:40:37 -0400 Subject: CDR: KJOC lists anarchy symbol with occult Message-ID: <20001021214011.27125.qmail@nym.alias.net> From andrew.mcmeikan at mitswa.com.au Sat Oct 21 02:59:10 2000 From: andrew.mcmeikan at mitswa.com.au (McMeikan, Andrew) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 17:59:10 +0800 Subject: CDR: anonymous e-money Message-ID: <54A50136B6CAD3118FBD00C00D00DDEF037377@mits_perth_com1.mitswa.com.au> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1225 bytes Desc: not available URL: From publicidad at worldspain.com Sat Oct 21 15:12:37 2000 From: publicidad at worldspain.com (publicidad at worldspain.com) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 18:12:37 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Stamp's news from Worldspain Online S,L, Message-ID: <200010212212.SAA05599@mail.virtual-estates.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 13297 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jimdbell at home.com Sat Oct 21 16:16:05 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 19:16:05 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Killing Judges References: <200010211146.HAA22075@smtp10.atl.mindspring.net> Message-ID: <017d01c03bb1$3ee32e60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: John Young > What has happened lately in the killing judges world? > There was a spate of cases and a couple of jokers got > vised, but any recently? My theory is that this kind of thing gets covered up whever the govt. can do this. It was a little more than a year ago, but it's about time that I tell the CP group about an incident that occurred the day after (June 3, 1999) I was sentenced at Tacoma Federal Court. I had just "reamed the judge a new asshole" with my commentary on June 2, and a fellow Seatac FDC inmate was taken to court the next day (with the same judge, Franklin Burgess, interestingly enough) to be sentenced for whatever he did (or didn't do, dependng...) (He told me what happened the subsequent day; apparently they were all still in a bad mood because of what I'd said...) During his proceedings, there was apparently some bomb, or bomb threat. (He overheard a couple of US Marshals talking about what was happening; whether those Marshals were, themselves, well-informed is unknown. Everyone else was evacuated from the courtroom, but he was left behind, locked inside. Naturally, he was pissed for obvious reasons. (His public-defender lawyer was Miriam Schwartz, in case anyone wants to hear more about this from a different perspective.) What he heard was that there was an explosion of some kind: Whether this was a real bomb or just some idiot Feds blowing up someone's lunch-bucket with a shotgun shell, he didn't know. Despite careful searching of the two local newspapers, Seattle Times and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer (PI), no indication of this incident could be found. Likewise, nobody I talked to ever saw a reference to this incident on any local TV-news programs. I made a mental note to myself to look into this when I had an opportunity. A few weeks ago, I was reminded of this when a nearby (Clark County, Washington) courthouse was bombed (no, it wasn't me! (B I mean in the US, not elsewhere it's acceptable culling. > > Is Jeff still here hoping for another gold star, is Tim still being > bullseyed for "he's gone too far, make him an example." > > Crypto-assassin CJ's still emitting judicial mock, with > filthy, disgusting heavals from Three Rivers, TX. Course, > the flung bung wads could be Jeff's plying your honor. > > > From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 19:30:57 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 19:30:57 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mr. May said: >PCBs are as close as your nearest utility pole transformer. > >Are they as dangerous as reporters have led us to believe? My suspicion? No. Just wait until the News Media realizes that everyone who ever died had also inhaled O2. "Breathing leads to dying, stop now!". -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 19:48:53 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 19:48:53 -0700 Subject: No subject Message-ID: Mr. May: >At 12:14 AM -0700 10/20/00, petro wrote: >>>At 1:39 PM -0400 10/18/00, Tim May wrote: >>> >>> >>>There's also a very scarce compilation of "The Peace War" and >>>"Marooned in Realtime" which is called "Across Realtime." It >>>contains "The Ungoverned" in between the two novels. Good luck in >>>finding it, though. >> >> I believe the Sunnyvale Public Library has a copy. IIRC >>that's where I checked it out--but returned it when I noticed that >>it seemed to be just Peace War and Marooned together in one book. > >Which is what I said, with the novella "The Ungoverned" in between. I realize that: My point was that I *didn't* realize it when I held the book in my hand. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 19:55:26 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 19:55:26 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Anonymous wrote: > >>Crypto-anarchy is in fact not really anarchy, since it only addresses >>some kinds of authority, ie government, and only in certain situations. >>True anarchy involves the dissolution of other hierarchical relationships, >>including those that spring from private property. Get rid of private >>property and many of these problems disappear. > >Details, details. People use the term 'anarchy' a bit too casually here, >nothing else. Mostly what they mean is 'libertarian'. The latter in no >way excludes other hierarchical relationships, as we all know hardcore >anarchy does. Tim's favorite characterization of this side of anarchy is No, it doesn't. There are some hardcore anarchists who claim that their vision of anarchy doesn't, but if (as an example) Alice cannot direct the life of bob *at* *all*, how can she prevent Bob from *voluntarily* joining (or in fact creating) a hierarchical relationship? -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From billp at nmol.com Sat Oct 21 18:56:08 2000 From: billp at nmol.com (billp at nmol.com) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 19:56:08 -0600 Subject: CDR: state lawsuits, geronimo and victorio Message-ID: <39F24938.CF1364F8@nmol.com> cypherpunks I visited my former phd student sobolewski for advice this afternoon. http://www.mhpcc.edu/general/john.html On leaving his home - with three of his issues of the Minerological Record - Sobolewki said Did you know that Lewis [another of my phd students http://www.friction-free-economy.com/] is no longer with Daimler-Benz? He is now a vp with Kodak. But that won't help Kodak. Then I asked Sobolewski, "How do I get into these messes?" Sobolewki responded, "Don't ask that. Ask how do you get out of them!" We are, of course, living on the wild side. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/load1.html Please read about geronimo and victorio. And pass the link along. Morales and I did it. We filed on Friday afernoon. I attach and will post. None of us could have done this alone. Keep up-wind bill http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/buehlerpayne.html http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/ http://members.tripod.com/bill_3_2/ http://www.nmol.com/users/billp/ -------------- next part -------------- SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF BERNALILLO STATE OF NEW MEXICO CASE NUMBER Arthur R Morales William H Payne Plaintiffs v Robert J Gorence John J Kelly Manuel Lucero Jan Elizabeth Mitchell Don F Svet Defendants Complaint for Writ of REPLEVIN and Relief from HARASSMENT 1 Citizens Morales and Payne file pro se Freedom of Information Act lawsuit 97cv0266 against the National Security Agency in New Mexico District federal court on February 27, 1997. Magistrate judge Don J. Svet was assigned case. US attorney John J Kelly assigns assistant US attorney Jan Elizabeth Mitchell to defend National Security Agency. 2 FBI agents Moore and Kohl hand-deliver May 29, 1997 at 08:29 harassment letter authored by First Assistant US Attorney Robert J Gorence on May 19, 1997. Exhibit A. 3 01/28/98 Svet issues ORDER by Magistrate Don J. Svet granting defendant's motion to strike any and all of plaintiffs' first set of requests for admissions to various employees of the National Security Agency & to various employees of Sandia National Laboratory (see order for further specifics re sanctions & communication) [28-1] (cc: all counsel, electronically) (dmw) (7k) 4 02/09/98 Mitchell submits AFFIDAVIT of attorney fees by Jan Elizabeth Mitchell in accordance with court order [37-1] (dmw) BILL OF COSTS is submitted to US District Court on Jun 12, 1998. Exhibit B. On June 30, 1998 Mitchell places liens on both Payne's and Morales personal properties. Exhibit L. 5 Morales and Payne file WRIT OF PROHIBITION with judge Anotin Scalia on March 18, 1998 to halt attempted sanctions. Scalia does not reply. 6 On April 30, 1998 court order (docket #42) removes Morales as plaintiff in this case. 7 US Attorney John J Kelly orders initiates garnishment against Morales on February 2, 1999. Exhibit C1. 8 US Attorney John J Kelly and US Assistant Attorney Manuel Lucero file CERTIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS ON JUDGMENT DEBTOR with US District Court on February 2, 1999. Exhibit C2. Morales notified of right to hearing in CLERK'S NOTICE OF POST-JUDGMENT GARNISHMENT AND INSTRUCTIONS TO DEBTOR. Exhibit D was included in the same letter as Exhibit C. Paragraph in D2 is quite clear If you want a hearing you must notify the court within 20 days after receipt of the notice. Your request must be in writing. If you wish., you may use this notice to request the hearing by checking the box below. You must either mail it or deliver it in person to the Clerk of the United States District Court at 333 Lomas NW. Suite 270, P.O. Box 689, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103. You must also send a copy of your request to the United States Attorney at: United States Attorney, District of New Mexico, ATTENTION: MANUEL LUCERO, Assistant U. S. Attorney, P. 0. Box 607, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103, so the Government will know you want a hearing. Letter in exhibit E Morales requested hearing. Letter in exhibit F shows that Morales protested when he did not get requested hearing. Government took money from Morales without due process. 9 Morales notifies US Attorney John J Kelly and US District Court Clerk Robert March of his request for hearing on February 12, 1999 delivered by Payne. Exhibit E. 10 WRIT OF GARNISHMENT is received at Sandia National Laboratories on February 17, 1999. Exhibit G and H. 11 Morales notifies US Attorney John J Kelly, US Assistant Attorney Manuel Lucero, US District Court Clerk Robert March, and Sandia employee Mary Resnick on February 22, 1999 DEMAND that garnishment proceeding be held in abeyance pending requested hearing. Exhibit F. 12 $625 is garnished from Morales wages without due process in Sandia pay period 02/12/1999 to 03/25/1999 and 02/26/199 through 03/11/1999. Exhibit I. 13 Payne pays Morales $312.50 for his share of expenses in NSA lawsuit. 14 US Attorney John J Kelly and US Assistant Attorney Manuel Lucero file ORDER OF GARNISHMENT for $1,793.56 signed by magistrate judge Don F Svet on April 20, 1999. Exhibit J. There is no cause of action before the court for such order of garnishment. 15 Morales and Payne file WRIT OF PROHIBITION with judge Anotin Scalia on April 27, 1999 to halt attempted unwarranted garnishment. Scalia, again, does not respond. But no money has yet been garnished from Morales' wages by Sandia. 16 On July 21, 1999 Rio Grande Title refunds Morales' $625 [Exhibit M] which was taken from escrow account from property lien being held since November 25, 199. Exhibit L. 17 Chief magistrate judge William Deaton is informed of the these and other illegal acts on February 26, 2000. Morales and Payne offer administrative settlement of these and other misconduct. Deaton is asked to respond by March 4, 2000. Deaton does not respond. 18 Citizens John J Kelly, Manuel Lucero, Jan Elizabeth Mitchell, and Don F Svet have broken New Mexico state laws by garnishing $625 from Morales' wages without due process. Exhibits B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, K, L, M. ARTICLE 11 Magistrate Court; Replevin Sec. 35-11-1. Replevin; grounds. 35-11-2. Replevin; special provisions. 35-11-3. Judgment. 35-11-1. Replevin; grounds. Whenever any personal property is wrongfully taken or detained, the person having a right to immediate possession may bring a civil action of replevin for recovery of the property and for damages sustained from the wrongful taking or detention. However, in replevin actions, magistrate courts shall not issue any writs of replevin or any other orders providing for a seizure of property before judgment. 19 Citizens Robert J Gorence harassed William Payne by Sending FBI agents to Payne's home to deliver threatening letter in Exhibit A. Don F Svet, John J Kelly, and Manuel Lucero harassed Arthur Morales by attempting to garnish $1,793.56 from Morales wages when there was no legal cause of action for such writ. Exhibit J. ARTICLE 3A Harassment and Stalking 30-3A-2. Harassment; penalties. A. Harassment consists of knowingly pursuing a pattern of conduct that is intended to annoy, seriously alarm or terrorize another person and which serves no lawful purpose. The conduct must be such that it would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress. B. Whoever commits harassment is guilty of a misdemeanor. WHEREFORE 20 Morales and Payne ask for their $625 taken from them without due process. 21 Morales and Payne ask for the $1,793.56 since this can be taken from Morales wages or file an property lien at any time. 22 Payne asks for punitive damages $300,000 from Gorence for harassment for illegally sending FBI agents to family residence to deliver harassment letter. 23 Illegal garnishment of Morales' salary jeopardized Morales' security clearance and employment at Sandia National Laboratories. Morales and Payne ask for punitive damages from citizens John J Kelly $300,000, Don F Svet $300,000, Manuel Lucero $100,000, Jan Elizabeth Mitchell $100,000 , and so that citizens and federal employees are sent a message to obey the laws they are tasked to upheld rather than abuse. 24 No one in the United States of America must be permitted to be above the law. Forward complaint to New Mexico Attorney General with recommendation for prosecution of citizens Robert J Gorence, John J Kelly, Manuel Lucero, Jan Elizabeth Mitchell, and Don F Svet for violation of New Mexico state laws. 25 Grant other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. I certify that I mailed a copy of this pleading to all defendants by certified - return receipt requested mail. _________________________________ __________________________________ Date Arthur R Morales 1024 Los Arboles NW Albuquerque, NM 87107 505 3451381 William H Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 98111 505 292 7037 4 -------------- next part -------------- SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF BERNALILLO STATE OF NEW MEXICO CASE NUMBER William H Payne Plaintiff v Sandia Corporation - Sandia National Laboratories American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation Lockheed Martin Corporation Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn John A. Bannerman Charles Burtner Lorenzo F. Garcia Michael G. Robles Carol Lisa Smith Defendants Complaint for Relief from DEFAMATION and HARASSMENT 1 Citizen Richard Gallegos gives documents in Exhibit A to citizen Arthur Morales. Morales gives documents to Payne on Saturday March 22, 1997. Exhibit A 4 show that the documents clearly refer to plaintiff W. H. Payne since his signature is affixed to that document. Payne had not seen Exhibit A documents before March 22, 1997. The documents contain false information. Release of documents like those seen in Exhibit A without written consent is a criminal violation of the Privacy Act, 5 USC § 552a, Records Maintained On Individuals http://www.usdoj.gov/04foia/privstat.htm 5 USC 552a(b) , the Privacy Act, states, CONDITIONS OF DISCLOSURE - No agency shall disclose any record which is contain in a systems of records by any means of communications to any person, or to another agency, except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior written consent of, the individual to who the record pertains, ... 5 USC 552a(i)1 applies. CRIMINAL PENALTIES. - Any officer or employee of an agency, who by virtue of his employment or official position, has possession of, or access to, agency records which contain individually identifiable information the disclosure of which is prohibited by this section or by rules or regulations established thereunder, and who knowing that disclosure of the specific material is so prohibited, willfully discloses of the specific material is so prohibited, willfully disclosed the material in any manner to any person or agency not entitled to receive it, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000. Further, The Privacy Act provides a civil remedy whenever an agency denies access to a record or refuses to amend a record. An individual may sue an agency if the agency fails to maintain records with accuracy, relevance, timeliness, and completeness as is necessary to assure fairness in any agency determination and the agency makes a determination that is adverse to the individual. An individual may also sue an agency if the agency fails to comply with any other Privacy Act provision in a manner that has an adverse effect on the individual. An individual may file a lawsuit against an agency in the Federal District Court in which the individual lives, in which the records are situated, or in the District of Columbia. A lawsuit must be filed within 2 years from the date on which the basis for the lawsuit arose. http://www.epic.org/open_gov/citizens_guide_93.html EMPLOYMENT REFERENCES I. Generally In recent years the trend has become for employers not to give detailed or even meaningful employment references when asked to do so. Most employers today either give no employment reference information or merely confirm that the (former) employee worked for the employer during specified dates and at a certain rank or position. The rationale for the unwillingness to provide more complete or specific information is that employers must minimize their risk of exposure to workplace defamation liability. Generally, an employer is liable to an employee for defamation if the employer publishes a false statement about the employee that harms the employee's reputation and that is not privileged. Each element of a defamation action is examined briefly below. First, employers cannot make false statements about an employee. Employers can now be held liable for false statements only if they are responsible for the falsity. This means that the employer can be held liable for a false statements only if they were negligent in attempting to ensure the truthfulness of the statement. In other words, employers are not liable for a false statement if they were not negligent in their attempts to ensure that the statement was true before they published it. RISK-FREE HIRING: How to Interview, Check References and Use Pre- employment Testing without Triggering Liability PRESENTED TO: COUNCIL ON EDUCATION IN MANAGEMENT ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO JUNE 25, 1997 PRESENTED BY: DEBRA J. MOULTON, ESQ. KAREN KENNEDY & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 6400 UPTOWN BLVD., NE, SUITE 630-E ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO 87110 (505) 884-7887 _____ 7-1 Defamation Defined The test for defamation is not merely a statement that hurts one's reputation. Defamation is the publication of a defamatory statement of fact. When defamation occurs in written form it is called libel. When the defamation is an oral communication, it is called slander. In order to prove that one has been defamed, the New Mexico courts rely on proof of the following facts: 1. that there was a defamatory statement of fact concerning another (i.e. a statement, as opposed to an opinion, that tends to lower the employee in the esteem of the community or other respectable individuals); 2. the statement must be published; that is it must be spoken or otherwise communicated to at least one person, usually a "third party," other than the complaining party; 3. fault amounting at least to negligence (should have known it was false) on part of the publisher, or, if the employer is a public official, the statement must have been made with the knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth; and 4. that the statement was the proximate cause of actual injury to the employee. It is imperative that employers take action to stop all defamatory actions by their employees, even in the realm of horseplay, since there exists in New Mexico both criminal, and civil liability for such actions. LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT IN NEW MEXICO: A Complete Desktop Guide to Employment Law, ERIC SIROTKIN Butterworth, 1994. While it may seem obvious to readers of Exhibit A that both Sandia National Laboratories and the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission got caught in writing violating both the criminal and civil portion of the Privacy Act and should settle, the federal government decided to fight in federal court relying on cooperation of federal judges to protect it. However, in this case the federal judge violated New Mexico state law in by mounting a campaign of harassment instead of administering a fair jury trial his zeal to protect the US government from liability. Therefore, on advice of Mew Mexico Federal Magistrate Judge Karen B Molzen and others legal remedy reverts to state court for hearing defamation and harassment complaints. See section 20 this document. 2 Payne brought suit CIV 99-270 against defendants and others on March 12, 1999 in US District Court for the District of New Mexico for violation of the Privacy Act, 5 USC § 552a, Records Maintained On Individuals. Exhibit B page 9 docket entry 1. 3 Magistrate judge Lorenzo Garcia presides. 4 May 12, 1999 Payne moves in CIV 99-270 for summons service by US marshal for defendants Larry Trujillo, R A Polansacz, and C A Searles. Exhibit B page 8 docket entry 12. 5 Garcia denies service in CIV 99-270 May 24, 1999 claiming that Payne can only use US marshal service in a in forma pauperis case. Exhibit C, Exhibit B page 8 docket entry 18. Payne never claimed he filed in forma pauperis and can, in fact, use US marshal service if he pays about $25 per summons. Citizen Garcia harasses Payne. 6 On 8/4/99 in CIV 99-270 defendants Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn, Smith and Bannerman file MOTION by defts R A Poloncasz, C A Searls, and E Dunckel |to dismiss this action against them without prejudice| (rd) Re:MEMORANDUM, OPINION, AND ORDER dismissing defts E Dunckel, C A Searls and ... [87] Exhibit B page 7 docket entry 58. 7 On 11/12/99 in CIV 99-270 Garcia grants MEMORANDUM, OPINION, AND ORDER: by Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia granting defts' motion to dismiss this action against them without prejudice [59-1] dismissing defts E Dunckel, C A Searls and R A Poloncasz without prejudice (cc: all counsel*) (rd) (11k) Re: MOTION to dismiss this action against them without prejudice [59] Exhibit B page 3 docket entry 87. Garcia gives as reason that Dunckel, Searls and Poloncasz have not been properly served. Citizen Garcia harasses Payne. 8 Payne in CIV 99-270 files Docket entry 34 Exhibit D. Exhibit B page 7 docket entry 34. 6/8/99 34 AFFIDAVIT of William H. Payne to remove Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia from this action (rd) [Entry date 06/09/99] 9 Garcia falsely identifies Payne's AFFIDAVIT to remove Garcia as a "motion" and denies it. Exhibit B page 7 docket entry 35. 6/9/99 35 ORDER by Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia denying motion to disqualify (affidavit to remove Judge Garcia) [34-11 (cc: all counsel, electronically) (rd) [Entry date 06/10/991 Citizen Garcia harasses Payne. 10 Payne gives Garcia opportunity to correct AFFIDAVIT to remove Garcia. 6/16/99 37 MOTION by Payne to alter or amend order denying motion to disqualify (sl) Exhibit B page 7 docket entry 37. Garcia's refuses to obey law. 6/16/99 38 ORDER by Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia denying pltf's motion to alter or amend order denying motion to disqualify [37-1] (cc: all counsel, electronically) (rd) Citizen Garcia continues to harass Payne in violation of New Mexico state law, 11 May 25, 1999 Payne left for an extended business trip. Payne informed the court. Exhibit B page 8 docket entry 20. 12 On 06/02/99 in CIV 99-270 Defendants Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn, Smith and Bannerman file MOTION by Sandia defts |for sanctions due to violations of Rule 11(b)(2)| (rd) Re: RESPONSE [76] MEMORANDUM, OPINION, AND ORDER [52] MEMORANDUM [24] Exhibit B page 8 docket entry 23. 13 June 18, 1999 Payne files for Motion for time extension of 90 days to answer Exhibit B page 7 docket entry 39. 14 On 08/05/99 in CIV 99-270 Garcia files ORDER by Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia assessing costs in favor of Sandia defts and against pltf in the amount of $912.50 to be paid within twenty (20) days [55-1] (cc: all counsel, electronically) (rd) (8k) Re: NOTICE [55] Garcia was removed from CIV 99-270 on 6/8/99 and, therefore, has no authority to order sanctions against Payne. Citizen Garcia harasses Payne in violation of New Mexico state law. 15 On August 12, 1999 Payne files for writ of prohibition by certified mail with judge Antonin Scalia. Payne wrote I sued under the Privacy Act as a result of false and defaming documents about my self distributed by Sandia Labs and EEOC. These are seen at http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/congress/8327/robles.htm Exhibit B shows that magistrate judge Garcia dismisses my air-tight Privacy Act Defamation lawsuit. Exhibit C shows that judge Garcia has the gall to attempt to assess me with fees. 2 I ask that you issue a writ of prohibition to judge Garcia to stay his August 5 ORDER ASSESSING COST IN FAVOR OF SANDIA DEFENDANTS AGAINST PLAINTIFF WILLIAM H. PAYNE because written evident seen at http: //www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/robles.htm controverts Garcia' s claims. Scalia does not respond. Garcia, of course, was removed from case on June 8, 1999 and had no authority to rule. Citizen Garcia harasses Payne in violation of New Mexico state law. 16 Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn, Smith and Bannerman file lien again Payne's and wife property on January 19, 2000. Exhibit D. Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn, Smith and Bannerman, knowing that Garcia was removed by affidavit harass Payne by filing illegal lien. Rule 11(b)(2) states Rule 11. Signing of Pleading, Motions, and other Papers; Representations to Court; Sanctions (b) Representations to Court. By presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating) a pleading, written motion, or other paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances,-- (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law; Evidence in documents in Exhibit A clearly violate the both the criminal and civil provision of the Privacy Act. CIV 99-270 is not frivolous. Citizens Garcia, Smith and Bannerman law firm Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn harass Payne in violation of New Mexico state law. 17 Payne files DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL in CIV 99-270 on March 24, 1999. Exhibit B page 9 docket entry 3. On 03/17/99 paid the filing fee for this jury trial guaranteed him by the Constitution and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Garcia, however, judged case without a jury trial. Citizen Garcia denied Payne's right for jury trial and thereby harasses Payne in violation of New Mexico state law. 18 New Mexico state law, ARTICLE 3A, defines Harassment and Stalking 30-3A-2. Harassment; penalties. A. Harassment consists of knowingly pursuing a pattern of conduct that is intended to annoy, seriously alarm or terrorize another person and which serves no lawful purpose. The conduct must be such that it would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress. B. Whoever commits harassment is guilty of a misdemeanor. 19 Chief magistrate judge William Deaton is informed of Garcia's, Smith's and Bannerman's harassment acts by certified letter on February 26, 2000. Administrative settlement of these and other misconduct was proposed. Deaton is asked to respond by March 4, 2000. Deaton does not respond. 20 Magistrate judge Karen B Molzen schedules telephone status conference for Monday August 30, 1999 at 2:00pm. Exhibit E and B5 docket entry 61. Payne is in Pullman, WA. Conference takes place between 13:40 and 13:17 pacific daylight time. Defendant lawyer Smith is part of conference call. Molzen conducts informal discussion with Smith. Molzen points out to Smith that Molzen believes that Payne has a state defamation case. Molzen, Payne believes, says conversation is recorded. While the Privacy Act violation portion of this matter is currently being reviewed by the Tenth Circuit, the defamation portion is now being tried, as Molzen and others recommend, in state court. WHEREFORE 21 Order Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn, Bannerman and Smith to pay Payne $912.50 to satisfy lien. 22 Payne asks for punitive damages of $300,000 from Garcia for disallowing service by US marshal, failure to remove himself from CIV 99-270 after affidavit was file, ordering Payne to pay $912.50 after Garcia was removed from case, and denying trial by jury which Payne paid for and was guaranteed by the Constitution and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Garcia is engaged in pattern and practice of harassment to deny rights due Payne under the Constitution and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Payne asks for punitive damages of $300,000 from Krehbiel, Bannerman & Horn for allowing lawyers Smith and Bannerman to harass him. Smith and Bannerman have engaged in pattern and practice of harassing Payne. 23 Punitive damages of $1,000,000 each from Sandia Corporation - Sandia National Laboratories, American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation Lockheed Martin Corporation for the preparation and distribution of libelous and defaming false documents distributed without Payne's knowledge seen in Exhibit A. 24 Punitive damages of $50,000 each from Charles Burtner and Michael G. Robles distributing the false, libelous, and defaming documents seen in Exhibit A. 25 No one in the United States of America must be permitted to be above the law. Forward complaint to New Mexico Attorney General with recommendation for prosecution of citizens Lorenzo Garcia, John Bannerman, and Carol Smith, for violation of the New Mexico state laws on harassment. 26 Grant other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. I certify that I mailed a copy of this pleading to all defendants by certified - return receipt requested mail. _________________________________ _________________________________ Date William H Payne 13015 Calle de Sandias NE Albuquerque, NM 98111 505 292 7037 1 From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 20:05:44 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 20:05:44 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >OK. So how about preventative care? It might well be that by insuring >everyone and keeping them in health, the total risk per dollars paid for >coverage actually goes down. Especially if infectious diseases can be kept >in check. Plus, the sum total of money paid by the insurees goes up as they >stay healthier for longer, thus giving more money for the insurance company >to invest into more profitable ventures. This is what governments do now. How are you going to make sure that people do the things that make them healthy? If their health care is paid for by the state (or rather by the collective labor of society), then they can engage in any sort of behavior they wish and still get covered, so why bother with that boring stuff like exercise and leafy green vegetables when you can sit back, suck up a six pack, eat some brauts and watch the game on the telly? Believe it or not, not all people in this world are hardworking. Not all people in this world are willing to put forth much effort at all, especially for long term issues like health. So how are you going to make sure that people do the things they need to do to keep them healthy? Pass laws? Use force? -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 20:06:44 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 20:06:44 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > >>> How does crypto-anarchy/libertarian/anarchy propose to deal with the >>> "tragedy of the commons" where by doing what is best for each persons own >>> interests they end up screwing it up for everyone (Overgrazing land with to >>> many cattle is the example I've been given). >> >>The tragedy of the commons is that nobody owns it. > >The point is, there are certain things which cannot be exclusively owned >without rendering the concept of rights, as most people understand them, for >all practical purposes moot. Air is one. You assume that most people understand "rights". I see no evidence of that. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From honig at sprynet.com Sat Oct 21 17:15:45 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 20:15:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: sieving the gene pool -not just Iceland Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001021171256.007bbaf0@pop.sprynet.com> Estonia plans to raise between 1e8 and 1.5e8 dollars for a project to begin next year, to "compile DNA profiles and health information on75%ofthe country's 1.4 million citizens" ... "by contrast, [to Iceland's anonymity] the data and DNA samples in the Estonian project will be identifiable through a coded system." The project will keep samples too; citizens can opt out and samples will be destroyed. _Science v 290 6 Oct 2000 p 31 "Estonia prepares for national DNA database" (And I realize this still doesn't make Estonia part of Scandanavia.. :-) From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 20:51:00 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 20:51:00 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: defaulting on US Dept Ed. school loans In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >Any suggested parameters or "recipes" for ducking under the govt's >radar regarding school loan collection....minimal property holdings, >shift belongings to spouses name, cousins name, liquidize and >hide....etc... So let me get this straight. You signed a contract agreeing to pay back monies loaned to you for the purposes of getting and education, and now you want to avoid paying? You know what that makes you? A thief. A miserable stinking thief that is--in effect--stealing *MY* money, since it's a government backed (hence tax-payer paid for) loan. I'm paying back my loans, and you can do as well you miserable piece of shit. People who won't fulfill their contracts need to be dealt with by those who *do* fulfill their contracts. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 20:55:46 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 20:55:46 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001020150022.B4059@well.com> References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <20001020150022.B4059@well.com> Message-ID: The Red Sed: >On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 01:23:32AM -0700, petro wrote: >> Most children--which is where genetic "abnormalities" show >> up--are covered often sight unseen through their parents policies, >> and often before they are even conceived. > >OK. This lowers the amount of people the companies would be >discriminating aginst. Therefore, the insurance company is saving >less money. Therefore, we have more reason to force them to insure >said people, if it affects them less. That is completely disconnected, and illogical. We have no reason to force insurance companies to do anything other than honor the contracts which they have signed. >> >> Medicine is not a commodity, but it's *still* a business. It has to be. > >Why does it have to be a business? Because everything is a business. Everything. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 21:02:02 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 21:02:02 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: May: >5. Not that this is necessarily the best option. The domes in deep >caves are perfectly fine. And there is much to be said for the >Pournelle/Hogan solution: put the vitreous beads in concrete-filled >drums, load them onto pallets, then park the pallets in neat rows >and columns in the center of a 10 km by 10 km fenced area in the >Mojave Desert of California. Very little rain (geological records >and fossil lakes show this); certainly no significant flash >flooding. Then erect signs, in many languages, and with >skull-and-crossbones, saying: "This area is poisoned." Even the most >bizarre devolution-to-savagery scenarios are unlikely to have >wandering savages in the waterless Mojave trying to scavenge stuff >out of sealed drums marked with skulls and crossbones! I've never really understood why we don't just put this stuff in some *really* tough polycarbonate containers aboard "mature" technology rockets and launch it into the biggest heat source in the solar system. I realize that there is a lot of it, but still. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 21:08:59 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 21:08:59 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? (insurance) In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001020223853.009938e0@idiom.com> References: <3.0.5.32.20001020223853.009938e0@idiom.com> Message-ID: >Without massive employer-funded health care, most people >would be more likely to pay for their routine costs directly >and buy insurance for excessive costs. "Catastrophic" health insurance--insurance which covers things massive trauma (car accidents etc) or Cancer are pretty cheap. If one has the resources to pay for "routine" health care up to and including extensive surgery (say 20 to 40k), it can be a reasonable filler. Minor surgery is relatively cheap--IIRC my hernia repair was only about 5 to 7k in 1997--this is out of the reach of the lower half of the socio-economic scale, and it made me damn glad I had health insurance, but it's hardly something that most people *couldn't* pay off if they were so inclined. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From tcmay at got.net Sat Oct 21 21:51:39 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 21:51:39 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 9:02 PM -0700 10/21/00, petro wrote: >May: >>5. Not that this is necessarily the best option. The domes in deep >>caves are perfectly fine. And there is much to be said for the >>Pournelle/Hogan solution: put the vitreous beads in concrete-filled >>drums, load them onto pallets, then park the pallets in neat rows >>and columns in the center of a 10 km by 10 km fenced area in the >>Mojave Desert of California. Very little rain (geological records >>and fossil lakes show this); certainly no significant flash >>flooding. Then erect signs, in many languages, and with >>skull-and-crossbones, saying: "This area is poisoned." Even the >>most bizarre devolution-to-savagery scenarios are unlikely to have >>wandering savages in the waterless Mojave trying to scavenge stuff >>out of sealed drums marked with skulls and crossbones! > > I've never really understood why we don't just put this stuff >in some *really* tough polycarbonate containers aboard "mature" >technology rockets and launch it into the biggest heat source in the >solar system. > > I realize that there is a lot of it, but still. This is a very old idea, rejected for good cause many, many years ago. Need I elaborate? --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From jimdbell at home.com Sat Oct 21 21:56:54 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 21:56:54 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Cost to "break" 1024-bit PGP (RSA) in 1997? References: Message-ID: <00a701c03be4$7fea07c0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Anonymous To: jim bell Cc: Cypherpunks Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2000 21:09 PM Subject: Re: Cost to "break" 1024-bit PGP (RSA) in 1997? > "jim bell" wrote: > > > I need an estimate of the cost to break a 1024-bit PGP key in 1997, given > > then-existing algorithms and hardware, etc. > > "There are some things that money can't buy." "For those, there are thumbscrews." > Would you like an estimate of the cost to break into somebody's house > and copy the secret key in 1997? Wouldn't work, at least as stated. The "secret key" in PGP doesn't contain the passphrase, which is also necessary. Besides, "breaking in" would be illegal, wouldn't it? Imagine what would (will?) happen when that incident becomes public? Because it will. Jim Bell From secret_squirrel at nym.alias.net Sat Oct 21 15:00:05 2000 From: secret_squirrel at nym.alias.net (Secret Squirrel) Date: 21 Oct 2000 22:00:05 -0000 Subject: CDR: New ID system keeps tabs on kids Message-ID: <6e7887175cd51a621cc5cfa971f5ee9c@anonymous> "Mooooo" say air passengers. "Baaaaa" say students. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 19:42:05 -0400 Newsgroups: alt.privacy Subject: New ID system keeps tabs on kids Students have their ID Cards scanned at the start of the school day at Bensalem High School By Denise Clay SPECIAL TO THE PREMIERE dclay at calkinsnewspapers.com Getting into Bensalem High School now requires identification, but not any card will do. Students have begun using photo identification cards connected to the school's new Comprehensive Attendance Administration and Security System. The cards have the student's name and other information encoded n them. A computerized reader scans them. The systen is designed to help school officials monitor students' comings and goings. In the future, the electronic screens at the ID stations will show if a student has been suspended and shouldn't be in school. The monitors will also sing "Happy Birthday" to a student on the appropriate day. Six identification stations are located at the front entrance of the school, said Princial Elliott Lewis. One station is staffed with a hall monitor all day. Students have been adjusting to the Windows 95-based system and the additional responsibilities connected to it, officials say. "The kids have been responding well," said Natalie Knable, assistant principal. "They've been carrying their IDs." Those who forget are given a temporary pass after signing in at the ID station. From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 22:56:18 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 22:56:18 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >At 9:02 PM -0700 10/21/00, petro wrote: >>May: >>>5. Not that this is necessarily the best option. The domes in deep >>>caves are perfectly fine. And there is much to be said for the >>>Pournelle/Hogan solution: put the vitreous beads in >>>concrete-filled drums, load them onto pallets, then park the >>>pallets in neat rows and columns in the center of a 10 km by 10 km >>>fenced area in the Mojave Desert of California. Very little rain >>>(geological records and fossil lakes show this); certainly no >>>significant flash flooding. Then erect signs, in many languages, >>>and with skull-and-crossbones, saying: "This area is poisoned." >>>Even the most bizarre devolution-to-savagery scenarios are >>>unlikely to have wandering savages in the waterless Mojave trying >>>to scavenge stuff out of sealed drums marked with skulls and >>>crossbones! >> >> I've never really understood why we don't just put this stuff >>in some *really* tough polycarbonate containers aboard "mature" >>technology rockets and launch it into the biggest heat source in >>the solar system. >> >> I realize that there is a lot of it, but still. > >This is a very old idea, rejected for good cause many, many years ago. > >Need I elaborate? The only things I can think of are: (1) Cost of pushing heavy shit up the gravity slope. (2) Danger of rocket "catastrophically" failing and blowing radioactive material all over hell and gone. (3) Not a chance in hell of selling it to the tree huggers and the ignorant. (1) Is the only one that makes sense, but we should be able to find a cheaper way of getting up there. We should be able to engineer around (2). (3) Is probably the toughest nut to crack. So, I am not asking for much elaboration, just a bit of a clue. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From nobody at remailer.privacy.at Sat Oct 21 14:24:03 2000 From: nobody at remailer.privacy.at (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 23:24:03 +0200 Subject: CDR: New crypto regs? Message-ID: [http://www.pscu.com/Newsbytes/2000/156920.html] New Encryption Regulations Take Effect On Today October 19, 2000 By Brian Krebs, Newsbytes. WASHINGTON, D.C., U.S.A., Published By Newsbytes News Network In the final step toward matching the European Union's recent liberalization of rules governing the export of encryption products, the Commerce Department's Bureau of Export Administration has published a final rule allowing the export of encryption products of any strength to 15 EU nations and eight other trading partners. The announcement cements changes proposed in July, when the Clinton administration said it would relax laws governing the export of powerful encryption technologies to allow exports of all information-scrambling products to any end user in the European Union, as well as Australia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Japan, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland. The move, designed to match recent shifts in encryption export policy for EU nations, also eliminates the 30-day waiting period that had been imposed on companies exporting encryption goods to EU nations and other trading partners. Instead, companies will now be required to submit a "commodity classification request," and will be allowed to ship products without waiting for a review from federal regulators. Previously, companies could export "retail" - or off-the-shelf - encryption products to nearly any country, except those labeled as terrorist or high-risk nations, such as China and Russia. But for exports of non-retail products, US companies had been required to obtain a license before they can export to the governments of any other country. By contrast, the EU allows companies in its member states to export encryption products without a license to a set list of 25 countries, and makes no distinction as to whether the end-user is a government or non-governmental entity. The new encryption regulations to take effect today eliminate the end user, retail and non-retail considerations for encryption exports destined for roughly 23 common trading partners. For more information on the published regulations, visit http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/Default.htm Reported by Newsbytes, http://www.newsbytes.com 11:57 CST Reposted 13:59 CST (20001019/WIRES ONLINE, PC, LEGAL, BUSINESS/ENCRYP/PHOTO) From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 21 23:26:14 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 23:26:14 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001021232248.01794980@shell11.ba.best.com> -- I think the Russian solution is the best. They dump high level liquid waste in the deep cold salty waters of the arctic ocean. This water slowly settles, and it will be a thousand or so years before it rises again. In the course of that thousand years, all the non actinide radioactives will have decayed, and the most of the actinide radioactives will have settled into the mud, and what remains is diluted into an enormous volume of water. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG YAYXNRekExHP1fQNkbogjUN2SDZe9ovpdOyXZaKT 41E9yEvCZVlu3lbGXOO/z4hBwQx2poGSQGFPdEYb0 From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 21 23:47:29 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 23:47:29 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: LDRider: Forwarded from the ST1100 list at the sender's request In-Reply-To: <68B95AA1648D1840AB0083CC63E57AD6819350@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft. com> References: <68B95AA1648D1840AB0083CC63E57AD6819350@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft. com> Message-ID: >From: "The Truth" >Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 12:54:05 -0400 >Subject: ST1100: John Korb and Two Brothers Racing > > The late John Korb had learned how Two Brothers Racing has alledgedly >stolen the ST1100 accessory designs of Ron Major, and continues to this day >to represent and sell these items as their own, with no attribution to Ron >Major, nor pay any royalties whatsoever to his surviving daughter. > >John wanted Two Brothers Racing to explain the nature of the Ron Major >luggage rack they had sold him. The letter in the web site below is TBR's >response, signed by Craig Erion. > >John was a member of the Long Distance Rider's email list. If one of you >would please forward this post to LDRiders, I am sure John would appreciate >it. > >The letter speaks for itself, especially the last sentence. You may draw >your own conclusions about TBR. > > http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/tbr/ Ok, so Mr. Majors invents this *really* nifty thing, then dies. TBR starts marketing it. Korb learns about it, and then gets killed. I smell a conspiracy... -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From bear at sonic.net Sun Oct 22 00:33:39 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:33:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Nathan Saper wrote: >> So these people are entitled to something for nothing? >> (or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)? > >That's the whole idea of insurance, isn't it? > You're trolling, aren't you? Insurance is a good idea for the insured because it takes money to make money. If you have any investments, any property, etc, which you *rely* on for your livelihood or your lifestyle, insurance is a way of knowing that you will continue to have, and being able to make plans based on having, those items into the future even if a disaster of some type hits. It's a trifle *MORE* expensive than just paying for the disaster, but it's money where you can budget it because you know when and how much you'll have to pay. Insurance is a good idea for the insurer because the insurer does business with a large enough number of people that paying for the fifteen or twenty actual disasters that happen in a given day can be done routinely out of the fifteen or twenty thousand premium payments received that day, with some money left over for lunch. As the numbers get larger, the disasters become more predictable. Nowhere in this business model is there any shred of entitlement or obligation. The insured is not entitled to coverage. The insurer is not obligated to write a policy on someone who has risk that makes the policy too cheap for the insurer to make money. Bear From bear at sonic.net Sun Oct 22 00:51:44 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:51:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001020134324.B3955@well.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Nathan Saper wrote: >The point is, it's not fair to punish someone for a genetic defect >that isn't his or her fault. What has fairness got to do with it? People are born with genetic defects; it's manifestly unfair, but it's true. Insurers are in business to make money, and their business model must reflect truth. Risk is Risk. Doesn't matter whether it's fair or not. If you want to make donations to the care of people who can't afford coverage or health care (who probably include some of the folk with genetic defects), do that through a charity. Whether they have money or not, you have no right to rob the stockholders in the insurance company in order to fund your pet charity. Bear From hayek-lhost at HOME.COM Sun Oct 22 01:56:49 2000 From: hayek-lhost at HOME.COM (List Host) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 01:56:49 -0700 Subject: H-WEB: G Radnitzky on Hayek & libertarianism Message-ID: >> Hayek On The Web << -- Hayek / "Libertarianism" Gerard Radnitzky, "Hayek on the role of the state: A radical libertarian critique", on the web at: http://www.cis.org.au/Policy/autumn00/Aut00-3.pdf Gerard Radnitzky, "Hayek on the role of the state: A radical libertarian critique". _Policy. 2000. (Autumn). "Hayek On The Web" is a regular feature of the Hayek-L list. Hayek-L Home Page: http://www.hayekcenter.org/hayek-l/hayek-l.html Scholars Bookstore: http://www.hayekcenter.org/bookstore/scholars_books.html Hayek Scholars Page: http://www.hayekcenter.org/friedrichhayek/hayek.html --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Externalities are the last refuge of the derigistes." -- Friedrich Hayek From jimdbell at home.com Sun Oct 22 02:15:18 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 02:15:18 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste References: Message-ID: <003301c03c08$9901a280$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: petro > >At 9:02 PM -0700 10/21/00, petro wrote: > >> I've never really understood why we don't just put this stuff > >>in some *really* tough polycarbonate containers aboard "mature" > >>technology rockets and launch it into the biggest heat source in > >>the solar system. > >> I realize that there is a lot of it, but still. > > > >This is a very old idea, rejected for good cause many, many years ago. > >Need I elaborate? > > The only things I can think of are: > (1) Cost of pushing heavy shit up the gravity slope. > (2) Danger of rocket "catastrophically" failing and blowing > radioactive material all over hell and gone. > (3) Not a chance in hell of selling it to the tree huggers > and the ignorant. > (1) Is the only one that makes sense, but we should be able > to find a cheaper way of getting up there. We should be able to > engineer around (2). > (3) Is probably the toughest nut to crack. > > So, I am not asking for much elaboration, just a bit of a clue. Angular momentum. Putting waste into the Sun requires the removal of nearly all of the angular momentum associated with the revolution around the sun, about 66,700 mph. Since energy is proportional to the square of the velocity, that's about 6 times greater energy than achieving earth's escape velocity, or maybe 15 times greater than low-earth-orbit energy. Extremely inefficient. A far better solution, I'd think, would be to drill a 5-mile deep hole (perhaps on the ocean floor, for good measure) and fill the bottom couple of miles with waste, and the rest with concrete. Jim Bell From nobody at remailer.ch Sat Oct 21 21:09:04 2000 From: nobody at remailer.ch (Anonymous) Date: 22 Oct 2000 04:09:04 -0000 Subject: CDR: Re: Cost to "break" 1024-bit PGP (RSA) in 1997? In-Reply-To: <012e01c03aec$ef721d60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: "jim bell" wrote: > I need an estimate of the cost to break a 1024-bit PGP key in 1997, given > then-existing algorithms and hardware, etc. "There are some things that money can't buy." Would you like an estimate of the cost to break into somebody's house and copy the secret key in 1997? From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 22 02:30:52 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 05:30:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: sieving the gene pool -not just Iceland In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001021171256.007bbaf0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: >1.4 million citizens" ... "by contrast, [to Iceland's anonymity] >the data and DNA samples in the Estonian project will be >identifiable through a coded system." That is really interesting considering that they have had, and still have, quite a problem with their Russian minority. Sort of takes one into the Orwellian mode of thought. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From rah at shipwright.com Sun Oct 22 05:23:27 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 08:23:27 -0400 Subject: CDR: H-WEB: G Radnitzky on Hayek & libertarianism Message-ID: This is a really good article which has a bunch of interesting things to say on it's way to saying that Hayek didn't go far enough, but it wasn't his fault. :-). For instance, how we ended up with nation-states (taxation is their only reason for existence) and legislation (the use of taxation for redistribution of assets by force in order to maintain social control), and why political solutions to political power end up squaring the circle, as it were. Of course, he talks about "law as the force which allocates property rights", and most cypherpunks would dispute that, knowing of better, cryptographic ways of allocating control of property. Cheers, RAH --- begin forwarded text From natedog at well.com Sun Oct 22 08:53:59 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 08:53:59 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from bear@sonic.net on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 12:33:39AM -0700 References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> Message-ID: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2781 bytes Desc: not available URL: From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Sun Oct 22 06:09:46 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 09:09:46 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: H-WEB: G Radnitzky on Hayek & libertarianism References: Message-ID: <39F2E701.7A9230A6@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> "R. A. Hettinga" wrote: > Of course, he talks about "law as the force which allocates property > rights", and most cypherpunks would dispute that, knowing of better, > cryptographic ways of allocating control of property. > I definitely intend to read more on Hayek, and am not disagreeing with the above, but I'm having a hard time imagining how this would work with real property. I'm living in my house, all paid for, you can't kick me out and move in since the law says it's my house. Take away the state, and I (and perhaps my family and friends, neighbors, tribe, whatever) simply kill you when you try to move in, which is clearly not workable in many situations, i.e., you have more men with guns. I can easily understand how crypto can protect intellectual property, ecash, etc. but not real estate, cars, whatever, without ultimately a state or some sort of arbitrating body (men with guns) to enforce title. Crypto -- digisigs -- to prove title, of course, but title has never meant much to men with guns who wanted it. And don't take this to mean I'm arguing against abolition of the state, I'm just looking for an explanation on how this would work. From info at ecoworld.com Sun Oct 22 09:30:45 2000 From: info at ecoworld.com (info at ecoworld.com) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 09:30:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: EcoWorld Message-ID: <200010221630.JAA25525@toad.com> Friends, Check out www.ecoworld.com. We are creating the first online source of complete data on the species and ecosystems of the world. We are also reporting on projects everywhere to preserve and restore species and ecosystems. You may wish to help us, either by telling us about good work going on in your part of the world to save the environment, or by becoming one of our contributors to help us fill our database. We will help save the planet, working together to create this resource. Are you interested? Take a look, Ed "Redwood" Ring CEO EcoWorld Incorporated www.ecoworld.com If you wish to be removed from EcoWorld's mailing lists simply reply to this e-mail with the word, un-subscribe , in the subject line. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Oct 22 08:42:29 2000 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 10:42:29 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Test - no reply Message-ID: ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From bear at sonic.net Sun Oct 22 10:51:56 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 10:51:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Nathan Saper wrote: >> Nowhere in this business model is there any shred of >> entitlement or obligation. The insured is not entitled >> to coverage. The insurer is not obligated to write a >> policy on someone who has risk that makes the policy >> too cheap for the insurer to make money. > >In theory, fine. However, we live in a society where people are not >automatically given healthcare. If you don't have insurance, and you >don't have the money to pay for treatment, you're shit out of luck. >If the insurance companies deny treatment to people who MAY develop a >disease later, they are setting these people up to die without >healthcare. That's true, but it is irrelevant. As long as insurance companies and hospitals are privately owned, putting a requirement like this one on them constitutes theft of their resources. If you want to have them engaging in charity, set up a charity and solicit money instead. ie, you can ask but you don't have permission to steal. >Maybe I view things differently than you do. I just think that in a >country as rich as ours, we can afford to keep our population healthy. Everybody dies of something. Some are likely to die sooner than others, due to accidents of birth or extreme lifestyle. That is reality. I persist in thinking that "freedom" means everybody gets to decide how to use his/her own talents and property and how to deal with his/her own deficiencies, genetic or otherwise. I also persist in believing that, as a philosophical point, nobody who is *compelled* to do something can be considered a good person for doing it. I also feel that history has shown us that those who receive charity compelled from others have never appreciated the work and sacrifice that it represents. Compelled charity is morally and emotionally meaningless. Bear From jya at pipeline.com Sun Oct 22 08:26:56 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 11:26:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Declan My Lai Message-ID: <200010221539.LAA32690@maynard.mail.mindspring.net> Declan, Pounding out the hundreds of deathless reports you've done did you dream it would be the Gore My Lai that got you onto the NYTimes opinion page today? From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 22 02:50:59 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 12:50:59 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, petro wrote: > There are some hardcore anarchists who claim that their >vision of anarchy doesn't, but if (as an example) Alice cannot direct >the life of bob *at* *all*, how can she prevent Bob from >*voluntarily* joining (or in fact creating) a hierarchical >relationship? In no way. But in this case Bob does not abide by the same idealism that bounds Alice and the point is moot. Anarchy brought to its logical conclusion for all practical purposes precludes hierarchical relationships between those who share the ideology. Really, from what little I know about anarchy, I believe its rhetoric revolves less around the concept of individual rights than it does around the one of equality. In that context your above emphasis on volition seems to lose some of its relevance. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 22 02:58:31 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 12:58:31 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, petro wrote: > How are you going to make sure that people do the things that >make them healthy? Why should you? Whoever said effectiveness is a requirement? > Believe it or not, not all people in this world are >hardworking. Not all people in this world are willing to put forth >much effort at all, especially for long term issues like health. I certainly am not. I worry about sickness when it comes, and if it's bad enough, suicide is painless. > So how are you going to make sure that people do the things >they need to do to keep them healthy? Pass laws? Usually people's decisions on matters related to health have little to do with the expected cost of getting ill. Not one of the people I know exercise to save money. They exercise to have fun, feel good, look good and to not get sick, which is generally unpleasant regardless of cost. Generally I know few people which are not in exceptional health. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From rah at shipwright.com Sun Oct 22 10:15:30 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 13:15:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: H-WEB: G Radnitzky on Hayek & libertarianism In-Reply-To: <39F2E701.7A9230A6@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> References: Message-ID: At 9:09 AM -0400 on 10/22/00, Harmon Seaver wrote: > I'm having a hard time imagining how this would work with real > property. I'm living in my house, all paid for, you can't kick me out and >move > in since the law says it's my house. Take away the state, and I (and perhaps > my family and friends, neighbors, tribe, whatever) simply kill you when you > try to move in, which is clearly not workable in many situations, i.e., you > have more men with guns. Again, go ahead and read somebody like David Friedman, or Vinge's Ungoverned, for more on this idea from a pre- financial crypto / ubiquitous internet point of view. As for the internet/crypto version, and strictly in, um, Hettingspeak, :-), I would say that we are currently transfer-pricing the market for force, and that the internet, bearer financial cryptography, etc., might allow us to have more efficient markets for same. Transfer-pricing is a result of transaction cost, and all that, and monopoly is the ultimate in transfer pricing. > I can easily understand how crypto can protect intellectual property, > ecash, etc. but not real estate, cars, whatever, without ultimately a >state or > some sort of arbitrating body (men with guns) to enforce title. Crypto -- > digisigs -- to prove title, of course, but title has never meant much to men > with guns who wanted it. Amen. The trick is to hire men with guns directly without going through the middleman -- without having to confiscate taxes and "switch" those assets up and down a large centralized hierarchy -- which is, of course, a Hard Problem. I think private electronic supervision of property (as opposed to government surveillance of citizens) is one step toward solving this problem, as is "Mesh and Net" -style automated rent-a-weaponry. It might be a bit of mystification of Moore's Law to say it'll happen before diminishing returns on same, but I think we may get there yet. On a moderately tangential note, remember that financial assets are the largest and most valuable asset category, and that financial assets are, as the Brits say, "dematerialised" already. More over, Paul Harrison talks about dematerialized bearer title to assets in transit and in storage, bills of lading, warehouse receipts (E-gold is, for the most part, a warehouse receipt, after all), things like that, though we talk about it in terms of a synthetic numeraire for the most part. So, if all these goodies work, we're looking at a world where title to assets are in bearer form and instantly tradeable, for cash. We should also have efficient markets for force to watch and protect those assets, if the above "private panopticon with teeth" actually happens. More important, we're looking at a world where we can do transactions small enough for even the most transfer-priced of "public" goods (selling passage on a road, or through a gas pipeline or water or electricity system, much less through a data network, where it will probably happen first), we don't need the confiscation of people's assets in order to pay for those goods. People (as in individuals, not "The People" in some Feudal/Russeau/Marx sense) will *own* the "commons", and *other* people will pay others to them to use whatever piece of that "commons" they need, as they're using it. Just like with bearer transactions, where you don't *need* the nation-state to enforce the non-repudiation of their transactions, you won't *need* the nation-state to provide much else except force, and, in the process, you get smaller force monopolies. Another angle on Negroponte's "10,000 nation-states in 100 years" idea, certainly. > And don't take this to mean I'm arguing against abolition of the state, > I'm just looking for an explanation on how this would work. Hope that helps. It doesn't mean that any of the above *will* happen, more that it's a way it *could* happen, certainly, and, frankly, if it *does* happen, it will only happen if, if course, it's significantly *cheaper* than the way we do things now. Progress, as always, is more stuff for less money, right? Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From GaryBogart at cableinet.co.uk Sun Oct 22 06:33:04 2000 From: GaryBogart at cableinet.co.uk (Gary Bogart) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 14:33:04 +0100 Subject: CDR: message Message-ID: :: Anon post to news.cableinet.co.uk.alt.test -------------------------------------------------------------- * help * -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 11260 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gbroiles at netbox.com Sun Oct 22 14:44:39 2000 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 14:44:39 -0700 Subject: CDR: Risk and insurance In-Reply-To: References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20001022124522.023276e0@mail.speakeasy.org> At 12:33 AM 10/22/00 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: >On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Nathan Saper wrote: > > >> So these people are entitled to something for nothing? > >> (or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)? > > > >That's the whole idea of insurance, isn't it? > > > >You're trolling, aren't you? > >Insurance is a good idea for the insured because it takes >money to make money. On the topic of risk and insurance, and apropos discussion of reading lists, cypherpunks may find the book "Against the gods: The remarkable story of risk" by Peter Bernstein of interest. -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com From honig at sprynet.com Sun Oct 22 12:15:02 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 15:15:02 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001021232248.01794980@shell11.ba.best.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001022120215.007afd20@pop.sprynet.com> At 02:30 AM 10/22/00 -0400, James A.. Donald wrote: > -- >I think the Russian solution is the best. > >They dump high level liquid waste in the deep cold salty waters of the >arctic ocean. This water slowly settles, and it will be a thousand or so >years before it rises again. In the course of that thousand years, all the >non actinide radioactives will have decayed, and the most of the actinide >radioactives will have settled into the mud, and what remains is diluted >into an enormous volume of water. Are you talking about waste or the kursk? :-( I've heard they drop spent reactor cores too. From honig at sprynet.com Sun Oct 22 12:16:18 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 15:16:18 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: <003301c03c08$9901a280$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001022120339.007bfc60@pop.sprynet.com> At 05:15 AM 10/22/00 -0400, jim bell wrote: > >A far better solution, I'd think, would be to drill a 5-mile deep hole >(perhaps on the ocean floor, for good measure) and fill the bottom couple of >miles with waste, and the rest with concrete. > >Jim Bell Isolation isn't enough; you have to worry about leaching. Ergo interest in vitrification From no at aol.com Sun Oct 22 09:10:46 2000 From: no at aol.com (no at aol.com) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 16:10:46 GMT Subject: CDR: Here is the queen for you, only for MIKE, not looking crazy.html (1/1) Message-ID: <39f31090.0@139.142.84.10> begin 644 crazy.html M/"%$3T-465!%($A434P at 4%5"3$E#("(M+R]7,T,O+T141"!(5$U,(#0N,"!4 M6=O;&0O8W)A>GDN8V9M M/VED/3$W-S at W-2`M+3X-"CQ(5$U,/CQ(14%$/CQ4251,13Y#2!';VQD M(%!R:79A=&4 at 4')O9W)A;3PO5$E43$4^#0H\345402!H='1P+65Q=6EV/4-O M;G1E;G0M5'EP92!C;VYT96YT/2)T97AT+VAT;6P[(&-H87)S970]=VEN9&]W MGEG;VQD(&YA;64]075T:&]R M/@T*/$U%5$$@8V]N=&5N=#TB35-(5$U,(#4N-3`N-#$S-"XV,#`B(&YA;64] M1T5.15)!5$]2/CPO2$5!1#X-"CQ"3T19/@T*/$-%3E1%4CX\0CX\1D].5"!F M86-E/4%R:6%L+$AE;'9E=&EC83X\1D].5"!C;VQOF4]*S(^4U!%0TE!3"`-"D]04$]25%5.2519($9/4B!93U4 at +2`D-3`@ M04Y$(%E/55(@24X\+T9/3E0^/"]&3TY4/CPO1D].5#X\+T(^(`T*/$A2('=I M9'1H/2(Q,#`E(CX-"CQ"4CX\24U'('-R8STB8W)A>GDM1&%T96EE;B]C6)A;BYG:68B(&)O2!A2!';VQD)FYBF4]*S(^0VQI8VL@;VX@#0IE86-H(&]F('1H92!P6]U2`D-2!T;R!E86-H(&)E M;&]W.CPO1D].5#X\+T9/3E0^/"]&3TY4/CPO0CX\+T-%3E1%4CX-"CQ0/CQ" M4CX\0CX\1D].5"!F86-E/2)!6=O;&0O4&%Y,2YC9FT_ M:60],3F4]*S(^,RX at 4&%Y("0U('1O/$$@#0IH6=O;&0O4&%Y-"YC9FT_:60],32YC;VTO8W)A>GEG;VQD+U!A>34N8V9M/VED/3$W-S at W M-29A;7`[4&%Y-3TQ-38R.#`B/B`-"C$U-C(X,#PO03Y?7U]?7U]?7U]?7U]? M7U]?7U]?7SPO1D].5#X\+T9/3E0^/"]&3TY4/CPO0CX@/$)2/CQ"/CQ&3TY4 M(`T*9F%C93TB07)I86P at 3F%RF4]*S(^-BX at 4&%Y("0U('1O/$$@#0IH2YC;VTO8W)A>GEG;VQD+U!A>3F4]*S(^."X at 4&%Y("0Q-2`-"G1O/$$@#0IH2!' M;VQD.CPO1D].5#X\+T),3T-+455/5$4^#0H\0DQ/0TM154]413X\1D].5"!F M86-E/4%R:6%L+$AE;'9E=&EC83Y4:&5R92!A2!';VQD(B`-"B`@ M+2!Y;W4@=VEL;"!B92!P;&%C960@:6YT;R!P;W-I=&EO;B!N=6UB97(@-RP@ M=VET:"`C-B!T:')U(",R(&UO=FEN9R!U<"!O;F4@#0H@('!O6=O;&0O4&%Y,2YC9FT_ M:60],37=H97)E(&EN(`T*("!T:&4@=V]R;&0@:6X at 86YY(&-O=6YT6]U(&YE960 at 86X@92UG;VQD(&%C8V]U;G0L(&-L:6-K(&AE6]U2!';VQD(%!A9V4B('-O('EO=2`- M"B`@=VEL;"!H879E(&$@9&]C=6UE;G0@=&\@6]U6=O;&0O6]U(&%L6]U(&%C=&EV871I;F<@>6]Uobvious that the mere fact that the NSA suggest a certain algorithm (say >Rijndael) for a national standard and recomends its use internationally >imply that they have a pretty darn good idea (if not actual technology) >on how to break it efficiently? I just don't see why else they would >advocate its use. The NSA exists in part as a national authority on computer and communications security, and therefore should recommended an algorithm for use as a means to protect its citizens and countries national security. By recommending its use "internationally", I assume that the fine print is that they recommend it for use by US nationals in an international environment, not to international users (a subtle but useful distinction, the NSA is a domestic agency, I don't think it attempts to speak for the world yet). Ideally, the NSA should be able to break this algorithm when no one else in the world can, as this would give it an advantage in its signals intelligence activities - supposedly these are activites used "in the national interest", for the benefit of citizens and society as a whole - commerce, etc. Well, society is no utopia and there are many other interests (relationships with policy in washington, etc), but you know what I mean. >After all isn't the fact that NSA could break DES since the 70's the reason >for the 'success' of DES? Complicated answer. By 'approving' DES, then medium security grade products procured by the government would presumably have had to have DES and ANSI conformance before they would be bought by the government. This at least then made DES a commercial choice for government use and something that industry had experience with because there is virtually no other choice, and thence also for financial institutions, and thence eventually more and more into the public arena as the need for information security products became more prevalent. Also, there were few alternatives to DES, and in fact during the 1970s and 1980s, significant academic activity was put into fiestal network research, S-box research, cipher modes of operation, cryptoanalytic attacks (differential cryptanalysis, for instance). From this, new symmetric algorithms, sometimes based on similar design principles to DES, or new principles investigated as an alternative, were created. You must remember that a large proportion of DES use in commercial products is outside the scope of technological paranoics (that is not entirely fair, there are many objective technologists) and in the scope of money men and corporate standards conformance and spread sheets - these people are more than happy with a NSA/NIST approved solution. What you see in the AES candidates are the fruits of decades of research and activity partially thanks to DES, but also a result of the age we live in (in the same way that "people knew the internet was coming, but they didn't know that it would be the internet", you could say that symmetric, assymetric ciphers were going to happen, they just happened to be DES and RSA to start with, the ball has to start somewhere, and it turned out that DES was a pretty good choice thanks to the skill of Coppersmith and associates at IBM). Whether the NSA could break DES is up for debate, and may be known in the future perhaps - what is known now is that the advance of technology has made DES an uneconomically feasible solution for medium to high grade risk situations. As a result of the AES selection, you must also remember that now there are 5 highly valued symmetric algorithms created by world class cryptographers, and 1 exceptional algorithm. While the AES may be recommended, they are now alternatives and additional algorithms that could be used for those desiring increased security (i.e. as wrappers for the AES, or alternatives to the AES, or whatever). What you will see in the coming years is a focus on analysing the strengths and weaknesses of the AES - hopefully this will only further prove that it is a good candidate. Also, in the same way that 3DES and Ritter style DES networks were seen as advantageous modes of operation, perhaps additional AES modes of operation will add a further layer of security that may allay some concerns about whether the NSA can break the algorithm. That's my rough answer, no doubt a few people could iron out my bumps. Best regards, Matthew Gream Year 2000 Grand Tour Madrid, Spain (enraptured by Goya and his use of diagonal line) _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. From juicy at melontraffickers.com Sun Oct 22 17:09:15 2000 From: juicy at melontraffickers.com (A. Melon) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 17:09:15 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? (insurance) Message-ID: <<< No Message Collected >>> From SSDFLKSDPF at zeus.microeuropa.pt Sun Oct 22 17:27:52 2000 From: SSDFLKSDPF at zeus.microeuropa.pt (SSDFLKSDPF at zeus.microeuropa.pt) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 17:27:52 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <746.353790.834622@mail.mindspring.com> GET YOUR OWN 100 MEG WEBSITE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH TODAY! STOP PAYING $19.95 or more TODAY for your web site, WHEN YOU CAN GET ONE FOR ONLY $11.95 PER MONTH! DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A WEBSITE? ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TRANSFER THE DOMAIN TO OUR SERVERS AND UPLOAD YOUR DATA AND YOU ARE READY TO GO! YOUR NEW WEB SPACE CAN BE CREATED INSTANTLY WITH JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL TO OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE DESIGN OF YOUR SITE AS MUCH AS YOU WANT with no extra charge! UNLIMITED TRAFFIC -- no extra charge! FRONT PAGE EXTENSIONS are FULLY SUPPORTED. A SET UP FEE OF $40.00 APPLIES for FIRST TIME CUSTOMERS. ALL FEES PREPAID IN ADVANCE FOR THE YEAR PLUS A $40.00 SET UP CHARGE. FOR DETAILS CALL 1 888 248 0765 if you are outside the USA, please fax 240 337 8325 Webhosting International From natedog at well.com Sun Oct 22 19:09:21 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 19:09:21 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from bear@sonic.net on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 10:51:56AM -0700 References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> Message-ID: <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 3036 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jamesd at echeque.com Sun Oct 22 20:12:45 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 20:12:45 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 07:09 PM 10/22/2000 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: > I think the government has a right to do whatever it needs to do to > maintain the health and well-being of its population. That is the > purpose of the government. Then the government should be raiding your home to check on your consumption of chocolate, and spying on your messages to detect if you are secretly arranging for the purchase or sale of forbidden substances. > That is one way of defining freedom. I view freedom as the right of people to live happy, productive lives. As contented sheep. > Fine, so the insurance companies won't be considered "good." Who > cares? The point is, people who need medical care would be getting > it. We cannot provide all the medical care for everyone who might want it. The question then is who decides who lives and who dies? If the fortunate are somehow compelled to pay for the less fortunate, that apparatus of compulsion is going to decide whether you deserve your open heart surgery or other expensive treatment. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG GUBFD2UeVQbTblq9mDTKK3VT3Zb2kipPNZRPhilI 4bXMDF9BDJEBTLlQ+J9MAOym72PaOobmLE+ThdUZU From bill.stewart at pobox.com Sun Oct 22 20:50:57 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 20:50:57 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001022205057.00a1da10@idiom.com> At 08:12 PM 10/22/00 -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > -- >At 07:09 PM 10/22/2000 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: > > I think the government has a right to do whatever it needs to do to > > maintain the health and well-being of its population. That is the > > purpose of the government. > >Then the government should be raiding your home to check on your >consumption of chocolate, and spying on your messages to detect if you are >secretly arranging for the purchase or sale of forbidden substances. Congratulations! You've finally discovered the Secret Ulterior Motive behind the Cypherpunks Grocery-Store-Frequent-Shopper Card Exchange Ritual, which is to discourage them from knowing who's *really* buying all that chocolate and beer. (We used to do it relatively often; now it's more of an occasional thing, especially since the Albertsons/AmericanStores merger means that Lucky no longer uses cards, but Safeway still does. Safeway started doing "Thank you for shopping at Safeway, Mr. Cypherpunki" a while back, and they're currently usually mispronouncing the person whose dietary habits I'm also disparaging. :-) Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From natedog at well.com Sun Oct 22 21:07:31 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 21:07:31 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com>; from jamesd@echeque.com on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 08:12:45PM -0700 References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <20001022210731.B2615@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2901 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 22 21:20:09 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 21:20:09 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Risk and insurance In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20001022124522.023276e0@mail.speakeasy.org> References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <5.0.0.25.2.20001022124522.023276e0@mail.speakeasy.org> Message-ID: At 2:44 PM -0700 10/22/00, Greg Broiles wrote: >At 12:33 AM 10/22/00 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: >>On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Nathan Saper wrote: >> >>>> So these people are entitled to something for nothing? >>>> (or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)? >>> >>>That's the whole idea of insurance, isn't it? >>> >> >>You're trolling, aren't you? >> >>Insurance is a good idea for the insured because it takes >>money to make money. > >On the topic of risk and insurance, and apropos discussion of >reading lists, cypherpunks may find the book "Against the gods: The >remarkable story of risk" by Peter Bernstein of interest. I support this recommendation. A readable book for the layman (most of us), on a par with past classics like "Lying with Statistics" and "Lady Luck." Available in a trade paperback for about $15 or so. The book I recommended a week or two ago, Judea Pearl's "Causality," is much more advanced in its mathematics. (But the math is important if one is actually trying to construct the causality diagrams Pearl is talking about.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 22 21:50:56 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 21:50:56 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Privacy Debate at the Commonwealth Club in SF (fwd) In-Reply-To: <9552af5b54f9bf62c6018f7590d74596@dizum.com> References: <9552af5b54f9bf62c6018f7590d74596@dizum.com> Message-ID: At 6:20 AM +0200 10/23/00, Nomen Nescio wrote: >[Fwd] > >For anyone in the SF Bay Area who is even mildly interested in the privacy >discussion, I highly recommend that you attend a public affairs-style >discussion on Internet privacy to be held at The Commonwealth Club on >Thursday, October 26, from 5:15 -- 7:15pm. > >The discussion will be moderated by John Markoff of The New York Times. >Panelists include: Bob Lewin, President and CEO of TRUSTe; Marc Rotenberg, >Exec. Dir. of EPIC; FTC Commissioner Mozelle Thompson; and Chris Kelly, >Chief Privacy Officer for Excite at Home. > >Together, the panel represents the five points that are driving the privacy >discussion: the media, self-regulation, government, industry, and advocacy. >Let's see if they can agree on anything. Funny how these same names keep cropping up in all sorts of talks and road shows. As for the "five points," I certainly don't see any representation from the broad contingent (users of PGP, Napster users, punks, students, anarchists,...) who basically say "Fuck it, I'll do what I want!" In any case, having attended several of the various crypto, Clipper, privacy, and net regulation panel discussions over the years, I know them to be a waste of time. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From larcher at about.com Sun Oct 22 22:28:48 2000 From: larcher at about.com (Luiz Archer) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 22:28:48 -0700 Subject: CDR: My E-GOLD Account is EXPLODING WITH CASH!! Yours CAN too! One-time $5 will GET YOU STARTED! Message-ID: <0G2V005KABC177@mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net>

MY E-GOLD ACCOUNT IS GROWING BY THE MINUTE!!

"FAST GOLD" 4 ALL
is Paying FAST!!! - Don't MISS This!

Tired of NOT MAKING MONEY on gold programs??
So are we!!

We finally found a program that is making our e-gold account EXPLODE!!
This is SO HOT!!

A ONE -TIME Low investment of $25 will get you started.
But...
For a VERY LIMITED time you can SAVE $20.00!!

THAT'S RIGHT, folks!!
You CAN JOIN US today FOR ONE-TIME $5.00!!

Don't Miss This!!
ONE TIME $5.00 CAN GET YOU STARTED - TODAY!!

You'll start receiving money in your e-gold account within MINUTES after you join us!!
You'll BE AMAZED!!
The MONEY keeps on coming!!!

INTERESTED??
Send a blank email to: FastCash4u at aol.com,
Subject Line: Fast Gold 4 ALL


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GET PAID TO SEND 390,000 SPAM FREE EMAILS 2 times a day!!!
Email your Ad to over 390,000 interested people 2 times a day,
spam-free with just one e-mail!! $10 a Referral 5-levels deep!!!
THIS MONEY MAKING SAFELIST WILL SHOCK YOU!

Master Blaster Safe List Pays You to JOIN http://www.f4ebony.com/safemb/FastCash4u.htm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This Email Message has been sent in Full Compliance of the Law and is not SPAM! Further transmissions to you by the sender of this Email may be stopped at no cost to You by sending a reply to this Email Address with the word "remove" in the subject line.
Please TO BE REMOVED Reply to: cashopportunities at hotmail.com
Thanks

 From natedog at well.com Sun Oct 22 22:31:36 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 22:31:36 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <026f01c03cad$fa516160$0100a8c0@matthew>; from commerce@home.com on Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 12:59:08AM -0400 References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001022210731.B2615@well.com> <026f01c03cad$fa516160$0100a8c0@matthew> Message-ID: <20001022223135.A3024@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1871 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Sun Oct 22 22:35:40 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 22:35:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001023011058.A23226@die.com>; from die@die.com on Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 01:10:58AM -0400 References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> Message-ID: <20001022223540.B3024@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2897 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 22 22:41:06 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 22:41:06 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> Message-ID: At 1:10 AM -0400 10/23/00, Dave Emery wrote: > > > Nobody dies without healthcare under our present system. Actually, many people do. What planet have you been living on? (I'm not arguing for "universal health care," or "socialized medicine," or Nathan Saper's "soak the giant corporations" scheme. I'm just disputing the point above, which is patently false.) Many do not have insurance, and do not receive care for various ailments until it's too late. Many do not have insurance and do not have annual physicals, or mammograms, or prostate exams, or pap smears, or any of the hundreds of such things. Some hospitals offers limited free services, some free clinics exist. But clearly many Americans are not receiving such care. And of course these "free services" are often a huge distance from _good_ healthcare. So much for "nobody dies without healthcare." > Sadly, at least for those of extreme libertarian bent that make >up the choir on this list, our society has chosen to pass laws that >require hospitals and to some degree other medical treatment facilities >to treat patients who cannot pay - mostly at their expense. ANYONE >with a life threatening or even just very serious medical condition can >walk into most any emergency room and get full medical treatment by law >even if there is no insurance and no money to pay. This is not true. Again, I have to question your connection to current events. Surely you have heard of folks being turned away at emergency room entrances and shipped off to the "public hospital"? There are many cases in many cities where people died in ambulances that had been turned away at the _nearest_ (or _better_) hospital and sent off on a 30-minute ambulance or taxicab ride to the "public" hospital in town. Again, I am not advocating that medicine be socialized or that hospitals be forced to treat those they choose not to treat. (Were it my hospital, I would not think highly of Men with Guns telling me I must give $10,000 worth of ER services to someone who won't pay me back and who has no insurance.) > > Of course, in the libertarian ideal universe someone not >completely indigent who had a genetic condition that made them high risk >might still be unable to get any kind of catastropic medical insurance >and might be wiped out of virtually all assets by a serious illness, >even one completely unrelated in any way to his genetic predisposition. > Yes...so? --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From petro at bounty.org Sun Oct 22 22:59:51 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 22:59:51 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> Message-ID: >> That's true, but it is irrelevant. As long as insurance companies >> and hospitals are privately owned, putting a requirement like this >> one on them constitutes theft of their resources. If you want to >> have them engaging in charity, set up a charity and solicit money >> instead. ie, you can ask but you don't have permission to steal. >> > >I think the government has a right to do whatever it needs to do to maintain You don't think very well then. >the health and well-being of its population. That is the purpose of >the government. Not in the United States of America it isn't. >> Everybody dies of something. Some are likely to die sooner than >> others, due to accidents of birth or extreme lifestyle. That is >> reality. I persist in thinking that "freedom" means everybody >> gets to decide how to use his/her own talents and property and how >> to deal with his/her own deficiencies, genetic or otherwise. > >That is one way of defining freedom. I view freedom as the right of >people to live happy, productive lives. A discriminatory policy such >as this one would infringe on that freedom. You have been completely brainwashed. You have a no idea what a "right" is. > >> >> I also persist in believing that, as a philosophical point, nobody >> who is *compelled* to do something can be considered a good person >> for doing it. I also feel that history has shown us that those who >> receive charity compelled from others have never appreciated the >> work and sacrifice that it represents. Compelled charity is >> morally and emotionally meaningless. > >Fine, so the insurance companies won't be considered "good." Who >cares? The point is, people who need medical care would be getting it. The point is that you are *forcing* me to part with my productive labor to support someone else. This makes me unhappy. Under your beliefs, you can't do this, as I have a right to be happy. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From petro at bounty.org Sun Oct 22 23:08:48 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 23:08:48 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> Message-ID: > > Of course, in the libertarian ideal universe someone not >completely indigent who had a genetic condition that made them high risk >might still be unable to get any kind of catastropic medical insurance >and might be wiped out of virtually all assets by a serious illness, >even one completely unrelated in any way to his genetic predisposition. Nonsense. If Insurance companies were completely (or even greatly) deregulated, they could offer *seriously* ala-carte policies. They could easily write a policy that simply excluded--say breast cancer--from the policy of a woman who has a strong genetic predisposition to it, and *greatly reduce* the overall cost of her insurance for *all* other illnesses. Leaving her free to either (a) find a high risk policy *just* for that, or spend the money on getting a radical mastectomy to eliminate the problem. Or any of a dozen other issues. That's what Nathan "I'm a thoughtless whiner" and Sambo A. S. seem to miss, is that increased costs for a few mean *savings* for everyone else. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From jimdbell at home.com Sun Oct 22 23:22:28 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 23:22:28 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com><20001022190921.B2270@well.com> Message-ID: <007b01c03cb9$a10bdf20$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: petro > The point is that you are *forcing* me to part with my > productive labor to support someone else. > > This makes me unhappy. Under your beliefs, you can't do this, > as I have a right to be happy. If this were an episode on the original tv series "Star Trek," this would be the point where SaperRobot notices the contradiction, freezes up, and Kirk and Spock push him into the Transporter and beam him out to infinity. Roll credits. Commercial. Etc. Jim Bell (for a big laugh, try: www.slaphillary.com ) From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 22 23:31:42 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 23:31:42 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022223540.B3024@well.com> References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> <20001022223540.B3024@well.com> Message-ID: At 10:35 PM -0700 10/22/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > >This is true in theory. However, from what I have read, it appears >that the care given to these people is far from the quality of care >given to those who can pay. Also, many diseases require very >expensive treatments, and I do not believe the hospitals are required >to pay for these. As I wrote in my previous article, IT IS NOT TRUE that private hospitals must accept all those who appear at their doorstep. This would be a "taking," and is not constitutionally permissable. It may be that _some_ private hospitals take in _some_ emergency room cases, but they are not "required" to. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From natedog at well.com Sun Oct 22 23:36:23 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 23:36:23 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from petro@bounty.org on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 10:59:51PM -0700 References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> Message-ID: <20001022233623.A3516@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2840 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Sun Oct 22 23:47:33 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 23:47:33 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from petro@bounty.org on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 11:08:48PM -0700 References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> Message-ID: <20001022234733.B3516@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2467 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 23 00:13:59 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 00:13:59 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022233623.A3516@well.com> References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <20001022233623.A3516@well.com> Message-ID: At 11:36 PM -0700 10/22/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 10:59:51PM -0700, petro wrote: > >> >the health and well-being of its population. That is the purpose of >> >the government. >> >> Not in the United States of America it isn't. > > >> > >Then what is the purpose of our government? Not mob rule, not democracy. Go back and read the books you apparently skipped over in the 10th or 11th grade. The Constitution exists largely to circumscribe the powers of government and to head off precisely the kind of "50% plus 1" mobocracy you have consistently been advocating. In case this just doesn't make sense to you, read the Bill of Rights several times and reflect on what the various elements actually mean. Think about this when next you advocate using the democratic vote to seize private property by majoritarian rule. Frankly, I think I've read enough of you, Nathan Saper. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From commerce at home.com Sun Oct 22 21:59:08 2000 From: commerce at home.com (Me) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 00:59:08 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001022210731.B2615@well.com> Message-ID: <026f01c03cad$fa516160$0100a8c0@matthew> From: "Nathan Saper" > However, I think most people would be willing to vote for a bill that > would guarantee insurance for people with genetic abnormalities, even My own aside, how many votes are required before my right to security in person and property should be violated? 50% + 1? > > We cannot provide all the medical care for everyone who might want it. The > > question then is who decides who lives and who dies? > We could easily provide healthcare for every American citizen. Just > raise taxes a bit, and cut out most of our military spending. Why only American citizens? There are entire countries whose populations are worse off than the most poorly ensured USAian. Doesn't your heart bleed for them? Regardless, don't go to the trouble of raising taxes and cutting military spending - it isn't needed. I can personally provide a some level of healthcare for every American citizen. I'm assuming quality of care isn't a consideration? From die at die.com Sun Oct 22 22:10:58 2000 From: die at die.com (Dave Emery) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 01:10:58 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022085359.B614@well.com>; from Nathan Saper on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 08:53:59AM -0700 References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> Message-ID: <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 08:53:59AM -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: > In theory, fine. However, we live in a society where people are not > automatically given healthcare. If you don't have insurance, and you > don't have the money to pay for treatment, you're shit out of luck. > If the insurance companies deny treatment to people who MAY develop a > disease later, they are setting these people up to die without > healthcare. > Nobody dies without healthcare under our present system. Sadly, at least for those of extreme libertarian bent that make up the choir on this list, our society has chosen to pass laws that require hospitals and to some degree other medical treatment facilities to treat patients who cannot pay - mostly at their expense. ANYONE with a life threatening or even just very serious medical condition can walk into most any emergency room and get full medical treatment by law even if there is no insurance and no money to pay. For the most part this treatment is funded by hospitals by hidden (and sometimes partly overt) charges built into their fee structure - in effect we already are paying a tax in our present private insurance systems and Medicare/Medicaid (and especially for private cash paying patients who pay full rate and don't get the deep discounts that Medicare and HMOs negotiate from providers) that provides this last gasp safety net coverage to the indigent. Of course, in the libertarian ideal universe someone not completely indigent who had a genetic condition that made them high risk might still be unable to get any kind of catastropic medical insurance and might be wiped out of virtually all assets by a serious illness, even one completely unrelated in any way to his genetic predisposition. > Maybe I view things differently than you do. I just think that in a > country as rich as ours, we can afford to keep our population healthy. > -- Dave Emery N1PRE, die at die.com DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass. PGP fingerprint = 2047/4D7B08D1 DE 6E E1 CC 1F 1D 96 E2 5D 27 BD B0 24 88 C3 18 From die at die.com Mon Oct 23 00:25:50 2000 From: die at die.com (Dave Emery) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 03:25:50 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from Tim May on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 10:41:06PM -0700 References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> Message-ID: <20001023032550.A23733@die.com> On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 10:41:06PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > At 1:10 AM -0400 10/23/00, Dave Emery wrote: > > > > > > Nobody dies without healthcare under our present system. > > Actually, many people do. What planet have you been living on? > > > Many do not have insurance, and do not receive care for various > ailments until it's too late. Many do not have insurance and do not > have annual physicals, or mammograms, or prostate exams, or pap > smears, or any of the hundreds of such things. > > Some hospitals offers limited free services, some free clinics exist. > But clearly many Americans are not receiving such care. And of course > these "free services" are often a huge distance from _good_ > healthcare. So much for "nobody dies without healthcare." I said healthcare. Not good healthcare, or even adaquate healthcare (though in fact substantially better than almost anyone got perhaps 50 years ago or most get in the third world today). With certain minor circumstantial exceptions people need not die without benefit of significant health care resources in this society. True they are unlikely to have received much proactive care (often a major problem for the system since treating them after the fact is greatly more expensive), and true that many poor and especially working poor uninsured people deny themselves treatment that might save their lives until its too late because they don't want to or even understand the need of allocating their very scarce resources to seeking medical treatment until they are very sick. But there is a minimal safety net in place, and while many do die from receiving inadaquate and too late treatment not very many are pushed out the door to die in the streets. But this raises the obvious question of what should society do, if indeed society as a whole 'should' do anything - I assert that no economic or political system is ever going to supply ideal "_good_" healthcare to those at the margins, so all of this is a question of how much freedom we are willing to give up and how great a burden we are willing to assume to push closer to adaquate health care for everybody. Certainly a classical libertarian society might supply a whole lot less health care of last resort to those too lazy, too stupid, too weak, too crippled by circumstance to take prudent steps to provide it for themselves. Some would even argue that this is appropriate. > > This is not true. Again, I have to question your connection to > current events. Surely you have heard of folks being turned away at > emergency room entrances and shipped off to the "public hospital"? > There are many cases in many cities where people died in ambulances > that had been turned away at the _nearest_ (or _better_) hospital and > sent off on a 30-minute ambulance or taxicab ride to the "public" > hospital in town. > I live in a very liberal state, where there are laws against this practice. I have heard it is more common elsewhere. > Again, I am not advocating that medicine be socialized or that > hospitals be forced to treat those they choose not to treat. > > (Were it my hospital, I would not think highly of Men with Guns > telling me I must give $10,000 worth of ER services to someone who > won't pay me back and who has no insurance.) > OK, so you would turn them out to die in the streets. Or at least want to believe that if you didn't it had been a voluntary act of charity rather than something forced on you as a social obligation. > > > > Of course, in the libertarian ideal universe someone not > >completely indigent who had a genetic condition that made them high risk > >might still be unable to get any kind of catastropic medical insurance > >and might be wiped out of virtually all assets by a serious illness, > >even one completely unrelated in any way to his genetic predisposition. > > > > > Yes...so? > Whether or not you view this as bad depends on your very basic views about the social compact and fairness - is it just bad luck and tough sushi for the poor unfortunate or should we as a society offer at least some safe harbor for those who drew the short straws ? And if we do offer such, how much of our collective wealth should we spend on it - .005%, 0.5% 1 %, 5%, 35% ? And how should we decide this ? And what happens in a world in which the mechanisms by which we express such sentiments erode as states wither... -- Dave Emery N1PRE, die at die.com DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass. PGP fingerprint = 2047/4D7B08D1 DE 6E E1 CC 1F 1D 96 E2 5D 27 BD B0 24 88 C3 18 From confirm-do-97876-cypherpunks=algebra.com at egroups.com Sun Oct 22 23:00:01 2000 From: confirm-do-97876-cypherpunks=algebra.com at egroups.com (eGroups) Date: 23 Oct 2000 06:00:01 -0000 Subject: CDR: Confirm your new account with eGroups Message-ID: <972280801.17993@egroups.com> Hello, Thank you for your interest in eGroups, a free email group service. To activate your account with eGroups, we need to verify that your email address is correct. To protect your email address, your account will not be activated until you follow one of the confirmation steps below: 1. PLEASE REPLY to this email using the reply function in your email program. Your correct email address will be entered automatically. OR 2. VISIT http://www.egroups.com/confirm.cgi?email=cypherpunks%40algebra%2Ecom&id=97876 and follow the easy instructions. To access the eGroups web site, please visit http://www.egroups.com If you did not request, or do not want, a eGroups account, please accept our apologies and ignore this message. Regards, eGroups Customer Support IMPORTANT NOTE: If you believe your email address has been registered with eGroups without your consent, please forward a copy of this message to abuse at egroups.com From nobody at dizum.com Sun Oct 22 21:20:05 2000 From: nobody at dizum.com (Nomen Nescio) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 06:20:05 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: Privacy Debate at the Commonwealth Club in SF (fwd) Message-ID: <9552af5b54f9bf62c6018f7590d74596@dizum.com> [Fwd] For anyone in the SF Bay Area who is even mildly interested in the privacy discussion, I highly recommend that you attend a public affairs-style discussion on Internet privacy to be held at The Commonwealth Club on Thursday, October 26, from 5:15 -- 7:15pm. The discussion will be moderated by John Markoff of The New York Times. Panelists include: Bob Lewin, President and CEO of TRUSTe; Marc Rotenberg, Exec. Dir. of EPIC; FTC Commissioner Mozelle Thompson; and Chris Kelly, Chief Privacy Officer for Excite at Home. Together, the panel represents the five points that are driving the privacy discussion: the media, self-regulation, government, industry, and advocacy. Let's see if they can agree on anything. Go to The Commonwealth Club site (www.commonwealthclub.org) for ticket information... See you there. From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 23 05:14:38 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:14:38 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Dave Emery wrote: > Of course, in the libertarian ideal universe someone not > completely indigent who had a genetic condition that made them high risk > might still be unable to get any kind of catastropic medical insurance > and might be wiped out of virtually all assets by a serious illness, > even one completely unrelated in any way to his genetic predisposition. 'virtualy all assets'? Try 'their life'. Typical libertarian bullshit, 'my money, over your life'. Libertarianism is about money and personal image based on that. It has no ethics and no companssion, it is 'eat or be eaten' - more 'freedom for me but not for thee'. Might and right measured by the all mighty god money dollar. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Mon Oct 23 05:22:40 2000 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:22:40 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <026f01c03cad$fa516160$0100a8c0@matthew> Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Me wrote: > My own aside, how many votes are required before my right to > security in person and property should be violated? 50% + 1? None, all it takes is probably cause (per the 4th). You have a right to privacy until your actions infract anothers rights. > Why only American citizens? There are entire countries whose > populations are worse off than the most poorly ensured USAian. > Doesn't your heart bleed for them? I empathise, but it is their country after all, This is mine. > Regardless, don't go to the trouble of raising taxes and cutting > military spending - it isn't needed. I can personally provide a > some level of healthcare for every American citizen. I'm > assuming quality of care isn't a consideration? 'some level' is not 'adequate level'. Right now every American already has 'some level'. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 23 05:26:42 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:26:42 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Risk and insurance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > I support this recommendation. A readable book for the layman (most > of us), on a par with past classics like "Lying with Statistics" and > "Lady Luck." Available in a trade paperback for about $15 or so. > > The book I recommended a week or two ago, Judea Pearl's "Causality," > is much more advanced in its mathematics. (But the math is important > if one is actually trying to construct the causality diagrams Pearl > is talking about.) What I find funny about Tim's reading recomendation is that the vast majority don't back his anarchic claims and he has been unable over the years to use these self-same references to demonstrate his point. Hayek is a perfect point. Tim, draw us a causality diagram that demonstrates crypto-anarcy actualy works... ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Mon Oct 23 05:28:25 2000 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:28:25 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022223135.A3024@well.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Nathan Saper wrote: > Yes, it does. And I think we as Americans, as well as our government, > should do everything in our power to help. However, the first concern > of any government is its own population. Change that to 'some government' and you're on the mark. Not all governments, even in principle, are interested in the individual well being (feudalism, libertarianism, and anarchy being three of them). ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 23 05:36:45 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:36:45 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, petro wrote: > > Of course, in the libertarian ideal universe someone not > >completely indigent who had a genetic condition that made them high risk > >might still be unable to get any kind of catastropic medical insurance > >and might be wiped out of virtually all assets by a serious illness, > >even one completely unrelated in any way to his genetic predisposition. > > Nonsense. It's not? Demonstrate where Libertarian or Anarchic ideals take care of this person even in principle? Explain how they're not turned away and left to die? And don't invoke the old 'somebody will take care of them' bullshit. Because it is clear today that many people don't get taken care of at all. Explain why moving to such a system will empower the mild of human kindness in these sad souls? > If Insurance companies were completely (or even greatly) > deregulated, they could offer *seriously* ala-carte policies. They could, but they're not stupid. In a un-regulated market the insurance companies will focus on profits alone and that unfortuantely (and much to the chagrin of the libertarian/anarchy crowd) means that there will actualy be LESS insurance available and it will exist at a higher cost. > They could easily write a policy that simply excluded--say breast > cancer--from the policy of a woman who has a strong genetic > predisposition to it, and *greatly reduce* the overall cost of her > insurance for *all* other illnesses. This can be done today legaly, the question is whether the newer more accurate technologies should be used. NOT wether such policies can be written. > Leaving her free to either (a) find a high risk policy *just* > for that, or spend the money on getting a radical mastectomy to > eliminate the problem. Or any of a dozen other issues. Leving her free to die, that ungrateful irresponsible bitch (for getting cancer that is). > That's what Nathan "I'm a thoughtless whiner" and Sambo A. S. > seem to miss, is that increased costs for a few mean *savings* for > everyone else. No, it means savings for the insurance company. It is clear that history shows that unregulated markets do not in general move to a minimum in costs and servicability. Hell, look at the aircraft industry for contrary evidence. And what you seem to miss is that your 'free market' theory is screwed for the simple reason that real life doesn't conform to free market theory without some major modifications (that happen to require at least light regulation). ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 23 05:39:36 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:39:36 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > As I wrote in my previous article, IT IS NOT TRUE that private > hospitals must accept all those who appear at their doorstep. This > would be a "taking," and is not constitutionally permissable. > > It may be that _some_ private hospitals take in _some_ emergency room > cases, but they are not "required" to. Same old spin doctor bullshit Timmy. Change the subject from 'hospital' to ' private hospital' and hope nobody notices. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 23 05:41:52 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:41:52 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <007b01c03cb9$a10bdf20$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: > From: petro > > The point is that you are *forcing* me to part with my > > productive labor to support someone else. > > > > This makes me unhappy. Under your beliefs, you can't do this, > > as I have a right to be happy. No dipshit, you have a right to TRY TO BE HAPPY. Typical anarcho/libertarian bullshit misprepresentation. And another prime example of 'freedom for me, but not for thee'. This is a perfect example of the failure of libertarian/anarcho thought, it is completely focused on the 'me'. When will you learn that free market economics is about the market and its stability and not the individuals attainment of nirvana. I'll answer my own question, never. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 23 05:46:09 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:46:09 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > At 11:36 PM -0700 on 10/22/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > > Then what is the purpose of our government? > > To confiscate taxes by force, of course. ;-). > > So long, Nathan, and thanks for all the red herring... Speaking of red herring (will you go now Robert? I didn't think so): No, until the SC found the personal income tax legal less than 100 years ago this was not a valid statement. And it isn't valid today. It is an expression of the typical anarchist/libertarian bullshit whereby they want to reap the benefits of a large and dyamic society and its economic market without having to actualy participate in it. It is EXACTLY the sort of viewpoints that Hayek warns against with respect to losses of individual freedom. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From rah at shipwright.com Mon Oct 23 05:02:43 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 08:02:43 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022233623.A3516@well.com> References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <20001022233623.A3516@well.com> Message-ID: At 11:36 PM -0700 on 10/22/00, Nathan Saper wrote: > Then what is the purpose of our government? To confiscate taxes by force, of course. ;-). So long, Nathan, and thanks for all the red herring... Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From rah at shipwright.com Mon Oct 23 05:12:25 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 08:12:25 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Risk and insurance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 2:50 PM +0300 on 10/23/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > recant "Recount", right? Asking Tim, or anyone else here for that matter, me included, to recant something, is, of course, an invitation to verbal violence. :-). Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 23 08:42:24 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 08:42:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Risk and insurance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 2:50 PM +0300 10/23/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > >>The book I recommended a week or two ago, Judea Pearl's "Causality," >>is much more advanced in its mathematics. (But the math is important >>if one is actually trying to construct the causality diagrams Pearl >>is talking about.) > >Would it be too much to ask you to recant the main point made? It sounds >pretty interesting... I'll recount it, but not recant it. Think of spacetime diagrams, a la the lightcones of Minkowski diagrams. Events A and B precede Event C. The same kind of diagrams obviously apply in ordinary events, without regard to the speed of light. A directed acyclig graph (DAG) of various events, some in the "causal chain" leading to some Event C, some outside the causal chain. Pearl addresses Bayesian networks in terms of DAGs and provides tools for analyzing when events actually "cause" other events. Of great interest for deciding when, for example, some drug test produces meaningful results, when some legal proof of causality is being challenged, etc. Pearl doesn't produce some magical formula for separating causes from non-causes, just a bunch of theorems and corollaries which may be useful in policy analysis, experiment design, and just thinking about the world. I think of it as a kind of "network analysis," akin to tools for circuit analysis (like Kirchoff's Law, for example). More discussion is of course available at Amazon or in search engines. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 23 09:04:09 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:04:09 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001023032550.A23733@die.com> References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> <20001023032550.A23733@die.com> Message-ID: At 3:25 AM -0400 10/23/00, Dave Emery wrote: >On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 10:41:06PM -0700, Tim May wrote: >> At 1:10 AM -0400 10/23/00, Dave Emery wrote: >> > >> > >> > Nobody dies without healthcare under our present system. >> >> Actually, many people do. What planet have you been living on? >> >> >> Many do not have insurance, and do not receive care for various >> ailments until it's too late. Many do not have insurance and do not >> have annual physicals, or mammograms, or prostate exams, or pap >> smears, or any of the hundreds of such things. >> >> Some hospitals offers limited free services, some free clinics exist. >> But clearly many Americans are not receiving such care. And of course >> these "free services" are often a huge distance from _good_ >> healthcare. So much for "nobody dies without healthcare." > > I said healthcare. Not good healthcare, or even adaquate >healthcare (though in fact substantially better than almost anyone got >perhaps 50 years ago or most get in the third world today). With >certain minor circumstantial exceptions people need not die without >benefit of significant health care resources in this society. You didn't say "need not die," you said they _don't_ die. As for all people having healthcare, I personally know people who _don't_ have healthcare. This refutes your point by example. > > >> (Were it my hospital, I would not think highly of Men with Guns >> telling me I must give $10,000 worth of ER services to someone who > > won't pay me back and who has no insurance.) > > > OK, so you would turn them out to die in the streets. Or at least >want to believe that if you didn't it had been a voluntary act of charity >rather than something forced on you as a social obligation. Yes, it is my "right" to turn them away. Just as it is my "right" to not feed those on the verge of starvation, not house those sleeping in the snow and rain, and not pay for lifesaving operations. Earth to Dave: people die every day because they cannot afford a transplant they need (and which medical science has figured out how to do). What is at all surprising about this? > > Whether or not you view this as bad depends on your very basic >views about the social compact and fairness - is it just bad luck and >tough sushi for the poor unfortunate or should we as a society offer >at least some safe harbor for those who drew the short straws ? And >if we do offer such, how much of our collective wealth should we spend >on it - .005%, 0.5% 1 %, 5%, 35% ? And how should we decide this ? >And what happens in a world in which the mechanisms by which we express >such sentiments erode as states wither... What happens? Evolution procedes apace. Those who figure out how to work hard, save from their paychecks, and prepare for the future will do better than those who don't. Sounds fair to me. More than just fair, it's going to happen. It already is. I see a widening gap between the Prepared and the Unprepared. And this is a Good Thing. Crypto anarchy will sharply accelerate this trend. And this is an Even Better Thing. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From christof at ece.WPI.EDU Mon Oct 23 06:31:12 2000 From: christof at ece.WPI.EDU (Christof Paar) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:31:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WPI Cryptoseminar, Wed, Oct 25 Message-ID: WPI Cryptography Seminar Implementing New Public-Key Schemes Prof. Berk Sunar ECE Department, WPI Wednesday, October 25 4:30 pm, AK 218 (refreshments at 4:15 pm) ABSTRACT: In this talk "new" public-key schemes are briefly introduced, namely Hyperelliptic Curve Cryptosystems, NTRU, and XTR. Implementation aspects of related algorithms are analyzed and complexity measures of the algorithms used in the implementation of these new PK-schemes are discussed. The talk will conclude with the presentation of future research ideas and implementation results of current practices. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DIRECTIONS: The WPI Cryptoseminar is being held in the Atwater Kent building on the WPI campus. The Atwater Kent building is at the intersection of the extension of West Street (labeled "Private Way") and Salisbury Street. Directions to the campus can be found at http://www.wpi.edu/About/Visitors/directions.html ATTENDANCE: The seminar is open to everyone and free of charge. Simply send me a brief email if you plan to attend. TALKS IN THE FALL 2000 SEMESTER: 9/27 Christof Paar et al., WPI Elliptic Curve Cryptography on Smart Cards without Coprocessors 10/11 Prof. William Martin, WPI Introduction to resilient and correlation-immune boolean functions 10/25 Prof. Berk Sunar, WPI Implementing New Public-Key Schemes 11/9 Susan Landau, Sun Microsystems Laboratories Have the Crypto Wars Been Won? 11/22 Seth Hardy, WPI Elliptic Curve Point Counting with the CM Method in Java 12/6 Scott Guthery, Mobile-Mind Who are You? Novel Means of Human Authentication TBA Adam Woodbury, WPI Public-key Cryptography in Constraint Environments (MS Thesis presentation) See http://www.ece.WPI.EDU/Research/crypt/seminar/index.html for talk abstracts. MAILING LIST: If you want to be added to the mailing list and receive talk announcements together with abstracts, please send me a short email. Likewise, if you want to be removed from the list, just send me a short email. Regards, Christof Paar ! WORKSHOP ON CRYPTOGRAPHIC HARDWARE AND EMBEDDED SYSTEMS (CHES 2001) ! ! Paris, France, May 13-16, 2001 ! ! www.chesworkshop.org ! *********************************************************************** Christof Paar, Assistant Professor Cryptography and Information Security (CRIS) Group ECE Dept., WPI, 100 Institute Rd., Worcester, MA 01609, USA fon: (508) 831 5061 email: christof at ece.wpi.edu fax: (508) 831 5491 www: http://ee.wpi.edu/People/faculty/cxp.html *********************************************************************** For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "dcsb-request at reservoir.com" with one line of text: "help". --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From apoio at giganetstore.com Mon Oct 23 01:51:53 2000 From: apoio at giganetstore.com (apoio at giganetstore.com) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:51:53 +0100 Subject: CDR: 7 dias, 7 ofertas HP Message-ID: <0c7f953510817a0WWWNETSTORE@wwwnetstore> 7 dias, 7 ofertas HP A giganetstore.com tem um produto HP diferente em cada dia com uma OFERTA muito especial Dia 23/10 Jornada 545 Oferta de 1 Bolsa Dia 24/10 Câmara Digital Photosmart C618 Oferta Papel Fotográfico+Photo SuiteII Dia 25/10 Câmara Digital Photosmart C912 Oferta Papel Fotográfico+Photo Suite Dia 26/10 CD Writer 8230e Oferta de 1 Porta CD´s Dia 27/10 Impressora 990Cxi Oferta Papel BrightWhite+Papel IronOn+Tshirt HP Dia 28/10 Officejet G55 Oferta Papel BrightWhite+CD Corel Dia 29/10 Scanjet 5370C Oferta Papel BrightWhite+CD Image Campanha válida até dia 29/10/2000 História da HP: Para retirar o seu email desta mailing list deverá entrar no nosso site http://www.giganetstore.com , ir à edição do seu registo e retirar a opção de receber informação acerca das nossas promoções e novos serviços. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 5698 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rah at shipwright.com Mon Oct 23 06:54:55 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:54:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: WPI Cryptoseminar, Wed, Oct 25 Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From mclow at owl.csusm.edu Mon Oct 23 09:56:21 2000 From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:56:21 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001023032550.A23733@die.com> References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> <20001023032550.A23733@die.com> Message-ID: At 3:25 AM -0400 10/23/00, Dave Emery wrote: > Whether or not you view this as bad depends on your very basic >views about the social compact and fairness - is it just bad luck and >tough sushi for the poor unfortunate or should we as a society offer >at least some safe harbor for those who drew the short straws ? My opinion on this is: No, we should not, as a society, offer any "safe harbor to those that draw the short straws". If you (as an individual) feel that these people should be helped, then you should help them. You are of course welcome to join with other like minded people and form a "Indigent Aid Society" to help them in larger numbers. Myself, I feel no compulsion to help "people". My help is directed at individuals, whom I have personal knowledge of. I don't contract out my charity to some faceless bureaucrat. >And if we do offer such, how much of our collective wealth should we spend >on it - .005%, 0.5% 1 %, 5%, 35% ? > And how should we decide this ? That one's easy. As much as each person wants to spend, individually decided. If you want to spend 90% of your wealth on this, that your business. >And what happens in a world in which the mechanisms by which we express >such sentiments erode as states wither... Before the state got into the "do-gooding" business, there were many more private charities. Most of them couldn't compete with the state-sponsored ones, for obvious reasons. -- -- Marshall "The era of big government is over." Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996 Marshall Clow MusicMatch From bear at sonic.net Mon Oct 23 10:53:11 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:53:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022223135.A3024@well.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Nathan Saper wrote: >Yes, it does. And I think we as Americans, as well as our government, >should do everything in our power to help. However, the first concern >of any government is its own population. No, the first concern of any and every government is its own survival. This is true whether or not it is achieved by allowing individual citizens to survive. Caucescu (sp?) and Duvalier the Elder were willing to execute half their respective populations to stay in power, remember? Extreme examples, but.... *sigh.* This is probably the last time I'm going to respond in this thread -- its clear that our opinions are too different, and held too firmly on both sides, for a useful discourse to emerge. However, I'm going to just mention something here. It is not terribly unreasonable to expect health care to be paid for by someone other than the recipient of said care, even in a free society. But in a free society, you don't do it by forcing hospitals to treat people they aren't getting paid to treat, and you don't do it by forcing insurers to insure any group of people at rates that won't cover the cost of treatment for that group. Those methods are an "unconstitutional taking" -- which is what you call theft when the government does it. In a free society, if you intend to have the government pay for health care, it pretty much has to be paying for *everybody's* health care, and it has to be doing it out of taxes rather than by forcing hospitals or insurance companies to engage in an unprofitable business practices. Picking on hospitals or insurance companies is robbing the few to pay for the needs of the many; the many may like it, but it's a very fundamental infringement. Taxation, on the other hand, is robbing the many to pay for the needs of the many -- inefficient and compulsory, but at least it operates without picking on particular people. Now, I've used the words, "free society" above. However, every coin paid in taxes is an erosion of freedom, and we have to recognize that. When taxation reaches 90%, the people are serfs and nothing more, even if technically free. However, I'd support government health care, even with the attendent taxation, if it were required to prevent a scheme like the one you propose. If it could be shown that it resulted in the whole population being substantially healthier for longer, at a lower cost, I'd support it anyway -- to paraphrase Mao, I don't care whether the cat is white or black, as long as it catches mice (not that I think it would, by the way). But, we have to recognize that even if it did result in better cheaper health care in the short run, it would mean changes detrimental to health care in the long run. For the last 20 years or so, theUS with its private health care system has also been the country that has fueled almost all research into new drugs and treatment techniques. Basically, everybody who's developed anything has done so because they have their eye on the lucrative American market for health care. Sure, you have to get past the FDA -- but it still happens. If we shifted to government-operated health care, the US market wouldn't be a moneymaker anymore, and you'd see a lot less private R&D. Finally, as much as we like talking about what *should* happen or *should not* happen, reality is about what *will* happen, which has only an incidental relationship to either. What *will* happen, nobody knows for sure. If Crypto Anarchy becomes the norm, then government involvement in medicine, like government involvement in almost everything, is on the way out and we are left to be prepared and deal with it. The alternative is pretty horrible to contemplate, because the only way to *prevent* Crypto Anarchy from becoming the norm is probably with an invasive and totalitarian worldwide police state. And of course, that could also happen. Bear From mmotyka at lsil.com Mon Oct 23 11:24:32 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (mmotyka at lsil.com) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:24:32 -0700 Subject: CDR: Any Comments? Message-ID: <39F48260.7CC4CF18@lsil.com> This sounds a little far-fetched to me. At the very least there have to be lots of items missed every day... http://cryptome.org/dark-spy.htm Mike From honig at sprynet.com Mon Oct 23 09:17:33 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 12:17:33 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: <39F42B42.3483F98A@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001023091210.007c6b50@pop.sprynet.com> At 08:14 AM 10/23/00 -0400, Ken Brown wrote: >(3) The small amount of stuff that really *is* dangerous is dangerous >enough that it would be too risky putting it in a rocket. What is the >success rate of unmanned launches? About 19/20? Those fsckers in NASA have lobbed a few kilos of very hot (literally) isotopes as thermoelectric power sources; they even played gravity-ball with one of them (Cassini IIRC) using Earth as the reflector. Wasn't that special of them? "We're from the government, and, well, you can't stop us, so bugger off." From matthewgream at hotmail.com Mon Oct 23 05:24:36 2000 From: matthewgream at hotmail.com (matthew gream) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 12:24:36 GMT Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: Nathan Saper wrote: >>and Sambo A. S. seem to miss, is that increased costs for a few mean >>*savings* for everyone else. > >The costs for the few would rise much more than the savings for the >many. Therefore, the number of people with genetic abnormalities who >could not afford insurance would rise, while the number of genetically >normal people who could afford insurance would not be altered >drastically. Isn't this one of the key points of the whole issue: where does the balance lie ? One the one hand, individuals should have the freedom to live as they please, so long as it does not affect (too much) the way other people choose to live. If you desire to live an unhealthy lifestyle, that is fine, so long as you live with the consequences - i.e. higher insurance premiums. I choose to live a healthy lifestyle, therefore I would expect to pay less in insurance premiums. On the other hand, I do not mind cross subsidising the rest of society to a certain extent, in order to stop everything falling apart, and to generally know that there is some safety for "my way of life", and to enjoy some common things for everyone. Certainly, I find it irritating that I should pay excessive costs to support a health care system that largely caters to supporting the many people that have chosen to drink or live their way to an unhealthy later life. Though, I am not sure I want to deny these people treatment because of the social carnage and damage to humanity it will cause, and perhaps twenty years ago, people were less enlightened about the possibility of making these choices. So perhaps the thing is - how do you list all the pros and cons and costs and everything else, then find an acceptable balance that is liberal "user pays", but has a safety net (i.e. you will not suffer, but you probably won't have a high quality life). Best regards, Matthew. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. From sunder at sunder.net Mon Oct 23 09:47:42 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 12:47:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: give me References: <8B6AE559367AD311B7090090273CEFAA8CFF5E@h203-176-54-164.ip.iphil.net> Message-ID: <39F46BAE.F902EE25@sunder.net> "Bernie B. Terrado" wrote: > > please give me an encrypted value > > I need one. I'll use it as a key. If you're stupid enough to use a string that someone gives you as a key, you deserve what you get. Here, use this one: HACKMEPLEASE -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From shatter at twistedinternet.com Mon Oct 23 12:52:21 2000 From: shatter at twistedinternet.com (Shattered Net) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 12:52:21 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: data In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20001023125201.021fef28@mail.twistedinternet.com> Missed something, what about Nevada? At 04:30 AM 9/14/2000 +0000, Mike Brown wrote: >How about Nevada? >_________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at >http://profiles.msn.com. > From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Mon Oct 23 05:12:50 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:12:50 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste References: Message-ID: <39F42B42.3483F98A@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Petro wrote: > I've never really understood why we don't just put this stuff >in some *really* tough polycarbonate containers aboard "mature" >technology rockets and launch it into the biggest heat source in >the solar system. Because (1) most of it (by bulk) isn't really that dangerous. The environmental damage done by the rockets would far, far, exceed any possible advantage in getting it off the planet. It is mostly consumables used in power-plants, labs, factories & so on. I contributed a little myself a few weeks ago - some rubber gloves & paper towels that had some really rather harmless scintillant spilled on it. All sealed in special bags & sent off to be shut away somewhere for a few years. Along with large amounts of lab coats, plastic bags, lunch boxes, used injection needles... for stuff which was less radioactive than the groundwater in Cornwall. (2) most of it (by mass) is bloody heavy. Reinforced concrete, big metal containers, submarines, the actual foundations of power stations. If anyone was into putting that much mass into space we'd be on our way to Mars by now. (3) The small amount of stuff that really *is* dangerous is dangerous enough that it would be too risky putting it in a rocket. What is the success rate of unmanned launches? About 19/20? Me, I'd favour subduction zones for the dangerous stuff. Even deep sedimentary rocks get eaten by bacteria sooner or later, so make sure anything really hot is on the going-down side of the escalator. But most of it just isn't nasty enough to be worth the bother. I guess most people don't have a sense of scale. If it says "nuclear waste" they dredge up half-remembered sf stories & think of two-headed lizards & glowing blue wastelands... From rsw at MIT.EDU Mon Oct 23 10:36:56 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:36:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022190921.B2270@well.com>; from natedog@well.com on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 07:09:21PM -0700 References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> Message-ID: <20001023133656.B10018@positron.mit.edu> Nathan Saper wrote: > I think the government has a right to do whatever it needs to do to maintain > the health and well-being of its population. That is the purpose of > the government. This is, predictably, the difference between your position and those of the people with whom you have been arguing. As far as I'm concerned (and I know many agree with me), government should not have anything to do with the provision of health care for its people; it simply exists to make sure the rules of the private market are followed, contracts are honored, a military exists to protect the people (and their ability to do business, etc) from foreign powers, etc. Compelling private business to be charitable doesn't fall within what I consider to be acceptable powers of the government. > That is one way of defining freedom. I view freedom as the right of > people to live happy, productive lives. A discriminatory policy such > as this one would infringe on that freedom. This is not discrimination; it is exactly the opposite. The insurance company has a standard of risk they are willing to take when they enter into a contract with a policy holder. This standard is applied in the same way to everyone. I know I've given this example in the past, but here it is again: if you are a smoker and have three times the chance of developing heart disease, the insurance company will not insure you. If I have a genetic defect that causes me to have three times the chance of developing heart disease, they won't insure me. In both cases, the reason that they don't offer a policy is because we have elevated risks of heart disease; they don't care that you smoke and I have a genetic disorder--this fact makes no difference to the success or failure of their business. The insurance company plays a game of probable ends, not of means; the cause of my heart's likelihood of failure is of no consequence to how much risk the insurance company is taking on me, so it shouldn't be a factor in deciding whether or not to insure me. In fact, if it becomes a factor, the insurance company is no longer able to effectively control their risk, and thus they are not longer effective in their real purpose--making money. If it sounds heartless to say that they're making money, then you just have your head buried in the sand. Everyone's out to make money. If you expect anything else, you will be sorely disappointed, and if you try to use force to make companies compassionate, you are perpetrating a greater injustice than you could ever hope to prevent. My biggest problem with your argument is that nowhere in it is there any need for the group bearing the burden to be the insurance companies. That is, you say that 'people should have health care,' and you say that 'insurance companies have a lot of money.' You conclude that insurance companies should provide for the care of those who are at high risks for certain types of illnesses or who can't afford a policy that will cover them at their risk level. It would be just as easy to say 'lawyers have a lot of money,' combine this with the first statement above, and conclude that lawyers should pay for the health care of people who are at high risk, although I don't support this claim either. In fact, what you're arguing for can be generalized with no modification of your argument to 'those who are successful should be made responsible for the care of those who are not.' I wholeheartedly reject this claim and all like it; people have a right to decide how they spend their money no matter how much they have managed to acquire. -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 2824 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rsw at MIT.EDU Mon Oct 23 10:49:40 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:49:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from ravage@ssz.com on Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 07:41:52AM -0500 References: <007b01c03cb9$a10bdf20$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <20001023134940.C10018@positron.mit.edu> Jim Choate wrote: > No dipshit, you have a right to TRY TO BE HAPPY. Wrong, Jim. Properly, it is 'you don't have a right to take positive action which makes me unhappy.' Thus, petro is correct; the government is taking positive action ("You! You're too successful! Pay for his health care.") that makes me unhappy. The other way, of course you can argue that the person not getting health care is unhappy, but that is through a lack of action on my part (== 'negative action') and is not covered under the above. I'll be quite entertained to see you try to make a case for a right to happiness through both positive and negative action. -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 1004 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kelsey.j at ix.netcom.com Mon Oct 23 11:31:08 2000 From: kelsey.j at ix.netcom.com (John Kelsey) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 14:31:08 -0400 Subject: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: References: <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <4.1.20001023133229.009a04b0@pop.ix.netcom.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 8328 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Mon Oct 23 04:50:26 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 14:50:26 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Risk and insurance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: >The book I recommended a week or two ago, Judea Pearl's "Causality," >is much more advanced in its mathematics. (But the math is important >if one is actually trying to construct the causality diagrams Pearl >is talking about.) Would it be too much to ask you to recant the main point made? It sounds pretty interesting... Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 23 13:07:50 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 15:07:50 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Nuclear waste In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001023091210.007c6b50@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: > At 08:14 AM 10/23/00 -0400, Ken Brown wrote: > >(3) The small amount of stuff that really *is* dangerous is dangerous > >enough that it would be too risky putting it in a rocket. What is the > >success rate of unmanned launches? About 19/20? > > Those fsckers in NASA have lobbed a few kilos of very hot (literally) > isotopes as thermoelectric power sources; they even played gravity-ball > with one of them (Cassini IIRC) using Earth as the reflector. Wasn't > that special of them? > > "We're from the government, and, well, you can't stop us, so bugger off." Oh, bullshit. The containment vessel for Cassini was more than sufficient had their been a cato. As to Ken's question, the success is approaching 80-90% AFTER the initial burn-in of the design. That usualy takes 2-5 flights depending on the pedigree of the particular bird you're talking about. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From sunder at sunder.net Mon Oct 23 12:22:01 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 15:22:01 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <3.0.6.32.20001016075651.007e5520@pop.sprynet.com> <20001016180439.G1718@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001017090044.00809300@pop.sprynet.com> <20001017175043.E14253@well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001018091027.008166d0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001018174827.B16756@well.com> <20001018212713.B18002@well.com> <20001018220759.A18195@well.com> Message-ID: <39F48FD9.421ECF2C@sunder.net> Nathan Saper wrote: > (A whole bunch of socialist crap) Nathan: look at it this way: it's evolution in action. Except these days the ability to earn money is one of the requirements of staying alive for longer periods of time. If Bob can't afford daily bread, than Bob has far more serious concerns than being able to pay for healthcare. Yes, it's too bad, and yes he may die, but that's what evolution is about. Money has aritificially become a requirement of guaranteeing survival. Sorry, no, I won't pay for Bob's bread nor his healthcare (unless I personally chose to do so.) Force me (and everyone else who is able to earn money) to do so at the point of a gun in the form of taxes and it becomes a far greater crime. Yes, there are charities who may help Bob, and donations to these are and should remain purely voluntary. We're not commiepunks, and we're not socialistpunks. We're cypherpunks. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Mon Oct 23 05:31:46 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 15:31:46 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Risk and insurance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >> recant > >"Recount", right? So right it hurts. GOD! >Asking Tim, or anyone else here for that matter, me included, to recant >something, is, of course, an invitation to verbal violence. :-). You can say that again. For less, even, as I well know. Every once in a while I just hate not being a native. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Mon Oct 23 05:57:03 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 15:57:03 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Jim Choate wrote: >In a un-regulated market the insurance companies will focus on profits >alone and that unfortuantely (and much to the chagrin of the >libertarian/anarchy crowd) means that there will actualy be LESS insurance >available and it will exist at a higher cost. That could only happen, without regulation, if monopoly powers were abused pretty badly. I don't think this one has a pulse. >Hell, look at the aircraft industry for contrary evidence. I think that is the worst possible example of a poorly working 'free' market. It's heavily driven by military funding and *strictly* regulated even when not. Generally the only intrinsically bad side I can think of is the high barrier of entry caused by massive R&D and materials investment and low volume deliveries. >And what you seem to miss is that your 'free market' theory is screwed for >the simple reason that real life doesn't conform to free market theory >without some major modifications (that happen to require at least light >regulation). Hmm. This is rather pointless when the opposition does not care about casual death/suffering/whatever. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From declan at well.com Mon Oct 23 13:30:22 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 16:30:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Zero-Knowledge -- Open Source Initiative = Responsible Privacy Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001023163013.01963940@mail.well.com> >From: kcory at redwhistle.com >X-Lotus-FromDomain: WEBER >To: declan at well.com >Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:22:26 -0700 >Subject: Zero-Knowledge -- Open Source Initiative = Responsible Privacy > > > >Hi Declan, > >I wanted to let you know that Zero-Knowledge Systems today announced that >it has >open-sourced its Freedom Linux client, the first step in its initiative to >disseminate privacy protocols and encourage pervasive privacy standards by >open >sourcing its entire Freedom network and software. > >Through its open source initiative, Zero-Knowledge is pioneering a movement >toward responsible privacy by inviting software developers and >cryptographers to >test and improve upon the Freedom code. Only by opening the math and >cryptography behind privacy tools to industry examination can >Zero-Knowledge and >other privacy companies truly prove the efficacy of their privacy solutions. >I've included the announcement below for your information. > >If you would like further information or would like to speak with a >Zero-Knowledge executive about the open source initiative, please call me at >(503) 332-0204. > >Best regards, >Kristy Cory >for Zero-Knowledge >kcory at redwhistle.com >503-332-0204 > > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > > ZERO-KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS RELEASES SOURCE CODE OF ITS NEW LINUX FREEDOM 2.0 > CLIENT; ANNOUNCES OPEN SOURCING OF FREEDOM PRIVACY SUITE > > --Source release demonstrates Zero-Knowledge Systems >' commitment to creating > open > standards and ubiquitous privacy technologies that benefit all Internet > users-- > > Montreal ? October 23, 2000 ? Zero-Knowledge® Systems Inc., the leading > developer of privacy solutions for consumers and companies, today > released the > source code of its next-generation Linux Freedom client. The company also > announced its commitment to open sourcing the entire award-winning Freedom® > privacy suite. > > This open source initiative demonstrates the company's commitment to > creating > open standards and ubiquitous privacy technologies that benefit all Internet > users. Using Freedom code developed by Zero-Knowledge, developers, > cryptographers and standards bodies will be able to build new open protocols > and technologies for protecting privacy. > > As the recognized privacy leader, Zero-Knowledge is fulfilling its > commitment > to deploy consumer products that are open and transparent in order to allow > anyone to verify how they perform. The release of source code provides the > software development and security communities the necessary proof that > Freedom > alone empowers consumers to trust only themselves with their data and > privacy. > > "Responsible privacy begins with privacy providers being open and > transparent > with their users. Zero-Knowledge is demonstrating its leadership by > releasing > the source code to Freedom and facilitating the creation of necessary > privacy > standards," said Mike Shaver, Chief Software Officer of Zero-Knowledge > Systems. > "We encourage other privacy companies to do the same." > > "Open source desktop users have a need for powerful privacy tools which > facilitate their use of network services. At Helix Code we are building a > world-class open source desktop environment that gives the user very > intimate > access to web services, and so privacy is especially important to our > users," > said Nat Friedman, Chief Executive Officer of Helix Code, the leading open > source desktop software and services company. "Now that Zero-Knowledge > System's > Freedom privacy suite will be open sourced and available for Linux, this > important need is finally being addressed. This is a big win for the open > source community." > > Freedom 2.0 for Windows (95/98, 2000, NT, Me) and Linux will be > available for > Internet users before Christmas 2000. The 2.0 version for Windows will > include > new features and performance enhancements requested by the Freedom user > community. A Macintosh version of Freedom is expected in 2001. Among other > accolades, Freedom was named 2000's "Most Promising Internet Newcomer" by PC > World and called "the Rolls-Royce of privacy software" by Yahoo! > Internet Life. > > The entire source code to the Linux version of the Freedom privacy suite, > released under the Mozilla Public License 1.1 and other Open Source? > licenses, > is available for download at http://opensource.zeroknowledge.com. > Zero-Knowledge will next release the source code to the Windows client > and to > the server software that powers the Freedom Network, a globally-distributed > network of servers operated by service providers and independent > operators that > route Freedom traffic. > > Freedom is the first commercial product that empowers Internet users to > fully > control their identities and personal information on the Internet without > having to trust their data to an ISP, privacy company or other third party. > Freedom transparently encrypts and reroutes Internet traffic, preventing the > accidental release of information that could compromise personal privacy > online. Users create multiple digital identities (pseudonyms, or "nyms") > that > they can associate with their Internet activities. > > About Zero-Knowledge Systems, Inc. > > Founded in 1997, Zero-Knowledge Systems (http://www.zeroknowledge.com) is > laying the digital infrastructure for privacy-enabled communications and > commerce between individuals, companies, governments and organizations. > Based > on its privacy infrastructure for the Internet, Zero-Knowledge creates > easy-to-use software and services that enable privacy through advanced > mathematics, cryptography and source code: the only reliable way to ensure > Internet privacy and security. > > In December 1999, Zero-Knowledge launched Freedom®, the only privacy system > that empowers Internet users to surf the Web, send email, chat and post to > newsgroups in total privacy without having to trust third parties with their > personal information. Freedom can be downloaded at http://www.freedom.net. > Journalists can visit the Zero-Knowledge pressroom at > http://www.zeroknowledge.com/media. > > (Freedom® and Zero-Knowledge® are registered trademarks of Zero-Knowledge > Systems, Inc. All other names are the property of their respective owners.) > > For more information > > Dov Smith > Director of Public Relations > 514.350.7553 > dov at zeroknowledge.com > > Kristy Cory > Red Whistle Communications > 503.552.3749 > kcory at redwhistle.com > > > > > From sacraver at ivy.ee.princeton.edu Mon Oct 23 09:34:21 2000 From: sacraver at ivy.ee.princeton.edu (Scott Craver) Date: 23 Oct 2000 16:34:21 GMT Subject: SDMI announcement Message-ID: Hello, If you read Salon or Slashdot, you may have already read of this. Our research group, comprising of crypto-folk from Princeton U, Rice U and Xerox have issued a press release and faq (http://www.cs.princeton.edu/sip/sdmi/) detailing comprehensive success in the 1st round of the SDMI challenge. Basically, we got positive results from the oracles for all four watermarking technologies. These oracles would yield a positive result if music submitted to it was modified enough that a watermark could not be detected, and if quality was good enough relative to 64Kbps MP3 compression. We dont know how they measured quality. But we passed all four oracles, and repeated our results as much as we could before the challenge deadline was over. A full technical writeup is coming soon, as we plan on sharing all our findings with the cryptographic and steganographic community. This is part of the reason we are not participating in the second phase: we are not interested in the prize money, and at this point the challenge is more like a contest, providing no real value to us from a scientific perspective. Further participation may also restrict our ability to publish our results---to be eligible for the prize, it appears one must sign a form transferring intellectual property rights to the analysis. Finally, if you are also a research team who has received positive results from SDMI oracles, wed love to hear about it. We are making a list of links to others who have received positive results in the first round. Keep in mind that if youre going after the money, you might become ineligible if you publicize these details. -Scott Heres the official statement, as found at the URL: --------------------------------------------------------------- Statement Regarding the SDMI Challenge The Secure Digital Music Initiative (SDMI) is developing a comprehensive system to prevent music piracy. Central to this system is watermarking, in which an inaudible message is hidden in music to provide copyright information to devices like MP3 players and recorders. Devices may then refuse to make copies of pieces of music, depending on the meaning of the watermark contained therein. In September 2000, SDMI issued a public challenge to help them choose among four proposed watermarking technologies. During the three-week challenge, researchers could download samples of watermarked music, and were invited to attempt to remove the secret copyright watermarks. During the challenge period, our team of researchers, from Princeton University, Rice University, and Xerox, successfully defeated all four of the watermarking challenges, by rendering the watermarks undetectable without significantly degrading the audio quality of the samples. Our success on these challenges was confirmed by SDMIs email server. We are currently preparing a technical report describing our findings regarding the four watermarking challenges, and the two other miscellaneous challenges, in more detail. The technical report will be available some time in November. This statement, a Frequently Asked Questions document, the full technical report (when it is ready), and other related information can be found on the Web at http://www.cs.princeton.edu/sip/sdmi. For more information, please contact Edward Felten at (609) 258-5906 or felten0x40cs0x2Eprinceton0x2Eedu. Editors note: replace 0x40 with @ and 0x2E with . ---------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Craver, Patrick McGregor, Min Wu, Bede Liu Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Princeton University Adam Stubblefield, Ben Swartzlander, Dan S. Wallach Dept. of Computer Science, Rice University Drew Dean Computer Science Laboratory, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center Edward W. Felten Dept. of Computer Science, Princeton University From anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net Mon Oct 23 13:43:33 2000 From: anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net (An Metet) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 16:43:33 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: At 23:31 -0700 10/22/00, Tim May wrote: > As I wrote in my previous article, IT IS NOT TRUE that private > hospitals must accept all those who appear at their doorstep. This > would be a "taking," and is not constitutionally permissable. Unfortunately, I'd bet it's just a matter of time until some protected minority successfully sues such a hospital for "discriminating" against them for their assumed inability to pay. i.e. "They *assumed* I couldn't pay my bills I'm black and don't have insurance. How dare they turn me away, racists!" It doesn't seem to require much of a leap to go from "Denny's is public and can't refuse to serve blacks" to "St. John's is public and can't refuse to serve blacks." Hospitals will, of course, remain "free" to turn away adult white heterosexual males. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Mon Oct 23 17:20:29 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 17:20:29 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Risk and insurance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001023172029.009ae100@idiom.com> Archives are on www.inet-one.com At 02:50 PM 10/23/00 +0300, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > >>The book I recommended a week or two ago, Judea Pearl's "Causality," >>is much more advanced in its mathematics. (But the math is important >>if one is actually trying to construct the causality diagrams Pearl >>is talking about.) > >Would it be too much to ask you to recant the main point made? It sounds >pretty interesting... > >Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university > > > > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From kode187 at galadriel.kode187.net Mon Oct 23 18:20:18 2000 From: kode187 at galadriel.kode187.net (Bruce J.A. Nourish) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 18:20:18 -0700 Subject: CDR: Illicit words Message-ID: <20001023182018.A9932@galadriel.kode187.net> I read somewhere that the FBI/NSA/some other Big Bro. organisation has a list of words that they check your email against, and if they find any, they have someone read your mail. Anyone know what they are? TIA & HAND -- Bruce J.A. Nourish (keys - see header) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: From commerce at home.com Mon Oct 23 15:23:36 2000 From: commerce at home.com (Me) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 18:23:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Any Comments? References: <39F48260.7CC4CF18@lsil.com> Message-ID: <016401c03d3f$e35f1ff0$0100a8c0@matthew> From: > This sounds a little far-fetched to me. At the very least there have to > be lots of items missed every day... > http://cryptome.org/dark-spy.htm It sounds like a prank. E.g.: "Finally, Whitelaw demonstrates steganography - the art of concealing text within more text. "Steganography is considered the third biggest threat to US security after biological and chemical attack," he says. " From kode187 at galadriel.kode187.net Mon Oct 23 19:08:34 2000 From: kode187 at galadriel.kode187.net (Bruce J.A. Nourish) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 19:08:34 -0700 Subject: CDR: Illicit words Message-ID: <20001023190834.C9630@galadriel.kode187.net> I read somewhere that the FBI/NSA/some other Big Bro. organisation has a list of words that they check your email against, and if they find any, they have someone read your mail. Anyone know what they are? TIA & HAND -- Bruce J.A. Nourish (keys - see header) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: From roach_s at intplsrv.net Mon Oct 23 18:06:00 2000 From: roach_s at intplsrv.net (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 20:06:00 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: judges needing killing... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.1.20001023200102.00ad12c0@mail.intplsrv.net> At 02:27 AM 10/20/2000, Tim May wrote: ... >PCBs are as close as your nearest utility pole transformer. > >Are they as dangerous as reporters have led us to believe? My suspicion? No. ... Granted, this thread is probably about as old and dead as it can get. I've had an electronics engineer, a former professor of mine and someone who claims to have worked on the original cruise missiles, tell me that, and I'll paraphrase as close as I can get to a quote, "one drop on the tongue of a dog is enough to kill a man". From what he provided, these things tend to cause cancer, and the dirt underneath old transformers, should those transformers have become leaky, is probably adequately tainted, and already needs clean up anyway. Impound a few ounces of alleyway dirt with the car. Then you're doing the planet a Service. Boxing up preexisting contaminated waste. Good luck, Sean Roach From jamesd at echeque.com Mon Oct 23 20:37:42 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 20:37:42 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022210731.B2615@well.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001023202934.01a429b8@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 09:07 PM 10/22/2000 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: > OK, granted, the government needs to be kept on a tight leash. Most > people will not want the government breaking into their homes. > However, I think most people would be willing to vote for a bill > that would guarantee insurance for people with genetic > abnormalities, even > that does mean that some CEOs and stockholders will have less money > in their already-full pockets. You cannot provide cheap insurance by punishing insurers, any more than you can provide cheap housing by punishing landlords. It has been tried. A law compelling insurance companies to insure the unhealthy will merely raise costs for the healthy, resulting in more people going uninsured. If you want to guarantee insurance for the unhealthy without ill effects the TAXPAYER has to pay, and I suspect that if this proposition was put to the public, enthusiasm would be considerably less. Indeed the Clintons did put something very like that proposition to the public, and there was little enthusiasm. > > We cannot provide all the medical care for everyone who might want > > it. The question then is who decides who lives and who dies? > We could easily provide healthcare for every American citizen. Just > raise taxes a bit, and cut out most of our military spending. We can provide RATIONED health care for every american citizen. And then who gets to do the rationing? Rationing is popular in Canada, because the wealthy skip across the border to the US. It would be considerably less popular in the US, because we have no unrationed health care conveniently nearby. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG e9ZUIWoa0uYBCwK2J5X9FrqbTnMcyu9rsO7nNHN/ 44gAW0FvWKBINlJj8Vy3dLcxDWiT2R/BtBDOUSQuZ From announce at inbox.nytimes.com Mon Oct 23 17:43:20 2000 From: announce at inbox.nytimes.com (The New York Times on the Web) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 20:43:20 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Important Membership Information Message-ID: <200010240043.UAA26644@web79t.lga2.nytimes.com> Dear cypherpunks411a, Welcome to NYTimes.com! We are delighted that you have decided to become a member of our community. As a member you now have complete access to the Web's premier source for news and information -- free of charge. NYTimes.com not only provides you with in-depth coverage of events happening around the world but also with a wealth of additional features and services. The site is updated regularly throughout the day by New York Times reporters and editors to give you greater insight into events unfolding throughout the day. No matter what the hour, you can look to NYTimes.com for the most trustworthy coverage available and unique perspective you won't find anywhere else. Please feel free to explore the other areas of NYTimes.com. Here are some starting points you may find useful: ** Get NYTimes.com headlines e-mailed directly to you. Choose from the day's top stories, breaking news alerts and your favorite sections: http://email.nytimes.com/email/email.jsp?welcome ** Search and retrieve articles from The New York Times Archives back to 1996. Searches and summaries of articles are free, but there is a small fee for full text. http://archives.nytimes.com/archives?welcome ** Explore the Help Wanted and other classified listings on the Web: http://classifieds.nytimes.com/hw?welcome ** Get a free photo screensaver from The New York Times Photo Archives Choose from Vintage New York, Americana, Coney Island and more: http://www.nytimes.com/partners/screensaver/index.html?welcome ** Search our archive of 50,000 book reviews, listen to author interviews or sign-up for an exclusive weekly newsletter from our Books Editor: http://www.nytimes.com/books/home?welcome Thank you again for becoming a member. We hope that you will make a point of visiting the site often. Sincerely, Rich Meislin, Editor in Chief New York Times Digital P.S. Your opinions are important to us. Share your thoughts about the site with us by sending an e-mail to feedback at nytimes.com ************************************************************* Your account information is listed below for future reference: Your Member ID is cypherpunks411a You selected your password at registration. Your e-mail address is cypherpunks at toad.com If you did not authorize this registration, someone has mistakenly registered using your e-mail address. We regret the inconvenience; please see http://www.nytimes.com/subscribe/help/cancel.html for instructions. From petro at bounty.org Mon Oct 23 23:19:20 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 23:19:20 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> <20001022223540.B3024@well.com> Message-ID: >At 10:35 PM -0700 10/22/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >> >>This is true in theory. However, from what I have read, it appears >>that the care given to these people is far from the quality of care >>given to those who can pay. Also, many diseases require very >>expensive treatments, and I do not believe the hospitals are required >>to pay for these. > > >As I wrote in my previous article, IT IS NOT TRUE that private >hospitals must accept all those who appear at their doorstep. This >would be a "taking," and is not constitutionally permissable. > >It may be that _some_ private hospitals take in _some_ emergency >room cases, but they are not "required" to. This may have been a state law in Missouri, but I swear I heard reference to a similar law in Illinois. I would be surprised that it was not the case in the peoples republic of California. *ALL* hospitals are required to provide at least stabilization and transport to an appropriate facility to critically wounded or ill patients. The are not required to admit them for inpatient treatment, but they are not allowed to let them die in the street either. These kinds of laws are good in at least one respect--they make sure that if you forget your insurance credentials, or are otherwise unable to present them, you get treated anyway. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From petro at bounty.org Mon Oct 23 23:34:27 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 23:34:27 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022233623.A3516@well.com> References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <20001022233623.A3516@well.com> Message-ID: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 10:59:51PM -0700, petro wrote: >> >> >> That's true, but it is irrelevant. As long as insurance companies >> >> and hospitals are privately owned, putting a requirement like this >> >> one on them constitutes theft of their resources. If you want to >> >> have them engaging in charity, set up a charity and solicit money >> >> instead. ie, you can ask but you don't have permission to steal. >> >> >> > >> >I think the government has a right to do whatever it needs to do >>to maintain >> >> You don't think very well then. >> > >Perhaps. > >> >the health and well-being of its population. That is the purpose of >> >the government. >> >> Not in the United States of America it isn't. >> >> > >Then what is the purpose of our government? www.constitution.org may help you. >> >That is one way of defining freedom. I view freedom as the right of >> >people to live happy, productive lives. A discriminatory policy such >> >as this one would infringe on that freedom. >> You have been completely brainwashed. >> You have a no idea what a "right" is. >OK, then, what is a "right"? A thing which no one else has entitlement or authority to take away. What you confuse is that just having a *right* to something doesn't put the onus of responsibility on anyone (or society) to provide it. For instance, you *do* have a right to housing, but there is neither a responsibility on government/society to provide it for you, nor a responsibility on them to make sure you keep it once you have it. They are just not allowed to prevent you from acquiring it without violating the property rights of others. You have the right to happiness, but I don't have to make you happy. I am also not obligated modify my behavior to keep you happy, absent an obligation not to initiate force against you. In your little fantasy world a right is an entitlement. It ain't so. >> >> I also persist in believing that, as a philosophical point, nobody >> >> who is *compelled* to do something can be considered a good person >> >> for doing it. I also feel that history has shown us that those who >> >> receive charity compelled from others have never appreciated the >> >> work and sacrifice that it represents. Compelled charity is >> >> morally and emotionally meaningless. >> > >> >Fine, so the insurance companies won't be considered "good." Who >> >cares? The point is, people who need medical care would be getting it. >> >> The point is that you are *forcing* me to part with my >> productive labor to support someone else. >> >> This makes me unhappy. Under your beliefs, you can't do this, >> as I have a right to be happy. > >Not if it hurts someone else. Serial killers often get off on killing >people. However, this hurts others, so it is outweighed. There is a distinct difference between the initiation of force and withholding aid. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 23 23:39:06 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 23:39:06 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk? In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 2:08 AM -0400 10/24/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >http://www.rollingstone.com/sections/magazine/text/excerpt.asp?afl=rsn&lngF >eatureID=120&lngStyleID > > What's in your top five from the past year? > > Being John Malkovich; East Is East; Shall We > Dance? I liked Gladiator a lot - I thought that was > an excellent movie. I loved The Matrix. I loved the > metaphor. Somebody gigged me in the mainstream > media for not liking too much violence in the movies > but simultaneously liking that movie. Well, you > know, it was rated for adults. It was very >violent, but > it was a terrific movie. And I can hardly >wait for the > sequel. This is not new. Al Gore was enthusiastic about "The Matrix" and then the Columbine shootings happened. He back-pedalled and began explaining away his enthusiasm, with language like the above, about it being suitable for adultsbutnotchildren, etc. This says more about the culture of political correctness in politics than about his actual views. (Sort of comparable to the demands by some on our own list who periodically demand that list members "denounce" acts of terrorism or whatever it is they don't like. "If you don't come out against the bombings of federal buildings, then you are as guilty as the bombers.") --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From petro at bounty.org Mon Oct 23 23:45:07 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 23:45:07 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001022234733.B3516@well.com> References: <20001018224631.C18319@well.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001023011058.A23226@die.com> <20001022234733.B3516@well.com> Message-ID: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 11:08:48PM -0700, petro wrote: >> > >> > Of course, in the libertarian ideal universe someone not >> >completely indigent who had a genetic condition that made them high risk >> >might still be unable to get any kind of catastropic medical insurance >> >and might be wiped out of virtually all assets by a serious illness, >> >even one completely unrelated in any way to his genetic predisposition. >> >> Nonsense. >> >> If Insurance companies were completely (or even greatly) >> deregulated, they could offer *seriously* ala-carte policies. They >> could easily write a policy that simply excluded--say breast >> cancer--from the policy of a woman who has a strong genetic >> predisposition to it, and *greatly reduce* the overall cost of her >> insurance for *all* other illnesses. >> >> Leaving her free to either (a) find a high risk policy *just* >> for that, or spend the money on getting a radical mastectomy to >> eliminate the problem. Or any of a dozen other issues. >> > >But they AREN'T deregulated, at least not yet. In any case, the >debate was about what companies should do NOW, not about what they No, the argument was over what it would be *right* for insurance companies to do. >would/could/should do in the as-of-now imaginary world of total >deregulation. > >I can't debate about the deregulation of insurance, because I'm not >well-read on that subject. > >> That's what Nathan "I'm a thoughtless whiner" > >Come on, now. Our disagreement doesn't automatically classify me as a >"thoughtless whiner." I have thought about these issues; I just >haven't reached the same conclusions you have. I am not calling you a thoughtless whiner because you disagree with me. I have disagreed with many on this list--including Mr. May, and Mr. Choate, but I would call neither of them thoughtless. You have consistently (in the short time you've been "here) advocated positions that indicate a severe lack of cycles spent on the ramifications of that which you argue. > >> and Sambo A. S. >> seem to miss, is that increased costs for a few mean *savings* for >> everyone else. > >The costs for the few would rise much more than the savings for the >many. Therefore, the number of people with genetic abnormalities who >could not afford insurance would rise, while the number of genetically >normal people who could afford insurance would not be altered >drastically. No, they wouldn't. Ailments caused by genetic predispositions, once they manifest, are *very* expensive, and help set the bell curve. In an insurance market with deregulated players (both providers and consumers) a companies would be forced to compete *much* harder than they do now. As it is, government influence in the Medical Insurance market has strongly distorted costs, and driven up the prices for medical care *and* insurance. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 24 00:01:48 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 00:01:48 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, petro wrote: > >> > Of course, in the libertarian ideal universe someone not >> >completely indigent who had a genetic condition that made them high risk >> >might still be unable to get any kind of catastropic medical insurance >> >and might be wiped out of virtually all assets by a serious illness, >> >even one completely unrelated in any way to his genetic predisposition. >> >> Nonsense. > >It's not? Demonstrate where Libertarian or Anarchic ideals take care of >this person even in principle? Explain how they're not turned away and >left to die? I did, and you brought up the reason why yourself: > >And don't invoke the old 'somebody will take care of them' bullshit. >Because it is clear today that many people don't get taken care of at all. > >Explain why moving to such a system will empower the mild of human >kindness in these sad souls? It's not kindness, it's *for the money*. If I (as Evil Insurance Inc) can make money selling a policy, I am going to do it. If you have a genetic pre-dispositing to, say, Brain Cancer, and I can write a policy that says I cover you for everything *BUT* that, why shouldn't I? Yes, it might be inordinately expensive for you to get a policy that *does* cover brain cancer, but you will be covered for lung cancer (unless you choose to smoke), testicular cancer or Alzheimer's disease. I can make money, so I will. >> If Insurance companies were completely (or even greatly) >> deregulated, they could offer *seriously* ala-carte policies. > >They could, but they're not stupid. In a un-regulated market the insurance >companies will focus on profits alone and that unfortuantely (and much to >the chagrin of the libertarian/anarchy crowd) means that there will >actualy be LESS insurance available and it will exist at a higher cost. How so? Insurance companies make money 2 ways. First is through a slight profit on their premiums. The second is through *investing* that money. If they can invest wisely--and they should be able to after all, they're in it for the profits--and properly balance the payouts v.s. premiums equation--and they should, they've been doing it long enough--they should have no problems. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 24 00:04:20 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 00:04:20 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >> From: petro > >> > The point is that you are *forcing* me to part with my >> > productive labor to support someone else. >> > >> > This makes me unhappy. Under your beliefs, you can't do this, >> > as I have a right to be happy. > >No dipshit, you have a right to TRY TO BE HAPPY. You're the "dipshit" that can't track a conversation. If you could, you would have noticed that it wasn't *me* that was making the assertion that one has a right to "be happy", I was poking at the original poster for his asserting that happiness is an entitlement. >Typical anarcho/libertarian bullshit misprepresentation. And another prime >example of 'freedom for me, but not for thee'. > >This is a perfect example of the failure of libertarian/anarcho thought, >it is completely focused on the 'me'. > >When will you learn that free market economics is about the market and its >stability and not the individuals attainment of nirvana. I'll answer my >own question, never. This would have a lot more weight if you could follow a converstation. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From Web1 at ixpres.com Tue Oct 24 00:16:52 2000 From: Web1 at ixpres.com (645,101 Search Engines.) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 00:16:52 Subject: CDR: 645,835 Search Engines/Resubmission Every Month. Message-ID: <200010240513.WAA24161@toad.com> This Is A Service Not An Opportunity! DO YOU HAVE A WEB SITE? We are WebSite Search Engine Submission Service. We will take your WebSite and Submit it to over 645,101 Search Engines,Links,Directories,All Side Server Search Engines and all FFA Sites. We are the only company that will > Resubmit < Your WebSite Every Month for an Entire Year! Our Data Base is Updated Every Week so This Number will Grow. We Use the Most Sophisticated Digital Submission Software Ever Manufactured ! > For Complete info Just Click Reply < > and Type in the Body of the Message < > Search Engine Info< This is the first and most Important Step of E-Commerce and Advertising on the Internet that you will ever Make. Thank You From declan at well.com Mon Oct 23 23:04:36 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 02:04:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Declan My Lai In-Reply-To: <200010221539.LAA32690@maynard.mail.mindspring.net>; from jya@pipeline.com on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 11:26:56AM -0400 References: <200010221539.LAA32690@maynard.mail.mindspring.net> Message-ID: <20001024020436.A18121@cluebot.com> Nope, never expected it. This proves what those wise and neutral folks on NPR today were calling the media's fascination with triviality. (Me, I would say that voting is such an inefficient process of getting what you want that it is not rational to read up on all policy positions of the candidates, and you might as well focus on character, or what you perceive to be the same.) If I wanted to be a partisan political reporter, clearly it would be higher-profile. But that doesn't interest me much, so I shall diminish, and remain, well, you get the idea. -Declan On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 11:26:56AM -0400, John Young wrote: > Declan, > > Pounding out the hundreds of deathless reports > you've done did you dream it would be the Gore > My Lai that got you onto the NYTimes opinion > page today? > > > From jimdbell at home.com Tue Oct 24 02:06:32 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 02:06:32 -0700 Subject: CDR: Selective news coverage (was "Killing judges.") References: <200010211146.HAA22075@smtp10.atl.mindspring.net> <017d01c03bb1$3ee32e60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <20001024021440.C18121@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <00fb01c03d99$b48ffdc0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Declan McCullagh > On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 03:49:52PM -0700, jim bell wrote: > > "Did the PI hear of this incident?". (There were presumably at least 100 > > people in the courthouse or nearby when this incident occurred: one might > > think that it would be very unlikely if ALL of them didn't call the news > > media.) Naturally, she had to point out that they were being "good > > citizens" by NOT reporting"every bomb threat". I should have asked her if > > I hate to defend my colleagues, but this is reasonable. I don't know > if bomb threats that turn out to be fake are inherently newsworthy. I wasn't particularly dinging her for ignoring "some" bomb threats. I mentioned this comment to relay what her (the newspaper's) stated position was. But "some" pretty quickly turns into "all", and -that- turns into "let's help the government cover up embarrassing facts about real bombs." (In place of "bombs," insert "any sort of incident that the government would want to call 'terrorism'." The World Trade Center bomb, as I vaguely recall from some Internet revelations a few years back, was actually bought and paid-for by US-Government money, funnelled through an informant. (Agent provocateur? Very embarrassingly, he taped his conversations not merely with the other bombers, but also the government agents!) I think the public ought to learn this kind of thing, but they won't if the government has anything to say about it. Maybe the reason that bombers (or, terrorists in general) ratchet up the severity of their attacks is to ensure that the news media won't be able to ignore them. > I would probably have made the same decision, given limited > resources. Unless there was some evidence that this was a pattern of > threats, etc. At the time, of course, you wouldn't have known that an inmate had been left inside the courtroom while everyone else was evacuated. I emailed the Post-Intelligencer to find out what I still don't know, after over a year: What really happened that day? And who knew what, and when did they know it? The PI assistant editor is unwilling to tell me, nor is she willing to tell me who she contacted after I sent my inquiry to her. > > At the time, though not publicly, I speculated that to try to counteract > > this, a small counter-media organization might be formed, containing as > > little as a sole individual.. I figured that it would announce itself as a > > sounding-board for this kind of thing. It would receive, anonymously, any > > sort of announcement, statement, threat, promise, warning, etc. It would > > combine these anonymous snippets, and deliver them (quite openly, in a > > recorded and documented fashion) to all the various news media organizations > > that might otherwise want to ignore what was being said. Since this > > What you're describing could well be a competing publication. You'd > presumably have greater legal protection that way in any case. Yes, the news media legal "terrain" in 2000 is dramatically different than the 1990 situation. The blurring of the line between ordinary citizens and traditional news media ("the Matt Drudge effect"...uh, sorry, the "Declan McCullagh effect" B^) ) has probably made it fairly difficult for the government to "go after" people who expend effort to expose/embarrass the government, even if they aren't associated with a traditional news-media organization. These days, one of the few things that government can do to keep the playing field un-level is to deny un-sympathetic net journalists access to press conferences, etc. 'course, you know more about this than I do! Check out the site, www.slaphillary.com . And read the article that introduces it, at: http://frontpagemag.com/editors_note/en10-17-00.htm An excerpt from it follows: ------------------begin excerpt------------- There is nothing unusual about Hillary being booed in New York. It happens all the time. When Hillary marched in the Saint Patrick's Day parade in March, she ran a 45-block gauntlet of boos and catcalls. She was also booed when she marched in the Salute to Israel parade in June. What was different about last Thursday, though, is that the mass media actually reported the booing. Usually, they pretend it never happened. When Eva Peron walked among her subjects, she often planted fake supporters in the crowds, who would cheer for the cameras. Hillary uses similar tactics. My wife and I watched Hillary march in the Columbus Day parade last week, on Fifth Avenue. There were plenty of booers and catcallers, as usual. But, wherever Hillary walked, a mob of about 50 operatives ran, in tight formation, on either side of the street, brandishing "Hillary" signs and screaming their support for the First Lady. Thus, the photographers and TV crews - if they angled their shots right - could always make it seem as if the First Lady were surrounded by adoring fans. ------------excerpt ends----------- The appeal of the "slap Hillary" website, I think, comes from the same gut level as the usual reaction to my AP system when it's described to people. I can't imagine having been the first to say it, but long ago (Musta been 20 years ago in "internet years") I said "you can't appeal a bullet." (Today, I can't find even a single reference to 'can't appeal a bullet' on Altavista nor Deja.com. Haven't checked the CP archives yet.) No matter how rabid, no Hillary-supporter can possibly "appeal" the website away, or the inestimable joy of giving our own "Hillarita Peron" a big one. "You can't appeal a slap." Jim Bell > I can see it now: "CJ and JB's BombNewsWire" > > -Declan From declan at well.com Mon Oct 23 23:07:10 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 02:07:10 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Illicit words In-Reply-To: <20001023190834.C9630@galadriel.kode187.net>; from kode187@galadriel.kode187.net on Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 07:08:34PM -0700 References: <20001023190834.C9630@galadriel.kode187.net> Message-ID: <20001024020710.B18121@cluebot.com> It's too late; you're already on the TLA list since you posted to cypherpunks. If they know who you are, they don't need to scan your email for keywords. They can simply read all of it. -Declan On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 07:08:34PM -0700, Bruce J.A. Nourish wrote: > I read somewhere that the FBI/NSA/some other Big Bro. organisation has a > list of words that they check your email against, and if they find any, they > have someone read your mail. Anyone know what they are? > > TIA & HAND > -- > Bruce J.A. Nourish (keys - see header) From declan at well.com Mon Oct 23 23:08:57 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 02:08:57 -0400 Subject: CDR: Al Gore goes cypherpunk? Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> http://www.rollingstone.com/sections/magazine/text/excerpt.asp?afl=rsn&lngF eatureID=120&lngStyleID What's in your top five from the past year? Being John Malkovich; East Is East; Shall We Dance? I liked Gladiator a lot - I thought that was an excellent movie. I loved The Matrix. I loved the metaphor. Somebody gigged me in the mainstream media for not liking too much violence in the movies but simultaneously liking that movie. Well, you know, it was rated for adults. It was very violent, but it was a terrific movie. And I can hardly wait for the sequel. From declan at well.com Mon Oct 23 23:14:40 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 02:14:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Killing Judges In-Reply-To: <017d01c03bb1$3ee32e60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com>; from jimdbell@home.com on Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 03:49:52PM -0700 References: <200010211146.HAA22075@smtp10.atl.mindspring.net> <017d01c03bb1$3ee32e60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <20001024021440.C18121@cluebot.com> On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 03:49:52PM -0700, jim bell wrote: > "Did the PI hear of this incident?". (There were presumably at least 100 > people in the courthouse or nearby when this incident occurred: one might > think that it would be very unlikely if ALL of them didn't call the news > media.) Naturally, she had to point out that they were being "good > citizens" by NOT reporting"every bomb threat". I should have asked her if I hate to defend my colleagues, but this is reasonable. I don't know if bomb threats that turn out to be fake are inherently newsworthy. I would probably have made the same decision, given limited resources. Unless there was some evidence that this was a pattern of threats, etc. > At the time, though not publicly, I speculated that to try to counteract > this, a small counter-media organization might be formed, containing as > little as a sole individual.. I figured that it would announce itself as a > sounding-board for this kind of thing. It would receive, anonymously, any > sort of announcement, statement, threat, promise, warning, etc. It would > combine these anonymous snippets, and deliver them (quite openly, in a > recorded and documented fashion) to all the various news media organizations > that might otherwise want to ignore what was being said. Since this What you're describing could well be a competing publication. You'd presumably have greater legal protection that way in any case. I can see it now: "CJ and JB's BombNewsWire" -Declan From jimdbell at home.com Tue Oct 24 02:53:17 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 02:53:17 -0700 Subject: CDR: Say Goodnight to Joshua, Mr. Anonymous References: Message-ID: <011101c03da0$3be06fc0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Sorry, but I didn't particularly appreciate the musical telephone call. An overenthusiastic colleague, perhaps? Before I was satisfied to look into people who had, unfortunately, allowed their property to be used against me. I found out most of what I needed to know about them, months ago, and they will be dragged through the (legal) dirt as soon as that's needed to get the rest of the infromation. (Have you told them, yet? I'm think a few of them caught on already: they're not very good actors.) So I decided to respond by doing a couple of hours of research, and combine that with a few hours of field-trip. Yes, that one. Just a "show the flag" circuit. Intended to be seen. Mapmaking for a process server? Just a reminder. So say goodnight to Joshua, Mr. Anonymous. Tell him it's not his fault that his father is a thug. Jim Bell From ssivanov at internet-bg.net Mon Oct 23 20:56:11 2000 From: ssivanov at internet-bg.net (Svetoslav Ivanov) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 06:56:11 +0300 Subject: CDR: QuickBooks format Message-ID: <01C03D87.8014CCE0@varnappp120.internet-bg.net> Hello, I read an e-mail from you for QuikBooks data format. Can you send me anything, if you have received in this way? Thanks! Svetoslav Ivanov, Varna, Bulgaria From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 24 07:14:38 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 10:14:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: http://www.rollingstone.com/sections/magazine/text/excerpt.asp?afl=rsn&lngFeatureID=120&lngStyleID At 2:08 AM -0400 on 10/24/00, Declan McCullagh wrote that Albert, "Gort" Gore, Jr., (a robot who would destroy the world to save it :-)) told the Rolling Stone: > I loved The Matrix. Innumeracy is as innumeracy does, I guess. And, unlike another, and equally fictional, moron with a better clue about how the world works, "Gort's" liking the Keanu Reeves neo-Platonist adolescent-hacker power fantasy The Matrix is paradoxically, but utterly, consistent with his currently-closet Luddist Socialism. For some reason, the very cartoon physics which made it popular was the main thing which bugged me most about The Matrix, as it does in a lot of other movies these days. Ships and weaponry in movie or television space opera whoosh by, as if there were really sound in space. To me, at least, that's just the tip of a towering iceberg of modern scientific and mathematical ignorance. Just like the premise of the movie itself, it might seem otherwise, but "The Matrix" is actually a classic example of this kind of mental noise. I understand the urge to make up something familiar to convey to the audience a sense of speed, or size, or whatever, and, since most of us have no direct experience of what things in space "sound" like anyway, movie directors can get away with it at our expense. It certainly seems harmless enough. Nonetheless, this kind of lazy physical shorthand is exactly the wrong urge in the face of our actual possession of so many actual *facts* about space itself, or anything else in math and science. Facts that get misrepresented all the time in the movies and on television, and which perpetuate our own ignorance about them. The result, especially in something proporting to be *science* fiction, is nothing short of propaganda, when you think about it enough. Like Edward Tufte's famous "Pravada charts" -- found frequently on the front page of their famous eponym, charts containing no scale and just an arrow graphing something, usually something immeasurable, up and to the right -- lots of modern celluloid "science" fiction actually perpetuates the really awful transfer-priced government educations most of us got the hands of the modern nation-state. To me, these misrepresentations of mathematics and science are exactly in the same intellectual league as the statist, cheerfully communist, paradises found in Star Trek, or Norman Spinrad, or Iain Banks' "Culture" novels. All of which I watch and read anyway -- just like I've seen "The Day the Earth Stood Still", containing Gort, a robot who would destroy the world to save it -- but all of which are just as ignorant of economics as a whooshing starship is of physics. And, of course, it is our very mis-education at the hands of those very Marx-inspired statists that causes us to demand, or at least accept, that kind of thing from the people who sell us our entertainment in the first place. The result works out rather nicely to keep us just as ignorant of reality as Neo, The Matrix's Gen-Y protagonist, ever was. Of course, like in the Matrix, where humans *couldn't* handle reality anyway, so they deserved what they got, some would say we deserve our own modern ignorance, preferring cartoon physics, and cartoon economics, to the real stuff. So, even though The Matrix's very premise -- that life as we know it is actually a Road-Runner cartoon in disguise, that because The Matrix *is* pseudospace, that the rules of physics *didn't* apply, that it's actually *okay* to have "physical cartoons" there, of all places -- even though that premise is, paradoxically, consistent with my trashing of the prevailing innumeracy and ignorance in movies and television somehow, all of that still didn't keep the movie from really getting up my nose. And, what I think finally did it for me wasn't the movie's depiction of the pseudoreality of the matrix itself, really. It was watching The Matrix's increasingly stupid Saturday-morning cartoon depiction of what "reality" *really* was that eventually drove me up the wall and almost out of the theater. Here we were, looking at the same old "revolutionary" neo-feudal response to a thoroughly feudal ultimate-surveillance society living *above* the sewers: Che Guevarra meets William Gibson, all depicted with deliberately cheezier CGIs to make it more "real" than the Matrix itself. Sheesh. So, ultimately, I suspect that the real reason that the libertarians and crypto-anarchists I like to hang out with on the net rave about The Matrix so much is because Neo gets to blow away so many cops, and in such exquisite detail. Quake with better graphics. And, like Quake, what would normally be considered murder in the "real" world doesn't "matter" so much, because the cops are not "real", not actual human beings. They're just software. Maybe, frankly, that's also why Albert, "Gort", Gore, Jr., a died-in-the-hairshirt man-the-barracades Mailerian Crypto-Communist disguised in a blue suit, white shirt, red tie, and, more recently, a Ronald Reagan pomade -- when he's not disguised as a earth-toned plaid-shirted pseudo-Gomer, or something else -- liked The Matrix so much. He's just as much an ideologue as my friends and I are, and he objectifies, and categorizes :-), his enemies as much as we do. In his heart of hearts, "Gort" sees himself as Neo: donning his Virtual Armani and titanium framed granny-shades every day in a never-ending fight smash the forces of the Evil Capitalist Matrix. Just wait, Al, until the financial cryptography of bearer transactions teaches "capitalism", a Marxist name for what normal people should call "economics", Al, to our very machines themselves. Profit and loss on the device level. You ain't seen *nothing* yet, Komrade "Gort". Klaatu Baruda Nicktoe, indeed. In the meantime, the Matrix's supposedly masterful special effects, its apparent main attraction, were, for the most part, pedestrian, and could have been found in any music video -- or even commercial -- of the time. Proof, to me anyway, that movies, and other filmed/taped media, will continue to fall behind the technical curve in a world of emerging, instantaneously-available, and, eventually, real-time programmable, geodesic media. Sooner or later, things like internet games, and, eventually, real-time immersive multi-role fantasy -- the *real* Matrix -- will relegate recorded film and video to the same status that painting, or, better, grand opera now has: nice, even pretty impressive once in a while, but too expensive, much less predictable and formulaic, to be useful for anybody's actual entertainment. Finally, the movie's preachy metaphysics was wheezing so badly -- in a Kung-Fu-in-mirrorshades, "Listen to the Stones, Grasshopper", sense -- that it needed Albuterol just to breathe. That's probably because its entire premise, frankly, was so ancient even its dust was heat-dead. As old and tired as Plato's cave, and, given that both the Matrix itself, and the world proporting to be "real", had all the implicit political repression and hierarchical social-stratification that Plato himself wanted in his own _Republic_, it's no surprise that Albert "Gort" Gore, Jr., a product of a private all-boys Epsicopalian education, cured in marijuana-smoked socialism until college graduation and military decommision, super-glued to 1980's born-again Baptist evangelicalism, composted in "environmental" pseudoscience, and grafted onto the largest cleptocracy this side of the Iron Curtain, liked it so very much. As a much better philosopher, Bertrand Russell, noted once, communism ("Socialism", "Environmentalism", "Consumerism", whatever) is just really feudalism, after all. Enough, already, Al. Gore: Klaatu Baruda Nicktoe! Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 24 07:37:36 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 10:37:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 10:14 AM -0400 on 10/24/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > all depicted with > deliberately cheezier CGIs to make it more "real" than the Matrix itself. ^^^^ *less* Sheesh. Edit twice, send once. Welcome to the net... :-). Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 24 10:38:11 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 10:38:11 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001024103811.0099fba0@idiom.com> At 10:37 AM 10/24/00 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >At 10:14 AM -0400 on 10/24/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > > >> all depicted with >> deliberately cheezier CGIs to make it more "real" than the Matrix itself. > ^^^^ > *less* > >Sheesh. > >Edit twice, send once. Welcome to the net... > >:-). But Bob, I thought you usually did "Edit once, send three or four times" :-) This one only went to cypherpunks and dcsb (plus Declan), without also hitting two or three other lists, unlike most of your announcements. (I don't mind - Eudora's pretty good at sorting stuff, and it's easy to skip the excess copies since they've got the same date and Subject, though I do occasionally get bouncegrams for replying when some of the lists allow non-subscriber content and some don't.) Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 24 11:17:40 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 11:17:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 10:14 AM -0400 10/24/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >http://www.rollingstone.com/sections/magazine/text/excerpt.asp?afl=rsn&lngFeatureID=120&lngStyleID > > >At 2:08 AM -0400 on 10/24/00, Declan McCullagh wrote that Albert, "Gort" >Gore, Jr., (a robot who would destroy the world to save it :-)) told the >Rolling Stone: > >> I loved The Matrix. > > >Innumeracy is as innumeracy does, I guess. And, unlike another, and equally >fictional, moron with a better clue about how the world works, "Gort's" >liking the Keanu Reeves neo-Platonist adolescent-hacker power fantasy The >Matrix is paradoxically, but utterly, consistent with his currently-closet >Luddist Socialism. No accounting for taste, of course, but I _loved_ "The Matrix." I'll leave it to others to decide whether I'm innumerate or not, whether I'm a luddite or not, and so on. Overall, it's up there in my Top 5 of SF films, with "2001," "Terminator 2," and "Blade Runner." Not necessarily in that order. Ihre Meilenzahl variiert vielleicht. > >For some reason, the very cartoon physics which made it popular was the >main thing which bugged me most about The Matrix, as it does in a lot of >other movies these days. Given that the characters were clearly described as being in a VR, and given that they "learned" to use the new rules they could access, the "cartoon physics" was very consistently done. As a physicist, I had no problems with it. > >So, ultimately, I suspect that the real reason that the libertarians and >crypto-anarchists I like to hang out with on the net rave about The Matrix >so much is because Neo gets to blow away so many cops, and in such >exquisite detail. Quake with better graphics. And, like Quake, what would >normally be considered murder in the "real" world doesn't "matter" so much, >because the cops are not "real", not actual human beings. They're just >software. Then count _this_ crypto anarchist as a counterexample to your point. > >Maybe, frankly, that's also why Albert, "Gort", Gore, Jr., a >died-in-the-hairshirt man-the-barracades Mailerian Crypto-Communist >disguised in a blue suit, white shirt, red tie, and, more recently, a >Ronald Reagan pomade -- when he's not disguised as a earth-toned >plaid-shirted pseudo-Gomer, or something else -- liked The Matrix so much. M > >In the meantime, the Matrix's supposedly masterful special effects, its >apparent main attraction, were, for the most part, pedestrian, and could >have been found in any music video -- or even commercial -- of the time. Actually, not so. The so-called "bullet time" effects hit the ads about the same time as "Teh Matrix" only because the tools and methods spread to the ad business faster than the film could be finished and distributed; in many cases, the same folks were taking what they'd learned and applying it to television. In any case, the proof is in the pudding. I certainly thought the effects were far from pedestrian. As to your not liking "The Matrix," fair enough. But using it as some kind of touchstone for everything that is bad in modern America is a bit of a reach. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From dannyb at panix.com Tue Oct 24 08:19:44 2000 From: dannyb at panix.com (danny burstein) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 11:19:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: EZ-Pass discovers risk of sending URLs instead of actual text Message-ID: In a story datelined 24-Oct-2000, and headlined: New Jersey shuts down E-ZPass statement site after security breached The Associated Press reported on a problem with privacy and security on the New Jersey EZPASS website where people can review their usage. (EZPass is a radio transponder placed in your motor vehicle which is "read" at toll booths, enabling you to zip through without having to stop and hand over cash. Naturally it keeps records of when and where you were for billing purposes... Which is another RISK all together) Per the story: TRENTON, N.J. (AP) -- A security breach has forced New Jersey officials to temporarily shut down a service that allows E-ZPass users to get monthly statements via e-mail. The story contains claims and counter-claims, some of which are mutually exclusive, but then has the following paragraph: Reagoso said Monday that it wasn't hard to break into the system. He discovered that the electronic statements aren't sent directly to drivers via e-mail, but rather drivers are provided with a link to access their accounts. Presumably the link for, say, October would have been something like www.[the number of your account].200010.[somelocation] and all you'd have to do is replace your own account number with the person's you were looking for. Quoting one more paragraph from the story: "It's something that an eighth-grader who designs his own Web page at home is capable of doing," Reagoso said. "It took four accidental keystrokes to display anybody's account." I just checked the EZPass website (www.ezpass.com) and they don't have any comments posted... [It turns out Mr. Reagoso has his own website: http://www.reagoso.com in which he says a bit more. DB] From anonymous at openpgp.net Tue Oct 24 08:21:06 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 11:21:06 -0400 Subject: CDR: Zero-Knowledge Open-Sources Linux Client Message-ID: <08aa89ff31f2e39e570bd3f3dc5ab00c@mixmaster.ceti.pl> from the privacy-for-all dept. jailbreakist writes "Zero-Knowledge Systems, a Montreal based privacy software company, has released the source code to their Linux client. The software in question provides anonymous web browsing, pseudonymous email, form filling, cookie management and more. You can get the source at opensource.zeroknowledge.com. The source is available under the MPL, and our clientshim and Yarrow (random number generation) implementations are under GPL." From declan at well.com Tue Oct 24 09:15:03 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 12:15:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001024121450.00ad7030@mail.well.com> At Wired News, we've compiled a list of the technology voting records of each member of the U.S. House of Representatives. That meant picking seven tech bills and grading all 435 legislators -- at least the ones who showed up those days -- on their floor votes. If they chose to take a hands-off approach, they got a "1", while regulatory votes got a "0." (If you disagree with us, flip the scale around.) Here's the list sorted by last name (scoll down to find your legislator): http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,39637,00.html Sorted by score, with the two California reps with 100 percent at the top: http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,39636,00.html And a summary of the results, with some methodology: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39625,00.html Some interesting results: Purported privacy advocates like Democrat Ed Markey didn't score well, getting a 33% of 100%, in part because of his opposition to financial privacy legislation. Republican Bob Goodlatte, Internet caucus co-chair, got just 43% because of his support for speech and gambling restrictions. -Declan The floor votes scored: HR2031: A vote to restrict online sales of alcohol. (No is 1) HR3615: A vote to create a new federal agency to spend $1.25 billion on rural TV service. (No is 1) HR3709: A vote to extend a temporary federal ban on Internet taxes. (Yes is 1) HR3125: A vote to prohibit Internet gambling. (No is 1) HR1501: A vote on an amendment to restrict the sale of violent material such as videogames to anyone under the age of 18. (No is 1) HR10: A vote on an amendment to protect financial privacy by restricting government monitoring of bank accounts. (Yes is 1) HR1714: A vote to allow the use of electronic signatures. (Yes is 1) From codewhacker at yahoo.com Tue Oct 24 11:53:44 2000 From: codewhacker at yahoo.com (Roy Silvernail) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 13:53:44 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) Message-ID: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> From: Tim May >No accounting for taste, of course, but I _loved_ "The Matrix." So did I. >Overall, it's up there in my Top 5 of SF films, with "2001," >"Terminator 2," and "Blade Runner." Not necessarily in that order. Our tastes seem curiously close. What's number 5 on your list? >Ihre Meilenzahl variiert vielleicht. Die meisten Meile Zahlen verändern sich. (blame babelfish!) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com From craig at red-bean.com Tue Oct 24 11:15:08 2000 From: craig at red-bean.com (Craig Brozefsky) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 14:15:08 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: Tim May's message of "Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:05:28 -0400" References: <4.3.0.20001018000003.00b4a7a0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <87snpmrv9g.fsf@piracy.red-bean.com> Tim May writes: > >>By 1986, numerous clones of the IBM PC and AT existed. > > > >Its quite simple. In 1995 MS released a version of Windoze which > >included a TCP/IP stack by default. Previously you had to acquire > >one and figure out how to install it. While fortunes were made > >on this, the collection of routers known as the Net was unavailable > >to Joe Sixpack until then. > > I don't buy this at all. Maybe there is some subtlety I am missing > completely. I don't buy it either. Prior to that release of Windows I was doing tech support for an ISP in Chicago using MacPPP for the mac and WinSock on Windows. We had several thousand subscribers prior to the time that TCP/IP came installed with Windows, and we had already hit the major upswing in our growth curve at that point. The explosion had more to do with Mosaic and Netscape than with the TCP/IP stack. The default stack in MS just allowed MS to strike deals with bigger ISPs, it didn't significantly streamline our installation process for new customers. The difference between installing from a cab file on your HD or CDROM, and installing from our CDROM, which came with a browser and the other applications that people were actually interested in, is trivial. I suppose one could say that the bundling of ISP services with the default Windows install increased the rate of new internet users significantly, but the explosive growth has already started by then. -- Craig Brozefsky "the sacrifice of real, immediate life is the price paid for the illusory freedom of an apparent life." Vaneigem From mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl Tue Oct 24 05:18:18 2000 From: mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl (Anonymous Remailer) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 14:18:18 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: Watermarking Utopia ... Message-ID: <578a89317f12dbb1a6cff39f53d9f69c@mixmaster.ceti.pl> From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 24 11:37:14 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 14:37:14 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 11:17 AM -0700 on 10/24/00, Tim May wrote: > But using it as some > kind of touchstone for everything that is bad in modern America is a > bit of a reach. Sometimes people do that. :-). Seriously, I knew you liked it when I fired up the old rant-machine this morning, but I hope we can agree to disagree about a movie or two around here. In the meantime, The Matrix just drove me nuts, and more so because I was *supposed* to like it, I guess... Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 24 14:53:21 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 14:53:21 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> Message-ID: At 1:53 PM -0500 10/24/00, Roy Silvernail wrote: >From: Tim May > > >>No accounting for taste, of course, but I _loved_ "The Matrix." > >So did I. > >>Overall, it's up there in my Top 5 of SF films, with "2001," >>"Terminator 2," and "Blade Runner." Not necessarily in that order. > >Our tastes seem curiously close. What's number 5 on your list? > Well, many consider these the classics. Usually "Aliens" is on the list. And "Star Wars." I should've have included that one, especially for its time. If "Dr. Strangelove" is considered SF (in involved science, of the bomb, and was fiction, mostly), then add it. There seems to be a new genre-defining SF film every several years. "2001" in 1967-8, "Star Wars" in 1977, "Blade Runner" in 1982, "Aliens" in 1987, "Terminator 2" in 1992-3, "The Matrix" in 1998. (If fantasy/horror is included, the pattern continues. "Rosemary's Baby," "The Exorcist," etc. Many great movies show their age. I recently saw the re-release of "The Exorcist" and it seemed slow-moving and tame by today's standards.) Interesting that Bob Hettinga is so offended by the ideology/outlook of "The Matrix." I thought it was mostly consistent with our main outlooks, albeit set in a world unlike our own. Some film ideologies _do_ offend me. The world of "Star Trek" is a good example: the Federation, Starfleet, Prime Directive, aliens speaking English, too many aliens by Fermi's Principle, affirmative action quotas for races and species, and goody-two-shoes namby-pamby simp-wimps. By the way, I didn't take seriously the view that _we_ are living in a Matrix world. The film was ambivalent on the claim that _this_ world is a Matrix world: it was more plausible to buy the timeline Morpheus gives of how _our_ world becomes the "Matrix" world. That is, the events taking place are "really" a few hundred years from now, with the machines having set the "environment bit" to "late 20th century." I thought this was obvious. Maybe not. Normally I don't worry ovemuch about such subtleties, but it seemed to me some fraction of Bob Hettinga's hate-rant had something to do with the supposed conceit that _our_ world is the "Matrix" world. I didn't take it this way. Rather, I took it as a classic SF story, describing some _possible future_. It's fun for a few seconds to think about the implications of _this_ world being a simulation in the Matrix, but it doesn't hold up, even in the context of the film's conceits. (I mean "conceit" in the lit-crit sense, not in the common sense.) Anyway, no accounting for tastes, as I said. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From carskar at netsolve.net Tue Oct 24 13:58:52 2000 From: carskar at netsolve.net (Carskadden, Rush) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 15:58:52 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives Message-ID: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555477B@cobra.netsolve.net> Everyone, Just a quick observation here. According to the Wired chart, it appears that the Republicans average roughly 49.85058296 and the Democrats average roughly 47.27853081 on the Wired News scale, with one representative being independent (Bernard Sanders), and one representative with an "A" for their party designation (Spencer Bachus). Here's my Republicans vs. Democrats breakdown of the Wired News chart: Party | Republican | Democrat | ----------------------------------- HR2301 | 0.181818182 | 0.343137255 | ----------------------------------- HR3615 | 0.153846154 | 0.024509804 | ----------------------------------- HR3709 | 0.958715596 | 0.697115385 | ----------------------------------- HR3125 | 0.218009479 | 0.575129534 | ----------------------------------- HR1501 | 0.440909091 | 0.908653846 | ----------------------------------- HR10 | 0.522522523 | 0.058252427 | ----------------------------------- HR1714 | 0.986175115 | 0.695652174 | ----------------------------------- total | 3.381165919 | 3.203791469 | ----------------------------------- votes | 6.798206278 | 6.777251185 | ----------------------------------- score | 49.85058296 | 47.27853081 | ----------------------------------- These are all just averages, and I omitted the "A" and "I" designated representatives. In regards to the "A" designated representative, Spencer Bachus, I think the "A" is an error. I was under the impression that he was a Republican. If he is, in fact, a Republican, then that changes our averages slightly: Party | Republican | Democrat | ----------------------------------- HR2301 | 0.180995475 | 0.343137255 | ----------------------------------- HR3615 | 0.153110048 | 0.024509804 | ----------------------------------- HR3709 | 0.95890411 | 0.697115385 | ----------------------------------- HR3125 | 0.216981132 | 0.575129534 | ----------------------------------- HR1501 | 0.438914027 | 0.908653846 | ----------------------------------- HR10 | 0.520179372 | 0.058252427 | ----------------------------------- HR1714 | 0.986238532 | 0.695652174 | ----------------------------------- total | 3.375 | 3.203791469 | ----------------------------------- votes | 6.799107143 | 6.777251185 | ----------------------------------- score | 49.75558036 | 47.27853081 | ----------------------------------- Which still puts Republicans in more of a hands-off strategy for technology, according to voting history. If Spencer Bachus is not a Republican, then please tell me what the hell an "A" party designation stands for. If you are interested in seeing TOTALS as opposed to AVERAGES, here is your chart: Party | Republican | Democrat | ----------------------------------- HR2301 | 40 | 70 | ----------------------------------- HR3615 | 32 | 5 | ----------------------------------- HR3709 | 210 | 145 | ----------------------------------- HR3125 | 46 | 111 | ----------------------------------- HR1501 | 97 | 189 | ----------------------------------- HR10 | 116 | 12 | ----------------------------------- HR1714 | 215 | 144 | ----------------------------------- total | 756 | 676 | ----------------------------------- votes | 1523 | 1430 | ----------------------------------- Again, it is entirely possible that my information is incorrect. I do recommend that you do the research yourself, as relying too much on these numbers means relying on numbers collected by a media source and in turn sorted and re-calculated by some punk-ass on the cypherpunks mailing list. To the best of my knowledge, however, this looks right. What alarms me is that though there is a slight difference in the overall score between Republicans and Democrats, neither party has a very strong leaning one way or the other, which illustrates the frustrations that a two-party system creates for those of us who would like to see a strong stance (either way) on the issue of government regulation of technology. I anxiously await any speculation that might take place on this list regarding how Libertarian representatives might have voted had they been in there, but the fact is that we live in a two-party system for the time being, and if we feel strongly about these issues, we need to accept that our representation may not be hearing us. Is it because we aren't speaking loudly enough on these issues? ok, Rush Carskadden -----Original Message----- From: Declan McCullagh [mailto:declan at well.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 11:15 AM To: Cypherpunks Mailing List Cc: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives At Wired News, we've compiled a list of the technology voting records of each member of the U.S. House of Representatives. That meant picking seven tech bills and grading all 435 legislators -- at least the ones who showed up those days -- on their floor votes. If they chose to take a hands-off approach, they got a "1", while regulatory votes got a "0." (If you disagree with us, flip the scale around.) Here's the list sorted by last name (scoll down to find your legislator): http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,39637,00.html Sorted by score, with the two California reps with 100 percent at the top: http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,39636,00.html And a summary of the results, with some methodology: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39625,00.html Some interesting results: Purported privacy advocates like Democrat Ed Markey didn't score well, getting a 33% of 100%, in part because of his opposition to financial privacy legislation. Republican Bob Goodlatte, Internet caucus co-chair, got just 43% because of his support for speech and gambling restrictions. -Declan The floor votes scored: HR2031: A vote to restrict online sales of alcohol. (No is 1) HR3615: A vote to create a new federal agency to spend $1.25 billion on rural TV service. (No is 1) HR3709: A vote to extend a temporary federal ban on Internet taxes. (Yes is 1) HR3125: A vote to prohibit Internet gambling. (No is 1) HR1501: A vote on an amendment to restrict the sale of violent material such as videogames to anyone under the age of 18. (No is 1) HR10: A vote on an amendment to protect financial privacy by restricting government monitoring of bank accounts. (Yes is 1) HR1714: A vote to allow the use of electronic signatures. (Yes is 1) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 10960 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 24 16:14:09 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:14:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Watermarking Utopia ... In-Reply-To: <578a89317f12dbb1a6cff39f53d9f69c@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: I think I know what the SDMI "challenge" is really trying to accomplish. These people are not trying to seriously test their watermarking schemes -- those are broken from the getgo because the players will be in control of (and owned by) their adversaries, and they know it. Moreover, it should be possible to create a program that can render any all-instrumental music in a watermark-free form, by simply recognizing the instrument (from the watermarked sound) and substituting with the same instrument from a recorded library of sounds, plus standard filters for modulation and mixing, so the existence of a watermarked version is almost irrelevant except in cases of vocal music. Nor are they trying to impress stockholders with the security of their stuff. There is no competition in the watermarking business yet; as far as stockholders are concerned, you are doing it or you are not. Nobody's is "more secure" than anybody else's, hence effort spent convincing stockholders that the security is an advantage is a waste of time. What they are trying to do, I think, is to set up a legal status indicating that they "did their homework". That way, when the crack of their published system happens (and it will) they can more easily get a favorable judgement from a court and try to legislate and sue the crack program out of existence. I know that DeCSS had this happen to it even though the MPAA didn't really do their homework -- but given what happened with DeCSS, I don't think the SDMI group could make a really solid case that the crack was totally unexpected in their case - and the DeCSS case hinged on expectation. Security by siccing a herd of lawyers on the incursion may be ridiculous from a technical standpoint - but it is effective in restricting what a business enterprise can do, as long as that business is owned by someone using a True Name who must answer to the law. Bear From anonymous at openpgp.net Tue Oct 24 13:21:50 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:21:50 -0400 Subject: CDR: voteauction moves offshore Message-ID: <80ad66ae1727b356bbb4e201583e14a4@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Will the Austrians treat the US injunction like Cryptome treats letters from HRH? Monday October 23 07:00 PM EDT Vote auction site attempts to skirt shutdown order By Patricia Jacobus, CNET News.com A rogue Web site purporting to sell votes for the upcoming U.S. presidential election is back in operation after being shut down last week under a federal court order. The Web site, formerly Voteauction.com, reappeared on the Net over the weekend under a new address run from outside the United States and beyond the easy reach of election officials. "The Web site may have started as a parody, but we dont think its a joke," said Thomas Leach, spokesman for the Chicago Board of Elections, which last Wednesday won an injunction ordering the site taken down. "Its encouraging U.S. citizens to break the law." The idea for the site, now Vote-auction.com, is to capitalize on undecided voters who planned on sitting out the November presidential election. Uncommitted voters can sell their votes to the Web site. The votes are then auctioned to the highest bidder, who decides which presidential candidate gets them. About 1,131 Illinois voters have participated in this questionable practice, according to the Web site. In California, 2,546 voters have so far taken part in the auction. Selling votes carries a maximum three-year federal prison term. It is unclear whether the votes being auctioned are legitimate. But with the balance of the presidential election hanging on a thin margin, the authorities arent taking any chances. "Could it affect the outcome of the elections? Yes," Leach said. "Should it? No." Created by James Baumgartner, a graduate student in New York, and later sold to a group of investors in Austria, the Web site has U.S. election officials up in arms. Authorities in New York, Illinois and California moved to shut down the site, with Chicagos election commission winning an injunction last week against Baumgartner, Austrian entrepreneur Hans Bernhard and three others, as well as Domain Bank, the registrar that provided the Internet address. As part of the court order, the judge specifically said Voteauction.com could not appear on the Net under a different name. After the order, Bernhard found a foreign registrar that issued a new, but slightly changed, Web address. Bernhard could not immediately be reached for comment, but information on his site declares that bidding on votes "works for, not against democracy." It also says he had huge reader support to keep the site in operation. Leach said the Chicago election commission has asked for help from the Austrian Embassy in Washington, D.C., to permanently shut down Bernhards business. The court injunction has also been delivered to the Ministry of Austria. "Theyre in defiance of a legitimate court order and in contempt of the American judicial system," Leach said of Bernhard and the others involved in Vote-auction.com. From ericm at lne.com Tue Oct 24 16:22:20 2000 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:22:20 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001024184518.00b51430@mail.well.com>; from declan@well.com on Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 07:04:02PM -0400 References: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555477B@cobra.netsolve.ne t> <4.3.0.20001024184518.00b51430@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20001024162220.A724@slack.lne.com> On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 07:04:02PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > Rush, > > This is a useful analysis. Thank you. I was considering doing one myself. > > Let me try to answer your question about how a Libertarian rep would rank. > Our rankings were explictly designed to reward "hands-off" votes, so it's a > reasonable assumption that one would score highly. > > But small-l and large-L libertarians disagree among themselves on what the > proper role of government should be on tech issues. Consider Ron Paul of > Texas. He has been the Libertarian candidate for president and has > reportedly never renounced his life membership in the party. > > Yet he scored just 71 percent, or 5 of 7 votes. That's because he voted > against banning states from taxing the Net (probably on federalism > grounds), even though libertarian groups such as Cato and Pacific Research > Institute liked that tax-ban. (His other negatively-scored vote was an > electronic signature law.) That vote on the Electronic Signature law could be considered a positive. It's a really lousy law. It's not a _Digital Signature_ law-- there's no crypto involved. Under this law, "clicking on a button" is explicitly considered a digital "signature". That is very easy to forge. This law opens up whole new vistas for identy theft and abuse. Maybe Paul has a clued-in person on his staff? -- Eric Murray http://www.lne.com/ericm ericm at lne.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5 Consulting Security Architect From tom at ricardo.de Tue Oct 24 07:26:24 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:26:24 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: New ID system keeps tabs on kids References: <6e7887175cd51a621cc5cfa971f5ee9c@anonymous> Message-ID: <39F59C10.46641C06@ricardo.de> Secret Squirrel wrote: > Students have been adjusting to the Windows 95-based system and > the additional responsibilities connected to it, officials say. there should be several geeks in the school that are already anticipating the fun they will have with this crap. From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 24 13:49:11 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:49:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: FW: House Republicans consider Census database, from NY Times Message-ID: The last time they did this, tens of thousands of law abiding American citizens were placed in prison camps, for no reason other than their ethnicity. Peter Trei > ---------- > From: Declan McCullagh[SMTP:declan at well.com] > Reply To: declan at well.com > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 2:29 PM > To: politech at politechbot.com > Subject: FC: House Republicans consider Census database, from NY > Times > > > ****** > > From: Steve Hutto > To: "'declan at well.com'" > Subject: politech submission > Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 12:21:36 -0600 > > Hi Declan, love the list. Apologies if you're already tracking this... > > Op-Ed from the NY Times 10/23/2000 > "My Data, Mine to Keep Private" by Linda R. Monk > http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/23/opinion/23MONK.html > > Scary opinion about House Republicans looking at creating a "linked data > set" between Census Bureau files and the IRS and SSA. Any meat to this > one? > > Excerpt: > "Under current law, census data on individuals can be used only to > benefit the Census Bureau, which has balked at turning over files > to the budget office without greater assurances of individual > privacy. However, the Congressional number crunchers are not taking > no for an answer. Republicans may tack an amendment allowing > Congress access to census data onto an appropriations bill before > Congress adjourns for the elections." > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology > You may redistribute this message freely if it remains intact. > To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html > This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > From jimdbell at home.com Tue Oct 24 16:52:25 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:52:25 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> Message-ID: <002b01c03e15$76044300$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Tim May Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) > (If fantasy/horror is included, the pattern continues. "Rosemary's > Baby," "The Exorcist," etc. Many great movies show their age. I > recently saw the re-release of "The Exorcist" and it seemed > slow-moving and tame by today's standards.) Remember what Beetlejuice said about it: "I've seen 'The Exorcist' a dozen (?) times and it keeps getting funnier each time I see it!" From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 24 14:05:43 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:05:43 -0400 Subject: CDR: Congress proposes raiding census records. Message-ID: Let us remember that the last time the privacy of census records were violated on this scale, they were used to imprison tens of thousands of law abiding American citizens, whose only crime was to have Japanese ancestry. Peter Trei ------------- http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/23/opinion/23MONK.html (free registration required) New York Times, 23 October, 2000 My Data, Mine to Keep Private By LINDA R. MONK WASHINGTON -- I was one of those paranoid Americans who chose not to answer all questions on the long form of the 2000 census. My husband and I decided that the government did not need to know, or had other ways of finding out, what time we left for work, how much our mortgage payment was or the amount of our income that came from wages. We were willing to risk the $100 fine to take a stand for individual privacy in an increasingly nosy and automated age. Editorial writers across the nation chided people like us for being so silly, insisting that only right-wing nuts with delusions of jackbooted federal invaders could possibly object to the census. Think of all the poor women who need day care and disabled people who depend on public transportation, we were told. And don't listen to the warnings of Trent Lott, the Senate majority leader - they're just another Republican ploy to get a low count on the census. Now, however, my concerns don't appear quite so ridiculous. The Congressional Budget Office, with the surprising help of some Congressional Republicans, is angling to get its hands on Census Bureau files. The budget office wants to create a "linked data set" on individuals - using information from the Internal Revenue Service, Social Security Administration and Census Bureau surveys - to help it evaluate proposed reforms in Medicare and Social Security. Under current law, census data on individuals can be used only to benefit the Census Bureau, which has balked at turning over files to the budget office without greater assurances of individual privacy. However, the Congressional number crunchers are not taking no for an answer. Republicans may tack an amendment allowing Congress access to census data onto an appropriations bill before Congress adjourns for the elections. The records the budget office wants are not themselves from the 2000 Census; they are voluntary responses to monthly surveys, with confidentiality promised. Forcing the bureau to give them up would set a disturbing precedent. Commerce Secretary Norman Mineta, who supervises the Census Bureau, warned Congress this month that amending the census law would "seriously compromise" the department's ability to safeguard taxpayers' privacy and "to assure continued high response rates of the American public to census surveys." Chip Walker, a spokesman for Representative Dan Miller, a Florida Republican who chairs the House subcommittee on the census, sees no problem with congressional access to census data. "The Census Bureau is the government, and Congress is the government," he said. Well, that's exactly what I'm afraid of. It's not surprising that a federal agency that stockpiles information would be raided by other federal agencies. If Congress changes the census law, the government will be well on its way to becoming another Amazon.com, which abruptly and retroactively weakened its privacy policy this year. I expected as much, because I don't believe either the government or businesses when they promise me privacy. That's why I routinely lie about personal information when applying for shoppers' discount cards and the like. And it's why I don't answer invasive questions on census forms. Keep your hands off my data set. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 24 17:08:05 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:08:05 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> Message-ID: At 7:43 PM -0400 10/24/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > >Moreover, all of these Hollywood Computer Generated Image applications were >designed to model *physics* to begin with, and it's just plain ignorance on >Hollywood's part, or at least on their audience's part, that keeps them >from being used the right way in the first place. Blame it on public >schools, or at least 30 years of socialist control of same. Nonsense, on at least a couple of accounts. I was active in the image processing field in 1980-84, and attended various SIGGRAPHs and suchlike. Fact is, "ray tracing" and various illumination models, and Gouraud and Phong shading and all the rest...were NOT motivated by a desire to model "*physics*." Physicist didn't give a dang about modelling light sources in 3D environments, and about morphing and wrapping and all that. The motivation was to produce special effects for education films (a la James Blinn at JPL), effects for movies (a la Alvy Ray Smith, eventually of Pixar), and advertisements for Hollywood and Madison Avenue. For many years, from at least the early 70s onward, the highlight of SIGGRAPH and similar conferences were the demos from leading makers of advertisements, digital paintboxes for t.v. weathermen, and so on. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 24 17:08:54 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: RE: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001024184518.00b51430@mail.well.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: >that only dealt with a narrow issue. We could have included ones such as >HR1501, but then we couldn't have figured out whether reps voted for it >based on their support of filtering software or firearm restrictions. > >-Declan I think that filtering software is an interesting case. While most of us would not use filtering software, I honestly think that it's important to freedom. If nobody comes up with some filterware that works, then there will probably be continuing pressure to regulate content. Count me in favor of filtering software -- just not in favor of its *compulsory* use. I want all the idiots who care about such things to filter out the sites I like and not see or think about them any more. 'cause if they think about them, they're likely to try and eliminate them. Bear (Who has read the odd copy of "Salon" and sometimes reads in the alt.sex.stories archives...) From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 24 17:37:46 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 17:37:46 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Who says there's gridlock in DC? In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001024202031.0234a8d0@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001024202031.0234a8d0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 8:20 PM -0400 10/24/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >bills that the prez signed today... Apropos of the socialist systems supported by Nathan Saper, Kerry Bonin, Dave Emery, and several others, what these bills do: > >On Tuesday, October 24th, 2000, the President signed into law: > >H.R. 1509 Disabled Veterans' LIFE Memorial Foundation "...requires that those hiring or doing business with disabled veterans must place them in jobs not stressful to their situation, and must take positive steps to assure veterans of their rights to all the beer they can drink..." >H.R. 3201 Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Site Study Act of 2000 "..is a special give-back to the heirs of Carter G. Woodson to provide them with a government-guaranteed pension and for funs to support the home of Carter G. Woodson, our first Undersecretary of the Interior for Central Texan Agrarian Affairs." >H.R. 3632 Golden Gate National Recreation Area Bountary Adjustment Act of >2000 "...establishes a free sex zone for lesbians, lesbigays, queers, fags, and transgendered persons in Golden Gate National Park..." > >H.R. 4063 Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical >Park Establishment Act of 2000 "...mandates that all history books be rewritten to stress the role of Rosie the Riveter and her fellow lesbians in winning the war. Requires that history teachers place her alongside of Crispus Attuck, the Negro bystander who was unknown until the 1960s when the Johnson Administration forced textbook writers to make him a central figure in the Revolutionary War." > And so on. And these were just _today's_ laws. Tomorrow brings us 37 new laws. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From 5963-3881 at m1.innovyx.com Tue Oct 24 18:15:10 2000 From: 5963-3881 at m1.innovyx.com (XBOX.com) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 18:15:10 -0700 Subject: CDR: News from XBOX.com Message-ID: <200010250139.SAA12376@toad.com> Thanks for your interest in Xbox. If you haven't already heard, Microsoft has announced a partnership with Imagine Media to publish the Official Xbox Magazine. Although you'll have to wait a year to see the print incarnation, Imagine wants to whet your appetite with the attached sample of their e-newsletter. Check it out and sign up to get it sent to you. ____________________________________ SUBSCRIBE To become a permanent subscriber to the Official Xbox Magazine Newsletter, please send an email to the following address: xbox-subscribe at lists.dailyradar.com UNSUBSCRIBE To cancel your subscription to Xbox.com News, please follow the instructions at the bottom of this page. THE OFFICIAL XBOX MAGAZINE NEWSLETTER Welcome to the Official Xbox Magazine Newsletter. Every month, you're going to get a complete blast of information right from the makers of the forthcoming Official Xbox Magazine and straight into your eyeballs. It could only get better if we were able to transmit the data straight into your cerebral cortex - and if we could, we would. DEVELOPING NEWS One-hundred and fifty-five of the best developers in the world have pledged allegiance to the Xbox - We've got the scoop, the games, and the rumors on 16 of the biggest. http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_25_3881 ASK SEAMUS He has a weird name, he loves to talk, and he knows more about the Xbox than anyone on this planet. See him talk, ask him questions, and generally marvel at his innate ability to tell you nothing and give away everything. http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_26_3881 BEHIND THE NUMBERS: Xbox vs. PlayStation 2 and what it means to you. http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_27_3881 BIG BROTHER: HE'S WATCHING YOU! Actual gossip or complete fabrications based on nothing more than one man's slide into insanity? Judge for yourself. http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_28_3881 TOP 10 THINGS TO DO WHILE YOU WAIT FOR THE XBOX Number 10: Petition Fruit Of The Loom to bring back adult-sized Underoos ... And nine other perfectly good ways to waste ... err ... spend the time. http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_29_3881 THE MAGAZINE How would you like to have a gaming magazine that combines the power and authority of an Official Magazine with the spirit, independence, and irreverence of a well-produced fanzine? See what we've got planned for Summer 2001. http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_23_3881 MAKE YOUR OWN MAGAZINE What kind of magazine do you really want? Speak up now or forever keep it to yourself. http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_24_3881 To see this email in HTML, click here: http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_31_3881 Not from the United States? Pick Your Newsletter: United Kingdom: http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_20_3881 France: http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_21_3881 Germany: http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_22_3881 For daily news on Xbox visit: http://tr.innovyx.com/redir.asp?109_30_3881 How to use this mailing list To cancel your subscription to this newsletter, either click on this link to unsubscribe http://t1.innovyx.com/unsubscribe.asp?5963_3881 or reply to this message with the word REMOVE in the Subject line. You can also unsubscribe at http://www.microsoft.com/misc/unsubscribe.htm. You can manage all your Microsoft.com communication preferences from this site. THIS DOCUMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS PROVIDED PURSUANT TO THIS PROGRAM ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. The information type should not be interpreted to be a commitment on the part of Microsoft and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information presented after the date of publication. INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED 'AS IS' WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. The user assumes the entire risk as to the accuracy and the use of this document. microsoft.com newsletter e-mail may be copied and distributed subject to the following conditions: 1. All text must be copied without modification and all pages must be included 2. All copies must contain Microsoft's copyright notice and any other notices provided therein 3. This document may not be distributed for profit -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 12868 bytes Desc: not available URL: From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Tue Oct 24 15:30:22 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 18:30:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> Message-ID: <39F60D7D.F281A3A1@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Gee, I saw the Matrix as definitely being our world now, today -- as was The 13th Floor, and Wag the Dog. What they are all talking about is the illusionary nature of "reality". Basic Buddhist precept, really -- and very apropos for our times. Forget the sci-fi razzmatazz. They're just trying to wake people up to the scam, the big lie. Watch Wag the Dog on DVD, and then watch the commentary that comes with it. Reality is a construct, built by our keepers. Tim May wrote: > By the way, I didn't take seriously the view that _we_ are living in > a Matrix world. The film was ambivalent on the claim that _this_ > world is a Matrix world: it was more plausible to buy the timeline > Morpheus gives of how _our_ world becomes the "Matrix" world. That > is, the events taking place are "really" a few hundred years from > now, with the machines having set the "environment bit" to "late 20th > century." I thought this was obvious. Maybe not. Normally I don't > worry ovemuch about such subtleties, but it seemed to me some > fraction of Bob Hettinga's hate-rant had something to do with the > supposed conceit that _our_ world is the "Matrix" world. I didn't > take it this way. Rather, I took it as a classic SF story, describing > some _possible future_. -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From declan at well.com Tue Oct 24 16:04:02 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 19:04:02 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives In-Reply-To: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555477B@cobra.netsolve.ne t> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001024184518.00b51430@mail.well.com> Rush, This is a useful analysis. Thank you. I was considering doing one myself. Let me try to answer your question about how a Libertarian rep would rank. Our rankings were explictly designed to reward "hands-off" votes, so it's a reasonable assumption that one would score highly. But small-l and large-L libertarians disagree among themselves on what the proper role of government should be on tech issues. Consider Ron Paul of Texas. He has been the Libertarian candidate for president and has reportedly never renounced his life membership in the party. Yet he scored just 71 percent, or 5 of 7 votes. That's because he voted against banning states from taxing the Net (probably on federalism grounds), even though libertarian groups such as Cato and Pacific Research Institute liked that tax-ban. (His other negatively-scored vote was an electronic signature law.) This scorecard is by nature brittle. If we had included more votes, it's a near certainty that our two 100-scorers would not have perfect votes. One is anti-porn; we (unfortunately) didn't have any Net-porn votes to include. Neither CDA nor COPA was this session. Adding more votes would have boosted other rankings. Also, the scorecard was designed to focus as closely as possible on votes that only dealt with a narrow issue. We could have included ones such as HR1501, but then we couldn't have figured out whether reps voted for it based on their support of filtering software or firearm restrictions. -Declan At 15:58 10/24/2000 -0500, Carskadden, Rush wrote: >Everyone, > Just a quick observation here. According to the Wired chart, it > appears that the Republicans average roughly 49.85058296 and the > Democrats average roughly 47.27853081 on the Wired News scale, with one > representative being independent (Bernard Sanders), and one > representative with an "A" for their party designation (Spencer Bachus). > Here's my Republicans vs. Democrats breakdown of the Wired News chart: > >Party | Republican | Democrat | >----------------------------------- >HR2301 | 0.181818182 | 0.343137255 | >----------------------------------- >HR3615 | 0.153846154 | 0.024509804 | >----------------------------------- >HR3709 | 0.958715596 | 0.697115385 | >----------------------------------- >HR3125 | 0.218009479 | 0.575129534 | >----------------------------------- >HR1501 | 0.440909091 | 0.908653846 | >----------------------------------- >HR10 | 0.522522523 | 0.058252427 | >----------------------------------- >HR1714 | 0.986175115 | 0.695652174 | >----------------------------------- >total | 3.381165919 | 3.203791469 | >----------------------------------- >votes | 6.798206278 | 6.777251185 | >----------------------------------- >score | 49.85058296 | 47.27853081 | >----------------------------------- > >These are all just averages, and I omitted the "A" and "I" designated >representatives. In regards to the "A" designated representative, Spencer >Bachus, I think the "A" is an error. I was under the impression that he >was a Republican. If he is, in fact, a Republican, then that changes our >averages slightly: > >Party | Republican | Democrat | >----------------------------------- >HR2301 | 0.180995475 | 0.343137255 | >----------------------------------- >HR3615 | 0.153110048 | 0.024509804 | >----------------------------------- >HR3709 | 0.95890411 | 0.697115385 | >----------------------------------- >HR3125 | 0.216981132 | 0.575129534 | >----------------------------------- >HR1501 | 0.438914027 | 0.908653846 | >----------------------------------- >HR10 | 0.520179372 | 0.058252427 | >----------------------------------- >HR1714 | 0.986238532 | 0.695652174 | >----------------------------------- >total | 3.375 | 3.203791469 | >----------------------------------- >votes | 6.799107143 | 6.777251185 | >----------------------------------- >score | 49.75558036 | 47.27853081 | >----------------------------------- > > Which still puts Republicans in more of a hands-off strategy for > technology, according to voting history. If Spencer Bachus is not a > Republican, then please tell me what the hell an "A" party designation > stands for. > > If you are interested in seeing TOTALS as opposed to AVERAGES, here > is your chart: > >Party | Republican | Democrat | >----------------------------------- >HR2301 | 40 | 70 | >----------------------------------- >HR3615 | 32 | 5 | >----------------------------------- >HR3709 | 210 | 145 | >----------------------------------- >HR3125 | 46 | 111 | >----------------------------------- >HR1501 | 97 | 189 | >----------------------------------- >HR10 | 116 | 12 | >----------------------------------- >HR1714 | 215 | 144 | >----------------------------------- >total | 756 | 676 | >----------------------------------- >votes | 1523 | 1430 | >----------------------------------- > > Again, it is entirely possible that my information is incorrect. I > do recommend that you do the research yourself, as relying too much on > these numbers means relying on numbers collected by a media source and in > turn sorted and re-calculated by some punk-ass on the cypherpunks mailing list. > > To the best of my knowledge, however, this looks right. What alarms > me is that though there is a slight difference in the overall score > between Republicans and Democrats, neither party has a very strong > leaning one way or the other, which illustrates the frustrations that a > two-party system creates for those of us who would like to see a strong > stance (either way) on the issue of government regulation of technology. > I anxiously await any speculation that might take place on this list > regarding how Libertarian representatives might have voted had they been > in there, but the fact is that we live in a two-party system for the time > being, and if we feel strongly about these issues, we need to accept that > our representation may not be hearing us. Is it because we aren't > speaking loudly enough on these issues? > >ok, >Rush Carskadden > >-----Original Message----- >From: Declan McCullagh [mailto:declan at well.com] >Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 11:15 AM >To: Cypherpunks Mailing List >Cc: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu >Subject: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives > >At Wired News, we've compiled a list of the technology voting records of >each member of the U.S. House of Representatives. > >That meant picking seven tech bills and grading all 435 legislators -- at >least the ones who showed up those days -- on their floor votes. If they >chose to take a hands-off approach, they got a "1", while regulatory votes >got a "0." (If you disagree with us, flip the scale around.) > >Here's the list sorted by last name (scoll down to find your legislator): > >http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,39637,00.html > >Sorted by score, with the two California reps with 100 percent at the top: > >http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,39636,00.html > > >And a summary of the results, with some methodology: > >http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39625,00.html > > >Some interesting results: Purported privacy advocates like Democrat Ed >Markey didn't score well, getting a 33% of 100%, in part because of his >opposition to financial privacy legislation. Republican Bob Goodlatte, >Internet caucus co-chair, got just 43% because of his support for speech >and gambling restrictions. > >-Declan > > >The floor votes scored: > >HR2031: A vote to restrict online sales of alcohol. (No is 1) >HR3615: A vote to create a new federal agency to spend $1.25 billion on >rural TV service. (No is 1) >HR3709: A vote to extend a temporary federal ban on Internet taxes. (Yes >is 1) >HR3125: A vote to prohibit Internet gambling. (No is 1) >HR1501: A vote on an amendment to restrict the sale of violent material >such as videogames to anyone under the age of 18. (No is 1) >HR10: A vote on an amendment to protect financial privacy by restricting >government monitoring of bank accounts. (Yes is 1) >HR1714: A vote to allow the use of electronic signatures. (Yes is 1) From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 24 16:13:50 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 19:13:50 -0400 Subject: DCSB: Ramzan and Van Someren; Minting Millidollars for Streaming Cash Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [Note that the Harvard Club is now "business casual". No more jackets and ties... --RAH] The Digital Commerce Society of Boston Presents Zulfikar Ramzan, Financial Cryptographer, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science and Dr. Nicko Van Someren, Financial Cryptographer, Chief Technology Officer, nCipher PLC, "Aspen" vs. "Hancock": Minting Millidollars for Streaming Cash Tuesday, November 7th, 2000 12 - 2 PM The Downtown Harvard Club of Boston One Federal Street, Boston, MA Zulfikar Ramzan is currently a PhD student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology where he works with the Cryptography and Information Security research group. At MIT, he works under the supervision of Professor Ronald Rivest, co-inventor of the RSA public-key cryptosystem and the Micromint micropayment protocol. He has authored a number of publications in the field of cryptography and has presented his research at various conferences in his field [including the International Conference on Financial Cryptography --RAH]. He holds a number of patents in data security, and some of his work is being considered for use in several national and international standards in the wireless communications industry. Mr. Ramzan has worked in cryptographic algorithm and protocol design with the Wireless Secure Communications group at Lucent Technologies. Upon graduation, Mr. Ramzan will join Lucira Technologies. Dr Nicko van Someren co-founded nCipher in 1996. As Chief Technology Officer Nicko leads nCipher's research team and directs the technical development of nCipher products. From 1993 to 1996, Nicko was Technical Director and co-founder of ANT Limited, where he developed hardware products and application software. Before that, he was employed as a Researcher by Xerox EuroPARC and as a Software Engineer by Atari Research and Perihelion Software Limited. Nicko has almost 20 years' experience in cryptography, software and hardware product development, and holds a Doctorate and First Class degree in Computer Science from Trinity College, Cambridge, UK. Zully Ramzan will talk about the proposed design of Aspen: a practical Micromint implementation for IBUC, the Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation. In addition to going over the basic underlying protocols, he will discuss the various design and parameter choices. He will also examine the practical ramifications of these decisions. Thereafter he will discuss potential modifications and extensions that may be of use for future implementations of Aspen. The ideas he will present are based on discussions with Ron Rivest and Adi Shamir, the two co-inventors of Micromint. Nicko van Someren will then talk about the practical problems surrounding the implementation of a MicroMint. He will consider the engineering issues along with the economic issues and look at how the nature of MicroMint mandates various unhelpful deployment issues. He will also consider alternatives to MicroMint which aim to solve these issues. [Including a signature-based solution IBUC is calling, for lack of a better moniker, "Hancock", which would be about 100 times cheaper to prototype, much less get to market, and streaming cash on the wire in 3-6 months. :-) --RAH] Want to know what IBUC's going to do *now*? Come to the November DCSB meeting and find out. Appropriately enough, this meeting of the Digital Commerce Society of Boston will be held on Election Day, Tuesday, November 7th, 2000, from 12pm - 2pm at the Downtown Branch of the Harvard Club of Boston, on One Federal Street. The price for lunch is $35.00. This price includes lunch, room rental, A/V hardware if necessary, and the speakers' lunch. The Harvard Club has relaxed its dress code, which is now "business casual", meaning no sneakers or jeans. Fair warning: since we purchase these luncheons in advance, we will be unable to refund the price of your meal if the Club finds you in violation of what's left of its dress code. We need to receive a company check, or money order, (or, if we *really* know you, a personal check) payable to "The Harvard Club of Boston", by Saturday, November 4th, or you won't be on the list for lunch. Checks payable to anyone else but The Harvard Club of Boston will have to be sent back. Checks should be sent to Robert Hettinga, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, Massachusetts, 02131. Again, they *must* be made payable to "The Harvard Club of Boston", in the amount of $35.00. Please include your e-mail address so that we can send you a confirmation If anyone has questions, or has a problem with these arrangements (We've had to work with glacial A/P departments more than once, for instance), please let us know via e-mail, and we'll see if we can work something out. Upcoming speakers for DCSB are: December TBA TBD Ted Byfield Decentralized DNS Control TBD Scott Moskowitz Watermarking and Bluespike As you can see, :-), we are actively searching for future speakers. If you are in Boston on the first Tuesday of the month, are a principal in digital commerce, and would like to make a presentation to the Society, please send e-mail to the DCSB Program Committee, care of Robert Hettinga, . For more information about the Digital Commerce Society of Boston, send "info dcsb" in the body of a message to From anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net Tue Oct 24 16:31:43 2000 From: anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net (An Metet) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 19:31:43 -0400 Subject: CDR: Public Demo of Carnivore and Friends Message-ID: <1d521c9c17a4e2bfa87c27be4d83532c@mixmaster.shinn.net> FBI agent Marcus C. Thomas (who is mentioned in the EPIC FOIA documents) made a very interesting presentation at NANOG 20 yesterday morning, discussing Carnivore. Agent Thomas gave a demonstration of both Carnivore 1.34 (the currently deployed version) and Carnivore 2.0 (the development version) as well as some of the other DragonWare tools. Most of this information isn't new, but it demonstrates that the DragonWare tools can be used to massively analyze all network traffic accessible to a Carnivore box. The configuration screen of Carnivore shows that protocol information can be captured in 3 different modes: Full, Pen, and None. There are check boxes for TCP, UDP, and ICMP. Carnivore can be used to capture all data sent to or from a given IP address, or range of IP addresses. It can be used to search on information in the traffic, doing matching against text entered in the "Data Text Strings" box. This, the agent assured us, was so that web mail could be identified and captured, but other browsing could be excluded. It can be used to automatically capture telnet, pop3, and FTP logins with the click of a check box. It can monitor mail to and/or from specific email addresses. It can be configured to monitor based on IP address, RADIUS username, MAC address, or network adaptor. IPs can be manually added to a running Carnivore session for monitoring. Carnivore allows for monitoring of specific TCP or UDP ports and port ranges (with drop down boxes for the most common protocols). Carnivore 2.0 is much the same, but the configuration menu is cleaner, and it allows Boolean statements for exclusion filter creation. -- The Packeteer program takes raw network traffic dumps, reconstructs the packets, and writes them to browsable files. CoolMiner is the post-processor session browser. The demo was version 1.2SP4. CoolMiner has the ability to replay a victim's steps while web browsing, chatting on ICQ, Yahoo Messenger, AIM, IRC. It can step through telnet sessions, AOL account usage, and Netmeeting. It can display information sent to a network printer. It can process netbios data. CoolMiner displays summary usage, broken down by origination and destination IP addresses, which can be selectively viewed. Carnivore usually runs on Windows NT Workstation, but could run on Windows 2000. Some choice quotes from Agent Thomas: "Non-relevant data is sealed from disclosure." "Carnivore has no active interaction with any devices on the network." "In most cases Carnivore is only used with a Title III. The FBI will deploy Carnivore without a warrant in cases where the victim is willing to allow a Carnivore box to monitor his communication." "We rely on the ISP's security [for the security of the Carnivore box]." "We aren't concerned about the ISP's security." When asked how Carnivore boxes were protected from attack, he said that the only way they were accessible was through dialup or ISDN. "We could take measures all the way up to encryption if we thought it was necessary." While it doesn't appear that Carnivore uses a dial-back system to prevent unauthorized access, Thomas mentioned that the FBI sometimes "uses a firmware device to prevent unauthorized calls." When asked to address the concerns that FBI agents could modify Carnivore data to plant evidence, Thomas reported that Carnivore logs FBI agents' access attempts. The FBI agent access logs for the Carnivore box become part of the court records. When asked the question "It's often common practice to write back doors into [software programs]. How do we know you aren't doing that?", Thomas replied "I agree 100%. You're absolutely right." When asked why the FBI would not release source, he said: "We don't sell guns, even though we have them." When asked: "What do you do in cases where the subject is using encryption?" Thomas replied, "This suite of devices can't handle that." I guess they hand it off to the NSA. He further stated that about 10% of the FBI's Carnivore cases are thwarted by the use of encryption, and that it is "more common to find encryption when we seize static data, such as on hard drives." 80% of Carnivore cases have involved national security. -- Also of interest was a network diagram that looked very similar to the one in the EPIC FOIA document at http://www.epic.org/privacy/carnivore/omnivorecapabilities1.html , except that there was no redaction of captions. -- Marcus Thomas can be contacted for questions at mthomas at fbi.gov or at (730) 632-6091. He is "usually at his desk." From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 24 16:43:09 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 19:43:09 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> Message-ID: At 2:53 PM -0700 on 10/24/00, Tim May wrote: > Interesting that Bob Hettinga is so offended by the ideology/outlook > of "The Matrix." I'm offended, if you can call it taking offense at all, by "cartoon physics", and innumeracy in general, in the movies and television. Just because we can show it on the screen and it looks real, doesn't mean that it'll ever be physically possible, and I don't mean that in the 19th century patent-examiner sense, I mean it in the "ain't physically possible" sense. Sound in space is a good example. Or, frankly, "morphing", "shapeshifting", or whatever. Sure, we might all turn into nanotech grey goo sooner or later, but, frankly, that stuff more likely in the realm of faster-than-light travel, which is another thing I have trouble with. However, life is too short to grumble about *everything*. :-). Moreover, all of these Hollywood Computer Generated Image applications were designed to model *physics* to begin with, and it's just plain ignorance on Hollywood's part, or at least on their audience's part, that keeps them from being used the right way in the first place. Blame it on public schools, or at least 30 years of socialist control of same. >I thought it was mostly consistent with our main > outlooks, albeit set in a world unlike our own. I think it's a lot less consistent with the cypherpunk viewpoint than most people here think. Morpheus et.al., are not libertarian anarchists, boys and girls. They're proto-statists. When the sequel comes out, if ever, and they show where the rest of the humans are, you'll see that, I bet. Unless they read cypherpunks, of course. :-). > Some film ideologies > _do_ offend me. The world of "Star Trek" is a good example: the > Federation, Starfleet, Prime Directive, aliens speaking English, too > many aliens by Fermi's Principle, affirmative action quotas for races > and species, and goody-two-shoes namby-pamby simp-wimps. Amen. Hierarchical, frankly communist, nonsense. In a hairshirt, for that matter. At least Banks is a communist with a sense of humor. Roddenberry's Earth: The Final Conflict is certainly in the same vein, and, so, too, is Andromeda, from the looks of it. I still watch the damn stuff though, even if they take a chainsaw, or at least a lemon meringue pie, to Starship Troopers. > By the way, I didn't take seriously the view that _we_ are living in > a Matrix world. Neither do I. With the exception that most people out there *are* statists, and that the Matrix makes a marvellous allegory for the nation-state, at least in terms of its pervasiveness. Frankly, having learned about the impact of cryptography on public internetworks, it's hard to just "jack back in", even if some of us can probably afford the odd Armani jacket themselves now, as a result what they've learned here... :-). > it seemed to me some > fraction of Bob Hettinga's hate-rant had something to do with the > supposed conceit that _our_ world is the "Matrix" world. Nope. Didn't intend that, sorry for creating that misapprehension. > Anyway, no accounting for tastes, as I said. No argument there... Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From jamesd at echeque.com Tue Oct 24 19:45:43 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A.. Donald) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 19:45:43 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk? In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001024194300.0183d358@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 11:39 PM 10/23/2000 -0700, Tim May wrote: > (Sort of comparable to the demands by some on our own list who > periodically demand that list members "denounce" acts of terrorism > or whatever it is they don't like. "If you don't come out against > the bombings of federal buildings, then you are as guilty as the > bombers.") I of course am in favor of bombing federal buildings. To judge by the cheer that goes up in the movie theatre during the big scene in "independence day" when Washington gets nuked, I have some company. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG RbyQGhtcSal+Jl5AK/03A47wMmWrsA0Tz4p/Fcei 41hxVbQh4jsFd1tmHegmmn9xjuEVBhIsXbhiMMQUH From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 24 16:49:52 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 19:49:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: DCSB: Ramzan and Van Someren; Minting Millidollars for Streaming Cash Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From declan at well.com Tue Oct 24 17:01:58 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 20:01:58 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives In-Reply-To: <20001024162220.A724@slack.lne.com> References: <4.3.0.20001024184518.00b51430@mail.well.com> <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555477B@cobra.netsolve.ne t> <4.3.0.20001024184518.00b51430@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001024195855.0234fb00@mail.well.com> I spoke to one of Paul's aides about the scorecard, and he said (I'm paraphrasing) that his boss voted against the bill in part because it was flawed, and not just on knee-jerk federalism grounds or whatnot. I've also written about the law, and I agree it's flawed, but I still decided to count it as a net positive. -Declan At 16:22 10/24/2000 -0700, Eric Murray wrote: >That vote on the Electronic Signature law could be considered a positive. >It's a really lousy law. It's not a _Digital Signature_ law-- >there's no crypto involved. Under this law, "clicking on a button" >is explicitly considered a digital "signature". >That is very easy to forge. This law opens up whole new vistas for >identy theft and abuse. Maybe Paul has a clued-in person on his staff? From declan at well.com Tue Oct 24 17:20:45 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 20:20:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Who says there's gridlock in DC? Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001024202031.0234a8d0@mail.well.com> bills that the prez signed today... On Tuesday, October 24th, 2000, the President signed into law: H.R. 1509 Disabled Veterans' LIFE Memorial Foundation H.R. 3201 Carter G. Woodson Home National Historic Site Study Act of 2000 H.R. 3632 Golden Gate National Recreation Area Bountary Adjustment Act of 2000 H.R. 3676 Santa Rosa and Santa Jacinto Mountains National Monument Act H.R. 4063 Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park Establishment Act of 2000 H.R. 4275 Colorado Canyons National Conservation Area and Black Ridge Canyons Wilderness Act of 2000 H.R. 4386 Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Act of 2000 H.R. 4613 National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Act of 2000 H.R. 5036 Dayton Aviation Heritage preservation Amendment of 2000 S. 1849 White Clay Creek Wild and Scenic Rivers System From ericzmiz at bigfoot.com Tue Oct 24 19:03:28 2000 From: ericzmiz at bigfoot.com (ericzmiz at bigfoot.com) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 00 21:03:28 EST Subject: CDR: Hi There! Message-ID: <200010250515.OAA08775@ns.realhost.co.kr> Hi There! I thought I would drop you a quick note and let you know that there is an exciting and very profitable SELF-RUN online business which is exploding in 2000. This is the EASIEST and the HOTTEST online business today! Voted as #1 online business in a major business magazine! Company of the month twice in another major publication! Please check out my website below for more details: http://216.32.170.11/rants/inetx/ It takes only 30 seconds to find out. You will be glad that you did! Thank you and have a nice day!......Brian From oral-heaven-owner at egroups.com Tue Oct 24 15:29:03 2000 From: oral-heaven-owner at egroups.com (oral-heaven Moderator) Date: 24 Oct 2000 22:29:03 -0000 Subject: CDR: Welcome to oral-heaven Message-ID: <972426543.4370@egroups.com> Hi ! Welcome to the group The success or otherwise of the group will depend on its members so please try to post whenever possible. Please take a few mins. to read the Frequently Asked Questions at http://www8.50megs.com/egtoys/faq.html Buy Sex Toys online at http://www.sextoyfun.com/egtoys/ Never have problems finding an egroup to join. See this groups link page for a selection of some of the best groups. http://www.egroups.com/links/oral-heaven/ Toys and Collectables AUctions http://www.geocities.com/ebkev/auctioneg.html From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 24 22:44:18 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 22:44:18 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk? In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001024194300.0183d358@shell11.ba.best.com> References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001024194300.0183d358@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: At 7:45 PM -0700 10/24/00, James A.. Donald wrote: > -- >At 11:39 PM 10/23/2000 -0700, Tim May wrote: >> (Sort of comparable to the demands by some on our own list who >> periodically demand that list members "denounce" acts of terrorism >> or whatever it is they don't like. "If you don't come out against >> the bombings of federal buildings, then you are as guilty as the >> bombers.") > >I of course am in favor of bombing federal buildings. To judge by >the cheer that goes up in the movie theatre during the big scene in >"independence day" when Washington gets nuked, I have some company. Yes, this was quite striking. Many people, even journalists, have reported the same observation. There was a visceral reaction to the sight of the White House being destroyed from above. Similarly, crowds went wild as hundreds of cops and feds and SWAT ninjas were mowed down in the attack on the police building in "The Matrix." Some lessons there. (No time to write a piece on this, but perhaps the whole Libertarian Party effort is foundering precisely because it has picked the "safe and boring" route. Murray Rothbard, for example, has his arcane theory about how people may not even take action when someone is attacking them...until the attack has actually resulted in injury. Many exposed to this kind of thinking, and the "inside baseball" of ultra-boring LP conventions, probably lose interest in Libertarian issues. Part of human nature, driven by evolutionary pressures, seems to be an inclination to act decisively.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From petro at bounty.org Tue Oct 24 22:46:21 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 22:46:21 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> Message-ID: For me the description of an ideal movie is "A series of gunshots and explosions strung together by one liners". I go to the movies for amusement, not intellectual satisfaction. That said: >By the way, I didn't take seriously the view that _we_ are living in >a Matrix world. The film was ambivalent on the claim that _this_ >world is a Matrix world: it was more plausible to buy the timeline >Morpheus gives of how _our_ world becomes the "Matrix" world. That >is, the events taking place are "really" a few hundred years from >now, with the machines having set the "environment bit" to "late >20th century." I thought this was obvious. Maybe not. Normally I >don't worry ovemuch about such subtleties, but it seemed to me some >fraction of Bob Hettinga's hate-rant had something to do with the >supposed conceit that _our_ world is the "Matrix" world. I didn't >take it this way. Rather, I took it as a classic SF story, >describing some _possible future_. The *ONE* thing that beefed me big time about the "Matrix" was the excuse they gave for the computer keeping all the people alive. The claim (as I remember) was that the bodies were used to store/create energy for the computer to run. It *really* irked me. > >It's fun for a few seconds to think about the implications of _this_ >world being a simulation in the Matrix, but it doesn't hold up, even >in the context of the film's conceits. (I mean "conceit" in the >lit-crit sense, not in the common sense.) If this world *were* a computer generated construct, it would explain a few things. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 24 23:29:43 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 23:29:43 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from ravage@ssz.com on Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 07:28:25AM -0500 References: <20001022223135.A3024@well.com> Message-ID: <20001024232942.F3255@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1072 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 24 23:36:40 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 23:36:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from petro@bounty.org on Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 12:04:20AM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20001024233639.G3255@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2178 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 24 23:39:47 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 23:39:47 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001023202934.01a429b8@shell11.ba.best.com>; from jamesd@echeque.com on Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 08:37:42PM -0700 References: <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001022210731.B2615@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001023202934.01a429b8@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <20001024233947.H3255@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2634 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Tue Oct 24 23:58:18 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 23:58:18 -0700 Subject: CDR: Insurance: My Last Post Message-ID: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2145 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pbright at thevision.net Wed Oct 25 00:41:49 2000 From: pbright at thevision.net (Rev. Parker Bright) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 00:41:49 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001025004036.00ad2d80@toto.csustan.edu> If you truly believe this why not take a hint from Camus and kill yourself. You could one, lose nothing due to inherent lack of value, two, exercise the one undeniable right, three, the secession of personal pain and four, free up resources to reduce the pain of others. Not taking shots, just offering options. Rev. PHB I like to hold the door open for people approaching the door behind me, especially when they're really far behind and they have to hustle so as not to leave me standing there. Then I get to hear those stupid polite bastards thank me, when all I did was make them run. - Jonathan Colan From galt at inconnu.isu.edu Wed Oct 25 00:41:25 2000 From: galt at inconnu.isu.edu (John Galt) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 01:41:25 -0600 (MDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Illicit words In-Reply-To: <20001023182018.A9932@galadriel.kode187.net> Message-ID: This was the list I used on "jam echelon day". It is by no means complete, but it's a start. The system is echelon, and it's used by the NSA outside the US and by extension by the FBI within the US. Echelon is only a rumor, but some LEA's have been caught saying in public that echelon is "old news" when asked about it. On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Bruce J.A. Nourish wrote: > I read somewhere that the FBI/NSA/some other Big Bro. organisation has a > list of words that they check your email against, and if they find any, they > have someone read your mail. Anyone know what they are? > > TIA & HAND > -- Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity. Who is John Galt? galt at inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! -------------- next part -------------- FBI CIA NSA IRS ATF BATF DOD WACO RUBY RIDGE OKC OKLAHOMA CITY MILITIA GUN HANDGUN MILGOV ASSAULT RIFLE TERRORISM BOMB DRUG HORIUCHI KORESH DAVIDIAN KAHL POSSE COMITATUS RANDY WEAVER VICKIE WEAVER SPECIAL FORCES LINDA THOMPSON SPECIAL OPERATIONS GROUP SOG SOF DELTA FORCE CONSTITUTION BILL OF RIGHTS WHITEWATER POM PARK ON METER ARKANSIDE IRAN CONTRAS OLIVER NORTH VINCE FOSTER PROMIS MOSSAD NASA MI5 ONI CID AK47 M16 C4 MALCOLM X REVOLUTION CHEROKEE HILLARY BILL CLINTON GORE GEORGE BUSH WACKENHUT TERRORIST TASK FORCE 160 SPECIAL OPS 12TH GROUP 5TH GROUP SF You hear those, Echelon? Help me celebrate "jam echelon" day by using any and all of these words in all email and phone conversations on 10/21/99. Any of the words should be enough to "flag" your communication by Echelon--let's see how big their storage capaity REALLY is... Who is John Galt? galt at inconnu.isu.edu, of course! From dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu Tue Oct 24 23:00:23 2000 From: dmolnar at hcs.harvard.edu (dmolnar) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 02:00:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, petro wrote: > > If this world *were* a computer generated construct, it would > explain a few things. This is why the Gnostics had such a good run of it in the first century, right? At least until they were wiped out... -David From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Wed Oct 25 01:08:42 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 04:08:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Congress proposes raiding census records. Message-ID: I only answered the first question in the last census: how many people live at that address (or something to that effect). The rest I crossed out with fat black permanent marker. The result: no visits from the census taker. No inquiries from the Census Office. No fine. No repercussions of any kind. I am puzzled why anybody would have bothered to answer the remaining questions. --Lucky Green "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 > -----Original Message----- > From: cypherpunks at openpgp.net [mailto:cypherpunks at openpgp.net]On Behalf > Of Trei, Peter > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 14:07 > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Congress proposes raiding census records. > > > Let us remember that the last time the privacy of > census records were violated on this scale, > they were used to imprison tens of thousands > of law abiding American citizens, whose only > crime was to have Japanese ancestry. > > Peter Trei > > ------------- > > http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/23/opinion/23MONK.html > (free registration required) > > New York Times, 23 October, 2000 > > My Data, Mine to Keep Private > > By LINDA R. MONK > > WASHINGTON -- I was one of those paranoid Americans > who chose not to answer all questions on the long form of > the 2000 census. My husband and I decided that the > government did not need to know, or had other ways of > finding out, what time we left for work, how much our > mortgage payment was or the amount of our income that came > from wages. We were willing to risk the $100 fine to take a > stand for individual privacy in an increasingly nosy and > automated age. > > Editorial writers across the nation chided people like us > for being so silly, insisting that only right-wing nuts with > delusions of jackbooted federal invaders could possibly > object to the census. Think of all the poor women who need > day care and disabled people who depend on public > transportation, we were told. And don't listen to the > warnings of Trent Lott, the Senate majority leader - > they're just another Republican ploy to get a low count on > the census. > > Now, however, my concerns don't appear quite so > ridiculous. The Congressional Budget Office, with the > surprising help of some Congressional Republicans, is > angling to get its hands on Census Bureau files. The budget > office wants to create a "linked data set" on individuals - > using information from the Internal Revenue Service, Social > Security Administration and Census Bureau surveys - to help > it evaluate proposed reforms in Medicare and Social > Security. > > Under current law, census data on individuals can be used > only to benefit the Census Bureau, which has balked at > turning over files to the budget office without greater > assurances of individual privacy. However, the Congressional > number crunchers are not taking no for an answer. > Republicans may tack an amendment allowing Congress access > to census data onto an appropriations bill before Congress > adjourns for the elections. > > The records the budget office wants are not themselves from > the 2000 Census; they are voluntary responses to monthly > surveys, with confidentiality promised. Forcing the bureau > to give them up would set a disturbing precedent. Commerce > Secretary Norman Mineta, who supervises the Census Bureau, > warned Congress this month that amending the census law > would "seriously compromise" the department's ability to > safeguard taxpayers' privacy and "to assure continued high > response rates of the American public to census surveys." > > Chip Walker, a spokesman for Representative Dan Miller, a > Florida Republican who chairs the House subcommittee on the > census, sees no problem with congressional access to census > data. "The Census Bureau is the government, and Congress is > the government," he said. > > Well, that's exactly what I'm afraid of. It's not surprising > that a federal agency that stockpiles information would be > raided by other federal agencies. If Congress changes the > census law, the government will be well on its way to > becoming another Amazon.com, which abruptly and > retroactively weakened its privacy policy this year. I > expected as much, because I don't believe either the > government or businesses when they promise me > privacy. That's why I routinely lie about personal > information when applying for shoppers' discount cards and > the like. And it's why I don't answer invasive questions on > census forms. Keep your hands off my data set. > > > From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Wed Oct 25 01:08:42 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 04:08:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: cypherpunks at openpgp.net [mailto:cypherpunks at openpgp.net]On Behalf > Of Ray Dillinger > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 17:06 > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: RE: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives > I think that filtering software is an interesting case. > > While most of us would not use filtering software, I honestly think > that it's important to freedom. > > If nobody comes up with some filterware that works, then there will > probably be continuing pressure to regulate content. Hogwash. "We must censor ourselves (a little, for now at least) or the government will censor us (harshly)". Get in the game, --Lucky Green "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Wed Oct 25 01:10:13 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 04:10:13 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: Nathan Saper wrote: > I think the government has a right to do whatever it needs to do > to maintain > the health and well-being of its population. That is the purpose of > the government. What is going on? Where are all these communists and fascists coming from that are populating our list nowadays? Why don't they crawl back under whatever rock they used to be? You are forgetting that government has some clear defined duties in this country. The duties are spelled out in the paragraph below: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed". No, meeting one of the requirements (life) at the expense of the others does not count. --Lucky Green "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 From tom at ricardo.de Wed Oct 25 02:19:51 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 05:19:51 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: voteauction moves offshore References: <80ad66ae1727b356bbb4e201583e14a4@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <39F6A473.7F6BF7BD@ricardo.de> anonymous at openpgp.net wrote: > "Theyre in defiance of a legitimate court order and in contempt of the American judicial > system," Leach said of Bernhard and the others involved in Vote-auction.com. once again, the US court system ignores the unpleasant fact that there are other countries on the planet. hey, wouldn't this be an interesting pick for havenco? high profile item, lots of publicity and a chance to show just what they're about. From kurth at usaexpress.net Wed Oct 25 02:23:26 2000 From: kurth at usaexpress.net (Kurth Bemis) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 05:23:26 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Illicit words In-Reply-To: References: <20001023182018.A9932@galadriel.kode187.net> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20001025052127.029e3c40@mail.usaexpress.net> At 01:41 AM 10/25/2000 -0600, John Galt wrote: i was always wondering when that day was......we should make it a monthly event :-) ~kurth FBI CIA NSA IRS ATF BATF DOD WACO RUBY RIDGE OKC OKLAHOMA CITY MILITIA GUN HANDGUN MILGOV ASSAULT RIFLE TERRORISM BOMB DRUG HORIUCHI KORESH DAVIDIAN KAHL POSSE COMITATUS RANDY WEAVER VICKIE WEAVER SPECIAL FORCES LINDA THOMPSON SPECIAL OPERATIONS GROUP SOG SOF DELTA FORCE CONSTITUTION BILL OF RIGHTS WHITEWATER POM PARK ON METER ARKANSIDE IRAN CONTRAS OLIVER NORTH VINCE FOSTER PROMIS MOSSAD NASA MI5 ONI CID AK47 M16 C4 MALCOLM X REVOLUTION CHEROKEE HILLARY BILL CLINTON GORE GEORGE BUSH WACKENHUT TERRORIST TASK FORCE 160 SPECIAL OPS 12TH GROUP 5TH GROUP SF >This was the list I used on "jam echelon day". It is by no means >complete, but it's a start. The system is echelon, and it's used by the >NSA outside the US and by extension by the FBI within the US. Echelon is >only a rumor, but some LEA's have been caught saying in public that >echelon is "old news" when asked about it. > >On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Bruce J.A. Nourish wrote: > > > I read somewhere that the FBI/NSA/some other Big Bro. organisation has a > > list of words that they check your email against, and if they find any, > they > > have someone read your mail. Anyone know what they are? > > > > TIA & HAND > > > >-- >Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity. > >Who is John Galt? galt at inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! Kurth Bemis - Network/Systems Administrator, USAExpress.net/Ozone Computer There is no sin except stupidity. -- Oscar Wilde kurth at usaexpress.net | http://www.usaexpress.net/kurth PGP key available - http://www.usaexpress.net/kurth/pgp Fight Weak Encryption! Donate your wasted CPU cycles to Distributed.net (http://www.distributed.net) From brflgnk at cotse.com Wed Oct 25 04:47:09 2000 From: brflgnk at cotse.com (brflgnk at cotse.com) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 07:47:09 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Illicit words Message-ID: <972474429.39f6c83dec3e2@webmail.cotse.com> Re: the Echelon bait list. I get most of them, but what is provocative about "POM PARK ON METER"? Google and AltaVista only seem to turn up pages that quote the list. From mmotyka at lsil.com Wed Oct 25 08:56:20 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (mmotyka at lsil.com) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 08:56:20 -0700 Subject: CDR: Nathan's fear of nothingness Message-ID: <39F702A4.5A7D79E7@lsil.com> Amusing. >Here is my last post in this thread, because I feel that it is going >nowhere: > Isn't that a CP thread hallmark? Is this a preview of item 2) ? >My views are irreconcilable with those of the libertarians on this >list. Here's the way I view the world: > > 1) Life has no inherent value. Our being here is random, and > there is no purpose to our lives. > All 100% true and anyone who disagrees is full of shit but you seem to have missed subparagraph a) where people in their wonderful and surprising variety have filled the void by assigning their own personal values to their lives and the world around them. Values which they hold dearly and do not have to justify to anyone unless they choose to. > 2) "Human progress" is bullshit. We are no further along as a > species now than we were in Plato's time. Basically, we're > going nowhere fast. > Again, an accurate but useless observation. At least the accomodations are good and we don't usually have to work on weekends and can get out to the occasional ballgame or fishing trip while we wait for the confirmation of our ultimate meaninglessness. > 3) People have no essential "rights." Rights don't exist. > This is a theme often found in the work of many modern > philosophers, such as Foucault. > Here we go again. 100% true and 100% useless. People have those rights which they choose and are able to guarantee themselves either individually or as a tribal group. > 5) Taking all three premises above, the only way I can find to > evaluate what is right and what is wrong is "do what causes the > least pain." > Aha! Now we see the arbitrary values inherent in the system. Fleeing from nihilism you have arrived at your current Pain Avoidance Value Set. It is one of many possible sets. You would impose impose these values on others as far as possible ( power thing ). Standard human behavior. Nothing new or profound. > I guess this is basically pragmatism. For > example, if raising taxes to 95% would feed everyone in the > world (I'm just speaking hypothetically), then I would advocate > this, because this would lead to less pain in the world. (And > I don't consider some people having to sell their Ferraris > "pain." ;-) Someone here said that each time taxes are raised, > we lose freedom. So what? First of all, what is "freedom"? > Second of all, what is so great about it that it should be > evaluated before everything else? > Arbitrary value set #1 vs. Arbitrary value set #2. Actually more of a continuum where self-interest, and community interest ( and sometimes looniness ) defines the camps and the players are free to choose. >So I guess when people say "but by making the insurance companies pay >for the medical care, you are stealing from them," my answer is "So >what?" > Steal from them if you can but keep in mind that they will try to protect themselves from your attempts to impose your arbitrary values on them. >I understand that this way of viewing the world is not shared by many >on this list, so it seems that it would be damn near impossible for us >to reach agreement. > yawn. Since when has Agreement of any sort been a desired outcome? Mike From declan at well.com Wed Oct 25 06:24:52 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:24:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: Legislative approaches to ID theft? Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001025092433.00aca180@mail.well.com> Likely means new criminal laws... (today) SOCIAL ISSUES Social Security Administration (SSA) Office of the Inspector General Identity Theft Prevention Workshop. Panels will discuss victims'views on prevention, Internet issues, workplace ID theft, private industry issues and legislative approaches to preventing ID theft Location: Health and Human Services Department (HHS), 330 Independence Ave., SW, Cohen Building, First Floor Auditorium. 9 a.m. Contact: Rich Rhode, 410-966-1722 From rsw at MIT.EDU Wed Oct 25 06:24:54 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:24:54 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: ; from petro@bounty.org on Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 10:46:21PM -0700 References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> Message-ID: <20001025092454.C3521@positron.mit.edu> petro wrote: > The *ONE* thing that beefed me big time about the "Matrix" > was the excuse they gave for the computer keeping all the people > alive. Ah, but you are forgetting. It was the power from humans "combined with a form of fusion." Everything, when combined with a form of fusion, makes a good movie energy source. "Their spaceship was powered by goat pornography combined with a form of fusion." See? Doesn't is sound nifty and hi-tech? :-P -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 918 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rsw at mit.edu Wed Oct 25 06:29:31 2000 From: rsw at mit.edu (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:29:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001024233639.G3255@well.com>; from natedog@well.com on Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 11:36:40PM -0700 References: <20001024233639.G3255@well.com> Message-ID: <20001025092931.D3521@positron.mit.edu> Nathan Saper wrote: > Yes, this was my assertion. However, my assertion was accompanied by > my stating that I really don't feel too sorry for the rich-ass > Insurance Co. CEO. If his losing a small percentage of his millions > causes him to be as unhappy as a poor person dying slowly of cancer, > than I guess you have an argument. Yes, you could say that "happiness > is subjective," and you would be right. However, I was stating "right > to be happy" as a generalization, not as something concrete. This is inherently flawed. It follows from this "right to happiness" that the government or some other regulatory body tells people what makes them happy and what doesn't---or, at the very least, it tells them if their happiness is unimportant. "Killing you, your family, and your dog shouldn't make you unhappy. You've all had long, productive lives already. If it does, well, too bad." -- from 'The Handbook of the Ministry Of Happiness', Appendix A: Handy Phrases for Public Relations -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 1304 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rsw at MIT.EDU Wed Oct 25 06:37:00 2000 From: rsw at MIT.EDU (Riad S. Wahby) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:37:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Illicit words In-Reply-To: ; from galt@inconnu.isu.edu on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 01:41:25AM -0600 References: <20001023182018.A9932@galadriel.kode187.net> Message-ID: <20001025093700.E3521@positron.mit.edu> John Galt wrote: > This was the list I used on "jam echelon day". It is by no means > complete, but it's a start. The system is echelon, and it's used by the > NSA outside the US and by extension by the FBI within the US. Echelon is > only a rumor, but some LEA's have been caught saying in public that > echelon is "old news" when asked about it. There is also the 'spook.lines' file that has come in every Emacs distribution at since 19.34 or earlier. On my machine it's /usr/share/emacs/20.7/etc/spook.lines You can use M-x spook to pull several random ones from a file and put them in the current buffer, like the following: CIA Legion of Doom Peking Noriega cracking Waco, Texas domestic disruption bomb security Kennedy KGB $400 million in gold bullion counter-intelligence colonel Semtex Of course, you could (and naturally should :-) put an X-NSA: header in every message with random words from that file or one like it. -- Riad Wahby rsw at mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 1288 bytes Desc: not available URL: From declan at well.com Wed Oct 25 06:45:36 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:45:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Congress proposes raiding census records. In-Reply-To: ; from shamrock@cypherpunks.to on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 04:08:42AM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20001025100611.B3872@cluebot.com> I didn't answer even that question. I did not return the form. My result was the same as yours: No visits or inquiries. That's a shame. If I get fined $100, I can write a column about my experience and sell it for much more. -Declan On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 04:08:42AM -0400, Lucky Green wrote: > I only answered the first question in the last census: how many people live > at that address (or something to that effect). The rest I crossed out with > fat black permanent marker. The result: no visits from the census taker. No > inquiries from the Census Office. No fine. No repercussions of any kind. > > I am puzzled why anybody would have bothered to answer the remaining > questions. > > --Lucky Green > > "Anytime you decrypt... its against the law". > Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association of America in > a sworn deposition, 2000-06-06 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cypherpunks at openpgp.net [mailto:cypherpunks at openpgp.net]On Behalf > > Of Trei, Peter > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 14:07 > > To: Multiple recipients of list > > Subject: Congress proposes raiding census records. > > > > > > Let us remember that the last time the privacy of > > census records were violated on this scale, > > they were used to imprison tens of thousands > > of law abiding American citizens, whose only > > crime was to have Japanese ancestry. > > > > Peter Trei > > > > ------------- > > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/23/opinion/23MONK.html > > (free registration required) > > > > New York Times, 23 October, 2000 > > > > My Data, Mine to Keep Private > > > > By LINDA R. MONK > > > > WASHINGTON -- I was one of those paranoid Americans > > who chose not to answer all questions on the long form of > > the 2000 census. My husband and I decided that the > > government did not need to know, or had other ways of > > finding out, what time we left for work, how much our > > mortgage payment was or the amount of our income that came > > from wages. We were willing to risk the $100 fine to take a > > stand for individual privacy in an increasingly nosy and > > automated age. > > > > Editorial writers across the nation chided people like us > > for being so silly, insisting that only right-wing nuts with > > delusions of jackbooted federal invaders could possibly > > object to the census. Think of all the poor women who need > > day care and disabled people who depend on public > > transportation, we were told. And don't listen to the > > warnings of Trent Lott, the Senate majority leader - > > they're just another Republican ploy to get a low count on > > the census. > > > > Now, however, my concerns don't appear quite so > > ridiculous. The Congressional Budget Office, with the > > surprising help of some Congressional Republicans, is > > angling to get its hands on Census Bureau files. The budget > > office wants to create a "linked data set" on individuals - > > using information from the Internal Revenue Service, Social > > Security Administration and Census Bureau surveys - to help > > it evaluate proposed reforms in Medicare and Social > > Security. > > > > Under current law, census data on individuals can be used > > only to benefit the Census Bureau, which has balked at > > turning over files to the budget office without greater > > assurances of individual privacy. However, the Congressional > > number crunchers are not taking no for an answer. > > Republicans may tack an amendment allowing Congress access > > to census data onto an appropriations bill before Congress > > adjourns for the elections. > > > > The records the budget office wants are not themselves from > > the 2000 Census; they are voluntary responses to monthly > > surveys, with confidentiality promised. Forcing the bureau > > to give them up would set a disturbing precedent. Commerce > > Secretary Norman Mineta, who supervises the Census Bureau, > > warned Congress this month that amending the census law > > would "seriously compromise" the department's ability to > > safeguard taxpayers' privacy and "to assure continued high > > response rates of the American public to census surveys." > > > > Chip Walker, a spokesman for Representative Dan Miller, a > > Florida Republican who chairs the House subcommittee on the > > census, sees no problem with congressional access to census > > data. "The Census Bureau is the government, and Congress is > > the government," he said. > > > > Well, that's exactly what I'm afraid of. It's not surprising > > that a federal agency that stockpiles information would be > > raided by other federal agencies. If Congress changes the > > census law, the government will be well on its way to > > becoming another Amazon.com, which abruptly and > > retroactively weakened its privacy policy this year. I > > expected as much, because I don't believe either the > > government or businesses when they promise me > > privacy. That's why I routinely lie about personal > > information when applying for shoppers' discount cards and > > the like. And it's why I don't answer invasive questions on > > census forms. Keep your hands off my data set. > > > > > > > > From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 25 09:53:42 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:53:42 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 12:43 PM +0300 10/25/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: >On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > >>suchlike. Fact is, "ray tracing" and various illumination models, and >>Gouraud and Phong shading and all the rest...were NOT motivated by a >>desire to model "*physics*." > >Yet now we have radiosity. And as you well know, illumination and rendering >are just two parts of the process. We still have kinematics, which is >probably the most abused part of the process, and the one designed to get >plausible physics. We had radiosity many, many years ago. And models for human motion, animal motion, and so on. The point is not that physics-constraints are good things, the point is that most advanced graphics was _not_ developed for the sake of science and physics! I was refuting Bob Hettinga's point about what advanced graphics were developed for. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From declan at well.com Wed Oct 25 07:04:12 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:04:12 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk? In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 10:44:18PM -0700 References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001024194300.0183d358@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: <20001025100411.A3872@cluebot.com> Perhaps this is one reason why Ralph Nader is reportedly drawing crowds of 5,000 at rallies. He's active: Bashing Gore, attacking corporations, etc. No philosophical twaddle (oh, it might have its place but not in politics) about landing on someone's balcony and trespass righs. -Declan On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 10:44:18PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > (No time to write a piece on this, but perhaps the whole Libertarian > Party effort is foundering precisely because it has picked the "safe > and boring" route. Murray Rothbard, for example, has his arcane > theory about how people may not even take action when someone is > attacking them...until the attack has actually resulted in injury. > Many exposed to this kind of thinking, and the "inside baseball" of > ultra-boring LP conventions, probably lose interest in Libertarian > issues. Part of human nature, driven by evolutionary pressures, seems > to be an inclination to act decisively.) From declan at well.com Wed Oct 25 07:09:53 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:09:53 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com>; from natedog@well.com on Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 11:58:18PM -0700 References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> Message-ID: <20001025100953.C3872@cluebot.com> It's a not entirely uninteresting approach, but one doesn't have to resort to libertarian rights-theory to refute it (not that arguing about rights is going to resolve anything anyway). Simple pragmatism can do the same. I mean, Nathan, have you ever considered what happens when taxes are raised to 95 percent? I know you were just speaking hypothetically, but to be realistic, a hypo will have to includse the negative effects as well as the positive. For instance, what are the economic effects? What are the black markets that arise? What punitive measures must nations adopt to enforce tax collection? What about revolt and the ensuing bloodshed? What about public choice theory? Think these things through, if you really want to be "pragmatic." -Declan On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 11:58:18PM -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: > least pain." I guess this is basically pragmatism. For > example, if raising taxes to 95% would feed everyone in the > world (I'm just speaking hypothetically), then I would advocate From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Wed Oct 25 07:10:29 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:10:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: > ---------- > Nathan Saper[SMTP:natedog at well.com] wrote: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 08:37:42PM -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: > > You cannot provide cheap insurance by punishing insurers, any more than > you > > can provide cheap housing by punishing landlords. It has been tried. A > > > law compelling insurance companies to insure the unhealthy will merely > > raise costs for the healthy, resulting in more people going uninsured. > > > > If you want to guarantee insurance for the unhealthy without ill effects > > > the TAXPAYER has to pay, and I suspect that if this proposition was put > to > > the public, enthusiasm would be considerably less. Indeed the Clintons > did > > put something very like that proposition to the public, and there was > > little enthusiasm. > > > > Having socialized healthcare would be ideal. However, I think that > the political atmosphere in this country pretty much removes that > possibility. > [...] Nathan, have you ever actually looked at socialized medicine? It's fine for some things, but not for others. Illnessess which can be cured and which curing will return a person to productive labour get treated - after a while. Illnessess which strike late in life and/or require expensive treatment get much shorter shrift. Britain's NHS record on cancer treatment is a national disgrace. Why do you think Austin Power's teeth were a running joke? The state of British (ie, socialized NHS) dentistry lags *far* behind the US, especially in the area of orthodontics. Canadians like their socialized system, but any Canadian who gets sick knows that (for a price) they can get faster, better treatment in the US. There are more MRI machines in single US cities than in all of Canada, and the waiting lists up there can outlast an Albertan winter. The sad truth is that cost of the best medical care has exceeded the ability of the average person to afford it. (When I say 'average' I mean the arithmetic mean of incomes, so robbing the rich to treat the poor still won't get everyone the best possible care). Regardless of how we choose to finance it, there will remain many people whose lives could have been improved by treatments which were not performed due to reasons of cost. Once you recognize that medical care *must* be rationed, the question is how, and by who. The majority of the subscribers to this list are anarcho-capitalists and/or libertarians, and abhor any taking by force. Your socialist outlook is very much a minority viewpoint, and I don't think you're going to change anyones mind. The solution to this problem is not to propose different ways to slice up the too-small pie - it's to expand the pie. The greater the wealth, the more people who can afford good care. People who are responsible for their own welfare (and enslaved to the welfare of others) have the best chance of acheiving wealth. Peter Trei From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Wed Oct 25 07:16:44 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:16:44 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk? References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001024194300.0183d358@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001025100411.A3872@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <39F6EB4B.59AF63C4@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> Declan McCullagh wrote: > Perhaps this is one reason why Ralph Nader is reportedly drawing > crowds of 5,000 at rallies. He's active: Bashing Gore, attacking > corporations, etc. No philosophical twaddle (oh, it might have its > place but not in politics) about landing on someone's balcony and > trespass righs. > 5,000? They've all been sellout crowds of 10,000-12,000 or more and they all have to *pay* to get in, $10-20 each. Bush and Gore don't charge anything and nobody comes. -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From rah at shipwright.com Wed Oct 25 07:23:16 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:23:16 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> Message-ID: At 5:08 PM -0700 on 10/24/00, Tim May wrote: > Nonsense, on at least a couple of accounts. Maybe, but I was talking, and not too clearly, it seems, about modeling the motion of things, and not ray-tracing, which I was not even thinking about, frankly. Morphing, it seems to me, was done just because they could, and as a result, it is the most aggregious of this cartoon physics nonsense. I think, eventually, the public may get tired of camera-trick physics as a movie plot, which, I guess, is probably more likely to happen sooner than prying our schools out of the hands of innumerate socialists any time soon. Anyway, this topic has been beaten like a dead horse, and I'm done with wandering around in the minutae. Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Wed Oct 25 07:26:22 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:26:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: why should it be trusted? TYPO!! Message-ID: I wrote: [...] > The solution to this problem is not to propose different ways to > slice up the too-small pie - it's to expand the pie. The greater the > wealth, the more people who can afford good care. People who are > responsible for their own welfare (and enslaved to the welfare of > ^NOT! > others) have the best chance of acheiving wealth. > > Peter Trei > > > > > > > From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 25 10:35:53 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:35:53 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post Message-ID: At 10:09 AM -0400 10/25/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >It's a not entirely uninteresting approach, but one doesn't have >to resort to libertarian rights-theory to refute it (not that >arguing about rights is going to resolve anything anyway). > >Simple pragmatism can do the same. I mean, Nathan, have you ever >considered what happens when taxes are raised to 95 percent? > >I know you were just speaking hypothetically, but to be realistic, a >hypo will have to includse the negative effects as well as the >positive. For instance, what are the economic effects? What are the >black markets that arise? What punitive measures must nations adopt >to enforce tax collection? What about revolt and the ensuing >bloodshed? What about public choice theory? > >Think these things through, if you really want to be "pragmatic." I've seen nothing from Nathan Saper that warrants the level of response we've been giving him. I regret having wasted my time writing replies to his puerile points. It's not so much that he's "wrong" as that he's "naive." He arrives on the CP list and begins regurgitating socialist blather he heard in his poli-sci and sociology classes. Junk about mandatory health care, feeding the poor, raising taxes to make the world a better place, government doing what it "needs to do" without regard for constitutional restraints, all said with utter disregard for basic economics. As I have said, and as Lucky just said this morning, the list has for some reason attracted a whole set of such naive and puerile people. One theory is that it's the "fall crop" of students. Another is that the noise coming out of "privacy rights organizations" is increasingly leftist and interventionist. (We have a Canadian branch of the Cypherpunks which is apparently led by a neo-fascist civil rights crusader who wants guns banned and is distrustful of free market solutions.) The Saper-Warped Hypothesis. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 25 10:43:42 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:43:42 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: <00102512021300.12069@reality.eng.savvis.net> References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> <002b01c03e15$76044300$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <00102512021300.12069@reality.eng.savvis.net> Message-ID: At 12:02 PM -0500 10/25/00, Jim Burnes wrote: > > >I was raised Catholic, but became a severe agnostic at age 15. I >read the Exorcist at age 12 and it scared the shit out of me. As >I got older it kept getting more and more humorous. > >My son who was raised agnostic thought it was hilarious from the >start. > >There is a lesson there. Interesting. And of course it fits with why "exorcism works." Like other forms of sympathetic magic--voodoo, for example--it works by the power of belief and suggestion. Those who believe in all the stuff about eating the body of Christ, drinking his blood, being possessed by evil demons, speaking in tongues, etc., are the ones most inclined to become possessed. And when Ritalin won't work, maybe killing a few chickens or spritzing with holy water will chase dem demons out. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From paul at cluefactory.org.uk Wed Oct 25 02:58:46 2000 From: paul at cluefactory.org.uk (Paul Crowley) Date: 25 Oct 2000 10:58:46 +0100 Subject: 256-bit keys (was Re: Paranoid Encryption Standard) In-Reply-To: John Kelsey's message of "Mon, 23 Oct 2000 14:31:08 -0400" References: <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> <4.1.20001023133229.009a04b0@pop.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <874s21z1gp.fsf_-_@hedonism.subnet.hedonism.cluefactory.org.uk> John Kelsey writes: > Probably not too much, in terms of worrying about > known-plaintext vs. chosen-plaintext attacks. Though > honestly, I think designing your PES is like providing > really effective padlocks for screen doors. (But you could > say the same thing about AES with 256-bit keys.) I agree on both counts. But I can see another use for larger keys than resisting brute force attack: they increase the difficulty of attacks on protocols and constructions based on inducing collisions in keys. -- __ \/ o\ paul at cluefactory.org.uk /\__/ http://www.cluefactory.org.uk/paul/ From mail at wenholee.org Wed Oct 25 11:14:24 2000 From: mail at wenholee.org (WenHoLee.org) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 11:14:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Fwd: Wen Ho Lee Petition for Blue Ribbon Investigation & Presidential Pardon - Discussion Zaplet Message-ID: <200010251814.LAA11428@mx.zaplet.com> WenHoLee.org has sent you an interactive Zaplet about 'Wen Ho Lee Petition for Blue Ribbon Investigation & Presidential Pardon '. Based on the email software you are using, the best way to access your Zaplet is on the web. Click here to view this Zaplet Thank You WenHoLee.org ---------------- If you are unable to reach the link above, go to the following address using your web browser: http://zaplet.zaplet.com/servlet/Z?m=2_QA_ilcQHUVhK2PZCHF68CjKC If you require assistance, please email us at support at zaplet.com To learn more about Zaplets, visit us at www.zaplet.com Thank you for using Zaplets! -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 20629 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sunder at sunder.net Wed Oct 25 08:55:11 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 11:55:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: vmware References: <1.5.4.32.20001019160158.00685690@joinville.udesc.br> Message-ID: <39F7025F.6A2B47B3@sunder.net> Alan David Zoldan wrote: > > Hello, > Do you know how I can get a valid license for my vmware for linux? Use a valid credit card. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 25 11:59:22 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 11:59:22 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Legislative approaches to ID theft? In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001025092433.00aca180@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001025092433.00aca180@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 9:24 AM -0400 10/25/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Likely means new criminal laws... (today) > >SOCIAL ISSUES >Social Security Administration (SSA) Office of the Inspector General >Identity Theft Prevention Workshop. Panels will discuss victims'views >on prevention, Internet issues, workplace ID theft, private industry >issues and legislative approaches to preventing ID theft Recall that it was agents of the U.S. Government who made _my_ Social Security Number, and other pertinent information, a matter of an open court record. BTW, something that's incredibly bad about modern online security is the increasing number of financial companies and agencies that now require "the last four digits of your social number" as an enabling key. When I speak to a phonedroid about the absurdity and danger of this, they act confused. Declan is right about the above meaning new laws are coming. New laws meaning more control. Government won't be affected...it rarely is affected by its own legislation. There are many ways to lessen the dangers of "identity theft." Government could start by sticking to the original words on _my_ SS card: "For tax and social security purposes only -- not to be used for identification." (Or words very similar to this. Somewhere I still have my original SS card, issued in 1969, and this is what it says. I have heard that this phrasing was dropped in later years, opening the door for the SS number to be used for student I.D. numbers, military I.D. numbers, financial record passwords, and all the rest.) Fucking hypocrites. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From jburnes at savvis.net Wed Oct 25 10:02:13 2000 From: jburnes at savvis.net (Jim Burnes) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:02:13 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: <002b01c03e15$76044300$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> <002b01c03e15$76044300$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <00102512021300.12069@reality.eng.savvis.net> On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, jim bell wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Tim May > Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes > cypherpunk?) > > > (If fantasy/horror is included, the pattern continues. "Rosemary's > > Baby," "The Exorcist," etc. Many great movies show their age. I > > recently saw the re-release of "The Exorcist" and it seemed > > slow-moving and tame by today's standards.) > > Remember what Beetlejuice said about it: "I've seen 'The Exorcist' a dozen > (?) times and it keeps getting funnier each time I see it!" I was raised Catholic, but became a severe agnostic at age 15. I read the Exorcist at age 12 and it scared the shit out of me. As I got older it kept getting more and more humorous. My son who was raised agnostic thought it was hilarious from the start. There is a lesson there. jim -- Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. -- Thomas Jefferson, 1st Inaugural From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 25 12:18:40 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:18:40 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Denver Judge rules Cops can seize bookstore records In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 12:45 PM -0500 10/25/00, No User wrote: >"If we can save but one child from the awful scourge of drugs..." > >Of course, the real issue here is why the bookstore was keeping such >personalized records in the first place. Probably just credit card receipts, naturally linked to the products bought. Paying cash works. For now. More comments below. > >-------- >Judge: Cops can seize bookstore records >http://www.denverpost.com/news/news1021b.htm > >By Susan Greene >Denver Post Staff Writer > >Oct. 21, 2000 - Police will be allowed to search customer purchase records >at the Tattered Cover Book Store to investigate a narcotics case, a Denver judge ordered Friday. > >Civil libertarians decried the order - believed to be the first of its >kind nationwide - for protecting law enforcement's ability to obtain >evidence over individual rights to read without interference from >authorities. And once again the "civil libertarians" have gotten the issues confused. The First Amendment does not say that ordinary subpoenas, discovery, and court orders for some reason do not apply to bookstores! As with "shield laws" for reporters, this is a wrong-headed idea. A bookstore is a business. It may even be _me_. Whether I sell a book to Alice or a roll of detcord to Alice, if faced with a valid court order to tell what I know, I must. Arguments that Alice has some right to "read without interference" won't cut it. Of course, that bookstore may choose to keep no records, by either purging past records, insisting on cash, or encouraging/requiring the use of unlinkable cards. Granted, this is not likely to happen today, for various reasons. What _would_ be an unconstitutional act would be a law _requiring_ a bookstore to keep linkable records, a kind of "reading escrow." Or requiring a library to have a "Library Awareness Program" to report suspicious activities. But a bookstore purchase record, once it exists, is no different from any other business or other record. It is subject to subpoena. Bookstores have no special exemptions that any of the rest of us don't have, any more than reporters have any special exemptions from subpoenas that the rest of us don't have. (Hint: "the rest of us" is the misleading point. We are all reporters, we are all book sellers. We are all first class objects.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 25 12:21:19 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:21:19 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <20001025153635.C7732@cluebot.com> References: <20001025153635.C7732@cluebot.com> Message-ID: At 3:36 PM -0400 10/25/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > >It must have something to do with being Canadianized. Only folks from >Alberta seem to get it right. Not counting a certain someone, initials SB/SS, from British Columbia? --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 25 09:37:24 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:37:24 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story In-Reply-To: <87snpmrv9g.fsf@piracy.red-bean.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001025081240.007bf300@pop.sprynet.com> At 02:15 PM 10/24/00 -0400, Craig Brozefsky wrote: >I suppose one could say that the bundling of ISP services with the >default Windows install increased the rate of new internet users >significantly, but the explosive growth has already started by then. I've come to see that it was the kink of the hockey stick that became evident, and a lot of mutually reinforcing factors were involved --including a more mature Mac IP environment, adding a browser to the email/usenet/ftp/wais net tools, eliminating TCP/IP stack install for the majority, general exponential deployment of computers, faster comm, changed NSF policy. Though it seems individual estimates of each factor's importance varies with experience. dh From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 25 09:37:30 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:37:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001024184518.00b51430@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001025093515.007dbdf0@pop.sprynet.com> At 08:06 PM 10/24/00 -0400, Ray Dillinger wrote: >If nobody comes up with some filterware that works, then there will >probably be continuing pressure to regulate content. Its called 'parenting' but most are too busy, so they ask the State, or machines (censorware, v-chips, rating systems, etc.) under others' control, to do it instead. The best ---most concise and environmentally friendly to boot--- response to "continuing pressure to censor" is probably a noose. See the constitution. From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 25 09:38:00 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:38:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001025093525.007d0d50@pop.sprynet.com> At 08:08 PM 10/24/00 -0400, Tim May wrote: > >Nonsense, on at least a couple of accounts. I was active in the image >processing field in 1980-84, and attended various SIGGRAPHs and >suchlike. Fact is, "ray tracing" and various illumination models, and >Gouraud and Phong shading and all the rest...were NOT motivated by a >desire to model "*physics*." Physicist didn't give a dang about >modelling light sources in 3D environments, and about morphing and >wrapping and all that. Not *that* kind of physicist. Something more like psychophysics (ie measurement of human perception) empowered by these newfangled computer thangs. There was a desire to see what was sufficient to generate photorealism. After all, the shading models you mention are crude approximations; but they usually work[1], which talks to the limits of perception. And to a nontrivial physics of a certain scale (modelling translucent objects, objects with embedded reflectors and adsorbers, etc.) There was also a desire to understand the rendering process so that you could understand the *inverse*, ie, inferring the world from what you see. Machine vision. Rendered jello, fires, fractal cloud effects, realistic water, rocks, etc. Hollywood was for a while making entire movies around a single new model (particle systems in that terraforming star trek movie). The question that motivates was, how do you do that? Where 'that' might be rendering hair, or modelling how skin creases at elbows. I modelled wood grain with a VAX in 1985 using a 24 bit monitor that cost more than some cars. Nowadays you would just scan and texture map real wood, but the (psychophysical) question was, what did you need to model to get grain indistinguishable from real[2]? Texture mapping is cheating. Similar questions exist for modelling motion. How many harmonics do you need to render for realistic motion? How do you make a desklamp move with emotion? (Luxo Jr..) (Recording actors and mapping movement is cheating, Mr. Spielberg.) >The motivation was to produce special effects for education films (a >la James Blinn at JPL), effects for movies (a la Alvy Ray Smith, >eventually of Pixar), and advertisements for Hollywood and Madison >Avenue. These folks had a more academic interest than you make out.. Blinn wrote a very mathematical column.. the sci films and movies paid the bills, bought the equiptment, etc., and sometimes motivated problems, but the problems were fascinating in and of themselves. Sure, their output was often visual candy, but it was new and interesting regardless of jazz appeal. [1] The moon does not show the cos(incidence-angle) reflectance of typical matte surfaces, and thus looks flat. Its surface is powder. [2] slice vertical concentric shells with radially varying albedo (annual rings) paired with small vertical radial planes (rays). The 3D geometry yields 2D constraints on the texture that distinguish it from other striated textures. Turning the knobs generates different types of woodgrains. From honig at sprynet.com Wed Oct 25 09:38:01 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:38:01 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Congress proposes raiding census records. In-Reply-To: <20001025100611.B3872@cluebot.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001025093236.007cf7e0@pop.sprynet.com> At 09:45 AM 10/25/00 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: >I didn't answer even that question. I did not return the form. > >My result was the same as yours: No visits or inquiries. > >That's a shame. If I get fined $100, I can write a column about my >experience and sell it for much more. > >-Declan Some folks who didn't send theirs in did get visits by (otherwise unemployable) censusworkers. They went away when told to do so, I'm told. My favorite census story was the (true) one where the (nice old lady working for the Fedz) census worker got literally eaten by the dozen or so dogs some nonresponding dude kept in his yard. From sunder at sunder.net Wed Oct 25 09:39:40 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:39:40 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Mac created the modern Internet References: <20001019175323.A13615@netestate.de> Message-ID: <39F70CCC.3D95FACD@sunder.net> Tim May wrote: > > I wouldn't give a _shred_ of credit to AOL, and even less to > CompuServe. They were drags, in fact. For internet access? Fuck no. That wasn't their purpose at all... Back in those days, I remember having a shell account at school, and SLIP had just come out. Someone had written a small program that would allow users to run SLIP from userland and turn a dial-up shell into a net connection. The sysadmins everywhere frowned upon this. Eventually, $20/month with X hours limit accounts started showing up. Things that used to be BBS's (running FIDO as a message transport) slowly turned into internet pops. Usually, your $20 bought you a shell account, an email address, and PPP access. As the script kiddies got bolder and the laziness of the sysadmins and developers started to show, the shell accounts went away. More and more people started offering unlimited network access, but busy signals put a limit on that. Back to AOL. I remember them from the latter Commodore 64 days. They were Q-Link back then. This was a time when BBS's were the rule, and toward the end, before the internet killed most of them off. The better ones such as Searchlight used ANSI text editors and menus, some had tree like message structures - much like usenet, and some even carried a few newsgroups. Way before this in the late eighties, I got into BBS's when modems were 300bps. Yes, oh yes, they were very slow, but it was quite manageable. You could read the text as it was delivered. If you listened into the conversation, you could actually discern one character from the next. Not that I could tell an "A" character apart from a "B" character, but I could tell that one had been sent, and then another, and then a third, etc. If you tried to immitate a carrier, some stupid modems would try to handshake with you. Going from 300 to 1200 was fun. :) It's how I learned to speed read. After 2400 and 14.4, I could no longer keep up with the text... The next level was of course Fido, and in some cases getting usenet content and email over uucp dial up networks. :) Ah, the fun of long chains of host names separated by slashes, and the strange IP like fidonet node numbers.... Going back to the later and more final versions of the BBS world... there were a few graphical standards coming out for BBS's. Most notably was the RIPScript code which had a new line followed by a pipe and an exclamation as its escape code sequence. Unlike ANSI codes which were (and still are for VT100 emulation) ESC followed by an open square bracket, these could be sent via email, so you could send pictures of a sort over 7 bit ascii systems and change colors, etc. HTML email's features is not much different from this -- except for the ability to link to urls, (and more recently with JavaScript -- infect you with viruses) which I don't think (or recall) RIPScript had. Back in those days AOL, Compuserve, Delphi, and GEnie did have a place. They were really pay for content services in disguise. You could do stock research, get research info, access encyclopedias, etc. This was before CD's were widely available and made such things accessible to the public for cheaper. There were also lots and lots of file forums where one could get files that were not available elsewhere - not even via FTP. Though, eventually these leaked to ftp servers by kind souls who passed them on to the net. I remember getting the first issues of Wired articles off AOL -- yes, I did have the dead tree versions for sure, but it was a nice thing to be able to read just the text (this wasn't html) without the purple neon on light green background and orange dots... Yes, there was also the New York Times, which wasn't yet on the web as there wasn't a fully developed web yet... Yes, AOL et al were indeed dragged into providing internet access, but of all the services, AOL became the slime. Their marketting campaigns of give away disks in every nook and cranny, of delivering more floppies and later CD's than were people in the USA was telling -- especially when their networks could not handle the load of the traffic. Soon after, they started popping up with dialog boxes asking you to buy stuff. I recall logging on a few weeks after not accessing AOL, and receiving tons of pop-up offers, and having to decline them all one at a time. I wonder how many clicked "Yes" by accident and received junk they didn't want. Then, as Cantor and Seigall flooded the net and opened up spamming, my mailbox became saturaged with trash. Now mind you, I didn't give out those email addresses (screen names) to very many people - just friends. So the only explanation to the flood of spam was simply that AOL had sold its subscriber lists out. Compuserve was also a very pricey fucked up place. You paid through the nose for just getting on, and then some for the extras. And those idiotic comma separated email addresses weren't helping. Hell, I cancelled that account, and they had the balls to send me bills telling me that the credit card company had not honored their charges after two months of them billing me illegally... (Back then Visa was good about not honoring subscriptions when the service had been notified to terminate the service but din't.) I didn't call it CrapUserve for nothing... Around this time, the SIG's I was after - most notably getting Apple OS upgrades and software for my Newton were of little value at those price points as plenty of ftp sites started carrying around the content, and more over, places like Wallnut Creek and other ftp site archivers started to offer - pricey CD's full of the archives I sought after. Sure, they cost $40 or so, but it was much cheaper in bulk than downloading all that at 9600 or 14.4. This was a time of shareware, not freeware. The Open Source movent was around, but didn't take off until the Linux kernel came out -- I recall booting 0.92 off a 5.25" disk and wondering "Hey, this is awesome, but other than ls, mkdir, cat, more and cd, what's the point." :) Yes, I recall spending nearly $400 for a piece of shit clamshell 1X SCSI CDROM for my Mac, and man it was so much slower than the hard drives, they were nearly floppy speed. But then having picked up Project Guttenberg's latest CD, I could now read tons and tons of books -- more than I had shelf space for. And as a bonus, I got the usual world Atlas (never mind that today you can get street maps on CD's!) a dictionary/thesaurus and a cheesy encyclopedia. (Back in those days every parent was sold on feeding their kids Britannica and the cheaper versions. To get it on CD was really something.) By 94 or so, I did use Mosaic and Cello and Trumpet Winsock on Win31 to get to the first of the web pages. Most of the "web" was really gopher and ftp sites, but here and there a web server was to be found. I honestly spent more time in Telnet (yes, not ssh as it hadn't been written yet!) using pine and trn than surfing pages... Another factor that IMHO had a big change on catalizing the web to be what it is now are portable electronic cameras such as the Apple QuickTake's, and good image editing software such as Photoshop... You could now post pix of your friends on the net, and that's what most of the home pages were. Descriptions of people, their pets and their hobbies. Not ads full of flashing junk. Sure, not much content either but much friendlier than in your face pop up javascript windows full of offers or blinking flaming banner ads asking you to punch the monkey or looking like a button or text search field... Now a days, I surf with a desktop firewall and a junkbuster, and over several hundred email filters to get rid of the spam and ads, javascript junk, cookies and shit. Sure, the 'zine's and paper sites where I read my news/articles from make money off these, but I don't want to see them. Let the fools who can't or don't know how to shut them off be advertised to. I hate ads. I'm not claiming they should be illegal mind you, but I claim to reserve the right to not display them on my screen by choice. And of course having a desktop firewall in a corporate environment where the desktops were run by total morons who barely knew what Windowze was didn't think to install a firewall, was a great boon. (Yes, that was a run on, no, I don't give a fuck.) After a while I stopped looking at the logs. There were ridiculous attempts on our networks every few seconds. Too many to count, or care about... But this is the 'net today. Full of the "bad guys" who are providing yet another horse for the TLA's, and full of the negligent and ignorant who don't know they are there. Full of banner ads and privacy invading cookies subsidizing content. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From sunder at sunder.net Wed Oct 25 09:40:11 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:40:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Mac created the modern Internet References: <20001019175323.A13615@netestate.de> Message-ID: <39F70CEB.1BB82E18@sunder.net> Tim May wrote: > > I wouldn't give a _shred_ of credit to AOL, and even less to > CompuServe. They were drags, in fact. For internet access? Fuck no. That wasn't their purpose at all... Back in those days, I remember having a shell account at school, and SLIP had just come out. Someone had written a small program that would allow users to run SLIP from userland and turn a dial-up shell into a net connection. The sysadmins everywhere frowned upon this. Eventually, $20/month with X hours limit accounts started showing up. Things that used to be BBS's (running FIDO as a message transport) slowly turned into internet pops. Usually, your $20 bought you a shell account, an email address, and PPP access. As the script kiddies got bolder and the laziness of the sysadmins and developers started to show, the shell accounts went away. More and more people started offering unlimited network access, but busy signals put a limit on that. Back to AOL. I remember them from the latter Commodore 64 days. They were Q-Link back then. This was a time when BBS's were the rule, and toward the end, before the internet killed most of them off. The better ones such as Searchlight used ANSI text editors and menus, some had tree like message structures - much like usenet, and some even carried a few newsgroups. Way before this in the late eighties, I got into BBS's when modems were 300bps. Yes, oh yes, they were very slow, but it was quite manageable. You could read the text as it was delivered. If you listened into the conversation, you could actually discern one character from the next. Not that I could tell an "A" character apart from a "B" character, but I could tell that one had been sent, and then another, and then a third, etc. If you tried to immitate a carrier, some stupid modems would try to handshake with you. Going from 300 to 1200 was fun. :) It's how I learned to speed read. After 2400 and 14.4, I could no longer keep up with the text... The next level was of course Fido, and in some cases getting usenet content and email over uucp dial up networks. :) Ah, the fun of long chains of host names separated by slashes, and the strange IP like fidonet node numbers.... Going back to the later and more final versions of the BBS world... there were a few graphical standards coming out for BBS's. Most notably was the RIPScript code which had a new line followed by a pipe and an exclamation as its escape code sequence. Unlike ANSI codes which were (and still are for VT100 emulation) ESC followed by an open square bracket, these could be sent via email, so you could send pictures of a sort over 7 bit ascii systems and change colors, etc. HTML email's features is not much different from this -- except for the ability to link to urls, (and more recently with JavaScript -- infect you with viruses) which I don't think (or recall) RIPScript had. Back in those days AOL, Compuserve, Delphi, and GEnie did have a place. They were really pay for content services in disguise. You could do stock research, get research info, access encyclopedias, etc. This was before CD's were widely available and made such things accessible to the public for cheaper. There were also lots and lots of file forums where one could get files that were not available elsewhere - not even via FTP. Though, eventually these leaked to ftp servers by kind souls who passed them on to the net. I remember getting the first issues of Wired articles off AOL -- yes, I did have the dead tree versions for sure, but it was a nice thing to be able to read just the text (this wasn't html) without the purple neon on light green background and orange dots... Yes, there was also the New York Times, which wasn't yet on the web as there wasn't a fully developed web yet... Yes, AOL et al were indeed dragged into providing internet access, but of all the services, AOL became the slime. Their marketting campaigns of give away disks in every nook and cranny, of delivering more floppies and later CD's than were people in the USA was telling -- especially when their networks could not handle the load of the traffic. Soon after, they started popping up with dialog boxes asking you to buy stuff. I recall logging on a few weeks after not accessing AOL, and receiving tons of pop-up offers, and having to decline them all one at a time. I wonder how many clicked "Yes" by accident and received junk they didn't want. Then, as Cantor and Seigall flooded the net and opened up spamming, my mailbox became saturaged with trash. Now mind you, I didn't give out those email addresses (screen names) to very many people - just friends. So the only explanation to the flood of spam was simply that AOL had sold its subscriber lists out. Compuserve was also a very pricey fucked up place. You paid through the nose for just getting on, and then some for the extras. And those idiotic comma separated email addresses weren't helping. Hell, I cancelled that account, and they had the balls to send me bills telling me that the credit card company had not honored their charges after two months of them billing me illegally... (Back then Visa was good about not honoring subscriptions when the service had been notified to terminate the service but din't.) I didn't call it CrapUserve for nothing... Around this time, the SIG's I was after - most notably getting Apple OS upgrades and software for my Newton were of little value at those price points as plenty of ftp sites started carrying around the content, and more over, places like Wallnut Creek and other ftp site archivers started to offer - pricey CD's full of the archives I sought after. Sure, they cost $40 or so, but it was much cheaper in bulk than downloading all that at 9600 or 14.4. This was a time of shareware, not freeware. The Open Source movent was around, but didn't take off until the Linux kernel came out -- I recall booting 0.92 off a 5.25" disk and wondering "Hey, this is awesome, but other than ls, mkdir, cat, more and cd, what's the point." :) Yes, I recall spending nearly $400 for a piece of shit clamshell 1X SCSI CDROM for my Mac, and man it was so much slower than the hard drives, they were nearly floppy speed. But then having picked up Project Guttenberg's latest CD, I could now read tons and tons of books -- more than I had shelf space for. And as a bonus, I got the usual world Atlas (never mind that today you can get street maps on CD's!) a dictionary/thesaurus and a cheesy encyclopedia. (Back in those days every parent was sold on feeding their kids Britannica and the cheaper versions. To get it on CD was really something.) By 94 or so, I did use Mosaic and Cello and Trumpet Winsock on Win31 to get to the first of the web pages. Most of the "web" was really gopher and ftp sites, but here and there a web server was to be found. I honestly spent more time in Telnet (yes, not ssh as it hadn't been written yet!) using pine and trn than surfing pages... Another factor that IMHO had a big change on catalizing the web to be what it is now are portable electronic cameras such as the Apple QuickTake's, and good image editing software such as Photoshop... You could now post pix of your friends on the net, and that's what most of the home pages were. Descriptions of people, their pets and their hobbies. Not ads full of flashing junk. Sure, not much content either but much friendlier than in your face pop up javascript windows full of offers or blinking flaming banner ads asking you to punch the monkey or looking like a button or text search field... Now a days, I surf with a desktop firewall and a junkbuster, and over several hundred email filters to get rid of the spam and ads, javascript junk, cookies and shit. Sure, the 'zine's and paper sites where I read my news/articles from make money off these, but I don't want to see them. Let the fools who can't or don't know how to shut them off be advertised to. I hate ads. I'm not claiming they should be illegal mind you, but I claim to reserve the right to not display them on my screen by choice. And of course having a desktop firewall in a corporate environment where the desktops were run by total morons who barely knew what Windowze was didn't think to install a firewall, was a great boon. (Yes, that was a run on, no, I don't give a fuck.) After a while I stopped looking at the logs. There were ridiculous attempts on our networks every few seconds. Too many to count, or care about... But this is the 'net today. Full of the "bad guys" who are providing yet another horse for the TLA's, and full of the negligent and ignorant who don't know they are there. Full of banner ads and privacy invading cookies subsidizing content. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Wed Oct 25 09:43:21 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:43:21 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: > ---------- > From: Ken Brown[SMTP:k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk] > Reply To: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 11:21 AM > To: Trei, Peter > Cc: Cypherpunks; 'Nathan Saper' > Subject: Re: why should it be trusted? > > "Trei, Peter" wrote: > > > Nathan, have you ever actually looked at socialized medicine? It's > > fine for some things, but not for others. Illnessess which can be > > cured and which curing will return a person to productive labour > > get treated - after a while. Illnessess which strike late in life and/or > > require expensive treatment get much shorter shrift. > > This isn't really true. The NHS tends to be quite good at big stuff, > serious interventions. The UK is also quite good for fixing small 1-off > problems (the poor wait in line, the less poor just pay same as anywhere > else). What it isn't so good at is chronic but not life-threatening > problems. In other words, just the ones "which curing will return a > person to productive labour". Of course these are also the exact same > health problems that private health insurance is worst at. > I've read various stories (mostly in New Scientist and The Economist) about people being refused expensive chemotherapy by the NHS. > > Why do you > > think Austin Power's teeth were a running joke?[...] > > Dentistry in the UK is almost entirely private & sometimes used as an > example of why publicly provided healthcare is supposed to be better! > Except for the poorest, we pay for it out of our own pockets (as adults > anyway, there is a certain amount of public provision for children). > Same applies to opticians & so on. > I stand corrected. The fact remains that bad teeth are part of the American stereotype of Britons. > There are a lot of problems (particularly local ones in London because > nationally set budgets don't reflect the cost of provision here - the > district I'm in has over 20% shortfall in the number of nurses on the > staff because they aren't paid enough), but on the whole I think you'll > find few Brits who would give up the idea of the NHS. After all we live > longer than you do, on average (assuming you are USAn), are slightly > poorer to start with & spend a *lot* less on healthcare per head, public > & private combined. In fact you spend almost as much on "socialised" > medicine as we do, far less cost-effectively. > ... and you have a continuous brain drain of doctors to the greener fields of the US. > Ken > Peter Trei From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Wed Oct 25 02:43:56 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:43:56 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: >suchlike. Fact is, "ray tracing" and various illumination models, and >Gouraud and Phong shading and all the rest...were NOT motivated by a >desire to model "*physics*." Yet now we have radiosity. And as you well know, illumination and rendering are just two parts of the process. We still have kinematics, which is probably the most abused part of the process, and the one designed to get plausible physics. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From gbroiles at netbox.com Wed Oct 25 12:44:34 2000 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:44:34 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Denver Judge rules Cops can seize bookstore records In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20001025123558.01b559c0@mail.speakeasy.org> Interesting - the article is a little confused on a few points - specifically, this is not the first time this has happened, the DEA subpoena'd records from a publisher of mushroom growing books back in the mid 90's. They also subpoena records from garden supply stores looking for people who buy too many grow lamps or hydroponic setups. Also, it doesn't sound like they're talking about a search warrant - those aren't issued by DA's, nor do their targets have an opportunity to argue about what's searched prior to the search, because the searches take place without notice and at gunpoint. It sounds like they're talking about a subpoena, which does afford the recipient a chance to get an attorney and argue about it prior to releasing information. Still, it's a good reminder that it can be dangerous to trust even good people with sensitive information - the good people may not willingly betray you, but they may be forced to divulge the information on pain of losing money, property, or their life, or it may simply be stolen by armed gangs. At 12:45 PM 10/25/00 -0500, No User wrote: >Real-To: No User > >"If we can save but one child from the awful scourge of drugs..." > >Of course, the real issue here is why the bookstore was keeping such >personalized records in the first place. > >-------- >Judge: Cops can seize bookstore records >http://www.denverpost.com/news/news1021b.htm > >By Susan Greene >Denver Post Staff Writer > >Oct. 21, 2000 - Police will be allowed to search customer purchase records >at the Tattered Cover Book Store to investigate a narcotics case, a Denver >judge ordered Friday. > >Civil libertarians decried the order - believed to be the first of its >kind nationwide - for protecting law enforcement's ability to obtain >evidence over individual rights to read without interference from >authorities. > >Tattered Cover owner Joyce Meskis said the order could have a "chilling >effect" on the First Amendment and on store patrons, who might hesitate to >buy books knowing that police have access to their purchase records. She >is considering an appeal. > >"A bookstore is a house of ideas," she said. "We certainly have the >responsibility to protect customers' rights to those ideas, and the right >to privacy that goes along with that." > >Law enforcers hailed the order as a victory. > >"If it only takes one or two records from a bookstore to help us eliminate >drugs on the street, then so be it," said Lt. Lori Moriarty, commander of >the North Metro Drug Task Force, which is seeking the Tattered Cover >records. "We need all the tools possible to help law enforcement do its >job." > >The controversy stems from a March 14 raid on an Adams County mobile home >in which task force members found a methamphetamine lab and two books: >"The Construction and Operation of Clandestine Drug Laboratories" by "Jack >B. Nimble," and "Advanced Techniques of Clandestine Psychedelic and >Amphetamine Manufacture" by "Uncle Fester." > >Investigators also found a bookshipping envelope containing an invoice >number from the Tattered Cover in Lower Downtown Denver. They are hoping >bookstore records will help pinpoint which of the six people who >frequented the mobile home bought the books and, presumably, operated the >lab. > >The task force first sought a search warrant from the Adams County >district attorney's office, which rejected the request partially on >grounds that executing it would give police a public relations "black >eye." > >Task force members then turned to the Denver DA's office, which granted >the warrant. > >Meskis blocked police from going through her store's records, saying they >should instead use other investigative measures such as fingerprinting to >find their suspect. > >Denver District Court temporarily blocked the task force from seizing the >records, pending the outcome of a hearing before Judge Stephen Phillips. > >Most states have laws protecting public libraries from police searches >except under exceptional circumstances, but there is no special law that >protects bookstores. > >The issue made headlines in 1998, when independent counsel Kenneth Starr >subpoenaed two Washington, D.C., bookstores for information on gifts >exchanged between President Clinton and White House intern Monica >Lewinsky. Barnes & Noble and Kramerbooks hired lawyers and challenged the >subpoena in federal court. > >A federal judge quashed Starr's request for the records. Lewinsky, >meantime, agreed to testify in exchange for immunity, rendering the whole >issue moot. > >Still, the case was a watershed for bookstore owners and privacy >advocates, who have been watching the Tattered Cover's legal battle with >intense interest. > >Phillips, in his order, recognized the First Amendment right to "receive >information and ideas, regardless of social worth," but he cited a legal >balancing test weighing such rights against the importance of law >enforcement to investigate crimes. > >Phillips ruled that the identity of the drug lab operators is "of >significant public interest" and that "the purchase of how-to books is a >highly important piece of evidence." > >The judge wrote that there's no other reasonable way, aside from seizing >store records, for investigators to obtain the information they're >seeking. He lauded the task force for asking only for specific invoices, >not "stumbl(ing) through other private records." > >Phillips deemed the Tattered Cover case "dramatically different" than the >Lewinsky case, about which he wrote: "The subpoenas were exploratory in >nature, and the government was unable to show any need nor any nexus to a >criminal event." > >And so Phillips denied investigators' broad request for a month's worth of >records that might show all titles purchased by the unnamed suspects. >Still, he granted police access to the specific invoice whose number >appeared on the book mailer. > >Meskis has 15 days to appeal before the task force seizes her records. > >Moriarty insists it was never her unit's intent to comb through reading >records of the general public. Rather, she said, Phillips' order will give >investigators "an important piece of a puzzle" needed to nab their >suspect. > >Critics say one arrest is a high price to pay for allowing a war against >drugs to chip away at civil rights. > >"Key principles of the right to privacy and freedom of speech have >ultimately been compromised in the decision," said Sue Armstrong, >executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Colorado. > >Judith Krug, director of the Office for Intellectual Freedom at the >American Library Association, said she worries that drug investigators >unfairly are "making the connection between what people read and what they >do." > >"Just because you read a book on homosexuality, for example, doesn't mean >you're gay. And reading a book on the symptoms of cancer doesn't mean you >have the disease," Krug said. > >"Our concern is that what people read, what goes into their heads will no >longer remain private." > > >KEY QUESTIONS: > >Denver District Judge Stephen Phillips posed four key questions as part of >a legal balancing test in his ruling: > >1. Is there a legitimate and significant government interest in acquiring >the information? > >2. Is there a strong nexus between the matter being investigated and the >material being sought? > >3. Is the information available from another source? > >4. Is the intrusion limited in scope so as to prevent exposure of other >constitutionally protected matters? > >Copyright 2000 The Denver Post. All rights reserved. > >Related: >Bookstore fights search warrant >http://www.denverpost.com/news/news1018d.htm -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com From no.user at anon.xg.nu Wed Oct 25 10:45:23 2000 From: no.user at anon.xg.nu (No User) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:45:23 -0500 Subject: CDR: Denver Judge rules Cops can seize bookstore records Message-ID: "If we can save but one child from the awful scourge of drugs..." Of course, the real issue here is why the bookstore was keeping such personalized records in the first place. -------- Judge: Cops can seize bookstore records http://www.denverpost.com/news/news1021b.htm By Susan Greene Denver Post Staff Writer Oct. 21, 2000 - Police will be allowed to search customer purchase records at the Tattered Cover Book Store to investigate a narcotics case, a Denver judge ordered Friday. Civil libertarians decried the order - believed to be the first of its kind nationwide - for protecting law enforcement's ability to obtain evidence over individual rights to read without interference from authorities. Tattered Cover owner Joyce Meskis said the order could have a "chilling effect" on the First Amendment and on store patrons, who might hesitate to buy books knowing that police have access to their purchase records. She is considering an appeal. "A bookstore is a house of ideas," she said. "We certainly have the responsibility to protect customers' rights to those ideas, and the right to privacy that goes along with that." Law enforcers hailed the order as a victory. "If it only takes one or two records from a bookstore to help us eliminate drugs on the street, then so be it," said Lt. Lori Moriarty, commander of the North Metro Drug Task Force, which is seeking the Tattered Cover records. "We need all the tools possible to help law enforcement do its job." The controversy stems from a March 14 raid on an Adams County mobile home in which task force members found a methamphetamine lab and two books: "The Construction and Operation of Clandestine Drug Laboratories" by "Jack B. Nimble," and "Advanced Techniques of Clandestine Psychedelic and Amphetamine Manufacture" by "Uncle Fester." Investigators also found a bookshipping envelope containing an invoice number from the Tattered Cover in Lower Downtown Denver. They are hoping bookstore records will help pinpoint which of the six people who frequented the mobile home bought the books and, presumably, operated the lab. The task force first sought a search warrant from the Adams County district attorney's office, which rejected the request partially on grounds that executing it would give police a public relations "black eye." Task force members then turned to the Denver DA's office, which granted the warrant. Meskis blocked police from going through her store's records, saying they should instead use other investigative measures such as fingerprinting to find their suspect. Denver District Court temporarily blocked the task force from seizing the records, pending the outcome of a hearing before Judge Stephen Phillips. Most states have laws protecting public libraries from police searches except under exceptional circumstances, but there is no special law that protects bookstores. The issue made headlines in 1998, when independent counsel Kenneth Starr subpoenaed two Washington, D.C., bookstores for information on gifts exchanged between President Clinton and White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Barnes & Noble and Kramerbooks hired lawyers and challenged the subpoena in federal court. A federal judge quashed Starr's request for the records. Lewinsky, meantime, agreed to testify in exchange for immunity, rendering the whole issue moot. Still, the case was a watershed for bookstore owners and privacy advocates, who have been watching the Tattered Cover's legal battle with intense interest. Phillips, in his order, recognized the First Amendment right to "receive information and ideas, regardless of social worth," but he cited a legal balancing test weighing such rights against the importance of law enforcement to investigate crimes. Phillips ruled that the identity of the drug lab operators is "of significant public interest" and that "the purchase of how-to books is a highly important piece of evidence." The judge wrote that there's no other reasonable way, aside from seizing store records, for investigators to obtain the information they're seeking. He lauded the task force for asking only for specific invoices, not "stumbl(ing) through other private records." Phillips deemed the Tattered Cover case "dramatically different" than the Lewinsky case, about which he wrote: "The subpoenas were exploratory in nature, and the government was unable to show any need nor any nexus to a criminal event." And so Phillips denied investigators' broad request for a month's worth of records that might show all titles purchased by the unnamed suspects. Still, he granted police access to the specific invoice whose number appeared on the book mailer. Meskis has 15 days to appeal before the task force seizes her records. Moriarty insists it was never her unit's intent to comb through reading records of the general public. Rather, she said, Phillips' order will give investigators "an important piece of a puzzle" needed to nab their suspect. Critics say one arrest is a high price to pay for allowing a war against drugs to chip away at civil rights. "Key principles of the right to privacy and freedom of speech have ultimately been compromised in the decision," said Sue Armstrong, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Colorado. Judith Krug, director of the Office for Intellectual Freedom at the American Library Association, said she worries that drug investigators unfairly are "making the connection between what people read and what they do." "Just because you read a book on homosexuality, for example, doesn't mean you're gay. And reading a book on the symptoms of cancer doesn't mean you have the disease," Krug said. "Our concern is that what people read, what goes into their heads will no longer remain private." KEY QUESTIONS: Denver District Judge Stephen Phillips posed four key questions as part of a legal balancing test in his ruling: 1. Is there a legitimate and significant government interest in acquiring the information? 2. Is there a strong nexus between the matter being investigated and the material being sought? 3. Is the information available from another source? 4. Is the intrusion limited in scope so as to prevent exposure of other constitutionally protected matters? Copyright 2000 The Denver Post. All rights reserved. Related: Bookstore fights search warrant http://www.denverpost.com/news/news1018d.htm From bill.stewart at pobox.com Wed Oct 25 12:56:59 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 12:56:59 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Illicit words Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001025125659.009aaa60@idiom.com> At 09:37 AM 10/25/00 -0400, Riad S. Wahby wrote: >There is also the 'spook.lines' file that has come in every Emacs >distribution at since 19.34 or earlier. On my machine it's >/usr/share/emacs/20.7/etc/spook.lines >You can use M-x spook to pull several random ones from a file and put >them in the current buffer, like the following: >CIA Legion of Doom Peking Noriega cracking Waco, Texas domestic >disruption bomb security Kennedy KGB $400 million in gold bullion >counter-intelligence colonel Semtex Makes a fine substrate for steganography as well :-) Pick 64 spookwords or spookphrases, which gets you six bits per word, or four bits with some duplications to level out distributions a lot. Heroin Intel Detonator DomIntel Echelon Noriega Semtex Terrorism Umber Feinstein Phreaking Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Wed Oct 25 03:13:26 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 13:13:26 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, petro wrote: > The claim (as I remember) was that the bodies were used to >store/create energy for the computer to run. > > It *really* irked me. 'Cause, you see, that's life energy. Of course you can produce *normal* energy in a plant, but anything that's alive, needs the other kind. In a word, ugly. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 25 10:35:49 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 13:35:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Congress proposes raiding census records. In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001025093236.007cf7e0@pop.sprynet.com> References: Message-ID: At 12:38 PM -0400 10/25/00, David Honig wrote: >At 09:45 AM 10/25/00 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: >>I didn't answer even that question. I did not return the form. >> >>My result was the same as yours: No visits or inquiries. >> >>That's a shame. If I get fined $100, I can write a column about my >>experience and sell it for much more. >> >>-Declan > >Some folks who didn't send theirs in did get visits by (otherwise >unemployable) censusworkers. They went away when told to do so, >I'm told. > >My favorite census story was the (true) one where the (nice old lady >working for the Fedz) census worker got literally eaten by the dozen or so >dogs some nonresponding dude kept in his yard. I had a "pre-visit" by a pair of women--perhaps Census workers, perhaps not--about a year before the actual Census. They told me they were listing structures on properties so that Census workers could then make accurate tallies of the outbuildings, structures, etc. While one of the women engaged me in conversation about how many rooms my house had--I didn't tell her anything--the other woman started to enter my side yard, through an archway. I yelled over to her, "Please don't trespass on my property." She retreated, and the first woman mumbled something about "not liking a threatening tone." She said they were required by the rules to check properties for evidence of numbers of residential units, out-buildings, "granny flats," etc. Angry by this time, as I am wont to get, I told the both of them that the U.S. Census exists for one and only one purpose: counting the population for the sole purpose of the apportionment of Congress. It doesn't exist to track races (Japs, for example), to make pretty maps of income, marital status, computer usage, sexual preferences, numbers of pets, numbers of televisions and computers, and so on. It just doesn't. They retreated down my driveway (they had walked in...I assume they were walking to all houses on the street). I half-way expected Yet Another Stern Call from the Sheriff, but it never came (either that or my phone line was busy, as is usually the case during the day). When the Census form eventually arrived I got the short one. I answered only the question about the number of adults living at the address. I wrote "Aryan" for my race...I figured if the "favored minorities" got to have dozens of sub-classes ("Asian American, Pacific Islander, but not Chamorro Islands," or somesuch), then I could certainly write down "Aryan." [For those not in the U.S., the Census is a slave to political correctness. We have the spectacle of those of Spanish descent, as in "from Spain," writing down some variant of Hispanic for their "race," even though a Spaniard is of course of European, aka white, stock, while most Mexicans are much different. Amerindian, or whatever. And the Asians are divided into a dozen or so groups which lobbied for inclusion in the Census. Meanwhile, Finns, Irish, Poles, Israelis, Russians, Arabs, BUT NOT SPANIARDS, are all lumped in as "white." Bizarre.] In the Censuses of 1980 and 1990 I think I wrote down "Human Race" or something like that. Now I try to be as politically incorrect as possible. Fucking statists. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From bear at sonic.net Wed Oct 25 10:39:29 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 13:39:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Filters In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001025093515.007dbdf0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, David Honig wrote: >At 08:06 PM 10/24/00 -0400, Ray Dillinger wrote: >>If nobody comes up with some filterware that works, then there will >>probably be continuing pressure to regulate content. > >Its called 'parenting' but most are too busy, so they ask the State, or >machines (censorware, v-chips, rating systems, etc.) under others' control, >to do it instead. Machines under *others* control? I think we have different ideas of what "filters" mean. I support the right of people to not see what they don't want to see, provided they can do it without restricting what the rest of us see. If they can buy software that blocks out the things they don't want to see, and run it, good for them and good for the software provider. Ditto Privately owned libraries - but probably not public ones, at least not unless they also maintain an *UN*censored connection. The v-chip does *not* prevent programming from reaching my home - it doesn't even prevent programming from reaching the homes of those who've willingly purchased and installed it, but it prevents stuff they'd find objectionable from being displayed on their screens. This is their right. After all, we're talking about *their* screens. Bear From jimdbell at home.com Wed Oct 25 14:01:24 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:01:24 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post References: <20001025153635.C7732@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <008c01c03ec6$bec80480$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Declan McCullagh To: Tim May > On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 10:35:53AM -0700, Tim May wrote: > > It's not so much that he's "wrong" as that he's "naive." He arrives > > on the CP list and begins regurgitating socialist blather he heard in > > his poli-sci and sociology classes. Junk about mandatory health care, > > True, true. It's probably not worth our time. It's not that he's not > educable -- although we see no indication of that yet -- it's that > there are better uses of scare resources. Could it be a sophisticated denial-of-service attack? B^) From ericm at lne.com Wed Oct 25 14:13:07 2000 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:13:07 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001025161515.023d2d70@mail.well.com>; from declan@well.com on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 04:17:22PM -0400 References: <3.0.5.32.20001024103811.0099fba0@idiom.com> <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <3.0.5.32.20001024103811.0099fba0@idiom.com> <4.3.0.20001025161515.023d2d70@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20001025141307.D724@slack.lne.com> On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 04:17:22PM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > > At 15:43 10/25/2000 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > >As to sending it to lists which have subscriber-post-only, it is, as usual, > >a consequence of spam prevention and not malice aforethought. Kinda sucks, > >of course, because anonymous posters can't post. Hope they fix that in > >future versions of majordomo, but I bet it'll be a while. > > The current version of majordomo allows for an authorized-poster file, > which I use with one of my lists to let people who aren't on the list > contribute. You could use a cron job to combine subscribers with add'l > posters to allow some of the more-likely-to-respond cypherpunks to post. Here's the cron-run script that I use to do it. In my case it combines the regular list and the list of subscribers to the digest version and any other address that's been added to the allowed posters list into a new allowed posters list. If you set up majordomo to send rejected emails to the list manager (the default) then any "legit" poster who's post gets bounced by somehow not being on the approved list can be added by the list operator. #!/bin/sh mjhome=/home/majordom if [ $# -ne 3 ]; then echo "usage: updateperms list1 list2 permlist" exit 1 fi cd $mjhome/lists if [ $1 -nt $3 -o $2 -nt $3 ]; then cat $1 $2 $3 | sort | uniq > $3.tmp && mv $3.tmp $3 echo "updated $3" fi -- Eric Murray Consulting Security Architect SecureDesign LLC http://www.securedesignllc.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From gbroiles at netbox.com Wed Oct 25 11:28:44 2000 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:28:44 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Congress proposes raiding census records. In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001025093236.007cf7e0@pop.sprynet.com> References: <20001025100611.B3872@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20001025111224.01ffb170@mail.speakeasy.org> At 12:38 PM 10/25/00 -0400, David Honig wrote: >Real-To: David Honig > >At 09:45 AM 10/25/00 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >I didn't answer even that question. I did not return the form. > > > >My result was the same as yours: No visits or inquiries. > > > >That's a shame. If I get fined $100, I can write a column about my > >experience and sell it for much more. > > > >-Declan > >Some folks who didn't send theirs in did get visits by (otherwise >unemployable) censusworkers. They went away when told to do so, >I'm told. I'm aware of one person, living in Oakland (CA) who simply ignored the annoying form. I'm told the Census people came to his apartment several times but were unable to even reach his apartment door because the apartment building had been hardened with security features which prevented access by burglars, panhandlers, solicitors, etc., so they were forced to leave notes requesting compliance, which didn't meet with a lot of sympathy. I'm also aware of a similar example in Mountain View, CA - it's pretty hard for them to bother people who use even elementary measures to protect their privacy and security. They can get all the data they need from Social Security, drivers' license, and ID card data. The mandatory Census is a ridiculous waste of time and money. Sure, it's interesting to learn about the demographic makeup of the country, but that's not a project that needs to happen at gunpoint. (Nor should it, if they're hoping for accurate results.) -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 25 11:42:46 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:42:46 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Filters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 1:39 PM -0400 10/25/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: > > >The v-chip does *not* prevent programming from reaching my home - >it doesn't even prevent programming from reaching the homes of >those who've willingly purchased and installed it, but it prevents >stuff they'd find objectionable from being displayed on their >screens. This is their right. After all, we're talking about >*their* screens. 1. The V-chip was _mandated_ for inclusion in all televisions bought after some date. No choice, no opt out, a mandatory increased cost. This is not consistent with freedom and non-coercion. (Saying the customer has the option of not using the V-chip features is irrelevant; that the manufacturer was commanded to include V-chip was the crime.) 2. The V-chip is, predictably, completely ineffectual in preventing Junior from accessing porn, whatever. For obvious reasons. First, most televisions pre-date the V-chip. Second, many other distribution mechanisms abound. Third, the V-chip programming is accessible to teens and others...their parents probably go to _them_ to ask for help (and then give up on the whole process). All it takes is the kid with the stash of porn to defeat the whole idea...just as when we were kids. The kid with the "questionable content" is precisely the one who will find one of the hundreds of millions of televisions without the V-Chip. And much more importantly, one of the hundreds of millions of VCRs which will play "Debbie Does Cyberspace" without any regard for what some nominal V-Chip will provide. (I don't believe even current-production VCRs are required to have the V-Chip, and since many folks use the VCR as their television tuner....) The whole V-Chip thing was a typical exercise in "feel good legislation." "Let's do something to show we care about saving the children." In any case, pragmatic issues aside, there is no justification in a free society for telling the maker of some piece of equipment that he must include some piece of censorware. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From jimdbell at home.com Wed Oct 25 14:49:33 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:49:33 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) cpunk References: <009501c03a0f$52f3be40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> <39F743CC.93BED427@sunder.net> Message-ID: <00a501c03ecd$76726480$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: sunder > There is a book that this is written in about called "Deep Time" which is > a damned good read IMHO. (It's about how to make things last for millenia.) > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0380975378/qid=972503490/sr=1-3/102-7 742712-2792108 > > The best quote from the guy that thought up the idea of feeding plankton > FeO2 was "Give me a frigate full of rust, and I'll give you your next > ice age." (from wetware RAM, #include ) My back-of-the-computerized-envelope calculation shows that it would take 5900 metric tons (2200 lbs) to load a volume of 100km by 100km by 100 meters of water with 100 nanomolar level of iron ion. (weight counts only that of iron, not the anion.) Big supertankers hold approximately 400,000 tons of oil, which happens to be much less dense than iron oxide. I haven't read much on the results of the experiment done, but my impression is that this kind of iron fertilizing is very much worth doing. Jim Bell From ahmed at emirates.net.ae Wed Oct 25 03:51:58 2000 From: ahmed at emirates.net.ae (ahmed moha) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:51:58 +0400 Subject: CDR: jhkhb Message-ID: <39F6BB4E.A19FE8A8@emirates.net.ae> fucing woman From carskar at netsolve.net Wed Oct 25 13:02:27 2000 From: carskar at netsolve.net (Carskadden, Rush) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 15:02:27 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Denver Judge rules Cops can seize bookstore records Message-ID: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555478A@cobra.netsolve.net> How do they subpoena records from garden supply stores looking for people who buy too many grow lamps or hydroponic setups? Do they just subpoena all of these stores on a regular basis? What do they claim they are looking for in the subpoenas? My understanding is that you pretty much have to know what you are looking for and be fairly specific about it in the subpoena. If you do not already know who is buying "too many" grow lamps or hydroponic setups, how do you structure the subpoena? The only signed subpoenas that I have seen that were grossly general and unsure of what was needed were either A) Internet related (taking advantage of a seeming lack of knowledge on the part of judges) or B) a case where the person who is being subpoena'd is actually a victim of the crime being investigated. Do you have more information on the garden supply store thing? ok, Rush Carskadden -----Original Message----- From: Greg Broiles [mailto:gbroiles at netbox.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 2:45 PM To: cypherpunks at cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Denver Judge rules Cops can seize bookstore records Interesting - the article is a little confused on a few points - specifically, this is not the first time this has happened, the DEA subpoena'd records from a publisher of mushroom growing books back in the mid 90's. They also subpoena records from garden supply stores looking for people who buy too many grow lamps or hydroponic setups. Also, it doesn't sound like they're talking about a search warrant - those aren't issued by DA's, nor do their targets have an opportunity to argue about what's searched prior to the search, because the searches take place without notice and at gunpoint. It sounds like they're talking about a subpoena, which does afford the recipient a chance to get an attorney and argue about it prior to releasing information. Still, it's a good reminder that it can be dangerous to trust even good people with sensitive information - the good people may not willingly betray you, but they may be forced to divulge the information on pain of losing money, property, or their life, or it may simply be stolen by armed gangs. At 12:45 PM 10/25/00 -0500, No User wrote: >Real-To: No User > >"If we can save but one child from the awful scourge of drugs..." > >Of course, the real issue here is why the bookstore was keeping such >personalized records in the first place. > >-------- >Judge: Cops can seize bookstore records >http://www.denverpost.com/news/news1021b.htm > >By Susan Greene >Denver Post Staff Writer > >Oct. 21, 2000 - Police will be allowed to search customer purchase records >at the Tattered Cover Book Store to investigate a narcotics case, a Denver >judge ordered Friday. > >Civil libertarians decried the order - believed to be the first of its >kind nationwide - for protecting law enforcement's ability to obtain >evidence over individual rights to read without interference from >authorities. > >Tattered Cover owner Joyce Meskis said the order could have a "chilling >effect" on the First Amendment and on store patrons, who might hesitate to >buy books knowing that police have access to their purchase records. She >is considering an appeal. > >"A bookstore is a house of ideas," she said. "We certainly have the >responsibility to protect customers' rights to those ideas, and the right >to privacy that goes along with that." > >Law enforcers hailed the order as a victory. > >"If it only takes one or two records from a bookstore to help us eliminate >drugs on the street, then so be it," said Lt. Lori Moriarty, commander of >the North Metro Drug Task Force, which is seeking the Tattered Cover >records. "We need all the tools possible to help law enforcement do its >job." > >The controversy stems from a March 14 raid on an Adams County mobile home >in which task force members found a methamphetamine lab and two books: >"The Construction and Operation of Clandestine Drug Laboratories" by "Jack >B. Nimble," and "Advanced Techniques of Clandestine Psychedelic and >Amphetamine Manufacture" by "Uncle Fester." > >Investigators also found a bookshipping envelope containing an invoice >number from the Tattered Cover in Lower Downtown Denver. They are hoping >bookstore records will help pinpoint which of the six people who >frequented the mobile home bought the books and, presumably, operated the >lab. > >The task force first sought a search warrant from the Adams County >district attorney's office, which rejected the request partially on >grounds that executing it would give police a public relations "black >eye." > >Task force members then turned to the Denver DA's office, which granted >the warrant. > >Meskis blocked police from going through her store's records, saying they >should instead use other investigative measures such as fingerprinting to >find their suspect. > >Denver District Court temporarily blocked the task force from seizing the >records, pending the outcome of a hearing before Judge Stephen Phillips. > >Most states have laws protecting public libraries from police searches >except under exceptional circumstances, but there is no special law that >protects bookstores. > >The issue made headlines in 1998, when independent counsel Kenneth Starr >subpoenaed two Washington, D.C., bookstores for information on gifts >exchanged between President Clinton and White House intern Monica >Lewinsky. Barnes & Noble and Kramerbooks hired lawyers and challenged the >subpoena in federal court. > >A federal judge quashed Starr's request for the records. Lewinsky, >meantime, agreed to testify in exchange for immunity, rendering the whole >issue moot. > >Still, the case was a watershed for bookstore owners and privacy >advocates, who have been watching the Tattered Cover's legal battle with >intense interest. > >Phillips, in his order, recognized the First Amendment right to "receive >information and ideas, regardless of social worth," but he cited a legal >balancing test weighing such rights against the importance of law >enforcement to investigate crimes. > >Phillips ruled that the identity of the drug lab operators is "of >significant public interest" and that "the purchase of how-to books is a >highly important piece of evidence." > >The judge wrote that there's no other reasonable way, aside from seizing >store records, for investigators to obtain the information they're >seeking. He lauded the task force for asking only for specific invoices, >not "stumbl(ing) through other private records." > >Phillips deemed the Tattered Cover case "dramatically different" than the >Lewinsky case, about which he wrote: "The subpoenas were exploratory in >nature, and the government was unable to show any need nor any nexus to a >criminal event." > >And so Phillips denied investigators' broad request for a month's worth of >records that might show all titles purchased by the unnamed suspects. >Still, he granted police access to the specific invoice whose number >appeared on the book mailer. > >Meskis has 15 days to appeal before the task force seizes her records. > >Moriarty insists it was never her unit's intent to comb through reading >records of the general public. Rather, she said, Phillips' order will give >investigators "an important piece of a puzzle" needed to nab their >suspect. > >Critics say one arrest is a high price to pay for allowing a war against >drugs to chip away at civil rights. > >"Key principles of the right to privacy and freedom of speech have >ultimately been compromised in the decision," said Sue Armstrong, >executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Colorado. > >Judith Krug, director of the Office for Intellectual Freedom at the >American Library Association, said she worries that drug investigators >unfairly are "making the connection between what people read and what they >do." > >"Just because you read a book on homosexuality, for example, doesn't mean >you're gay. And reading a book on the symptoms of cancer doesn't mean you >have the disease," Krug said. > >"Our concern is that what people read, what goes into their heads will no >longer remain private." > > >KEY QUESTIONS: > >Denver District Judge Stephen Phillips posed four key questions as part of >a legal balancing test in his ruling: > >1. Is there a legitimate and significant government interest in acquiring >the information? > >2. Is there a strong nexus between the matter being investigated and the >material being sought? > >3. Is the information available from another source? > >4. Is the intrusion limited in scope so as to prevent exposure of other >constitutionally protected matters? > >Copyright 2000 The Denver Post. All rights reserved. > >Related: >Bookstore fights search warrant >http://www.denverpost.com/news/news1018d.htm -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 14551 bytes Desc: not available URL: From alan at clueserver.org Wed Oct 25 15:06:54 2000 From: alan at clueserver.org (Alan Olsen) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 15:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: At last! In-Reply-To: <200010252001.NAA14822@toad.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, clubbers chat wrote: > Hi, > At last clubberschat has arrived! > > Some time ago we contacted you with news of a forthcoming service � Clubberschat. > > Clubberschat is a site that is linked up to hundreds of other clubbing sites > worldwide, which should solve that age-old problem of empty chat rooms! I have examined your site and have found that it does not cover the clubbing of baby harp seals. Please recitify this situation as I am most interested in this topic. "By breaking this seal, you agree to these terms and limitations..." alan at ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys. "In the future, everything will have its 15 minutes of blame." From melliott at ncsa.uiuc.edu Wed Oct 25 12:19:27 2000 From: melliott at ncsa.uiuc.edu (Matt Elliott) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 15:19:27 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Congress proposes raiding census records. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >I am puzzled why anybody would have bothered to answer the remaining >questions. I did the same thing and the census worker came by 4 times trying to get my wife or I to divulge more information. -- Matt Elliott High Performance Data Management Team 217-265-0257 From declan at well.com Wed Oct 25 12:28:22 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 15:28:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: References: <20001025153635.C7732@cluebot.com> <20001025153635.C7732@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001025152540.02398510@mail.well.com> Ah, no. Said individual was born in the U.S. from American parents (and then moved to BC). It's that Yankee blood that does it. :) -Declan At 12:21 10/25/2000 -0700, Tim May wrote: >Not counting a certain someone, initials SB/SS, from British Columbia? From declan at well.com Wed Oct 25 12:36:35 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 15:36:35 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 10:35:53AM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20001025153635.C7732@cluebot.com> On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 10:35:53AM -0700, Tim May wrote: > It's not so much that he's "wrong" as that he's "naive." He arrives > on the CP list and begins regurgitating socialist blather he heard in > his poli-sci and sociology classes. Junk about mandatory health care, True, true. It's probably not worth our time. It's not that he's not educable -- although we see no indication of that yet -- it's that there are better uses of scare resources. Anyone hoping to be taken seriously should at least have read some of the basic cpunk literature. And he has not. > As I have said, and as Lucky just said this morning, the list has for > some reason attracted a whole set of such naive and puerile people. > One theory is that it's the "fall crop" of students. Another is that Probably. I remember on Usenet circa '91 we'd see an influx of freshmen polluting otherwise useful newsgroups. Lots seemed to come from psu.edu, for some odd reason. > increasingly leftist and interventionist. (We have a Canadian branch > of the Cypherpunks which is apparently led by a neo-fascist civil > rights crusader who wants guns banned and is distrustful of free > market solutions.) Righto. While anyone who wants to can call themselves a cypherpunk, anarchic labeling and all that, it's clear that some folks just don't get it. It must have something to do with being Canadianized. Only folks from Alberta seem to get it right. From rah at ibuc.com Wed Oct 25 12:43:00 2000 From: rah at ibuc.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 15:43:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001024103811.0099fba0@idiom.com> References: <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <3.0.5.32.20001024103811.0099fba0@idiom.com> Message-ID: At 10:38 AM -0700 on 10/24/00, Bill Stewart wrote: > But Bob, I thought you usually did "Edit once, send three or four times" :-) Right. I figured it would only really be relevant here, and I tried to restrain myself, but couldn't, quite. ;-). As to sending it to lists which have subscriber-post-only, it is, as usual, a consequence of spam prevention and not malice aforethought. Kinda sucks, of course, because anonymous posters can't post. Hope they fix that in future versions of majordomo, but I bet it'll be a while. Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From commerce at home.com Wed Oct 25 13:09:55 2000 From: commerce at home.com (Me) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:09:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post References: <20001025153635.C7732@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <015c01c03ebf$8bad9b20$0100a8c0@matthew> From: "Declan McCullagh" > It must have something to do with being Canadianized. Only folks from > Alberta seem to get it right. Pierre Lemieux?! From declan at well.com Wed Oct 25 13:17:22 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:17:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.5.32.20001024103811.0099fba0@idiom.com> <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <3.0.5.32.20001024103811.0099fba0@idiom.com> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001025161515.023d2d70@mail.well.com> At 15:43 10/25/2000 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >As to sending it to lists which have subscriber-post-only, it is, as usual, >a consequence of spam prevention and not malice aforethought. Kinda sucks, >of course, because anonymous posters can't post. Hope they fix that in >future versions of majordomo, but I bet it'll be a while. The current version of majordomo allows for an authorized-poster file, which I use with one of my lists to let people who aren't on the list contribute. You could use a cron job to combine subscribers with add'l posters to allow some of the more-likely-to-respond cypherpunks to post. -Declan From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Wed Oct 25 08:21:13 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:21:13 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: Message-ID: <39F6FA69.10DEDA79@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> "Trei, Peter" wrote: > Nathan, have you ever actually looked at socialized medicine? It's > fine for some things, but not for others. Illnessess which can be > cured and which curing will return a person to productive labour > get treated - after a while. Illnessess which strike late in life and/or > require expensive treatment get much shorter shrift. This isn't really true. The NHS tends to be quite good at big stuff, serious interventions. The UK is also quite good for fixing small 1-off problems (the poor wait in line, the less poor just pay same as anywhere else). What it isn't so good at is chronic but not life-threatening problems. In other words, just the ones "which curing will return a person to productive labour". Of course these are also the exact same health problems that private health insurance is worst at. > Why do you > think Austin Power's teeth were a running joke? The > state of British (ie, socialized NHS) dentistry lags *far* behind > the US, especially in the area of orthodontics. Dentistry in the UK is almost entirely private & sometimes used as an example of why publicly provided healthcare is supposed to be better! Except for the poorest, we pay for it out of our own pockets (as adults anyway, there is a certain amount of public provision for children). Same applies to opticians & so on. There are a lot of problems (particularly local ones in London because nationally set budgets don't reflect the cost of provision here - the district I'm in has over 20% shortfall in the number of nurses on the staff because they aren't paid enough), but on the whole I think you'll find few Brits who would give up the idea of the NHS. After all we live longer than you do, on average (assuming you are USAn), are slightly poorer to start with & spend a *lot* less on healthcare per head, public & private combined. In fact you spend almost as much on "socialised" medicine as we do, far less cost-effectively. Ken From rah at ibuc.com Wed Oct 25 13:24:49 2000 From: rah at ibuc.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:24:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001025161515.023d2d70@mail.well.com> References: <3.0.5.32.20001024103811.0099fba0@idiom.com> <4.3.0.20001024020843.0233a0b0@mail.well.com> <3.0.5.32.20001024103811.0099fba0@idiom.com> <4.3.0.20001025161515.023d2d70@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 4:17 PM -0400 on 10/25/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: > The current version of majordomo allows for an authorized-poster file, That's probably the way to do it, with all the anonymous remailers listed in it, I bet. Oddly enough, people who are clueful enough to use the current state of remailer technology aren't clueless enough to spam with them. Or so it seems from the content of remailer generated traffic I've seen, anyway. Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From sunder at sunder.net Wed Oct 25 13:34:20 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:34:20 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) cpunk References: <009501c03a0f$52f3be40$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <39F743CC.93BED427@sunder.net> jim bell wrote: > > And if you've been following science issues over the last few years, it is > now shown that dumping iron ions (at nanomolar levels) in the south Pacific > ocean greatly assists the growing of biota which sequester CO2 from the > atmosphere. Sure, as easy as this may end up being, that's going to require There is a book that this is written in about called "Deep Time" which is a damned good read IMHO. (It's about how to make things last for millenia.) http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0380975378/qid=972503490/sr=1-3/102-7742712-2792108 The best quote from the guy that thought up the idea of feeding plankton FeO2 was "Give me a frigate full of rust, and I'll give you your next ice age." (from wetware RAM, #include ) The current issue of Wired wrote up on this also. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From sunder at sunder.net Wed Oct 25 13:35:52 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:35:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Non-Repudiation in the Digital Environment (was Re: First Monday August 2000) References: <3366.965720890@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <3.0.6.32.20000809201038.008cecf0@pop.sprynet.com> <39DF759D.92B318EF@nma.com> <39E388F8.9EBC1BFB@nma.com> <39EA900D.9A8103B4@nma.com> <39EB911C.10E673B3@nma.com> <39EC98AB.827388D1@nma.com> <39EDDCA8.189CED40@nma.com> Message-ID: <39F74428.EE826734@sunder.net> "Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > > > Eye twinkle doesn't come across in e-mail, I'm afraid. My apologies > to Tony. This is obviously one of my hot buttons. Bullshit: ;-) or ;) or ;^) would have done just fine. >8^D -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From jimdbell at home.com Wed Oct 25 13:50:06 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:50:06 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Congress proposes raiding census records. References: Message-ID: <007201c03ec5$32a61b00$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: Tim May > When the Census form eventually arrived I got the short one. I > answered only the question about the number of adults living at the > address. I wrote "Aryan" for my race...I figured if the "favored > minorities" got to have dozens of sub-classes ("Asian American, > Pacific Islander, but not Chamorro Islands," or somesuch), then I > could certainly write down "Aryan." > > [For those not in the U.S., the Census is a slave to political > correctness. We have the spectacle of those of Spanish descent, as in > "from Spain," writing down some variant of Hispanic for their "race," > even though a Spaniard is of course of European, aka white, stock, > while most Mexicans are much different. Amerindian, or whatever. "Beaners" BTW, I wonder if anyone else on this list is aware that the inmate population of Phoenix Federal Correctional Intitute is about 40% Mexican. Not "mexican-american." The average American's illusion is that when an illegal alien is found he's immediately kicked across the border. Well, the first time maybe, but there is now a 2-year sentence for illegal entry for repeat offenders. Very convenient, because the majority of prison guards are probably ex-US Military-types who "need" to be kept in the Federal fold. For every couple of beaners they keep, they get to hire another guard. Jim Bell From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 25 16:56:53 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:56:53 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <200010252024.PAA18122@ecom1.wiu.edu>; from K-Elliott@wiu.edu on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 03:24:35PM -0500 References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> <200010252024.PAA18122@ecom1.wiu.edu> Message-ID: <20001025165653.B1804@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 4030 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 25 17:02:09 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 17:02:09 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001025004036.00ad2d80@toto.csustan.edu>; from pbright@thevision.net on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 12:41:49AM -0700 References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001025004036.00ad2d80@toto.csustan.edu> Message-ID: <20001025170209.C1804@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1376 bytes Desc: not available URL: From secret_squirrel at nym.alias.net Wed Oct 25 10:11:22 2000 From: secret_squirrel at nym.alias.net (Secret Squirrel) Date: 25 Oct 2000 17:11:22 -0000 Subject: CDR: For small values of "Ideal" (was: Re: why should it be trusted?) Message-ID: <4a73446076dd47a52b815d23277aacfd@anonymous> Nathan Saper wrote: > Having socialized healthcare would be ideal. However, I think that "Having total gun control would be ideal," "Having self censorship would be ideal," "Having salary standardization would be ideal," and now: "Having socialized healthcare would be ideal." What next? "Having crypto export controls would be ideal"? If I set up a Killfilepunks list, will you migrate? From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 25 17:15:06 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 17:15:06 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <20001025100953.C3872@cluebot.com>; from declan@well.com on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 10:09:53AM -0400 References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> <20001025100953.C3872@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <20001025171506.D1804@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 2965 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 25 17:27:45 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 17:27:45 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: ; from ptrei@rsasecurity.com on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 10:10:29AM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20001025172745.E1804@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 4443 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jimdbell at home.com Wed Oct 25 17:35:55 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 17:35:55 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: CIA in Oregon, Intelink References: <200010252246.SAA17955@maynard.mail.mindspring.net> Message-ID: <00b701c03ee4$b3eb9400$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: John Young To: Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 15:34 PM Subject: CIA in Oregon, Intelink > Would anyone in the Oregon area know about > a CIA organization acronymed ISTAC? > > Here's the NIC entry, which includes a CIA rep > in Bend, OR. Note that the other CIA rep used > only a last name initial. > > Designated Agency Rep, Requester, Sr. Registration Official: > Mueller, Deforest X. (DXM2) > (541) 385-6836 > MUELLER at BENDNET.COM > Record last updated on 13-Apr-99. > Mueller, Deforest X. (DXM2) > cia > 63350 majestic loop > bend, OR 97701 > (541) 385-6836 > MUELLER at BENDNET.COM Here is a list of all driver's licenses in Oregon in 1996 that contain "DEFOREST". Notice the last entry: "MC CAULEY, DALE DEFOREST","3314 SE TAYLOR","","PORTLAND","OR",26,97214,15,12,24,"M",600,180,"A","0199503" "MC FARLAND, DAVID DEFOREST","36003 E CROWN PT HWY","","CORBETT","OR",26,97019,42,3,21,"M",510,230,"","0738491" "MCFARLAND, DANIEL DEFOREST","36003 E CROWN POINT HWY","","CORBETT","OR",26,97019,75,12,18,"M",511,150,"A","5323237" "MILBURN, DONALD DEFOREST","653 SMITH ROCK WAY","","TERREBONNE","OR",9,97760,59,6,19,"M",601,190,"","2256445" "MUELLER, SCOTT DEFOREST","1823 GARNET PL WA","PO BOX 486","CHELAN","WA",60,98816,50,7,10,"M",600,174,"","2005706" Here is a car for "Scott Deforest Mueller", registered in Oregon but with the Chelan, Washington, address. ---------- s.txt "SAL903","1","CHEV","SV2","VA","1GBEG25H5G7185373","9535286527",86,1,97,9,16 ,"MUELLER, SCOTT DEFOREST",50,7,10,2005706,"MUELLER, KIM MARIE",59,11,8,3772314,"1823 GARNET PL WA","PO BOX 486","CHELAN","WA",98816,60,"",1,95,12,18,0,0,"","","","","","","",0 And here is the data from 1997 license plates. ---------- sal SAL903 1CHEV VA1GBEG25H5G7185373 9535286527861990916MUELLER, SCOTT DEFOREST MUELLER, KIM MARIE 20830 DIONE WAY BENDPO BOX 486 CHELAN WA9881660 I'll look up the information for "Kim Marie Mueller" later on today. Jim Bell From bill.stewart at pobox.com Wed Oct 25 15:23:37 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 18:23:37 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Congress proposes raiding census records. In-Reply-To: <20001025100611.B3872@cluebot.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001025133256.009ab5b0@idiom.com> I'd been planning to take the Fifth and write a rant to go with it explaining why. There were half a dozen things wrong with the forms and associated package purely aside from the questions themselves. But it wasn't a high priority, so I ended up not returning the form. At 09:45 AM 10/25/00 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: >I didn't answer even that question. I did not return the form. > >My result was the same as yours: No visits or inquiries. > >That's a shame. If I get fined $100, I can write a column about my >experience and sell it for much more. > >-Declan > > >On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 04:08:42AM -0400, Lucky Green wrote: >> I only answered the first question in the last census: how many people live >> at that address (or something to that effect). The rest I crossed out with >> fat black permanent marker. The result: no visits from the census taker. No >> inquiries from the Census Office. No fine. No repercussions of any kind. >> >> I am puzzled why anybody would have bothered to answer the remaining >> questions. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From jya at pipeline.com Wed Oct 25 15:34:29 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 18:34:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: CIA in Oregon, Intelink Message-ID: <200010252246.SAA17955@maynard.mail.mindspring.net> Would anyone in the Oregon area know about a CIA organization acronymed ISTAC? Here's the NIC entry, which includes a CIA rep in Bend, OR. Note that the other CIA rep used only a last name initial. CIA (ISTAC-DOM) 1820 Electric Avenue Vienna, VA 21076 Domain Name: ISTAC.GOV Status: ACTIVE Domain Type: Federal Technical Contact, Administrative Contact: S, Dan (DS3) 703-281-8087 DAN at ISTAC.GOV Domain servers in listed order: MARS.ISTAC.GOV 199.99.221.33 NS1.SPRINTLINK.NET 204.117.214.10 NS2.SPRINTLINK.NET 199.2.252.10, 199.2.252.1 NS3.SPRINTLINK.NET 204.97.212.10 Record last updated on 31-Oct-97. cia (W19990412003631) Federal Government: Yes Unlisted Organization: Yes Status: Pending Designated Agency Rep, Requester, Sr. Registration Official: Mueller, Deforest X. (DXM2) (541) 385-6836 MUELLER at BENDNET.COM Record last updated on 13-Apr-99. ----- Mueller, Deforest X. (DXM2) cia 63350 majestic loop bend, OR 97701 (541) 385-6836 MUELLER at BENDNET.COM ------ Second inquiry on accessing Intelink, or IC.GOV While this is registered, it does not respond to a browser inquiry. Here is its NIC data: IC.GOV Central Intelligence Agency (IC-DOM) Global Network Enterprise Washington, DC 20505 Domain Name: IC.GOV Status: ACTIVE Domain Type: Federal Technical Contact: Networks, Public (PN2) (702) 874-7205 EDSN at UCIA.GOV Administrative Contact: Farnham, David B. (DBF) (703) 874-2871 DAVEF at UCIA.GOV Domain servers in listed order: NS.DIGEX.NET 164.109.1.3 NS2.DIGEX.NET 164.109.10.23 Record last updated on -Apr-10. ------------------------------------------------------------ Networks, Public (PN2) Central Intelligence Agency ATS/EDSN, 1U1332 NHB Washington, DC 20505 (702) 874-7205 EDSN at UCIA.GOV E-mail Host: UCIA.GOV Record last updated on 27-Jan-99. ------------------------------------------------------------ Farnham, David B. (DBF) ATS/NSG, 2W03 NHB ATS/NSG, 2W03 NHB Washington, DC 20505 (703) 874-2871 DAVEF at UCIA.GOV Record last updated on 27-Jan-99. ------------------------------------------------------------ Source: http://www.nic.gov/REFERENCE/rfc2146-2.txt CROSS-AGENCY COLLABORATIONS Q. An organization maintains a domain name that represents a cross-agency community, IC.GOV, which represents members of the intelligence community. As a cross-agency collaborative effort, does the domain have to be re-registered? A. The policy states that "Cross-agency collaborative organizations (e.g., "Federal Networking Council", "Information Infrastructure Task Force") are eligible for registration under .GOV upon presentation of the chartering document and are the only non-listed (in either FIPS 95-1 or the US Government Manual) organizations eligible for registration under .GOV." "IC.GOV" however, is grand-fathered since it is an existing domain. Nevertheless, it would be appropriate to provide a copy of the chartering document to the FNC for the record. This would ease future changes to the IC.GOV domain if necessary. ----------------------------------------------------------- From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 25 18:51:20 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 18:51:20 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <20001025170209.C1804@well.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001025004036.00ad2d80@toto.csustan.edu> <20001025170209.C1804@well.com> Message-ID: At 5:02 PM -0700 10/25/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 12:41:49AM -0700, Rev. Parker Bright wrote: >> If you truly believe this why not take a hint from Camus and kill yourself. >> You could one, lose nothing due to inherent lack of value, two, exercise >> the one undeniable right, three, the secession of personal pain and four, >> free up resources to reduce the pain of others. >> Not taking shots, just offering options. >> > >I've thought about it many times. I guess the reason I haven't is >that, every once in a while, I actually do have fun. Nevertheless, _our_ happiness demands that you off yourself...soonest. As you have so convincingly articulated, it's simple majority rule. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Wed Oct 25 16:19:22 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 19:19:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: CIA in Oregon, Intelink Message-ID: > ---------- > From: John Young[SMTP:jya at pipeline.com] > Reply To: John Young > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 6:34 PM > To: cypherpunks at cyberpass.net > Subject: CIA in Oregon, Intelink > > Would anyone in the Oregon area know about > a CIA organization acronymed ISTAC? > > Here's the NIC entry, which includes a CIA rep > in Bend, OR. Note that the other CIA rep used > only a last name initial. > > CIA (ISTAC-DOM) > 1820 Electric Avenue > Vienna, VA 21076 > > > Domain Name: ISTAC.GOV > Status: ACTIVE > Domain Type: Federal > > Technical Contact, Administrative Contact: > S, Dan (DS3) > 703-281-8087 > DAN at ISTAC.GOV > [...] Well, you *could* call up Mr. Dan and ask (the worst he could do is lie), but that would be too easy, wouldn't it? The most likely suspect appears to be a BXA advisory body. Of course, acronyms can get overloaded :-) Since the duties of this ISTAC appear to include advising BXA on encryption, I think it's relevant to the list. Peter. google gives: -------------------------------- http://207.226.239.89/990126mo.htm and http://bxatac.doc.gov/ suggests ISTAC = Information Systems Technical Advisory Committee That page also has links to minutes from the public parts of meetings, (which are held in DC) The next ISTAC meeting is November 15 &16, and is partially open to the public. Here's some cut&paste text WHAT ARE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEES? Technical Advisory Committees (TACs) advise the Department of Commerce on the technical parameters for export controls applicable to dual-use commodities and technology and on the administration of those controls. The TACs are composed of representatives from industry and Government representing diverse points of view on the concerns of the exporting community. Industry representatives are selected from firms producing a broad range of goods, technologies, and software presently controlled for national security, foreign policy, nonproliferation, and short supply reasons or that are proposed for such controls, balanced to the extent possible among large and small firms. HOW ARE MEMBERS CHOSEN? TAC members are appointed by the Secretary of Commerce and serve terms of not more than four consecutive years. The membership reflects the Department's commitment to attaining balance and diversity. TAC members must obtain secret-level clearances prior to appointment. These clearances are necessary so that members can be permitted access to relevant classified information needed in formulating recommendations to the Department of Commerce. Each TAC meets approximately 4 times per year. Members of the TACs will not be compensated for their services. HOW MANY TACS ARE THERE, AND WHAT DO THEY DO? The following is a list of TACs that currently advise BXA, along with a short summary of each TAC's issue areas. You can access the committee's charter by clicking on its name. 1.Information Systems - Articles, materials and supplies of computers electronics, and telecommunications equipment. 2.Materials - Articles, materials, and supplies for radar absorption, jet engine turbines blades, super- conductivity, fluids, lubricants, composites, and for nuclear, missile, chemical, and biological weapons, including technical data and other information. 3.Materials Processing Equipment - Articles, materials and supplies of metal-working equipment, numerically controlled machine tools and robots, including technical data on the integration of numerically controlled machine tools and robotics equipment to form manufacturing cells and flexible manufacturing systems and enterprise automation technologies, as well as other information. 4.Regulations and Procedures - The Export Administration Regulations (EARs) and procedures implementing these regulations. 5.Sensors and Instrumentation - Articles, materials and supplies of sensors and instrumentation, including technical data and other information. 6.Transportation and Related Equipment - Articles, materials and supplies of transportation and related equipment, including technical data and other information. From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 25 19:37:43 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 19:37:43 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <01d401c03eef$df820580$0100a8c0@matthew>; from commerce@home.com on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 09:55:52PM -0400 References: <20001025172745.E1804@well.com> <01d401c03eef$df820580$0100a8c0@matthew> Message-ID: <20001025193743.B2203@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1829 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lust4cp at hotmail.com Wed Oct 25 17:39:47 2000 From: lust4cp at hotmail.com (john doe) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 19:39:47 CDT Subject: CDR: quick question Message-ID: was surfing the net and ran across an artile you posted that had a picture in it in and was wondering where to get the decoder for the picture... the website is http://www.inet-one.com/cypherpunks/dir.97.06.19-97.06.25/msg00323.html thanks _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. From declan at well.com Wed Oct 25 16:58:02 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 19:58:02 -0400 Subject: CDR: Privacy: Dems criticize GOP, Calif, Australia, and Carnivore Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001025195747.01f7f630@mail.well.com> ********* More privacy stuff at: http://www.cluebot.com/search.pl?topic=privacy ********* http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/25/2351218&mode=nested Democrats Criticize Census Data Sharing posted by cicero on Wednesday October 25, @06:49PM from the hypocritcal-congresscritters-so-what-else-is-new dept. David Sobel of EPIC just sent us a letter that a pair of Democratic legislators are circulating on Capitol Hill. Turns out they want to stop a Republican plan to share some Census data with other government agencies. The opposition from Carolyn Maloney and John Dingell is certainly welcome, but it's important to realize that this is a simple partisan manuevering. While they piously bleat that "Congress should be protecting personal privacy," neither voted for privacy-protective measures when they had the chance, according to a Wired News scorecard. The letter, dated October 25: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/25/2351218&mode=nested http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/24/226242&mode=nested CIX: E-mail Headers Aren't Legal Carnivore Fodder posted by protozoa on Tuesday October 24, @04:38PM from the slippery-slope-vs-vertical-slope dept. The Commercial Internet Exchange Association has published this white paper (PDF format) arguing that e-mail headers shouldn't legally be considered the same thing as telephone numbers dialed. Why is that important? Because according to the paper's introduction,"[t]hrough programs like "Carnivore," the government seeks real-time access to the e-mail addresses and other transactional elements of e-mail communications under the low "pen register" standard used to trace the digits dialed on a telephone,". It's a tricky legal distinction, but a very important one -- such a finding in court could cut the FBI's net surveillance plans off at the knees. I've included the paper's introduction below. The CIX introduction (in HTML): http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/24/226242&mode=nested http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/21/1517258&mode=nested California Creates State Privacy Office posted by protozoa on Saturday October 21, @09:58AM from the you-said-what-to-who? dept. According to this press release, California Governor Gray Davis signed twenty bills yesterday tailored to protect privacy and other consumer interests for state residents. Most noteworthy of these bills is SB 129, which creates the first-ever statewide Office of Privacy Protection under California's Department of Consumer Affairs. Other new laws include and procedural assistance for identity theft victims and new consumer "opt-out" reqirements for credit bureaus. Dan Gillmor wrote a column about identity theft and privacy protection in California back in March, expressing his support for two stronger and more far-reaching bills in this arena. Neither of them were among those passed. http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/21/1421235&mode=nested Australian Privacy Legislation Inches Forward posted by protozoa on Saturday October 21, @09:07AM from the privacy-privacy-oi-oi-oi dept. An Australian Senate committee has produced a set of recommendations (in PDF form) governing private corporations' data collection practices. The bill is scheduled to be considered during the coming session. The Privacy Amendment (Private Sector) Bill 2000 aims to update regulations in light of the "dramatic developments in information technology and data communication practices" since the passage of the Privacy Act in 1988. The recommendations include an exemption for small businesses (except in instances where medical information is involved) and a strategy for accordance with the European Data Directive. Electronic Frontiers Australia called the bill "complex, unwieldy, ineffective and an insult to the citizens of Australia" in its testimony in May, citing numerous loopholes and inadequate enforcement provisions. Many of their concerns appear to have been ignored. ABC (that's A for Australian) ran a brief piece on Federal Attorney-General Daryl Williams' support of the bill. As it says at the bottom of the box: Post your comments below. Can any privacy legislation better than none? Is ineffectual privacy legislation worse than none? From jya at pipeline.com Wed Oct 25 17:02:31 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:02:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: CIA in Oregon, Intelink In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200010260014.UAA09572@maynard.mail.mindspring.net> Yes, the BXA ISTAC is familiar since I'm on its mailing list. The CIA ISTAC is a different dog. And it was the Oregon rep which surprised, not the Vienna, VA and DC addresses. Why Oregon? Intel, Microsoft, In-Q-tel, or another bedmate helping equip and run Intelink? Intelink is reportedly restricted to those with intelligence need to know, and is blocked to outsiders. However, IC.GOV has been around a while and I wondered if a wizard here might know a way to finagle access. Here are few specific URLs provided in the DoD Intelligence Information System Instructions 2000: Intelligence Community PKI activities: http://www.iccio.ic.gov/ DIA page: http://www.dia.ic.gov/proj/dodiis/dodiis.html JITF Intelink: http://web1.rome.ic.gov:82/vtf.cgi Here's the URL for the DoDIISI2000 doc: http://www.dia.mil/Graphics/Intel_community/dodiis_2000/0204_DoDIISInstr_Fin al.doc (The URL may wrap.) For the dark side of the Albright bearhug, the DIA FOIA site offers the "North Korea Country Handbook," May, 1997, prepared by the intel community, and published by the Marine Corps Intelligence Acitivity: http://www.dia.mil/Graphics/FOIA/nk/nkor.pdf (429 pages, 5.6MB) It could be useful to those intending to exchange URLs with the Chief of NOFOIA DPKR. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Wed Oct 25 17:34:33 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:34:33 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Congress proposes raiding census records. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001025153703.009fc340@idiom.com> At 03:19 PM 10/25/00 -0400, Matt Elliott wrote: >>I am puzzled why anybody would have bothered to answer the remaining >>questions. > >I did the same thing and the census worker came by 4 times trying to get my >wife or I to divulge more information. that's because you failed to say the magic words to them. "Repeat after me - You have the right to remain silent." (Droid either gets it or doesn't, repeat as needed) "Anything you say can and may be used against you in a court of law" Droid: dittos... Droid: "You have the right to remain silent" "You have a right to a lawyer. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you" Droid: dittos... "OK, so I'm planning to remain silent, and you can bring me a lawyer if you want to talk more." Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From gary at gnetservices.com Wed Oct 25 20:52:38 2000 From: gary at gnetservices.com (gary at gnetservices.com) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 20:52:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Imagine how many people in your downline would like to use this service to boost their online recruiting efforts. Now multiply that number by $10.00! Message-ID: <200010260352.UAA12108@cyberpass.net> Welcome to the most effective prospecting site on the Internet today! I began using your website just 75 days ago and it now has become my number one source of qualified prospects for my business! So far this month I have enrolled 19 new Marketing Executives into my program with my HomeBusiness.to website and it's only the 19th of the month. I have never enrolled one per day in my entire career in this business before now! Jim Simpson ***************************************************************************************** You can now use our site to promote either an e-commerce opportunity or a diet and nutrition opportunity. When signing up, simply choose the version you would like to use. To make our service even better, you can now earn an incredible $10.00 PER MONTH for each person you refer to our site! That's right, every month you can get paid $10.00 for every person using our service that you sent to us. Imagine how many people in your downline would like to use this service to boost their online recruiting efforts. Now multiply that number by $10.00! Our basic subscription service is just $19.95, that means with just two active referrals your service now becomes virtually free! With three referrals, you actually make money each month. How many magazines and newspapers can offer that? Signup Now http://www.homebusiness.to/GNetSvcs ACT TODAY!!! From richard at howlett.plus.com Wed Oct 25 13:05:13 2000 From: richard at howlett.plus.com (clubbers chat) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 21:05:13 +0100 Subject: CDR: At last! Message-ID: <200010252001.NAA14822@toad.com> Hi, At last clubberschat has arrived! Some time ago we contacted you with news of a forthcoming service – Clubberschat. Clubberschat is a site that is linked up to hundreds of other clubbing sites worldwide, which should solve that age-old problem of empty chat rooms! We are having three main rooms at first with a view to add more when necessary, chill out room, dance floor room and on the pull room! We are now live and are in a promotional fortnight of signing up affiliates. Within these two weeks, signup is free. If you do decide to join us you will get your own personalised page with your logo and background colours to blend in with your site. This is a great way to offer YOUR COMMUNITY more value from your site, plus your hits will increase as people come back time and time again to use the chat, they will also tell their friends. You will get your own personalised page linking directly into the chat. If you are interested in signing up or want to see how the chat works then please visit: www.globalchatlink.com for more details plus a sign up procedure! Affiliates and their link pages are done on a first come, first served basis. Can you really afford not to be part of this unique opportunity? Add chat, add value, add hits, add Clubberschat! If this is not for you, or we have your mail address in our database by mistake, please accept our apologies – we will not send this mail out again. Richard Howlett Business Development Clubberschat is a service offered by www.globalchatlink.com From k-elliott at wiu.edu Wed Oct 25 19:31:56 2000 From: k-elliott at wiu.edu (Kevin Elliott) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 21:31:56 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <20001025165653.B1804@well.com> References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> <200010252024.PAA18122@ecom1.wiu.edu> <20001025165653.B1804@well.com> Message-ID: At 16:56 -0700 10/25/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >I am fairly familar with utilitarian thought. My specific form of >utilitarianism is act utilitarianism, which means that each individual >action is evaulated, instead of using utilitarian ideas to form a >complete system of moral thought. The problem with act utilitarianism is that in whatever form it takes it leaves itself much to open to the problems of personal view point. Hitler felt himself completely justified in murdering all the jews because he felt they were causing an enormous amount of pain to the rest of the population. He would have been justified under your framework IF it could be shown they were causing sufficient pain, although that would necessarily be enormous amount of pain. >The reason why I use "the least pain for the greatest number" instead of >"the greatest happiness for the greatest number" is because the latter >justifies many not-so-great acts under act utilitarianism. Consider >this example: > > There is going to be a Sado-Masachism (sp?) convention, which > will be attended by 10,000 S&M-ers. They kidnap a poor person, > bring him to their convention, and electrically shock him. This > delights the crowd, but devastates the poor person. Under the > common definition of utilitarianism, this act is justified > because it pleasures 10,000, while hurting only 1. However, > under my definition, this act is not justified because it creates > a lot of pain, whereas not doing it does not create any pain. This is a problem with any formulation of act utilitarianism. Any formulation of act utilitarianism inherently falls victim to a set of extreme circumstances that result in outcomes which are clearly immoral (see the Hitler example above for a counter example). That's why I'm not an act utilitarianist.... -- "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Justice William O. Douglas ____________________________________________________________________ Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott ICQ#23758827 From k-elliott at wiu.edu Wed Oct 25 19:34:22 2000 From: k-elliott at wiu.edu (Kevin Elliott) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 21:34:22 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <20001025171506.D1804@well.com> References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> <20001025100953.C3872@cluebot.com> <20001025171506.D1804@well.com> Message-ID: At 17:15 -0700 10/25/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >Who would revolt? The rich? Too few in numbers. The middle class? >They're apathetic, and they'd still get access to everything they had >under our system in the new system. The poor? They'd be better off, >so they wouldn't revolt. Cypherpunks? Sorry, guys, but there aren't >that many of you. ;-) The problem with repressing any group is that they have an annoying habit of waking up at the most inopportune moments... -- "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Justice William O. Douglas ____________________________________________________________________ Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott ICQ#23758827 From commerce at home.com Wed Oct 25 18:55:52 2000 From: commerce at home.com (Me) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 21:55:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <20001025172745.E1804@well.com> Message-ID: <01d401c03eef$df820580$0100a8c0@matthew> From: "Nathan Saper" > In a recent WHO study, the U.S. was ranked (IIRC) 15th in the world > for healthcare (factoring in quality, availability, etc). This was > behind many socialized healthcare countries, such as Canada. >From memory. From my ass. I believe the US was ranked #37. The study seemed to rank countries based on some pretty useless things. For example, IIRC, it put a great deal of emphasis on relative levels of care within a country. Absolute or objective levels of care don't matter to the sick. That is why countries like Oman, Cuba, and Boobabooba outranked the US: almost everyone gets shitty, but equal, levels of care. Everyone gets to use that same needle. Also, it attempted to factor out the disabled, genetic freaks, the old and pathetic, etc. -- all of the people you care about. Chad can't afford to support these people, the US does, so it just wouldn't be fair if this were to be factored in. Those people just don't count! From natedog at well.com Wed Oct 25 21:56:12 2000 From: natedog at well.com (Nathan Saper) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 21:56:12 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: ; from k-elliott@wiu.edu on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 09:31:56PM -0500 References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> <200010252024.PAA18122@ecom1.wiu.edu> <20001025165653.B1804@well.com> Message-ID: <20001025215612.B3044@well.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 3293 bytes Desc: not available URL: From petro at bounty.org Wed Oct 25 22:05:42 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 22:05:42 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <20001024233947.H3255@well.com> References: <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001022210731.B2615@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001023202934.01a429b8@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001024233947.H3255@well.com> Message-ID: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 08:37:42PM -0700, James A.. Donald wrote: >> At 09:07 PM 10/22/2000 -0700, Nathan Saper wrote: >> > OK, granted, the government needs to be kept on a tight leash. Most >> > people will not want the government breaking into their homes. >> > However, I think most people would be willing to vote for a bill >> > that would guarantee insurance for people with genetic >> > abnormalities, even >> > that does mean that some CEOs and stockholders will have less money >> > in their already-full pockets. >> >> You cannot provide cheap insurance by punishing insurers, any more than you >> can provide cheap housing by punishing landlords. It has been tried. A >> law compelling insurance companies to insure the unhealthy will merely >> raise costs for the healthy, resulting in more people going uninsured. >> >> If you want to guarantee insurance for the unhealthy without ill effects >> the TAXPAYER has to pay, and I suspect that if this proposition was put to >> the public, enthusiasm would be considerably less. Indeed the Clintons did >> put something very like that proposition to the public, and there was >> little enthusiasm. >> > >Having socialized healthcare would be ideal. However, I think that You obviously know nothing about socialism or medicine. Go learn. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From tcmay at got.net Wed Oct 25 23:38:34 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 23:38:34 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Illicit words; How do I get off of this damn list? In-Reply-To: <39F7CB77.C275B5AD@cableone.net> References: <39F7CB77.C275B5AD@cableone.net> Message-ID: At 1:13 AM -0500 10/26/00, Jimmy Cooksey wrote: > >How do I get off of this mailing list? It clutters my box, like 200 >messages to >download sometimes.. eeek! > Please let me.. When you joined, you received instructions. Further, amongst those hundreds of messages you cite have been messages explaining how to unsubscribe. Please find and read them. Until then, you are being put on the special high spam diet. And please don't even _think_ about complaining to _my_ ISP. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From commerce at home.com Wed Oct 25 21:00:56 2000 From: commerce at home.com (Me) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:00:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <20001025172745.E1804@well.com> <01d401c03eef$df820580$0100a8c0@matthew> <20001025193743.B2203@well.com> Message-ID: <020001c03f01$58ca3d20$0100a8c0@matthew> From: "Nathan Saper" > Maybe we're thinking of different studies. I'm pretty sure the > U.S. did better than 37th in the study I'm thinking of. Prob; these rankings seem to be a fav passtime among many .ints. > I'll do a search of WHO's website, and if they don't have it, I'll > search Lexis-Nexis. The who's site won't talk to me tonight. These are the first few things yahoo threw at me: http://www.commondreams.org/views/091500-101.htm http://www.worldbank.org/html/prddr/trans/May-Aug2000/pg41.htm http://www.cato.org/dailys/07-05-00.html From njohnson at interl.net Wed Oct 25 22:07:06 2000 From: njohnson at interl.net (Neil Johnson) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:07:06 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: RE: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives References: <4.3.0.20001024184518.00b51430@mail.well.com> <3.0.6.32.20001025093515.007dbdf0@pop.sprynet.com> Message-ID: <043d01c03f0a$96bc0060$0100a8c0@nandts> > Its called 'parenting' but most are too busy, so they ask the State, or > machines (censorware, v-chips, rating systems, etc.) under others' control, > to do it instead. > Any parent who lets a child have a TV or a computer in their bedroom now days is nuts. (Okay, My parents let me have my C64 in my bedroom, but I quickly got tired of downloading monochrome porn at 300 baud and went back to playing "Jumpman". ;) ). We severely limit our kids (both < 5 yrs old) TV time. Even then, they watch mostly videos. Even some of those we have to fast forward through the "previews" because of the content, ( An ad for "Batman" on a "There goes an Bulldozer!" video, come on!). However, that's my responsibility as parent, and not something I desire to give up to anyone else non-voluntarily. As for the V-Chip. I've seen enough programs rated "For All Ages" that are not appropriate for young kids to know that they are worthless. (By the way I want a P-chip to filter Politicians, a BB-(Bible Beater) chip to filter out the 700 Club. etc. I seem to remember that's what made the billions for the character in Sagan's "Contact" ). I do miss the old Bugs Bunny/Road Runner cartoons with their senseless violence :) If you haven't watched them lately on Saturday morning you'll find that they have been heavily censored/edited to be quite PC. Neil M. Johnson njohnson at interl.net http://www.interl.net/~njohnson PGP Key Finger Print: 93C0 793F B66E A0C7 CEEA 3E92 6B99 2DCC From VMontgo32 at aol.com Wed Oct 25 22:17:39 2000 From: VMontgo32 at aol.com (by way of Jan ) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:17:39 -0500 Subject: ip: "Bush is a mixed bag. But I think Al Gore is the devil." Message-ID: Ironic Processing By Virginia Postrel http://www.reason.com/0011/co.vp.ironic.html When I give a speech about the big-picture political and cultural ideas in my book The Future and Its Enemies, the question and answer period almost always starts with a down-to-earth query: "What do you think of George W. Bush and Al Gore?" "Well," I say, "Bush is a mixed bag. But I think Al Gore is the devil." This line always gets a laugh, but it�*�s not really a joke. Don�*�t get me wrong: Unlike some Clinton haters, who have the same opinion of his boss, I don�*�t mean Gore is literally the Prince of Darkness. I simply mean that he operates according to core principles that work to erode the freedoms of individuals and the progress of the open society. This is true whether you examine the "real Gore"�*�the intellectual wannabe who seems like he�*�d rather have my job than Bill Clinton�*�s�*�or the political Gore, who speaks in poll-tested phrases. Both versions share the patronizing world view perfectly expressed in the vice president�*�s tendency to address his audiences as though they were dim second-graders. Both want to tell everyone else how to live, to subordinate our diverse, individualized purposes to their own goals. Back before his populist peroration at the Democratic National Convention, the intellectual Gore gave a remarkable interview to Nicholas Lemann of The New Yorker. Lemann was smart enough not to ask routine, soundbite-inducing questions. Instead, he asked Gore about his favorite ideas, and he ran long quotations from their conversations. Gore�*�s responses elicited scorn, derision, and dismay in Washington�*�s political-intellectual circles. He was way, way, way too interested in obscure notions about complexity and fractals. He drew strange diagrams. He talked a lot about metaphor. He dropped names of philosophers and physicists. Gore sounded like a New Age version of Newt Gingrich. The pundits were so flabbergasted by his strangeness that they paid little attention to the content of what he said. But Lemann�*�s article revealed more than Gore�*�s interest in odd ideas; it gave readers a peek at his political philosophy. And the substance of Gore�*�s world view is troubling. Gore believes society needs to take ideas from science and apply them to politics and economics, and he�*�s frustrated that scientific ideas are too unfamiliar to the general public�*�and his political colleagues�*�to be used that way. He wants to replace the old metaphors of a clockwork universe and machine-age government with something more up-to-date. His favorite metaphor is "distributed intelligence." That sounds promising. The insight that knowledge is scattered through society, and that it�*�s impossible to collect all relevant information (including the knowledge of individuals�*� purposes and preferences) in a single place, is fundamental to understanding why central planning does not work, and why it is incompatible with individual freedom. But Gore�*�s idea of distributed intelligence does not in any way endorse the significance of dispersed, local knowledge. To the contrary, Gore imagines society as a giant computer system, using massively parallel processing to attack a single problem. In such a system, he explained in a 1996 speech to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, "When a problem was presented, all the processors would begin working simultaneously, each performing its small part of the task, and sending its portion of the answer to be collated with the rest of the work that was going on. It turns out that for most problems, this approach is more effective." (Actually, massively parallel processing isn�*�t good for most problems, but that�*�s a messy real-world detail.) As a metaphor for society, this analogy suggests that someone in charge decides what the problem is and parcels out tasks to individuals. Individuals do not choose their own problems and purposes or respond to the needs and desires of other dispersed individuals. Asked by Lemann to apply this idea to government, Gore imagined members of Congress bringing information from their districts to "assemble it at the center, in the Capitol building." So "distributed intelligence," a phrase that appears to honor decentralized knowledge, turns out to enshrine centralized decision making. This vision is in keeping with Gore�*�s desire, in Earth in the Balance, for a "central organizing principle for civilization," a goal to which all other goals are subordinated. Gore also rebels against the dispersed knowledge that makes an advanced civilization possible�*�the specialization that lets people do what they�*�re good at and enables us to benefit from the knowledge of others, the specialization that acknowledges that each of us is inevitably ignorant about most things. To the AAAS, he bemoaned "the increasing segmentation of society," blaming it for the failure of his favorite metaphor to capture the public imagination. The problem of specialization, he told Lemann, was what Earth in the Balance was all about. The book was an attempt, he said, "to understand the origins of our modern world view, and its curious reliance on specialization and ever-narrower slices of the world around us into categories that are then themselves dissected, in an ongoing process of separation, into parts and subparts�*�a process that sometimes obliterates the connection to the whole and the appreciation for context and the deeper meanings that can�*�t really be found in the atomized parts of the whole." No wonder the pundits scoffed. That Gore doesn�*�t sound like much of a politician. His views can nonetheless be translated into a campaign document. You just have to push the metaphor: The "atomized parts" are citizens, or voters, or taxpayers, or just plain individuals. They�*�re the little pieces that don�*�t count for much until they�*�re brought into the grand scheme, connected to the whole. You connect them to those deeper meanings by deciding what goals they should pursue�*�programming them to solve the right problems. Follow this analogy, and you wind up with a platform that reads something like Gore�*�s campaign document, Prosperity for America�*�s Families.� Filled with grandiose promises and constant repetition, this 191-page "plan" consists largely of prescriptions to add more headache-inducing complexity to the tax code, all in the name of rewarding good behavior. Take retirement savings. Gore wants people to save, but he wants the savings to cost people the same regardless of how much money they make. Today�*�s IRAs don�*�t do that. A family making $25,000 pays no income taxes, so putting away $2,000 in retirement savings costs the full two grand. A family that makes $75,000 is in the 28 percent bracket, so sticking $2,000 in a tax-deductible IRA costs just $1,440. That�*�s not fair, suggests the Gore document. You could, of course, solve the unfairness problem by flattening tax rates, so that everyone faced the same tax hit. You could even eliminate special treatment of retirement savings and let taxpayers decide, in an unbiased way, how to spend their money. But that even-handed approach would let the atomized parts decide on their own purposes. It would offer no deeper meanings. Instead, the current progressivity of the tax code becomes an argument for even greater progressivity. Gore proposes a new Retirement Savings Plus program in which people who save but don�*�t pay taxes will receive matching funds and people who save and do pay taxes will get credits that go down as their tax rate goes up. Having centrally decided that the nation�*�s little processors should all attack the problem of retirement savings, he has to rig the pieces of the problem assigned to each household. Saving for retirement is important to Gore, but the true central organizing principle of his plan is that everyone should be raising children and sending them to college. His plan thus offers a tax deduction for college tuition, establishes tax-sheltered accounts to save for educational expenses, and gives a tax credit for after-school programs. It hikes the child-care tax credit (including a credit for parents who stay home with very young kids) and promises full-time moms who haven�*�t paid Social Security taxes the same benefits as employed women who have. Parents whose kids aren�*�t either in college or young enough for day care are pretty much out of luck when it comes to tax cuts as, of course, are people who make too much money. Prosperity for America�*�s Families goes on and on in this vein. To keep the nation�*�s "atomized parts" from pursuing their own, unapproved goals, Gore creates so many new specialized categories that he winds up contradicting his own goals. His plan "corrects" the marriage penalty by doubling the standard deduction, for instance, but that penalizes any couple who itemizes to take advantage of any of its other credits�*�or of the old mortgage deduction. The overall effect is an irony worthy of any machine-age, old-paradigm manager: In pursuit of deeper meanings and centralized purposes, Gore winds up slicing Americans into ever-narrower interest groups, favoring some and punishing others. Editor-at-Large Virginia Postrel ( vpostrel at reason.com) is the author of The Future and Its Enemies: The Growing Conflict Over Creativity, Enterprise, and Progress, recently published in paperback by Touchstone. --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From jcooksey at cableone.net Wed Oct 25 23:13:11 2000 From: jcooksey at cableone.net (Jimmy Cooksey) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 01:13:11 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Illicit words; How do I get off of this damn list? References: Message-ID: <39F7CB77.C275B5AD@cableone.net> John Galt wrote: > This was the list I used on "jam echelon day". It is by no means > complete, but it's a start. The system is echelon, and it's used by the > NSA outside the US and by extension by the FBI within the US. Echelon is > only a rumor, but some LEA's have been caught saying in public that > echelon is "old news" when asked about it. > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Bruce J.A. Nourish wrote: > > > I read somewhere that the FBI/NSA/some other Big Bro. organisation has a > > list of words that they check your email against, and if they find any, they > > have someone read your mail. Anyone know what they are? > > > > TIA & HAND > > > > -- > Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity. > > Who is John Galt? galt at inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: echelonsig > echelonsig Type: Plain Text (TEXT/PLAIN) > Encoding: BASE64 > Description: old jam echelon day sig How do I get off of this mailing list? It clutters my box, like 200 messages to download sometimes.. eeek! Please let me.. From nobody at dizum.com Wed Oct 25 22:50:36 2000 From: nobody at dizum.com (Nomen Nescio) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 01:50:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: CA gun registration, Canada, and civil disobedience Message-ID: <3d8688e28de409b3ca6029084bd927aa@dizum.com> The upcoming deadline for CA's "Assault Weapon Registration" has weighed heavily upon my thoughts for some time. The blank registration form sits on my desk, staring back at me every time my eyes wander away from the screen. Registrant Last Name, Registrant First Name, Registrant Middle Name, DOB, Sex, Height, Weight, Eyes, Hair, Physical Residence Address, Mailing Address, CA Driver License or ID Number, Telephone Number, and, of course, Right Thumbprint. ("The registrant's right thumbprint impression of fingerprint identification quality must be provided in the space indicated. If DOJ identification specialists determine the impression quality is unacceptable, the application will be returned unprocessed. Local police and sheriffs' departments provide quality fingerprint impression services.") The Fall 2000 issue of the JPFO's Bill of Rights Sentinel contained the following article on Canada's C-68. Balancing my own cynicism against the authors' bit of Pollyannaish rhetoric, it seems there are at least a few brave Canadians willing to openly thumb their noses at their Firearms Act on January 1, 2001. What will happen when January 1, 2001 hits CA? Probably not much. I strongly doubt that even a single individual will be bold enough to present himself, unarmed, in public (much less his local police station) and exclaim, "Hear that, CA DOJ? I tore up your little card and I didn't turn in my gun!" Refusal to cooperate with the census seemed almost fashionable this year. My census form met its untimely demise in my paper shredder. No doubt many other forms, both Cypherpunk and Sheeple alike met more creative ends. How many Californians have publicly announced their refusal to cooperate with the fascist Assault Weapon Registration? How many op-ed pieces have been written encouraging citizens to "Just Say No" to this precursor to confiscation? How many outside the state are wringing their hands in dismay that their legislatures will soon follow suit? What sane person would engage in civil disobedience in this climate of trendy gun-grabbing? Likewise, what *fool* would actually register his "assault weapons"? What to do, what to do... "Peace where freedom is compromised isn't peace - it's surrender. In a compromise between poison and food, the only winner is death." ------------------------------------- [Bill Of Rights Sentinel, Fall 2000, JPFO, Inc. www.jpfo.org] Civil Disobedience in Canada: It Just Happened to Be Guns by Dr. Paul Gallant and Dr. Joanne Eisen "One who breaks an unjust law that conscience tells him is unjust...is in reality expressing the highest respect for law... We will not obey your evil laws..." -- Martin Luther King, Jr. In a representative government, and in an ideal world, those elected to public office are expected to act selflessly, and always in the best interests of their constituents. And they are trusted to do so, until the evidence of betrayal is undeniable. Sometimes, that betrayal takes the form of an unjust law, one which is both dangerous and costly to society. That's exactly what befell Canadians in 1995 with the passage of C-68, the Act Respecting Firearms and Other Weapons (generally referred to as simply the "Firearms Act"). As of January 1, 2001, Canadians who currently own a firearm, or who wish to own one are required to obtain a license from a Chief Firearms Officer. And although the Canadian government has required registration of handguns since 1934, as of January 1, 2001 all other firearms lawfully owned must be accounted for by a registration certificate. By that date, the Canadian Justice Department will thus possess a registry of all gun-owners and their guns, if all goes according to plan. But the result of the Firearms Act has been massive civil disobedience. R. Bruce Hutton, formerly of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP, Canada's national police force), formed the Law-Abiding Unregistered Firearms Association (LUFA) in November 1998. Since then, Hutton has been traveling throughout Canada urging non-compliance with the Firearms Act, and exhorting fellow gun-owners, "Come to jail with me." More than twenty thousand Canadian gun-owners had taken Hutton up on his challenge as of July 15, 2000, openly declaring their intent to disobey the law by not complying with registration. When gun-owner populations are compared, that translates to the U.S. equivalent of almost 400,000 American gun-owners, conservatively stated. Hutton's anger has clearly resonated among fellow Canadians, proving that an ordinary man can make an extraordinary difference. When January 1, 2001 rolls around, LUFA's members are prepared to stand unarmed in front of RCMP offices and submit, as felons, to their 5-year prison terms. LUFA's projected membership that time will be enough to overwhelm an already strained Canadian criminal justice system. An equivalent action by American gun-owners would probably have the same effect. Hundreds of thousands of other Canadian gun-owners have made known their intent to delay registration until the last possible moment. Their forms will arrive all together in the last few weeks, throwing the entire bureaucracy into disarray. On June 15, 2000, Canada's Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Firearms Act and finally pushed some Canadians over the brink. The provincial governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba have dumped both the administration and the enforcement of all federal gun-control laws -- including the 66-year old handgun registry -- right back into Ottawa's lap, throwing the Canadian government into civil war, one fought on paper for the time being. Interesting times lie ahead to the North of us. Why are our usually obedient neighbors to the North acting out of character? C-68: FALSE PROMISE AND LIES Various rationales have been articulated to explain civil disobedience in response to the Firearms Act. A good deal of discussion has focused on the skyrocketing costs of administration. But none of these explanations account for why Canadian gun-owners are increasingly willing to disobey their government, and suffer hefty fines and serious jail-time. The real answer seems to lie in the fact that, although the Firearms Act mandates firearm registration, it is not "just another" gun-control law, and the defiance it has elicited is not just about guns. When it was enacted into law, the Firearms Act did far more than implement firearm registration. It provided for the confiscation of more than half of all registered, legally-owned handguns in Canada -- without compensation -- an action which Canadian gun-owners rightly interpreted as a blatant disregard for traditional property rights. The Firearms Act also empowered the government to profoundly infringe upon rights that all Canadians cherish. According to Canadian Researcher Dr. Gary Mauser, "these infringements should frighten any civil libertarian. The Firearms Act expands the grounds for warrantless searches, reduces restraints on issuing warrants, and requires people to testify against themselves." In fact, Dr. Mauser noted, the Firearms Act "vastly extends police powers" in Canada, and that "such sweeping police powers...authorize police procedures that [would] violate the US Fourth Amendment's protection against warrantless searches and the Fifth Amendment's protection [of] due process." During the debate on C-68, and upon its implementation, the Canadian government made a number of promises and claims. In discussing some of these (see sidebar [see end]), Canadian journalist Lorne Gunter observed, "perhaps the Liberals do not have as their ultimate goal the disarming of the civilian population. But registration would make confiscation easier by telling the government where all the guns are." Why all the lies, both to facilitate the passage of C-68, and to perpetuate the government's false promises? Addressing the 11th Annual Community Legal Education Associations conference in January 1996, Senator Sharon Carstairs made a telling admission when she thought no one else was listening: the Firearms Act was intended, from the outset, to be integral to her party's plans to "socially re-engineer Canada", something the Liberal party of Canada has set about doing for the past 30 years. Disarming the citizenry and creating a utopian pacifist society is integral to this "social re-engineering". Wrote Lorne Gunter in a March 14, 1996 column: "...the Liberals knew that when they promised C-68 would reduce crime, Canadians would naturally assume the government meant rounding up criminals and throwing them in jail, preventing murders and holdups... when all along, what the Liberals really meant was that they believed C-68 would re-engineer Canada (and especially male gun owners) making its citizens more docile... [But] when lawmakers trample centuries-old liberties without offering an overwhelming social good in return...then respect for the law dies and the rule of law along with it." SOMETHING IS ROTTEN IN OTTAWA Garry Breitkreuz is a Member of Parliament from the province of Saskatchewan. He was first elected to the Canadian House of Commons in 1993, and re-elected in 1997. Columnist Peter Worthington of the Sun chain of newspapers referred to Breitkreuz as "the one-man wrecking crew when it comes to federal gun registration". Recounting his earlier experience with the Justice Department concerning a secret research project designed to evaluate the effects of a restrictive gun law enacted in 1997, Breitkreuz commented: "This statistical analysis was supposed to evaluate the effectiveness of [previous] firearms legislation. After a thirteen month investigation, the Information Commissioner has confirmed that the government knowingly and without any authority whatsoever withheld information from Members of Parliament. The information concerned public safety and was vital to the debate of the federal gun control legislation (Bill C-68) and yet the Justice Minister and his officials effectively hid it from the public and Parliament... If a Member of Parliament can't get information from the government what hope does the average citizen have?" Why would the Canadian government keep this information secret? Could it be that the 1977 law did not work, as advertised, to reduce violent crime in Canada? And could it be that this information might jeopardize its agenda now? Who stands to gain when a government deliberately withholds information from its own citizens? In an attempt to understand the practical implementation of C-68, we went to its actual text. Despite our own familiarity with a wealth of U.S. gun laws, we found C-68 to be an almost undecipherable maze of words. One of the documents we received from Breitkreuz's office shed light on our difficulty. Prepared by the Research Branch of the Library of Parliament, and dated April 18, 1997, it stated the following: "...the sheer volume of regulatory authority can make it extremely difficult for Parliamentary bodies to envisage the final scope of the Act. OR FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE LEGISLATION MAY IMPACT ON THEM. [emphasis ours]. Bill C-68, the Firearms Act, might well be described as an example of such legislation... The combined effect [of its provisions] is to invest the Chief Firearms Officer with an extremely large, if not unprecedented, degree of discretion." In fact, according to Dave Tomlinson, President of Canada's National Firearms Association, C-68 allows the government to "legally confiscate all guns at any time." Now we also know the answer to the question of why Canadians are acting out of character: THEY AREN'T! They are beginning to read the "fine print" of the Firearms Act, and are expressing -- according to Martin Luther King, Jr. -- the "highest respect for the law", in their own way. NICS: A BETTER MOUSETRAP? Contrast the Firearms Act with NICS, our own National Instant Check System. While Canadians refer to th Firearms Act as outright registration, American proponents of NICS have painstakingly avoided any reference to the term, or characterization of NICS as a system of gun or gun-owner registration. Yet NICS may more effectively accomplish what the Firearms Act has openly set out to do -- register law-abiding gun-owners and their guns. The machinery for registration was set in place by the very design of NICS: Americans, and the guns they buy, are automatically -- and illegally -- entered into a Department of Justice database, as an immediate consequence of the instant check provision required for purchases from licensed dealers. Unlike Canada's Firearms Act, however, registration via NICS is essentially passive on the part of gun-owners. Its architects have cleverly removed registration as an option from American gun purchasers. Except for one small detail, that is. The Brady Law's provisions apply only to sales from licensed dealers, and private gun sales are therefore currently exempt from "instant-check"-style registration. But private gun sales account for approximately a third of all gun acquisitions in this country, which leaves a huge chunk of firearm transfers unaccounted for by a government paper trail. The reason then becomes perfectly clear why Bill Clinton and the rest of America's anti-self-defense politicians have relentlessly pushed for a background check on ALL private gun transfers, even at gun shows. Witness the so-called "gun-show loophole" mantra which drones on incessantly from a biased, firearm-hostile mainstream media. Now we know exactly what Bill Clinton had in mind when he announced during his weekly Saturday radio address on February 3, 1999, "No background check, no gun. No exceptions." While registration in the U.S. will take longer with NICS than the published timetable for Canada's Firearm Act, if the "gun-show loophole" is closed, a more complete listing of gun-owners and their guns will likely result. The Canadian experience amounts to a crash-course on registration and confiscation. And it should serve as a wake-up call for gun-owners here in the States." ---- ABOUT THE AUTHORS: Dr. Paul Gallant practices optometry in Wesley Hills, N.Y. Dr. Joanne Eisen practices dentistry in Old Bethpage, N.Y. Lorne Gunter is a columnist for the _Edmonton Journal_, one of Canada's largest daily newspapers. His columns on politics, society, government, the environment, the law, and economics appear three times a week. [References omitted] SIDEBAR: LIES MY GOVERNMENT TOLD ME by Lorne Gunter Mark Twain said "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." The Canadian government used all three to ram through its latest gun controls, which came into effect on December 1, 1998. Among the lies: federal politicians promised that point-of-sale registrations, which must now be completed before a buyer may take his firearm home, would take "only" 10 to 15 minutes over the telephone. Some have taken weeks, many other three months or more. Those of less than an hour are exceedingly rare. The mail-in registration of previously unregistered shotguns and rifles was to be accomplished on a postcard. The form actually contains 135 Questions and is as complicated as a tax return. there were the damned lies -- lies the government still refuses to admit are false. The registry was to cost no more than $85 million over five years. to date, the government will admit it has registered fewer than one-in-five gun owners with just five months remaining to the December 31 deadline. And instead of 200 employees, it has over 1,400, including hundreds of frontline police officers who have been rerouted from crime-busting to gun registration. Canadians were assured the registry would not divert funds from other Police operations. But the Mounties have all but lost their organized crime and white collar crime divisions, while the registry grows and grows. Then there were the statistics. The Department of Justice overestimated (likely knowingly) the number of gun crimes in the country by nearly 10-fold and exaggerated the cost of treating gunshot wounds by nearly 100-fold to create the appearance of a national emergency. Even the nation's police chiefs tried to help justify over half of all guns recovered at cime scenes were long guns. What the chiefs' failed to mention was that most had been stolen from their lawful owners before being used in a crime or had not been involved in a crime, merely recovered at the scene. From galt at inconnu.isu.edu Thu Oct 26 02:26:51 2000 From: galt at inconnu.isu.edu (John Galt) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 03:26:51 -0600 (MDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Illicit words; How do I get off of this damn list? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: HEY! He was MY toy--he CC'ed ME! :P On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > At 1:13 AM -0500 10/26/00, Jimmy Cooksey wrote: > > > >How do I get off of this mailing list? It clutters my box, like 200 > >messages to > >download sometimes.. eeek! > > > Please let me.. > > When you joined, you received instructions. > > Further, amongst those hundreds of messages you cite have been > messages explaining how to unsubscribe. Please find and read them. > > Until then, you are being put on the special high spam diet. > > And please don't even _think_ about complaining to _my_ ISP. > > --Tim May > -- There is no problem so great that it cannot be solved with suitable application of High Explosives. Who is John Galt? galt at inconnu.isu.edu, that's who! From rah at shipwright.com Thu Oct 26 03:31:12 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 06:31:12 -0400 Subject: CDR: Gore's Panopticon State (was ip: "Bush is a mixed bag. But I think Al Gore is the devil.") Message-ID: Gore, like most communists, apparently doesn't understand von Mises' calculation problem very well... Cheers, RAH --- begin forwarded text From jamesd at echeque.com Thu Oct 26 09:12:52 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A. Donald) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 09:12:52 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <39F6FA69.10DEDA79@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> References: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001026085552.00ba98f0@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 04:21 PM 10/25/2000 +0100, Ken Brown wrote: > This isn't really true. The NHS tends to be quite good at big > stuff, serious interventions. Serious interventions, for example coronary bypass for the elderly, are rationed. Furthermore they are corruptly rationed. > on the whole I think you'll find few Brits who would give up the > idea of the NHS. Stockholm syndrome. Named after the irrational response to some terrorists in Stockholm. When someone is able to kill with impunity, many people have a desperate desire to see him as wise and good and just, as more than human. In particular the vast majority of people subject to his terror have a desperate desire to see him as wise and good and just and reasonable, no matter how glaringly obvious that he is a vicious sadistic and capricious murderer. Even if he kills randomly without reason, for the mere pleasure of it, they invent good reasons for each killing. Once he is killed, or his power successfully opposed, most people then seem him as he really is, but not until then. We see the same phenomena in health care. When a government with a total monopoly over health care, for example the Canadian government introduces "health care rationing" people love it. When the VA (an American government operation which does not have a monopoly) rations health care, people hate it and are outraged and indignant. I saw the same thing in Cuba since tourism. In the interior, away from the tourist zone, I found that everyone loved their free medical health care system, and were very proud of it, though it is profoundly unimpressive. In the tourist zones, where Cubans can get real medical care by prostituting their daughters to tourists, etc, many of them hate and detest the Cuban medical system, and consider it one of the major evils of communism. I attribute their affection for their socialist medical systems, (as I saw in the interior) to the Stockholm syndrome. You are reluctant to think hostile thoughts about people who hold their life in your hands. Since Cubans in the tourist zone could buy black market medical treated diverted from the tourists only facilities, they were free to hate the monopoly medical system. Cubans in the interior were afraid to hate. We can see the same phenomena with the communist regimes. Before the Soviet Union fell, people in the West were shocked and outraged if you said unkind things about communist regimes. Now there is no problem. "Hey, of course the Soviet Union was the evil empire, do bears shit in the woods?" > After all we live longer than you do, on average (assuming you are > USAn), are slightly poorer to start with & spend a *lot* less on > healthcare per head, public & private combined. You do not live longer than people in the US do. The hopelessly incompetent and improvident among you live longer than the hopelessly incompetent and improvident in the US. Doubtless the same is true of people in prisons. When the slaves were freed, their death rate similarly went way up, because many of them were too feckless to look after themselves. Nonetheless, few of them wished to return to the old system. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG smwbM0NqhxH6QzqEO5zPXX2xY1l2Hj/rQWvWNFx0 4hOOyfBLTrE6UOP7ius/r4q+UAsiSHfhHoaRfEPT+ From declan at well.com Thu Oct 26 06:50:27 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 09:50:27 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Filters In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 02:42:46PM -0400 References: Message-ID: <20001026100945.A17691@cluebot.com> Not only that, but at one point there was an FCC proceeding to include it in computers with TV tuners. I reported on it for Time magazine. Don't think it ever went anywhere. -Declan On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 02:42:46PM -0400, Tim May wrote: > 1. The V-chip was _mandated_ for inclusion in all televisions bought > after some date. No choice, no opt out, a mandatory increased cost. > This is not consistent with freedom and non-coercion. (Saying the > customer has the option of not using the V-chip features is > irrelevant; that the manufacturer was commanded to include V-chip was > the crime.) From declan at well.com Thu Oct 26 07:16:19 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:16:19 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <20001025171506.D1804@well.com>; from natedog@well.com on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 05:15:06PM -0700 References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> <20001025100953.C3872@cluebot.com> <20001025171506.D1804@well.com> Message-ID: <20001026101619.B17691@cluebot.com> On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 05:15:06PM -0700, Nathan Saper wrote, quoting me: > > For instance, what are the economic effects? > > Again, it depends on the economic framework under which we are operating. Nope. You don't get it. Economics is in part hte study of people acting in their own rational self-interest, which can't be denied by government fiat. > > What are the > > black markets that arise? > > I don't know, what black markets would arise? If people were housed, > clothed, fed, etc, then most would still have plenty of disposable > income to buy what they wanted. Are you clueless? You were talking in this hypothetical about a tax rate of 95 percent. That's not a whole lot of disposable income to buy widescreen TVs. > I'm not sure. However, if all housing and food was provided by the > government, and not paying your appropriate level of taxes removed > your entitlement to said housing and food, then I'd think most people > would pay their taxes. Have you ever looked at government housing? If I could escape it and my tax obligations by the simple expedient of deciding not to pay, I would. You've just made taxes voluntary, twit. -Declan From declan at well.com Thu Oct 26 07:17:56 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:17:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <015c01c03ebf$8bad9b20$0100a8c0@matthew>; from commerce@home.com on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 04:09:55PM -0400 References: <20001025153635.C7732@cluebot.com> <015c01c03ebf$8bad9b20$0100a8c0@matthew> Message-ID: <20001026101756.C17691@cluebot.com> Maybe. I spent a weekend with Pierre last week in the mountains north of Montreal, and he nearly qualifies as a cypherpunk. I'll cite him as an exception that proves my rule. :) -Declan On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 04:09:55PM -0400, Me wrote: > From: "Declan McCullagh" > > It must have something to do with being Canadianized. Only > folks from > > Alberta seem to get it right. > > Pierre Lemieux?! > > From declan at well.com Thu Oct 26 07:24:03 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:24:03 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Legislative approaches to ID theft? In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 11:59:22AM -0700 References: <4.3.0.20001025092433.00aca180@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20001026102403.D17691@cluebot.com> Yeah, the sappy Congressional Privacy Caucus ("we ignore government violations") is having a press conference in an hour to talk about this bill: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/13/0350220&mode=nested I sent my intern. Then there's the sappy media. I'll forward the complete note, but one TV reporter just emailed me: >In addition to interviewing pioneers in the field, we are looking for individuals who have experienced an invasion of privacy over the Internet. More specifically, we are looking for men and women, over the age of eighteen, who have experienced: stolen identity, exploitation of personal information, loss of job due to employer monitoring employee9s emails, etc. Our discussions with anyone who responds to the posting would be strictly confidential unless he/she gave written permission and agreed to an interview. Sigh. -Declan On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 11:59:22AM -0700, Tim May wrote: > BTW, something that's incredibly bad about modern online security is > the increasing number of financial companies and agencies that now > require "the last four digits of your social number" as an enabling > key. When I speak to a phonedroid about the absurdity and danger of > this, they act confused. > > Declan is right about the above meaning new laws are coming. New laws > meaning more control. Government won't be affected...it rarely is > affected by its own legislation. > > There are many ways to lessen the dangers of "identity theft." > Government could start by sticking to the original words on _my_ SS > card: "For tax and social security purposes only -- not to be used > for identification." > > (Or words very similar to this. Somewhere I still have my original SS > card, issued in 1969, and this is what it says. I have heard that > this phrasing was dropped in later years, opening the door for the SS > number to be used for student I.D. numbers, military I.D. numbers, > financial record passwords, and all the rest.) > > Fucking hypocrites. From declan at well.com Thu Oct 26 08:53:55 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 11:53:55 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Denver Judge rules Cops can seize bookstore records In-Reply-To: ; from tcmay@got.net on Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 12:18:40PM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20001026115355.F17691@cluebot.com> On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 12:18:40PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > And once again the "civil libertarians" have gotten the issues > confused. The First Amendment does not say that ordinary subpoenas, > discovery, and court orders for some reason do not apply to > bookstores! Two thoughts: * It is possible that "ordinary discovery" has gone too far in the U.S. Shielded areas, such as bookstores protected by this view of the 1A, might be a good thing. * Richard Epstein has a nice piece in the May 2000 Stanford Law Review (I was reading it last night). Epstein argues against "First Amendment exceptionalism," which grants speech more protection than the common law would afford. He says that creates weird side effects that prohibit things like trespass to obtain private information but say (if such info is leaked to a newspaper) that info can be published without, generally, any recourse by the aggrieved party. All of this may not be relevant once anonymous publishing -- or shall I say consequence-less publishing? -- becomes more widespread. -Declan From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 26 08:59:36 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 11:59:36 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance (was: why should it be trusted?) cpunk In-Reply-To: <00a501c03ecd$76726480$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001026085502.007e9480@pop.sprynet.com> At 05:49 PM 10/25/00 -0400, jim bell wrote: > >My back-of-the-computerized-envelope calculation shows that it would take >5900 metric tons (2200 lbs) to load a volume of 100km by 100km by 100 meters >of water with 100 nanomolar level of iron ion. (weight counts only that of >iron, not the anion.) Big supertankers hold approximately 400,000 tons of >oil, which happens to be much less dense than iron oxide. > >I haven't read much on the results of the experiment done, but my impression >is that this kind of iron fertilizing is very much worth doing. > >Jim Bell The performance-art potential for drawing with plankton blooms in the ocean (for imaging by satellites) boggles. Anyone have Christo's number? From bear at sonic.net Thu Oct 26 11:59:51 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 11:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Hard Shelled ISP? Message-ID: Would there be a market for someone to create an encrypted-services provider? Would people do this? Here is what I envision, at a cost of something like $10/month. Email accounts that bounce anything not encrypted - either silently or with a message that says "this account accepts only encrypted mail." at the option of the account holder. These accounts are restricted in some way that makes them unattractive to spammers - probably they are able to send no more than 3 or 4 unencrypted emails a day, maybe they are unable to send *any* unencrypted email. Web Hosting strictly via HTTPS. Standard accounts get four or eight kilobytes accessible by http (enough for a redirect), and 100 Megabytes or so of web space accessible by HTTPS. Anonymous accounts. You send a message with a long random key and a few dozen choices for your login name, and a password to use (send via a remailer or whatever) and the provider publishes a webpage with listings mapping keys to login names to tell you what login name you've gotten. The provider holds the name for a couple of weeks. If during that time the provider recieves payment for an account by that name with a that password (say, by cash or bullion via mail or courier, or any of various ecash systems) then the provider creates an account with login, that balance and that password. The provider also publishes a page of login names in use, so you can check to try to avoid collisions. To renew your account, your payment must be sent with your login name and the original payment key. If it can be done legally, the service provider would get a debit card for each account paid more than $200 in advance, and give the card number to the account holder. Then, whatever amount had been prepaid would be available for web purchases, etc. for web merchants with POS stuff. This is a sticking point, and could cause a lot of trouble if any missteps are made. In the worst case, 30% of this money would have to be paid to the IRS - to avoid charges of abetting tax evasion while maintaining client anonymity. (technically, this ought to make the money paid for the service tax deductible, but you could only claim it by revealing your True Name along with proof that you'd paid it -- so clients interested in real anonymity would have to bite the bullet and pay taxes on that money twice). Nice anonymizing web proxy with whatever filters you like, returning whatever CGI information you want it to return. Cookie functioning is selectable by host (so you can, eg, deal with your bank via the proxy if you want). Web proxy is available only via https -- ie, the link between the proxy and the user is *required* to be encrypted. Anonymous encrypted FTP. Two kinds -- one is FTP over SSL, the other is FTP where the file being downloaded is encrypted to start with. There are applications for both. Paying clients could put up a download directory; joe random could download stuff from it. No unencrypted FTP would be available. NNTP over SSL. Not that what's in usenet news is secret, but there's no point in having your reading habits monitored. The basic idea is, there's no point in having *any* unencrypted traffic on a server if you can help it. It ought to be the case that even if a 'carnivore' is installed, there is no unencrypted traffic for it to sniff. I think this is, just barely, feasible. What say you all? Bear From honig at sprynet.com Thu Oct 26 09:34:24 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 12:34:24 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Wired News tech scorecard for U.S. House of Representatives In-Reply-To: <043d01c03f0a$96bc0060$0100a8c0@nandts> References: <4.3.0.20001024184518.00b51430@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001026093008.007deea0@pop.sprynet.com> At 01:21 AM 10/26/00 -0400, Neil Johnson wrote: >> Its called 'parenting' but most are too busy, so they ask the State, or >> machines (censorware, v-chips, rating systems, etc.) under others' >control, >> to do it instead. >> > >Any parent who lets a child have a TV or a computer in their bedroom now >days is nuts. Yep. And any parent who relies on v-chips is *abdicating responsibility* by depending on someone else's ratings. Similarly with internet content ratings or MPAA filtering (PG vs R) or FCC filtering (content vs. broadcast time, or their stupid labels on broadcasts). To Bear: my reference top "machines under others' control" means censorware which hides its list of sites from parents. Certainly relying on other editors (filters) is useful, but parents have to pick the editors carefully. This is not a political but a personal responsability issue; as far as the state goes, no filtering can be *imposed* by others in a free society. My point was that a parent voluntarily chosing some black-box default is not doing their job. \begin{political} A parent forced to use filtered feeds needs to eliminate that force, then that imposed filter. Anyone can open up a ratings system and filtering tools. And they are free to have open or secret lists and rules. You are free to pick and choose raters you like ---just like you can chose to eat kosher-rated, or 'organic'-rated, or whatever. But the filters can have no support from the State, for that is censorship. Freedom + filters = lame parenting; State + filters = censorship. \end{political} >However, that's my responsibility as parent, and not something I desire to >give up to anyone else non-voluntarily. Precisely. >As for the V-Chip. I've seen enough programs rated "For All Ages" that are >not appropriate for young kids to know that they are worthless. Yes. Plus the insult of being forced to pay for it. Along with CALEA, locatable cell phones, parental advisory labels, etc. .... This post is rated: VG for reference to government violence NS for no spam countermeasure schemes NG for no mention of geodesic global economies NK for no observations about who needs killing NC for no alternate-universe mis-physics NE for no spurious Emily Dickinson grille ciphers From gil_hamilton at hotmail.com Thu Oct 26 06:02:00 2000 From: gil_hamilton at hotmail.com (Gil Hamilton) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 13:02:00 GMT Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? Message-ID: Nathan Saper writes: >In a recent WHO study, the U.S. was ranked (IIRC) 15th in the world >for healthcare (factoring in quality, availability, etc). This was >behind many socialized healthcare countries, such as Canada. Did it ever occur to you that WHO might have an agenda of its own that its rankings are intended to advance? >This assumes that wealth will be achieved by everyone. This is simply >not true. Look at America. The rich are getting richer, and the poor >are getting poorer. That's bullshit. "Liberals" in this country like to bitch and moan about the suffering of the poor and how stingy the rest of us are, even while most of the so-called poor have cell phones hanging on their belts. The poor aren't getting poorer, their expectations are simply getting higher. How many "poor" homes don't have a color TV and a VCR? To the extent that there are things they are "forced" to do without, it largely reflects their own personal choices and/or their lack of ambition. The few that can really be called poor in this country are the homeless, most of whom are either mentally disturbed or simply ambitionless addicts and alcoholics (or both). - GH _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. From apoio at giganetstore.com Thu Oct 26 05:02:40 2000 From: apoio at giganetstore.com (apoio at giganetstore.com) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 13:02:40 +0100 Subject: CDR: giganetstore.com na Inforpor 2000 Message-ID: <0e7484002121aa0WWWNETSTORE@wwwnetstore> A giganetstore.com vai estar presente na Inforpor 2000, Feira de Negócios e Tecnologias de Informação, na FIL Expo, nos próximos dias 26, 27, 28 e 29 de Outubro. Dias 26 e 27 (5ª e 6ª feira) 14 h - 22 h ( Empresarial ) Dia 28 (sábado) -14 h - 22 h Dia 29 (domingo) -10 h - 19 h Neste sentido temos a decorrer as seguintes promoções: *Ganhe 2.000$00 em compras ao registar-se durante a visita à Inforpor no nosso expositor como cliente giganetstore.com *Entregamos-lhe no momento um Netpin grátis Ao comprar um Computador Compaq à sua escolha na giganetstore.com , mas terá de fazê-lo na Inforpor Estamos presentes no Pavilhão 1, na àrea profissional com a Microsoft E já agora... QUER CONVITES PARA A INFORPOR? Nós oferecemos-lhe 2 convites Basta dirigir-se à giganetstore.com , Avenida Defensor de Chaves, nº45, 7º, 1000-112 Lisboa ou então contacte-nos: 808210808, apoio at giganetstore.co m Para retirar o seu email desta mailing list deverá entrar no nosso site http://www.giganetstore.com ,ir à edição do seu registo e retirar a opção de receber informação acerca das nossas promoções e novos serviços. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 3191 bytes Desc: not available URL: From reinhold at world.std.com Thu Oct 26 10:55:00 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 13:55:00 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: <4.1.20001023133229.009a04b0@pop.ix.netcom.com> References: <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> <4.1.20001023133229.009a04b0@pop.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: At 2:14 PM -0700 10/20/2000, Bram Cohen wrote: >This is just silly. There's nothing wrong with Rijndael. Maybe so. I do agree that Rijndael is an excellent design and a good choice for AES. But it hasn't been tested enough for complete confidence, in my opinion. Supposedly NSA takes 7 years to vet a new cipher. If anything, the public cryptographic community should take even longer, given we lack the budgets and accumulated methodologies that NSA can bring to bear. Testing is the most expensive part of any new cipher effort. So I think there is a practical basis for at least asking if there is a simple way to combine the AES finalists and take advantage of all the testing that each has already undergone. And, IMHO, it is an interesting theoretical question as well. Even if the answer is "yes," I am not advocating that it be used in most common applications, e.g network security, because there are so many greater risks to be dealt with. But it might make sense in some narrow, high value, applications. At 2:31 PM -0400 10/23/2000, John Kelsey wrote: >[long, clear exposition deleted] > >The reason the keys have to be independent is because >otherwise, the proof doesn't work. If the keys are chosen >so that K1 == K2, then I can't build these attacks for my >proof, because I can't choose F_{K2} without knowing K1. I agree that Massey and Maurer's proof requires independent keys for each cipher, and have tried meet that requirement in my design. But the fact that Massey and Maurer's proof fails does not mean that the keys must, in fact, be independent for the combined cipher to be secure. See below. > >Now, we can also come up with examples of places where >choosing K1 and K2 to be related is a bad idea. For >example, imagine the following ``game:'' You define some >structure for putting N block ciphers together, and >then I get to choose the N ciphers, with the constraint that >at least one of the N must be strong against all attacks. >Now, in this model, it's clear that if the keys are all >equal, I can choose the ciphers so that a structure like >E1(E2(E2(X))) is easily broken. (Let E1 = 3DES encryption, >E2 = 3DES decryption, and E3 = the identity cipher.) > >In this model, it's also clear that when the keys are >independent, I can't choose the ciphers to include one >strong cipher and N-1 ones specially designed to me to make >the composition weak. If I could, I could always convert >the algorithm into a chosen-plaintext attack on the strong >cipher. I have long felt that there should be some way to exclude using the inverse cipher in these counter examples just as we exclude the possibility that the attacker can simply guess the key. I think I have a different approach to formulating the problem which does that: Let's define a modified version of your game: game2. We'll stick with the two cipher case E(F()) for the moment. Here are the rules: 1. Just as in your game, you get to choose two ciphers, one of which has to be strong. 2. You pick which is E and which is F. 3. The ciphers have to be bijections (one-to-one, onto functions) on {1,...,2**N} where N is the block size in bits. In particular, this means each cipher has no internal state. The same input always produces the same output. 4. If K is the key for the combined cipher, then the key for E is also K, but the key for F is K xor M, where M is a bit string the same length as K that will be selected randomly AFTER you have specified your two ciphers. You will then be informed of its value (which will never change) and may use it in attempting to break E(F()), but you cannot input it into either cipher. If a strong cipher is assumed to have the property that you cannot derive any information about the content of an input block from examining the output block unless you know the complete key, then I claim E(F()) cannot be broken without guessing M. I am making a very broad assumption about what a strong cipher is, but even without it, I believe my version of the game breaks up all counterexamples that use the inverse ciphers to break E(F()). Now you might say "this construction proves my point, you are not using the same keys." That is true, but the keys are far from independent. I can go even further. Most block ciphers have some internal constants that can be varied. There may be constraints on how these constants are selected, but there is still some underlying variability. You can think of these constants as playing the same role as M in game2. If we were allowed to select final values for these constants in the strong cipher after the probe cipher was finalized, one could make a similar argument without a separate M. >... >>The problem with OFB is that what you get is a stream >>cipher and that, in turn, means a unique IV for each message >>is required. > >Hmm. It seems like you're going to need an IV for any >chaining mode. Using a superstrong block cipher, but then >not bothering to use a chaining mode, is just silly. > >The IV reuse problem *is* a lot worse for OFB and counter >modes than for any other mode. Though once you decide >you're going to use CFB- or CBC-mode, and choose a random >IV, nearly all attacks end up being chosen-plaintext >attacks, so maybe that's another reason not to worry too >much about which cipher is first. Block ciphers are easy to test and audit and are hard to subvert (you have to alter the cipher at each node and at the same time.) On the other hand, IV generation schemes are hard to test, nearly impossible to audit, and relatively easy to subvert (you just have to sabotage the RNG at one node). It would be really foolhardy of me to introduce a stream cipher with those known risks, just to counter what I admit is a very small chance of an undetected flaw in Rijndael. > >>So here is my draft proposal for the Paranoid Encryption Standard, >>PES: (P is a plaintext block and K is the user key.) >> >>PES(P) =Twofish(Serpent(MARS(DEAL(AES(P))))), where: > >>the key for AES is SHA2(K||"Rijndael") >>the key for DEAL is SHA2(K||"DEAL") >>the key for MARS is SHA2(K||"MARS") >>the key for Serpent is SHA2(K||"Serpent") >>the key for Twofish is SHA2(K||"Twofish") > >Just an aside: What properties are you assuming for SHA2? >Because you're going to all this trouble to build a paranoid >encryption standard, but then you're doing this weird >construction to derive keys for everything, and it's not >clear that you can prove anything about the structure when >SHA2 is just a collision-resistant hash function. >... I am assuming SHA2 is a one-way hash as well. So breaking one of the component ciphers will not allow an attacker to derive the key for any of the other ciphers. It was an ad hoc response to your comment about the need for key independence. Better suggestions are welcome. My game2 construction, above, suggests that key independence doesn't have to be super strong. I suppose based on that argument I should use constants that were clearly derived after the individual cipher designs had been completed. One possibility might be to use voting results from the upcoming Nov. 7 U.S. presidential election: say, Alabama's for AES. Delaware's for DEAL, Maryland's for MARS and South Carolina's for Serpent, Tennessee's for Twofish. (Final voting results as decimal numbers in ascii, with no punctuation or leading zeros, in alphabetical order by candidate: Buchanan, Bush, Gore, Nader). Arnold Reinhold From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Thu Oct 26 10:58:05 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 13:58:05 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Congress proposes raiding census records. In-Reply-To: <007201c03ec5$32a61b00$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, jim bell wrote: >Not "mexican-american." The average American's illusion is that when an >illegal alien is found he's immediately kicked across the border. Well, the >first time maybe, but there is now a 2-year sentence for illegal entry for >repeat offenders. What's the history of this particular piece of legislation? A naive person might think there has to be something special about the crime if jurisdiction can be obtained merely via the presence of an individual. >Very convenient, because the majority of prison guards >are probably ex-US Military-types who "need" to be kept in the Federal fold. >For every couple of beaners they keep, they get to hire another guard. OK. This would be 'rent-seeking', right? ;) Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From anonymous at openpgp.net Thu Oct 26 12:10:27 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 15:10:27 -0400 Subject: CDR: infowar in palestine Message-ID: <7d7eddba137444ab5fa9e3bd07b12a05@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Israeli government, army Web sites crash after hostile hits JERUSALEM (AP) -- Several official Israeli Web sites crashed after being flooded by thousands of simultaneous hostile hits in a digital onslaught by Islamic groups abroad, officials said Thursday. The cyber attack is the most intense since Israels government launched its Internet sites several years ago. It opens a new front in Israels confrontation with the Arab world. Palestinian rioters have been clashing with Israeli forces for almost a month. At a weekend summit, Islamic countries condemned Israel and called for cutting relations with the Jewish state. Both sides are emphasizing the public relations aspect of their conflict. Interest in the Israeli government Web sites has increased noticeably since the riots began Sept. 28, officials said. The targeted sites provide information about the conflict from an official Israeli point of view. The first shot in the cyberwar was apparently fired by some Israeli teenagers, who bragged to a local newspaper last week that they had succeeded in sabotaging a Web site of the Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon. Return fire was not long in coming. Uri Noy, who oversees the Foreign Ministry Web site, said that several extremist Islamic web sites called on their users to attack Israeli sites, providing them access to computer programs that allow users to flood sites with huge amounts of electronic mail, jamming them. First to feel the effects was the official site of the Israeli Prime Ministers office. After that site was restored, the Foreign Ministrys Web site was overwhelmed by incoming mail and knocked off the web. Almost two days after the attack began, the site had still not been restored. The Israeli army repaired its information Web site, and to increase security, switched from a local server to one connected to the U.S. communications giant ATT, the military said. The Web site of the Knesset, Israels parliament, was the target of a different king of cyber attack. Hackers broke into the site and tampered with its files, Knesset spokesman Giora Pordes said. He said the attack may have come from Saudi Arabia. "You cannot be perfectly safe. Any system can be infiltrated," Miki Buzaglo, an Israeli who took credit for first sabotaging the Hezbollah site, said on Israel TV. "There is a war of brains going on here." An Israeli Internet service provider which hosted the three targeted sites scrambled to make repairs Thursday. Israeli officials said no damage was done to sensitive computer systems used by the army and the government, since they are insulated from the Internet. Noy denounced the attacks. "We see the sabotaging of our Web site as equivalent to the burning of books," he said. He said the bombardment of the site continued even as efforts were made to restore it. "Its too bad that the Internet has become another battleground," said member of parliament Michael Eitan, the Knesset Internet expert. "We need to have a cease-fire on the Web." http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/26/israel.cyberwar.ap/index.html From sunder at sunder.net Thu Oct 26 13:06:49 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 16:06:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? References: <20001022085359.B614@well.com> <20001022190921.B2270@well.com> <4.3.1.2.20001022200551.02345ac8@shell11.ba.best.com> <20001022210731.B2615@well.com> Message-ID: <39F88ED9.77B40242@sunder.net> Nathan Saper wrote: > > We could easily provide healthcare for every American citizen. Just > raise taxes a bit, and cut out most of our military spending. Sure, why stop there though. Let's raise taxes a bit more and we can feed everyone who is hungry. No, that's not enough, let's raise it some more and we can also clothe everyone - in designer wear. After all why should the majority look like slobs when they could be wearing what the models wear, and for a little more we could send everyone to college, and for even a little more we can house everyone, in luxury apartments, and provide them with free cable TV and internet access... And since government and religion don't mix, let's ban all religeons, let's burn and sack the churches, they are after all a form of drug addiction without any drugs and feh! who needs corporations, they just keep the profits to themselves, let's not tax the People, let's let the people own the fruits of their work, let's have the workers profit. Yes, and to make sure that the capitalist pigs don't come back, we'll institute government oversight of everything. While we're on the topic of healthcare, it seems to us that lots of people don't agree with the party's teachings. After all, what the party says is good for the people and for their benefit, therefore those who disagree with the party are evil capitalists, or more likely they simply need (re)education. So let's send them to our glorious mental clinics. And so that the People may prosper, let's institute a series of 5 year plans and great leap forwards... Sure they'll have to work hard and sacrifice themselves for a few years, but it's for the children and the future... Is this what you are after Nathan? Socialism/Communism? Well, in that case, I have a few words for you: ###### # # #### # # # # # # # # # ##### # # # #### # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #### #### # # ### # # #### # # ### # # # # # # ### # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ### # #### #### ### ##### # ###### # # # # # # # ##### # # # # # # # # ##### # ###### #### #### # # # # # ###### # # # # ## ## ## ## # # # # # # ## # # ## # # ##### # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #### #### # # # # # ###### #### #### # # # # # # # # # ## ## #### # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #### #### #### # # -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From rah at shipwright.com Thu Oct 26 13:37:07 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 16:37:07 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:59 AM -0700 on 10/26/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: > Here is what I envision, at a cost of something like $10/month. Go find the original archived web page for c2.net? When privacy costs more than no privacy, we have no privacy. Sad, but true. Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From allyn at well.com Thu Oct 26 17:35:20 2000 From: allyn at well.com (Mark Allyn) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 17:35:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I like the idea, however it could be a management nightmare. How would you meter the http vs https traffic? How would you meter the pgp email vs the non pgp email? Many pgp emails (including mine) have some non encrypted stuff in it (such as the sentance 'PGP message follows' or whatever. Good Luck! Mark From jimdbell at home.com Thu Oct 26 15:02:52 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 18:02:52 -0400 Subject: CDR: Gore's Misleading us (was: Congress proposes raiding census records.) References: Message-ID: <006301c03f98$7e7a5860$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: Sampo A Syreeni To: Multiple recipients of list Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 10:58 AM Subject: Re: Congress proposes raiding census records. > On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, jim bell wrote: > > >Not "mexican-american." The average American's illusion is that when an > >illegal alien is found he's immediately kicked across the border. Well, the > >first time maybe, but there is now a 2-year sentence for illegal entry for > >repeat offenders. > > What's the history of this particular piece of legislation? A naive person > might think there has to be something special about the crime if > jurisdiction can be obtained merely via the presence of an individual. It's called illegal entry. Probably most countries have such laws, although whether they are quite so actively enforced as southwestern US is a question. > > >Very convenient, because the majority of prison guards > >are probably ex-US Military-types who "need" to be kept in the Federal fold. > >For every couple of beaners they keep, they get to hire another guard. > > OK. This would be 'rent-seeking', right? ;) In the last day or two, Gore promised (in response to Bush's criticism) that he wouldn't increase the size of the Federal Government. (Don't know the exact wording, but I think it was based on the number of employees.) Sounds reassuring? No way. Over the last 10 years the US military has shrunk due to the end of the Cold War, etc. As it should, and in fact it should probably shrink a lot more. ( I wish I had the exact figures with me.) But what has happened is that many ex-military-types were simply shifted to other areas of the Federal Government. Sure, the overall size of government is smaller, but not nearly as much as it could have been if the non-military areas of government were fixed in size and did not help absorb the overflow. If anyone has the statistics, I'd like to read the details. Jim Bell From billp at nmol.com Thu Oct 26 18:56:03 2000 From: billp at nmol.com (bill payne) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 19:56:03 -0600 Subject: CDR: the rain Message-ID: <39F8E0B3.55DA865B@nmol.com> Best laszlo http://www.nmol.com/users/billp/rain1.html I'm still sick about what happened. It would be FUN to send the guilty to the Evin for question and answer time!!!! From wolf at priori.net Thu Oct 26 18:11:08 2000 From: wolf at priori.net (Meyer Wolfsheim) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 21:11:08 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? Message-ID: <200010270111.VAA04010@Prometheus.schaefer.nu> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 1499 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Thu Oct 26 11:34:27 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 21:34:27 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: why should it be trusted? In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001026085552.00ba98f0@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, James A. Donald wrote: > > on the whole I think you'll find few Brits who would give up the > > idea of the NHS. > >Stockholm syndrome. This particular argument works both ways and is exceptionally difficult to prove in either direction. It's not nearly as credible as the economic ones people seem to love, here. As for the WHO study, it indeed displays some queer characteristics: for instance, what on earth does mortality, per se, have to do with the quality of health care? It is true that better health care for a population, other things being equal, implies higher expected lifespan. This does not necessarily go the other way around. Some more specific measures based on mortality (like infant mortality, death from diseases related to affluency etc.) perhaps serve as decent indicators of the general quality of health care, but not the base measure. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From egerck at nma.com Thu Oct 26 22:33:39 2000 From: egerck at nma.com (Ed Gerck) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 22:33:39 -0700 Subject: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) References: <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001002220826.00bdb370@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001004024006.00be6d60@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001005031644.00b1a570@shell1.shore.net> <4.2.2.20001008163631.00c6cc40@shell1.shore.net> <4.1.20001011195157.0099edf0@pop.ix.netcom.com> <4.1.20001023133229.009a04b0@pop.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <39F913B3.8E1D50E2@nma.com> "Arnold G. Reinhold" wrote: > At 2:14 PM -0700 10/20/2000, Bram Cohen wrote: > >This is just silly. There's nothing wrong with Rijndael. > ... > Testing is the most expensive part of any new cipher effort. So I > think there is a practical basis for at least asking if there is a > simple way to combine the AES finalists and take advantage of all the > testing that each has already undergone. And, IMHO, it is an > interesting theoretical question as well. Even if the answer is > "yes," I am not advocating that it be used in most common > applications, e.g network security, because there are so many greater > risks to be dealt with. But it might make sense in some narrow, high > value, applications. ...which should then use OTPs, no? The whole point of AES was a combination of efficiency versus security. Otherwise, just use TripleDES. Getting Rijndael in use, out on its own, is the best way to verify whether it works well -- as efficiently and as securely as desired. This is the way to gain confidence, by testing. Trust is earned. Cheers, Ed Gerck From declan at well.com Thu Oct 26 19:46:28 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 22:46:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? In-Reply-To: ; from bear@sonic.net on Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 11:59:51AM -0700 References: Message-ID: <20001026224628.C25781@cluebot.com> You might want to check out what Lance is doing with his dialup accounts. Anyone can pay him a few dollars a month (cash, money order is fine) and get an anonymous account. That account can be configured to reject unencrypted email (procmail) or use HTTPS only, or whatnot. I think this solution already exists. anonymizer.com. -Declan On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 11:59:51AM -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: > > Would there be a market for someone to create an encrypted-services > provider? Would people do this? > > Here is what I envision, at a cost of something like $10/month. > > Email accounts that bounce anything not encrypted - either silently > or with a message that says "this account accepts only encrypted mail." > at the option of the account holder. These accounts are restricted > in some way that makes them unattractive to spammers - probably they > are able to send no more than 3 or 4 unencrypted emails a day, maybe > they are unable to send *any* unencrypted email. > > Web Hosting strictly via HTTPS. Standard accounts get four or eight > kilobytes accessible by http (enough for a redirect), and 100 > Megabytes or so of web space accessible by HTTPS. > > Anonymous accounts. You send a message with a long random key and > a few dozen choices for your login name, and a password to use > (send via a remailer or whatever) and the provider publishes a > webpage with listings mapping keys to login names to tell you > what login name you've gotten. The provider holds the name for > a couple of weeks. If during that time the provider recieves > payment for an account by that name with a that password (say, > by cash or bullion via mail or courier, or any of various ecash > systems) then the provider creates an account with login, that > balance and that password. > > The provider also publishes a page of login names in use, so you > can check to try to avoid collisions. > > To renew your account, your payment must be sent with your login > name and the original payment key. > > If it can be done legally, the service provider would get a debit > card for each account paid more than $200 in advance, and give the > card number to the account holder. Then, whatever amount had been > prepaid would be available for web purchases, etc. for web > merchants with POS stuff. This is a sticking point, and could > cause a lot of trouble if any missteps are made. In the worst > case, 30% of this money would have to be paid to the IRS - to > avoid charges of abetting tax evasion while maintaining client > anonymity. (technically, this ought to make the money paid for the > service tax deductible, but you could only claim it by revealing > your True Name along with proof that you'd paid it -- so clients > interested in real anonymity would have to bite the bullet and > pay taxes on that money twice). > > Nice anonymizing web proxy with whatever filters you like, returning > whatever CGI information you want it to return. Cookie functioning > is selectable by host (so you can, eg, deal with your bank via the > proxy if you want). Web proxy is available only via https -- ie, > the link between the proxy and the user is *required* to be encrypted. > > Anonymous encrypted FTP. Two kinds -- one is FTP over SSL, the other > is FTP where the file being downloaded is encrypted to start with. > There are applications for both. Paying clients could put up a > download directory; joe random could download stuff from it. No > unencrypted FTP would be available. > > NNTP over SSL. Not that what's in usenet news is secret, but there's > no point in having your reading habits monitored. > > The basic idea is, there's no point in having *any* unencrypted > traffic on a server if you can help it. It ought to be the case > that even if a 'carnivore' is installed, there is no unencrypted > traffic for it to sniff. > > I think this is, just barely, feasible. > What say you all? > > Bear > > > > > > > > From anarchie at suburbia.net Thu Oct 26 21:58:37 2000 From: anarchie at suburbia.net (Peter Tonoli) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 00:58:37 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Mac created the modern Internet In-Reply-To: <39F70CEB.1BB82E18@sunder.net> Message-ID: Guess it's time for me to reminisce.. :) On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, sunder wrote: > Back in those days, I remember having a shell account at school, and > SLIP had just come out. Someone had written a small program that would > allow users to run SLIP from userland and turn a dial-up shell into a > net connection. Sounds like SLiRP :).. Most annoying thing setting those things up over non 8-bit clean lines. > As the script kiddies got bolder and the laziness of the sysadmins and > developers started to show, the shell accounts went away. More and more > people started offering unlimited network access, but busy signals put > a limit on that. It's still hard to get unlimited access since it costs around 16-19c a meg wholesale in Australia. > Back to AOL. I remember them from the latter Commodore 64 days. They > were Q-Link back then. This was a time when BBS's were the rule, and > toward the end, before the internet killed most of them off. The better > ones such as Searchlight used ANSI text editors and menus, some had > tree like message structures - much like usenet, and some even carried > a few newsgroups. Most boards this side of the world were running Remote Access or other QuickBBS clones.. IMHO more configurable :) > Not that I could tell an "A" character apart from a "B" character, but > I could tell that one had been sent, and then another, and then a third, > etc. If you tried to immitate a carrier, some stupid modems would try > to handshake with you. Going from 300 to 1200 was fun. :) It's how I remember users connecting to my system with modems that only supported 300bps or 1200/75 and seeing them attempt to upload at 1200/75, now that was slow. > Going back to the later and more final versions of the BBS world... > there were a few graphical standards coming out for BBS's. I'm suprised with the amount of Mac users here, that no-one's mentioned BBS systems such as 'firstclass'. Firstclass was the first GUI based terminal application I ever used - it allowed you to call BBS'es while retaining an interface similar to the finder - at a reasonable speed too. Downloading files was simly a click and a drag away. > Most notably was the RIPScript code which had a new line followed by a > pipe and an exclamation as its escape code sequence. Unlike ANSI codes > which were (and still are for VT100 emulation) ESC followed by an open > square bracket, these could be sent via email, so you could send pictures > of a sort over 7 bit ascii systems and change colors, etc. RIPscript didn't really take off here, at least in Australia. Speed was something to be desired, and the resolution wasn't that good. I also faintly remember licensing issues, or that there wasn't a free/affordable RIPterm. Fuzzy memory.. There was also AVATAR which was similar to ANSI, but used shorter escape codes, and was a fair bit faster although it was still text based. > features is not much different from this -- except for the ability to > link to urls, (and more recently with JavaScript -- infect you with > viruses) which I don't think (or recall) RIPScript had. Mentioning that, I remember the first vulnerability I saw. The BBS package TBBS tended to dump all memory (specifically usernames/passwords) to the user if they had the %location% macro, which would print their location, in their location. > Compuserve was also a very pricey fucked up place. You paid through the > nose for just getting on, and then some for the extras. And those > idiotic comma separated email addresses weren't helping. First time I tried it, the hourly cost was something like A$38p/h, not including those services which cost more - besides the layout of the place wasn't terribly untuitive. > Yes, I recall spending nearly $400 for a piece of shit clamshell 1X SCSI > CDROM for my Mac, and man it was so much slower than the hard drives, they > were nearly floppy speed. Worse still, when MacOS 7 came out. I remember having to share one of those slow CDROM's between several users on a localtalk network - ultimate definition of slow. > But then having picked up Project Guttenberg's > latest CD, I could now read tons and tons of books -- more than I had > shelf space for. And as a bonus, I got the usual world Atlas (never mind > that today you can get street maps on CD's!) a dictionary/thesaurus and > a cheesy encyclopedia. (Back in those days every parent was sold on > feeding their kids Britannica and the cheaper versions. To get it on > CD was really something.) Back in those days, you could get BBS-in-a-box type CD's that had basically all of the shareware and PD software you'd need.. Slowly these CD's would turn into multiple CD set's. > By 94 or so, I did use Mosaic and Cello and Trumpet Winsock on Win31 to > get to the first of the web pages. Most of the "web" was really gopher > and ftp sites, but here and there a web server was to be found. Hey, don't forget WAIS :) > yet another horse for the TLA's, and full of the negligent and ignorant > who don't know they are there. Full of banner ads and privacy invading > cookies subsidizing content. Too true.. Peter. From bentj93 at itsc.adfa.edu.au Thu Oct 26 23:29:30 2000 From: bentj93 at itsc.adfa.edu.au (BENHAM TIMOTHY JAMES) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 02:29:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Mac created the modern Internet In-Reply-To: from "Peter Tonoli" at Oct 27, 2000 12:58:37 AM Message-ID: <200010270628.e9R6Su504345@octarine.itsc.adfa.edu.au> > > > Back in those days, I remember having a shell account at school, and > > SLIP had just come out. Someone had written a small program that would > > allow users to run SLIP from userland and turn a dial-up shell into a > > net connection. > > Sounds like SLiRP :).. Most annoying thing setting those things up over > non 8-bit clean lines. I was using something similar called SLAP or somesuch -- Australian product. It worked quite well and might even be worth digging up now as an odball way of multiplexing a telnet session (eg to improve the utility of restricted access machines). > > > As the script kiddies got bolder and the laziness of the sysadmins and > > developers started to show, the shell accounts went away. More and more > > people started offering unlimited network access, but busy signals put > > a limit on that. > > It's still hard to get unlimited access since it costs around 16-19c a meg > wholesale in Australia. Tried dingoblue? $27.50 unlimited if you also sign up fo rtheir long distance service (which is also cheap). Be sure to quote 100641226 when you sign up and we'll both get $40. Tim From jimdbell at home.com Fri Oct 27 03:07:17 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 03:07:17 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Denver Judge rules Cops can seize bookstore records References: <20001026115355.F17691@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <00a301c03ffd$b5e78a60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Declan McCullagh Subject: Re: Denver Judge rules Cops can seize bookstore records > Two thoughts: > * It is possible that "ordinary discovery" has gone too far in the > U.S. Shielded areas, such as bookstores protected by this view of the > 1A, might be a good thing. It's about as "possible" as the "possibility" of the sun coming up over the horizon tomorrow morning. We all know that the system really doesn't work the way it is supposed to. The standard is SUPPOSED to be "probable cause" which should arguably mean that "the policeman knows that a crime has been committed and that there is at least a 51% probability that evidence of that crime is at the place in question." But in fact logic is totally ignored. We already know that the only evidence likely at the book store is that which points to the identity of the person who bought the book on the subject of drugs. Buying that book was not, in itself, a crime. And, in fact, the purchase of the book may have occurred before the drug-lab-manufacturing "crime." Thus, it is obvious that there is virtually certain to be no evidence at the book store of the crime for which the police are investigating. In fact, what the police are looking for might best be called "non-crime evidence." Information tending to prove or disprove acts which were NOT crimes. Iinterestingly enough, as far as I know the "justice system" (yucch!) doesn't have a separate term for "evidence that is not the evidence of a crime." It's just called "evidence." There's a problem with this, as I learned firsthand: Authorities drop by, take lots of stuff, and then tell the news media that "evidence was collected and removed." Problem is, neither at the time it was taken nor later was it actually "evidence" of some sort of crime. What they actually should have said was that "non-evidence was taken" but expecting them to be that honest is futile. If anybody is aware of a commonly (or, even, uncommonly) used term for "non-evidence-evidence" I' like to hear it. > * Richard Epstein has a nice piece in the May 2000 Stanford Law Review > (I was reading it last night). Epstein argues against "First Amendment > exceptionalism," which grants speech more protection than the common > law would afford. He says that creates weird side effects that prohibit > things like trespass to obtain private information but say (if such > info is leaked to a newspaper) that info can be published without, > generally, any recourse by the aggrieved party. > > All of this may not be relevant once anonymous publishing -- or shall > I say consequence-less publishing? -- becomes more widespread. > -Declan In this case, I'd say the issue is more like "consequenceless book-buying," not publishing. Nobody is talking about charging the book store with any crime. I think that businesses (including bookstores) should be entitled to do business with customers, giving binding promises to not share information about those transactions with anybody including police and courts, perhaps unless the transaction itself was criminal. Anybody ever heard of "impairment of contract"? Jim Bell From toyota-prius-owner at egroups.com Thu Oct 26 20:51:57 2000 From: toyota-prius-owner at egroups.com (toyota-prius Moderator) Date: 27 Oct 2000 03:51:57 -0000 Subject: CDR: Welcome to toyota-prius Message-ID: <972618717.31485@egroups.com> Hello, Welcome to the toyota-prius group at eGroups, a free, easy-to-use email group service. Please take a moment to review this message. To start sending messages to members of this group, simply send email to toyota-prius at egroups.com If you do not wish to belong to toyota-prius, you may unsubscribe by sending an email to toyota-prius-unsubscribe at egroups.com You may also visit the eGroups web site to modify your subscriptions: http://www.egroups.com/mygroups Regards, Moderator, toyota-prius From Jans.39 at 12move.nl Fri Oct 27 05:04:28 2000 From: Jans.39 at 12move.nl (Jans.39 at 12move.nl) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 05:04:28 +0-100 Subject: CDR: AD: EARN $5,000+/MONTH WORKING PART-TIME! Message-ID: <6erc0bnhtdra5.402e0q0loh2y3p73sh@Myhost.com> Dear Friend: AS SEEN ON NATIONAL TV : ''Making over half million dollars every 4 to 5 months from your home for an investment of only $25 U.S. Dollars expense one time'' THANX TO THE COMPUTER AGE AND THE INTERNET ! =============================================== BE A MILLIONAIRE LIKE OTHERS WITHIN A YEAR !!! Before you say ''Bull'' , please read the following. This is the letter you have been hearing about on the news lately. Due to the popularity of this letter on the internet, a national weekly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of this program described below , to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved once and for all that there are ''absolutely NO Laws prohibiting the participation in the program and if people can follow the simple instructions, they are bound to make some mega bucks with only $25 out of pocket cost''. This is what one had to say: '' Thanks to this profitable opportunity. I was approached many times before but each time I passed on it. I am so glad I finally joined just to see what one could expect in return for the minimal effort and money required. To my astonishment, I received total $ 610,470.00 in 21 weeks, with money still coming in''. Pam Hedland, Fort Lee, New Jersey. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is another testimonial: ''' this program has been around for a long time but I never believed in it. One day when I received this again in the mail I decided to gamble my $25 on it. I followed the simple instructions and walaa ..... 3 weeks later the money started to come in. First month I only made $240.00 but the next 2 months after that I made a total of $290,000.00. So far, in the past 8 months by re-entering the program, I have made over $768,000.00 and I am playing it again. The key to success in this program is to follow the simple steps and NOT change anything . But like most of the people I was also a little skeptical and little worried about the legal aspect of it. So I checked it out with the U.S. Postal Service (1-800- 725 2161 = 24 hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed Legal ! I am now loving it !" Richard Templeton, Dallas, Texas. ---------------------------------------------------------------- More testimonials later but first, ****** PRINT THIS NOW FOR YOUR FUTURE REFERENCE ******* $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make atleast $500,000 every 4 to 5 months legally, easily and comfortably, please read the following...then READ IT AGAIN and AGAIN and follow the simple instructions ! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ DUE TO THE RECENT INCREASE OF POPULARITY & RESPECT THIS PROGRAM HAS ATTAINED, IT IS CURRENTLY WORKING BETTER THAN EVER. FOLLOW THE SIMPLE INSTRUCTION BELOW AND YOUR FINANCIAL DREAMS WILL COME TRUE, GUARANTEED ! The sooner you do it, the faster you start making money !!! INSTRUCTIONS: **** Order all 5 reports shown on the list below. **** For each report, send $5 CASH, THE NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING and YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS to the person whose name appears ON THAT LIST next to the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE TOP LEFT CORNER in case of any mail problems. **** When you place your order, make sure you order each of the 5 reports. You will need all 5 reports so that you can save them on your computer and resell them. YOUR TOTAL COST $5 X 5 = $25.00. **** Within a few days you will receive, vie e-mail, each of the 5 reports from these 5 different individuals. Save them on your computer so they will be accessible for you to send to the 1,000's of people who will order them from you. Also make a floppy of these reports and keep it on your desk in case something happen to your computer. **** IMPORTANT __ DO NOT alter the names of the people who are listed next to each report, or their sequence on the list, in any way other than what is instructed below in step '' 1 through 6 '' or you will loose out on majority of your profits. Once you understand the way this works, you will also see how it does not work if you change it. Remember, this method has been tested, and if you alter, it will NOTn work!!! People have tried to put their friends/relatives names on all five thinking they could get all the money. But it does not work this way. Believe us, we all have tried to be greedy and then nothing happened. So Do Not try to change anything other than what is instructed. Because if you do, it will not work for you. Remember, honesty reaps the reward!!! 1.... After you have ordered all 5 reports, take this advertisement and REMOVE the name & address of the person in REPORT # 5. This person has made it through the cycle and is no doubt counting their fortune. 2.... Move the name & address in REPORT # 4 down TO REPORT # 5. 3.... Move the name & address in REPORT # 3 down TO REPORT # 4. 4.... Move the name & address in REPORT # 2 down TO REPORT # 3. 5.... Move the name & address in REPORT # 1 down TO REPORT # 2 6.... Insert YOUR name & address in the REPORT # 1 Position. PLEASE MAKE SURE you copy every name & address ACCURATELY ! ========================================================= **** Take this entire letter ( with the modified list of names) and save it on your computer. DO NOT MAKE ANY OTHER CHANGES. Save this on a disk as well just in case if you loose any data. **** To assist you with marketing your business on the internet, the 5 reports you purchase will provide you with invaluable marketing information which includes how to send bulk e-mails legally, where to find thousands of free classified ads and much more. There are 2 Primary methods to get this venture going: METHOD # 1 : BY SENDING BULK E-MAIL LEGALLY ============================================ let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we will assume You and and those involved send out only 5,000 e-mails each. Let's also assume that the mailing receive only a 0.2% response (the response could be much better but lets just say it is only 0.2% . Also many people will send out hundreds of thousands e-mails instead of only 5,000 each). Continuing with this example, you send out only 5,000 e-mails. With a 0.2% response, that is only 10 orders for report # 1. Those 10 people responded by sending out 5,000 e-mail each for a total of 50,000. Out of those 50,000 e-mails only 0.2% responded with orders. That's = 100 people responded and ordered Report # 2. Those 100 people mail out 5,000 e-mails each for a total of 500,000 e-mails. The 0.2% response to that is 1000 orders for Report # 3. Those 1000 people send out 5,000 e-mails each for a total of 5 million e-mails sent out. The 0.2% response to that is 10,000 orders for Report # 4. Those 10,000 people send out 5,000 e-mails each for a total of 50,000,000 (50 million) e-mails. The 0.2% response to that is 100,000 orders for Report # 5. (there are over 170 million people on the internet worldwide and about 30,000 more new customers signs up everyday). THAT'S 100,000 ORDERS TIMES $5 EACH = $500,000.00 (half million). Your total income in this example is: 1..... $50 + 2..... $500 + 3..... $5,000 + 4..... $50,000 + 5..... $500,000 ......... Grand Total = $555,550.00 NUMBERS DO NOT LIE. GET A PENCIL & PAPER AND FIGURE OUT THE WORST POSSIBLE RESPONSES AND NO MATTER HOW YOU CALCULATE IT, YOU WILL STILL MAKE A LOT OF MONEY ! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING ONLY 10 PEOPLE ORDERING OUT OF 5,000 YOU MAILED TO. Dare to think for a moment what would happen if everyone, or half or even one 4th of those people mailed 100,000 e-mails each or more? There are over 150 million people on the internet worldwide and counting. Believe me, many people will do just that, and more! METHOD # 2 : BY PLACING FREE ADS ON THE INTERNET =================================================== Advertising on the net is very very inexpensive and there are hundreds of FREE places to advertise. Placing a lot of free ads on the internet will easily get a larger response. We strongly suggest you start with Method # 1 and add METHOD # 2 as you go along. For every $5 you receive, all you must do is e-mail them the Report they ordered. That's it . Always provide same day service on all orders. This will guarantee that the e-mail they send out, with your name and address on it, will be prompt because they can not advertise until they receive the report. ___________________________ AVAILABLE REPORTS ___________________________ ORDER EACH REPORT BY ITS NUMBER & NAME ONLY. Notes: Always send $5 cash (U.S. CURRENCY) for each Report. Checks NOT accepted. Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in atleast 2 sheets of paper. On one of those sheets of paper, Write the NUMBER & the NAME of the Report you are ordering, YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS and your name and postal address. PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR THESE REPORTS NOW : ============================================== REPORT # 1 : ''The Insider's Guide to Advertising for Free on the Net'' Order Report # 1 from: Jan Scheltes Leerhoevestraat 16 2406 DD Alphen aan den Rijn The Netherlands __________________________________________________ REPORT # 2 : ''The Insider's Guide to Sending Bulk e-mail on the Net'' Order Report # 2 from : Kim Hansen Kyse markvej 6, kyse 4700 Naestved Denmark ___________________________________________________ REPORT # 3 : ''The Secret to Multilevel marketing on the net'' Order Report # 3 from: Lenhard Harlingten 772 16th Street Courtenay, BC, V9N 1X7 Canada ___________________________________________________ REPORT # 4 : ''How to become a millionaire utilizing MLM & the Net'' Order Report # 4 from: Alex Diamond 9903 Santa Monica Blvd; Apt. # 405 Beverly Hills, Ca 90212 U.S.A. ____________________________________________________ REPORT # 5 : ''HOW TO SEND 1 MILLION E-MAILS FOR FREE'' Order Report # 5 from: Rockin' E Marketing 8325 , 35th Street N.E. Warwick, N.D. 58381 U.S.A. ___________________________________________________ $$$$$$$$$ YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINES $$$$$$$$$$$ Follow these guidelines to guarantee your sucess: *** If you do not receive atleast 15 orders for Report #1 within 2 weeks, continue sending e-mails until you do. Your target should be to receive atleast 20 orders for Report # 1 within 2 - 3 weeks of your mailing to be on the safe side. Because some people will do nothing after they sent you $5 for Report # 1 due to lack of enthusiasm or lack of desire to become a millionaire by end of 2000. We suggest you continue sending e-mails until you have attained the basic goal. *** After you have received 15 - 20 orders for Report # 1, then 2 to 3 weeks after that you should receive atleast 100 orders or more for Report # 2. If you did not, continue sending mails until you do. *** Once you have received 100 or more orders for Report # 2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you , and the cash will continue to roll in ! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER : Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a Different report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. IF YOU WANT TO GENERATE MORE INCOME SEND ANOTHER BATCH OF E-MAILS AND START THE WHOLE PROCESS AGAIN. There is NO LIMIT to the income you can generate from this business !!! ______________________________________________________ FOLLOWING IS A NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: "" You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with NO RISK and JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT. You can make more money in the next few weeks and months than you have ever imagined. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do Not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e-mail a copy of this exciting report after you have put your name and address in Report #1 and moved others to #2 ...........# 5 as instructed above. One of the people you send this to may send out 100,000 or more e-mails and your name will be on everyone of them. Remember though, the more you send out the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent. IT IS UP TO YOU NOW ! ************** MORE TESTIMONIALS **************** '' My name is Mitchell. My wife , Jody and I live in Chicago. I am an accountant with a major U.S. corporation and I make pretty good money. When I received this program I grumbled to Jody about receiving ''junk mail''. I made fun of the whole thing, spouting my knowledge of the population and percentages involved. I ''knew'' it would'nt work. Jody totally ignored my supposed intelligence and few days later she jumped in with both feet. I made merciless fun of her, and was ready to lay the old ''I told you so'' on her when the thing didn't work. Well, the laugh was on me! Within 3 weeks she had received 50 responses. Within the next 45 days she had received total $ 147,200.00 ........... all cash! I was shocked. I have joined Jody in her ''hobby''. Mitchell Wolf M.D. , Chicago, Illinois ------------------------------------------------------------ '' Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my mind to participate in this plan. But conservative that I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that there was just no way that I wouldn't get enough orders to at least get my money back''. '' I was surprised when I found my medium size post office box crammed with orders. I made $319,210.00 in the first 12 weeks. The nice thing about this deal is that it does not matter where people live. There simply isn't a better investment with a faster return and so big''. Dan Sondstrom, Alberta, Canada ----------------------------------------------------------- '' I had received this program before. I deleted it, but later I wondered if I should have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get another copy, so I had to wait until I was e-mailed again by someone else.........11 months passed then it luckily came again...... I did not delete this one! I made more than $490,000 on my first try and all the money came within 22 weeks''. Susan De Suza, New York, N.Y. ---------------------------------------------------- '' It really is a great opportunity to make relatively easy money with little cost to you. I followed the simple instructions carefully and within 10 days the money started to come in. My first month I made $ 20, 560.00 and by the end of third month my total cash count was $ 362,840.00. Life is beautiful, Thanx to internet''. Fred Dellaca, Westport, New Zealand ------------------------------------------------------------ ORDER YOUR REPORTS TODAY AND GET STARTED ON YOUR ROAD TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM ! ======================================================= If you have any questions of the legality of this program, contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices, Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Washington, D.C. //////////////////////////////////////////////// ONE TIME MAILING, NO NEED TO REMOVE ////////////////////////////////////////////// This message is sent in compliance of the proposed bill SECTION 301. per Section 301, Pragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 1618. Further transmission to you by the sender of this e-mail may be stopped at no cost to you by sending a reply to: jans.39 at 12move.nl with the word Remove in the subject line. This message is not intended for residents in the State of Washigton, screening of addresses has been done to the best of our technical ability. -------- T H E E N D --------- GOOD LUCK, Jan This ad is being sent in compliance with Senate bill 1618, Title 3, section 301. Here is a more detailed version of the legal notice above: This message is sent in compliance of the new e-mail bill: SECTION 301. Per Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 1618, Further transmissions to you by the sender of this email may be stopped at no cost to you by sending a reply to this email address with the word "remove" in the subject line. From jya at pipeline.com Fri Oct 27 04:18:44 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 07:18:44 -0400 Subject: CDR: DMCA Final Rule Message-ID: <200010271130.HAA16019@blount.mail.mindspring.net> We offer the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act Final Rule on Access Control Circumvention: http://cryptome.org/dmca102700.txt (149KB) An excerpt on why there will be no exemption for circumventing access to DVDs by tools such as DeCSS: http://cryptome.org/dmca-dvd.htm (15KB) The two exemptions granted: "1. Compilations Consisting of Lists of Websites Blocked by Filtering Software Applications 2. Literary Works, Including Computer Programs and Databases, Protected by Access Control Mechanisms That Fail to Permit Access Because of Malfunction, Damage or Obsoleteness." The copyright industry's arguments are often cited as grounds for minimal exemptions, as well as the power of the market to correct what Congress gave the industry. Specious. From k-elliott at wiu.edu Fri Oct 27 07:01:42 2000 From: k-elliott at wiu.edu (Kevin Elliott) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:01:42 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <20001025215612.B3044@well.com> References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> <200010252024.PAA18122@ecom1.wiu.edu> <20001025165653.B1804@well.com> <20001025215612.B3044@well.com> Message-ID: At 21:56 -0700 10/25/00, Nathan Saper wrote: >I don't think your Hitler example applies, because he could not prove >that the Jews were causing pain. In any case, my formulation of act >utilitarianism seems to suffer from those sorts of attacks less than >the normal formulation, and I have yet to find a moral theory as >coherant as utilitarianism. He had certainly managed to convince himself. And unfortunately if your using act utilitarianism, he's the only one who has to be convinced. I'm not sure your 10,000 screaming sadists was terribly likely either but I didn't whine about it... -- "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Justice William O. Douglas ____________________________________________________________________ Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott ICQ#23758827 From rah at shipwright.com Fri Oct 27 06:13:30 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:13:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: paycash payment system ver. 1.xx Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From UltraTrim2000 at excte.com Fri Oct 27 09:22:18 2000 From: UltraTrim2000 at excte.com (UltraTrim2000 at excte.com) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:22:18 Subject: CDR: LOSE 30 POUNDS IN 30 DAYS, GUARANTEED! Message-ID: <455.119694.629324@mail01.homeworkers23232.com> *****AMAZING MELT AWAY FAT ABSORBER CAPSULES***** LOSE 30 POUNDS IN 30 DAYS... GUARANTEED!!! All Natural Weight-Loss Program, Speeds Up The Metabolism Safely Rated #1 In Both Categories of SAFETY & EFFECTIVENESS In (THE USA TODAY) WE'LL HELP YOU GET THINNER IN WINTER!!! WE'RE GOING TO HELP YOU LOOK GOOD, FEEL GOOD AND TAKE CONTROL IN 2000 ***** Receive 1 Free Bottle Of Ultra Trim 2000 & Your Bonus Supply, With Every Order Of 2 Or More Bottles. Offer Good Until November 12, 2000! ***** WE GLADLY SHIP TO ALL FOREIGN COUNTRIES! You will be losing by tomorrow! Don't Wait, visit our web page below, and join now! ***************** http://weightlossworld.50megs.com/intro.html ***************** This is the easiest, fastest, and most effective way to lose both pounds and inches permanently!!! This weight loss program is designed specifically to "boost" weight-loss efforts by assisting body metabolism, and helping the body's ability to manage weight. A powerful, safe, 30 Day Program. This is one program you won't feel starved on. Complete program for one amazing low price! Program includes: BONUS AMAZING FAT ABSORBER CAPSULES, 30 DAY - WEIGHT REDUCTION PLAN, PROGRESS REPORT, AND MUCH MORE!!! SPECIAL BONUS..."FAT ABSORBERS", AS SEEN ON TV With every order...AMAZING MELT AWAY FAT ABSORBER CAPSULES with directions (1 Month Supply, Absolutely Free ) ...With these capsules you can eat what you enjoy, without the worry of fat in your diet. 2 to 3 capsules 15 minutes before eating or snack, and the fat will be absorbed and passed through the body without the digestion of fat into the body. You will be losing by tomorrow! Don't Wait, visit our web page below, and join now! ***************** http://weightlossworld.50megs.com/intro.html ***************** ___1 Month Supply $32.95 plus $3.75 S & H, 100 Amazing MegaTrim Capsules. ___2 Month Supply $47.95 plus $3.75 S & H, 200 Amazing MegaTrim Capsules. (A $9.95 Savings, Free Bottle)! ___3 Month Supply $62.95, Plus $3.75 S & H, 300 Amazing MegaTrim Capsules. (A $19.90 Savings, Free Bottle)! To Order by postal mail, please send to the below address. Make payable to MegaTrim. Ultra Trim 2000 4132 Pompton Ct. Dayton, Ohio 45405 (937) 567-9807 Order by 24 Hour Fax!!! (775) 414-7455 ***** Important Credit Card Information! Please Read Below! * Credit Card Address, City, State and Zip Code, must match billing address to be processed. CHECK____ MONEYORDER____ VISA____ MASTERCARD____ AmericanExpress___ Debt Card___ Name_______________________________________________________ (As it appears on Check or Credit Card) Address____________________________________________________ (As it appears on Check or Credit Card) ___________________________________________________ City,State,Zip(As it appears on Check or Credit Card) ___________________________________________________ Country ___________________________________________________ (Credit Card Number) Expiration Month_____ Year_____ *****IMPORTANT NOTE***** If Shipping Address Is Different From The Billing Address Above, Please Fill Out Information Below. Shipping Name______________________________________________ Shipping Address___________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Shipping City,State,Zip ___________________________________________________________ Country ___________________________________________________________ Email Address & Phone Number(Please Write Neat) From ericm at lne.com Fri Oct 27 10:11:00 2000 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:11:00 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479B@cobra.netsolve.net>; from carskar@netsolve.net on Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:09:40AM -0500 References: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479B@cobra.netsolve.net> Message-ID: <20001027101100.F724@slack.lne.com> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:09:40AM -0500, Carskadden, Rush wrote: > Scott and I have been discussing (from a theoretical standpoint) the > possibility of a third party that focuses on privacy and personal freedom, There already is one. It's called the Libertarian party. www.lp.org. -- Eric Murray Consulting Security Architect SecureDesign LLC http://www.securedesignllc.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From frissell at panix.com Fri Oct 27 07:25:50 2000 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:25:50 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Congress proposes raiding census records. In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20001025111224.01ffb170@mail.speakeasy.org> References: <3.0.6.32.20001025093236.007cf7e0@pop.sprynet.com> <20001025100611.B3872@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20001027095519.044fb150@popserver.panix.com> >sympathy. I'm also aware of a similar example in Mountain View, CA - it's >pretty hard for them to bother people who use even elementary measures to >protect their privacy and security. I always lie on the forms and send them in. No blowback. The Net has had a major impact on this Census since all the politically active types seem to be aware of the $100 fine which was not true before. My brother refused to return his form and was contacted by his *Neighborhood Watch* representative who had been contacted by Census. Just like the Chinese block ladies who keep an eye on things. Of course, he lives in the most commie state in the union. He could sue in a case like this for a privacy violation by Census. I doubt there will be any prosecutions this year. There weren't any in 1990 or 1980 and the 1970 prosecutions ran into First Amendment selective prosecution problems. DCF ---- "SENATOR: Mister Witness, do you advocate the overthrow of the government of the Yew-nited States by force or violence? WITNESS: Well, Senator I've never quite thought about it in those terms before but if I had to choose, I guess I'd choose 'violence'." From carskar at netsolve.net Fri Oct 27 09:09:40 2000 From: carskar at netsolve.net (Carskadden, Rush) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 11:09:40 -0500 Subject: CDR: Parties Message-ID: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479B@cobra.netsolve.net> Scott and I have been discussing (from a theoretical standpoint) the possibility of a third party that focuses on privacy and personal freedom, and the difficulties in gaining creedence for this third party, as opposed to the difficulties associated with influencing existing major parties (either of them) to take a stronger stance on these issues. Assuming that you could reconcile your differences with either Democrats or Republicans in order to gain a strong Washington D.C. presence on a few key issues, would that approach be easier than creating a viable "third" party? What percentage of the voters do you think are holding on to a very few key issues from their party of choice, and would be willing to vote for another party that could give them equally strong representation on those issues? ok, Rush Carskadden -----Original Message----- From: Scott Schram [mailto:scott at schram.net] Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 4:14 PM To: Carskadden, Rush Subject: RE: Bachus Hi Rush, I mentioned the "third party", inspired by my frustration with the two leading parties, and their apparent lack of understanding about technology, and privacy issues. Some thoughts about the current parties: Al Gore's populist rhetoric about drug companies which completely overlooks the fact that we're on the eve of incredible discoveries and it costs lots of money to research and bring new drugs to market. Despite what Gore has indicated, big pharma spends about 4 times as much on research as they do on advertising. George W. Bush's hints at dropping the Microsoft suit (and the tobacco suit for that matter.) The recent Republican (I think) proposals to link Social Security information to IRS information. Our government is (probably justifiably) paranoid about attacks from external and internal terrorists. It is easier for terrorists to cause problems than it is for the government to prevent them. Each time an incident happens, people call for more preventative measures, thus we have: Secret searches (and bugging) of homes, no-knock entries, the Carnivore IP monitoring system, etc. Did you see the recent HBO special about extremist groups and their use of the internet to encourage action by "lone wolf" sociopaths? Nobody wants to appear soft on this kind of crime. Libertarians have some cool ideas (at least they sound cool), but I can't imagine withdrawing all of our military force from the world and limit ourselves to defending our borders. Our enemies would have a field day. Further, while I'm pro-business, I'm all for them playing "in bounds" and only a strong referee can keep some of them from dumping PCBs at the local playground. The Reform Party is basically an old-time circus freak show, and I mean no disrespect to circus freaks. A number of issues are no longer "Right" or "Left". So, back to your question: The third party route would probably be very difficult. It's not clear whether it would actually dilute efforts to influence the major parties. I offer this hypothesis: The way the system works now, with third parties being excluded from debates, often excluded from matching funds, the electoral college that makes for artificial "landslide" elections for the major candidates... all of these things tend to squash the life out of any third party. I believe that people interested in the new issues are growing, and we might find allies in unexpected places. For example, my southern baptist friends were not very happy with the long census form. I have used the following techniques with some success: Letter writing to congress still works. I have written to other representatives in the state if they happened to be the only one on a committee, or even representatives for other states. www.smokefree.org is an excellent example of publicizing issues and encouraging people to write letters. I don't think phone calls work quite as well, but I recall influencing an issue in this way. It was a niche issue, and I got some attention with a careful explanation. (The issue was: For a while, songwriters and authors were not able to deduct business expenses unless they were able to relate directly to the song or work that was produced with that expense.) One of my favorite things to do is write a short, punchy (often satirical) letter to the editor. Their paper starts out blank every day, and I have yet to get one rejected doing it this way. If it's a technology issue, you might be the only one writing in on that topic, and thus more likely to get in print. Give money, either to candidates or groups like EFF or whatever. There's some random thoughts for you Rush, and you can repost any of them if you see fit. Thanks for your questions! What do you think? What are the most important issues in your mind? Scott http://schram.net At 09:41 AM 10/25/00, you wrote: Scott, Thank you for the link and the clarification of my info. I agree about your assertion that a "third" party may better see to our concerns, but do we think it would be easier to create a third party and give it enough creedance to fill our needs, or do you think it would be easier to influence existing party members to take a stronger stance? My assumption has been that existing party members are not very concrete about the technology issues. I don't think there is an old school party line in regards to technology in and of itself on either side. Do you think that we can sway them? Or are we forced to create a new party just to get an issue addressed as we wish it could be? Possibly a harder question still is whether we could live with either of the parties even if they did take a strong stance on technological issues... Maybe a question for the entire list, but I didn't want to stick your private reply up there without asking you. What do you think, though? ok, Rush Carskadden -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 7357 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ericm at lne.com Fri Oct 27 11:16:08 2000 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 11:16:08 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479D@cobra.netsolve.net>; from carskar@netsolve.net on Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 12:54:39PM -0500 References: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479D@cobra.netsolve.net> Message-ID: <20001027111608.K18991@slack.lne.com> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 12:54:39PM -0500, Carskadden, Rush wrote: > Eric, > Yeah, there is the Libertarian party, and they get a lot of electoral > votes. In fact, I think that our next president will be Harry Browne. Our > work is done. Let's go get a drink. > Seriously, what we are discussing here is the feasibility of > establishing a credible power base for a third party. I don't think (and > maybe you disagree with me here) that the Libertarian party has achieved > this at all. I don't think that the current Libertarian party CAN establish > this kind of voter confidence. The current presidential candidate for the > Libertarian party, Harry Browne, has done little to gain voter enthusiasm > with such bold and impractical claims as the statement that his first action > in office would be granting executive pardon to drug offenders. Well, that gets my vote! Why should I vote for someone who doesn't stand for what I beleive in just because the media says that they're "not electable"? That's the kind of loser attitude that's gotten us a contest that'll assuredly elect either an idiot (Bush) or a fool (Gore). Unfortunately Americans are more interested in voting for a "winner" than they are in voting their concious. A "Libertarian Lite" party wouldn't get the principled voters away from the Libertarian party and wouldn't get any more mainstream voters than any other third party gets. But if you really want to do it, go ahead. The cipherpunks list isn't a very good place to discuss it though, as most posters seem to think that the Libertarian party isn't radical enough, and besides, crypto anarchy will soon make governments obsolete. -- Eric Murray Consulting Security Architect SecureDesign LLC http://www.securedesignllc.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From comeback at pogo.com Fri Oct 27 12:39:40 2000 From: comeback at pogo.com (comeback at pogo.com) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 12:39:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Come back to pogo.com! Message-ID: <20586525.972675580229.JavaMail.cdc-ops@stan.pogo.com> Dear cypherpunk0, We've missed you! You signed up for our FREE games and prizes, but we haven't seen you on the site in a while. We're inviting you to come back to pogo.com and see all the fun you've been missing. To show how much we care, we'll give you 250 tokens AND a chance to win $500.00 in CASH just for coming back. Account name: cypherpunk0 Password: password Your Token Balance: 1000 Check out some of our newest and most popular games: Bank Buster Lotto(tm) - crack the safe combination and you could take home ONE MILLION DOLLARS! What more do we need to say - it's a chance to win ONE MILLION DOLLARS! Ali Baba Slots(tm) - chat with friends while you win tokens. Get 3 Genies and win the jackpot! This is one of our most popular games; over 500,000 people played in the first month! Buckaroo Blackjack(tm) - blackjack with a twist! Win tokens while you play. Get the Gold Ace and Jack and win the jackpot! This is another of our most popular games; over 300,000 people played in the first month! Jump to the games! Go to: http://play.pogo.com/ten/misc/welcome-back.jsp?site=pogo AOL members, click here to jump to the games! To unsubscribe from all future pogo.com mailings, go to: http://play.pogo.com/ten/unsubscribe/remove-e-mail.jsp?pid=18619444&site=pogo -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 2759 bytes Desc: not available URL: From carskar at netsolve.net Fri Oct 27 10:54:39 2000 From: carskar at netsolve.net (Carskadden, Rush) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 12:54:39 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Parties Message-ID: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479D@cobra.netsolve.net> Eric, Yeah, there is the Libertarian party, and they get a lot of electoral votes. In fact, I think that our next president will be Harry Browne. Our work is done. Let's go get a drink. Seriously, what we are discussing here is the feasibility of establishing a credible power base for a third party. I don't think (and maybe you disagree with me here) that the Libertarian party has achieved this at all. I don't think that the current Libertarian party CAN establish this kind of voter confidence. The current presidential candidate for the Libertarian party, Harry Browne, has done little to gain voter enthusiasm with such bold and impractical claims as the statement that his first action in office would be granting executive pardon to drug offenders. I am familiar with the Libertarian party, to the extent that I was a member for the past several years, and have attended several state and national Libertarian party conventions, and spoken with Congress-people as a representative of Libertarian interests. The fact of the matter is, in a discussion of strong representation of issues within a viable Washington D.C. power movement, you can only be bringing up the Libertarian party as either an example of failure in the third party strategy or a recommendation for a third party to endorse. As for the possible assertion that the Libertarian party is an example of a failure to succeed at activism outside of the two-party arena, I think that any failure (perceived or real) may in fact be due to the outrageous demands of the LP (as an activist, I have been embarrassed by them many times), and the complete stubborn demand for overnight change without compromise. These facets of the party may be sexy to guys like you and I, but don't engender the public, or establish a foothold in Washington. As to the possible recommendation of the Libertarian party as a viable alternative to the two party system, I just don't see how that answers my question. Sure, the Libertarian party seems to be fairly interested in privacy and personal freedom. That still doesn't tell me whether you think it would be easier to get the Libertarian party enough power to actually protect our interests, or convince existing partisan powers to take up the cause. In short, thanks for the info, but you've answered nothing. ok, Rush Carskadden -----Original Message----- From: Eric Murray [mailto:ericm at lne.com] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 12:11 PM To: Carskadden, Rush Cc: 'cypherpunks at algebra.com' Subject: Re: Parties On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:09:40AM -0500, Carskadden, Rush wrote: > Scott and I have been discussing (from a theoretical standpoint) the > possibility of a third party that focuses on privacy and personal freedom, There already is one. It's called the Libertarian party. www.lp.org. -- Eric Murray Consulting Security Architect SecureDesign LLC http://www.securedesignllc.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4337 bytes Desc: not available URL: From carskar at netsolve.net Fri Oct 27 11:00:54 2000 From: carskar at netsolve.net (Carskadden, Rush) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:00:54 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) Message-ID: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479E@cobra.netsolve.net> Are you guys still talking about the feasibility of a cipher that implements each AES candidate in turn with the same key? I don't really get this idea. Provided you were actually using the same key with each stage of the encryption, then your system is only gong to be as secure as the key of the first algorithm. In fact, it seems that if the key is compromised at any one point, then the entire system is shot, given that you know the algorithm (Kerckhoff's principle IIRC). Maybe I am misunderstanding. ok, Rush Carskadden -----Original Message----- From: Arnold G. Reinhold [mailto:reinhold at WORLD.STD.COM] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 12:29 PM To: Damien Miller Cc: John Kelsey; Bram Cohen; cryptography at c2.net; cypherpunks at cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) At 4:16 PM +1100 10/27/2000, Damien Miller wrote: >On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: > >> simple way to combine the AES finalists and take advantage of all the >> testing that each has already undergone. And, IMHO, it is an >> interesting theoretical question as well. Even if the answer is >> "yes," I am not advocating that it be used in most common >> applications, e.g network security, because there are so many greater >> risks to be dealt with. But it might make sense in some narrow, high >> value, applications. > >What threat model do you propose that would require this? o Your opponent has the cryptologic capabilities of the a major world power o The content has very high value (multi-billion dollar deal, could bring down a government, could start a war) o Long term protection is required (30+ years) o You are in a position to properly secure the terminals at both ends 0 Efficiency is not a concern For example, a chief of state's personal diary, an opposition leader's communications, best and final bids on large projects, etc. > >I can't think of anything that isn't contrived and couldn't be served >by using 3DES. > In a way I see this question as how one should manage the transition from 3DES to AES. Does one keep using DES until the big day and then switch to AES? Or does a blended solution make sense in some cases? While I think there may be a use for something like a Paranoid Encryption Standard in very unusual situations, I don't wish to waste more of people's time arguing with those who say there's no need for it at all. I don't have any compelling evidence. It's pure speculation. I am really more interested in the theoretical "why not?" question, i.e. is there any real downside in combining ciphers in this way, besides efficiency? Conventional wisdom seems to be more cautious than I think is justified and I am trying to prove that. Arnold Reinhold -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4410 bytes Desc: not available URL: From anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net Fri Oct 27 10:06:30 2000 From: anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net (An Metet) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:06:30 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties Message-ID: <5538a081bd737078a017b48b5c7c1830@mixmaster.shinn.net> God, what a bunch of shit. The only thing that is really going to make a difference is a suitcase nuke or a balloon full of Ebola virus on Washington. There's about a 1/4 million assholes all over the country that need to be hunted down and killed after that. Then we will have freedom and privacy. Write your congress critter about that. From tom at ricardo.de Fri Oct 27 04:10:53 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:10:53 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? References: Message-ID: <39F962BD.23C9A05E@ricardo.de> Ray Dillinger wrote: > > Would there be a market for someone to create an encrypted-services > provider? Would people do this? > I have something like this in the making. if you're working on a similiar project - why not team up? > Here is what I envision, at a cost of something like $10/month. > > Email accounts that bounce anything not encrypted - either silently > or with a message that says "this account accepts only encrypted mail." > at the option of the account holder. These accounts are restricted > in some way that makes them unattractive to spammers - probably they > are able to send no more than 3 or 4 unencrypted emails a day, maybe > they are unable to send *any* unencrypted email. in addition, access to the email account is via encrypted means only: either forwarding through S/MIME or SSL channels or IMAP with SSL. plus a local mixmaster for sending out mail (in the process mixing it without mail that's merely travelling through). an optional (2nd) e-mail address can accept unencrypted mail, but before forwarding will encrypt it (PGP). goal: your home machine never gets an unencrypted e-mail. > Web Hosting strictly via HTTPS. Standard accounts get four or eight > kilobytes accessible by http (enough for a redirect), and 100 > Megabytes or so of web space accessible by HTTPS. not planned here. I'm on the e-mail aspect only. data you need to provide is minimal - a username/pwd and/or a forwarding e-mail. we don't want to know what we have no technical need to know. all payment can be done anonymously - that's an important point and possibly the most difficult one. > I think this is, just barely, feasible. > What say you all? all of this is doable. as I said: I'm working on encrypted e-mail services at the moment (I bounced a couple stego ideas off this list recently). From reinhold at WORLD.STD.COM Fri Oct 27 10:29:23 2000 From: reinhold at WORLD.STD.COM (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:29:23 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 4:16 PM +1100 10/27/2000, Damien Miller wrote: >On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: > >> simple way to combine the AES finalists and take advantage of all the >> testing that each has already undergone. And, IMHO, it is an >> interesting theoretical question as well. Even if the answer is >> "yes," I am not advocating that it be used in most common >> applications, e.g network security, because there are so many greater >> risks to be dealt with. But it might make sense in some narrow, high >> value, applications. > >What threat model do you propose that would require this? o Your opponent has the cryptologic capabilities of the a major world power o The content has very high value (multi-billion dollar deal, could bring down a government, could start a war) o Long term protection is required (30+ years) o You are in a position to properly secure the terminals at both ends 0 Efficiency is not a concern For example, a chief of state's personal diary, an opposition leader's communications, best and final bids on large projects, etc. > >I can't think of anything that isn't contrived and couldn't be served >by using 3DES. > In a way I see this question as how one should manage the transition from 3DES to AES. Does one keep using DES until the big day and then switch to AES? Or does a blended solution make sense in some cases? While I think there may be a use for something like a Paranoid Encryption Standard in very unusual situations, I don't wish to waste more of people's time arguing with those who say there's no need for it at all. I don't have any compelling evidence. It's pure speculation. I am really more interested in the theoretical "why not?" question, i.e. is there any real downside in combining ciphers in this way, besides efficiency? Conventional wisdom seems to be more cautious than I think is justified and I am trying to prove that. Arnold Reinhold From ericm at lne.com Fri Oct 27 13:54:23 2000 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:54:23 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: ; from ssyreeni@cc.helsinki.fi on Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:30:26PM +0300 References: <20001027111608.K18991@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: <20001027135423.P18991@slack.lne.com> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:30:26PM +0300, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Eric Murray wrote: > > >Why should I vote for someone who doesn't stand for what I beleive > >in just because the media says that they're "not electable"? > >That's the kind of loser attitude that's gotten us a contest > >that'll assuredly elect either an idiot (Bush) or a fool (Gore). > >Unfortunately Americans are more interested in voting for a "winner" > >than they are in voting their conscious. > > That's commendable idealism, but in most modern countries the electorial > process is practically guaranteed - and in fact mostly designed - to in > essence round out dissent. The fact that voting for the loser implies > casting your vote for nothing, *even in matters which had nothing to do > with the winner being elected*, simply means that there is absolutely no > point in voting for someone who cannot win. Of course if everyone feels that way, then we'll elect only the candidates which have been pre-chosen for us. Which is pretty much what happens in the US, at least on a national level. I refuse to play along, especially in contests where I don't like the candidates from the two major parties. I prefer it to not voting at all. If voters don't vote, then the major parties see them as merely apathetic. They don't care how many people don't vote as long at they win. If voters do vote, but for a third party, then the major parties see them as voters who care, but not for them. Meaning that there's an issue or issues which they presumably voted for that the major parties can co-opt in order to try to get their vote the next time. So, while I agree with you that the system is rigged so that third parties never get appreciable power, I disagree that voting for one is a waste of one's vote. -- Eric Murray Consulting Security Architect SecureDesign LLC http://www.securedesignllc.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From vd at mailbox.alkor.ru Fri Oct 27 02:54:36 2000 From: vd at mailbox.alkor.ru (Victor Dostov) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:54:36 +0400 Subject: paycash payment system ver. 1.xx Message-ID: Paycash, digital cash payment system, released production version 1.xx. It can be downloaded at English section of www.paycash.ru. Current pilot version has about 10,000 users what is about 1-2% of active Russian internet users. Concerning current growth rate it is expected that in the next 6 month this number will increase five times. To the moment the system has operating representative companies in Russia, Latvia, Ukraine and USA. For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "dcsb-request at reservoir.com" with one line of text: "help". --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From onemug at gdn.net Fri Oct 27 10:58:45 2000 From: onemug at gdn.net (Nick Bretagna) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:58:45 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: FC: U.S. Copyright Office says DeCSS bad, filtering hacking good References: <20001027103856.C31138@cluebot.com> Message-ID: <39F9C255.22B9E97B@gdn.net> Declan McCullagh wrote: > > ----- Forwarded message from John Young ----- > The two exemptions granted: > > "1. Compilations Consisting of Lists of Websites Blocked > by Filtering Software Applications > > 2. Literary Works, Including Computer Programs and > Databases, Protected by Access Control Mechanisms > That Fail to Permit Access Because of Malfunction, > Damage or Obsoleteness." So: our free speech -- our ability to express ideas -- is now subject to the imprimature of the US copyright office, who we need to appeal to for "exemptions"?? How many *other* Federal Agencies do you think will step forth to claim this power, as well??? One would certainly hope the courts would figure this one out as blatantly unconstitutional.... > > The copyright industry's arguments are often cited > as grounds for minimal exemptions, as well as the > power of the market to correct what Congress gave > the industry. Specious. -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Nicholas Bretagna II mailto:afn41391 at afn.org If we give in [to the impulse to censor and instill speech codes] then we are giving to the bigots the gift of our freedom. If you give in, what you're saying is that Freedom is less important than not being offended. What a disaster for a country whose *soul* depends on Liberty. - Alan C. Kors - From apoio at giganetstore.com Fri Oct 27 06:56:28 2000 From: apoio at giganetstore.com (apoio at giganetstore.com) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:56:28 +0100 Subject: CDR: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pr=E9-Lan=E7amento_de_A_Caverna?= Message-ID: <019ad2856131ba0WWWNETSTORE@wwwnetstore> A Giganetstore.com tem o prazer de lhe apresentar a última obra do Escritor José Saramago Seja o primeiro a entrar em " A Caverna " Disponível a partir de 16 de Novembro Não hesite e Encomende Já ! Os primeiros 20 clientes a comprarem A Caverna de José Saramago, terão direito a 1 convite para o lançamento do livro, que contará com a presença do Nobel da Literatura. A Caverna José Saramago Uma Pequena Olaria, um centro comercial gigantesco. Um mundo em rápido processo de extinção, outro que cresce e se multiplica como um jogo de espelhos onde não parece haver limites para a ilusão enganosa. Este Romance fala de um modo de viver que vai sendo cada vez menos o nosso e assoma-se à entrada de um brave new world cujas consequências sobre a mentalidade humana são cada vez mais visíveis e ameaçadoras. Todos os dias se extinguem espécies animais e vegetatis, todos os dias há profissões que se tormam inúteis, idiomas que deixam de ter pessoas que os falem, tradições que perdem sentido, sentimentos que se convertem nos seus contrários. Fim de século, fim de milénio, fim de civilização.Uma família de oleiros compreende que deixou de ser necessária ao mundo. Como uma serpente que despe a pele para poder crescer noutra que mais adiante se há-de tornar pequena, o centro comercial diz à olaria : " Morre já não preciso de ti ". Em A Caverna José Saramago enfrenta-se ao processo acelerado de desumanização que estamos vivendo, com dois romances anteriores Ensaio Sobre a Cegueira e Todos os Nomes - este novo livro forma um tríptico em que o Autor deixou inscrita a sua visão do mundo actual, da sociedade humana tal como a vivemos. Não mudaremos de vida se não mudarmos a vida. O Autor Obras Publicadas Aproveitamos para o informar que estamos a ampliar o nosso catálogo na categoria de Livros, e que neste momento, também já contamos com a presença da Editora Caminho. Para retirar o seu email desta mailing list deverá entrar no nosso site http://www.giganetstore.com , ir à edição do seu registo e retirar a opção de receber informação acerca das nossas promoções e novos serviços. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4720 bytes Desc: not available URL: From auto87114 at hushmail.com Fri Oct 27 13:08:17 2000 From: auto87114 at hushmail.com (auto87114 at hushmail.com) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:08:17 -0500 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Net Privacy Bill Called 'Trojan Horse' Message-ID: <200010271903.MAA17412@user3.hushmail.com> Net Privacy Bill Called 'Trojan Horse' By Robert O'Harrow Jr, Washington Post WASHINGTON, DC, U.S.A., 25 Oct 2000, 6:14 AM CST The legislation began as an effort to protect people like Amy Boyer, a New Hampshire woman who was slain by a man who tracked her down after buying her Social Security number on the Internet. In May, Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., proposed a law to sharply limit the sale of the identifying numbers, which often serve as hooks for electronic dossiers about the whereabouts, credit histories and lifestyles of millions of Americans. Then the information industry got involved. Now privacy advocates say Gregg's modified measure, part of an appropriations bill set to pass in the final days of Congress, is a "Trojan horse" that does more harm than good, because loopholes allow giant data brokers, banks, marketers and even private detectives to exchange or sell the numbers among themselves. That means such companies will be free to use the numbers to track down debtors or deadbeat parents, collect personal data, conduct fraud investigations, and build profiles about what people buy and do. The debate is the latest flare-up over one of the staples of the information age, a number that enables government agencies, marketers and information brokers to keep close tabs on a proliferation of data about individual Americans. Some privacy activists believe that Social Security numbers should be used only with individuals' permission. At the same time, information industries that rely on unfettered access to personal information fear losing control over a key to their business. "It is just the worst kind of legislation," said Edmund Mierzwinski, consumer advocate at the US Public Interest Research Group, who has worked with Consumers Union, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Clinton administration to oppose Gregg's proposal. "It is supposed to do something good, but it actually makes things worse." Tim Remsburg, Amy Boyer's stepfather, who originally asked Gregg to introduce the bill, is angry about how it evolved. "It sure isn't as effective as what I asked for at the beginning," he said in an interview. "They want to put Amy's name on this." A Gregg spokesman defended the legislation, saying it will make it illegal to sell Social Security numbers to individuals. But he acknowledged that the current legislation was crafted with help from the Individual Reference Services Group (IRSG), an industry association that includes some of the nation's largest data marketers. Members include such companies as Acxiom Corp., Equifax Inc. and Trans Union LLC, which have strongly opposed any efforts to curb access to personal data. IRSG representative Ronald Plesser, who worked with Gregg's office on the legislation, did not return repeated telephone calls. In a Sept. 28 letter to Gregg's office, Plesser blasted more stringent restrictions proposed by the Clinton administration. A letter from IRSG said, "Your bill strikes the right balance by providing strong privacy protections without undermining the range of important and socially beneficial activities by business and government that have developed based upon the use of SSNs." One exception also would permit state and local governments to continue selling records containing Social Security numbers. The provision is worded in such a way that, critics say, it would allow businesses buying those records to use Social Security numbers with no legal restraints. Remsburg's stepdaughter, Amy Boyer, 20, was fatally shot last year by a man who had been stalking her for some time. The man, who killed himself after killing Boyer, acknowledged at a Web site that he obtained details about Boyer from brokers on the Internet. "It's a significant restriction on the ability of individuals to get Social Security numbers," said Gregg spokesman Edmund M. Amarosi. "We feel it will have a significant impact on preventing a recurrence of what happened to Amy Boyer." In a statement, Gregg's office said that "the exceptions that are outlined in the Amy Boyer Law were the result of thoughtful consideration of the impact that a complete ban on the use of Social Security numbers would have on our nation's economy." Until recently, at the request of industry, the law also prohibited states from enacting tougher legislation. But Amarosi said that exception would be dropped because of objections from the administration and others. Copyright (C) 2000, The Washington Post. Reprinted with permission. Reported By The Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com . From carskar at netsolve.net Fri Oct 27 13:23:31 2000 From: carskar at netsolve.net (Carskadden, Rush) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:23:31 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Parties Message-ID: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479F@cobra.netsolve.net> Eric, Glad to hear that all it takes to "get your vote" is a reckless executive pardon of criminals that is designed to utilize executive power to bypass the checks and balances system and negate the efforts of the legislative and judicial branches of government (known in some circles as "saying 'fuck the constitution'"). So to clarify (because I am completely baffled), you are saying it doesn't matter what the outcome of any legislative effort is at all? You seem to be saying that you are in favor of voting on your own "concious" (conscience?) regardless of outcome. So when they take every freedom you have, when your social security number is bought and sold amongst governments and big businesses, when every facet of your life is documented and displayed publicly, with any attempt at obfuscation deemed illegal, you will say that it is ok, because you voted with your conscience, and it didn't matter if your cause won. Of course it matters. At least to me it does. You may not agree, but I would like to see my privacy and personal freedoms protected by the government (in addition to my own strong efforts at defending them myself). That is not the case right now, and the Libertarian party has done fuck all to change it. So my question to you, posed for the third time, is whether you think it is easier to give a third party (you seem to think that it should be the Libertarian party, and I tend to agree with you) viability in Washington with our efforts (or rather MY efforts, as you are quite content to lose the fight), or whether it would be easier to convince an existing power to take up our cause. I am not currently trying to start a third party. I think I was very clear in my initial email about the third party talk being theoretical. I am in no position to be in the business of redefining political partisanship, and if I was, I would not have achieved that position by asking opinions of people who assert that crypto anarchy will make governments obsolete in the near future. In short, thank you again for your Andy Rooney moment, but you seem to have abandoned the question completely. ok, Rush Carskadden -----Original Message----- From: Eric Murray [mailto:ericm at lne.com] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 1:16 PM To: Carskadden, Rush Cc: cypherpunks at algebra.com Subject: Re: Parties On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 12:54:39PM -0500, Carskadden, Rush wrote: > Eric, > Yeah, there is the Libertarian party, and they get a lot of electoral > votes. In fact, I think that our next president will be Harry Browne. Our > work is done. Let's go get a drink. > Seriously, what we are discussing here is the feasibility of > establishing a credible power base for a third party. I don't think (and > maybe you disagree with me here) that the Libertarian party has achieved > this at all. I don't think that the current Libertarian party CAN establish > this kind of voter confidence. The current presidential candidate for the > Libertarian party, Harry Browne, has done little to gain voter enthusiasm > with such bold and impractical claims as the statement that his first action > in office would be granting executive pardon to drug offenders. Well, that gets my vote! Why should I vote for someone who doesn't stand for what I beleive in just because the media says that they're "not electable"? That's the kind of loser attitude that's gotten us a contest that'll assuredly elect either an idiot (Bush) or a fool (Gore). Unfortunately Americans are more interested in voting for a "winner" than they are in voting their concious. A "Libertarian Lite" party wouldn't get the principled voters away from the Libertarian party and wouldn't get any more mainstream voters than any other third party gets. But if you really want to do it, go ahead. The cipherpunks list isn't a very good place to discuss it though, as most posters seem to think that the Libertarian party isn't radical enough, and besides, crypto anarchy will soon make governments obsolete. -- Eric Murray Consulting Security Architect SecureDesign LLC http://www.securedesignllc.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 6013 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sunder at sunder.net Fri Oct 27 12:29:01 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:29:01 -0400 Subject: CDR: Insurance: My Last Post References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> Message-ID: <39F9D77D.E8A481A8@sunder.net> Your conclusion is at odds with your views. Based one 1, it is surprising that you're not advocating humanicide. Based on 2, it is surprising that you're not advocating being Amish Based on 3, it is surprising that you don't support dictatorships. Not surprisingly, views 1,2,3 put into political power provide nothing less than oppression. Nathan Saper wrote: > My views are irreconcilable with those of the libertarians on this > list. Here's the way I view the world: > > 1) Life has no inherent value. Our being here is random, and > there is no purpose to our lives. > > 2) "Human progress" is bullshit. We are no further along as a > species now than we were in Plato's time. Basically, we're > going nowhere fast. > > 3) People have no essential "rights." Rights don't exist. > This is a theme often found in the work of many modern > philosophers, such as Foucault. > > 5) Taking all three premises above, the only way I can find to > evaluate what is right and what is wrong is "do what causes the > least pain." I guess this is basically pragmatism. For > example, if raising taxes to 95% would feed everyone in the > world (I'm just speaking hypothetically), then I would advocate > this, because this would lead to less pain in the world. (And > I don't consider some people having to sell their Ferraris > "pain." ;-) Someone here said that each time taxes are raised, > we lose freedom. So what? First of all, what is "freedom"? > Second of all, what is so great about it that it should be > evaluated before everything else? -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From sunder at sunder.net Fri Oct 27 12:34:21 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:34:21 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Congress proposes raiding census records. References: Message-ID: <39F9D8BD.69742395@sunder.net> Lucky Green wrote: > > I only answered the first question in the last census: how many people live > at that address (or something to that effect). The rest I crossed out with > fat black permanent marker. The result: no visits from the census taker. No > inquiries from the Census Office. No fine. No repercussions of any kind. > > I am puzzled why anybody would have bothered to answer the remaining > questions. I've answered none of the questions. Just simply put the questionaire in the appropriate recycling bin. And the follow up. I made sure I didn't answer the door when the Censuswhores were walking the streets. Perhaps ten years from now when the next one hits, I'll tell them why I won't answer any questions, and when they inform me of my protected privacy, I'll point to the recently mentioned bills. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From carskar at netsolve.net Fri Oct 27 13:38:37 2000 From: carskar at netsolve.net (Carskadden, Rush) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:38:37 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) Message-ID: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A353055547A0@cobra.netsolve.net> Cool. I have to think about this some more and see if I can provide you with a proof either way, but for now you're right. I am operating entirely on conventional wisdom. That is not sound. My assumption here (offered for your opinion) is that provided a working knowledge of the actual ciphers and a copy of the key (compromised through a weakness in one of the ciphers), that I could use that same key, along with the respective decryption algorithms, to completely unravel all of the encryption. Granted, step-by-step analysis would almost definitely not include plaintext related attacks (as deciphered text from one algorithm simply results in unobfuscated text resulting from the previously implemented cipher), but my knee-jerk reaction here is to think that if one could compromise the last cipher applied and derive the key, then the entire scheme would be blown. If this is the case, then the strength of the entire cipher is only as strong as it's weakest link. On the other hand, I would think that some chain of ciphers that all used different keys (preferably not derivative) would seem stronger to me. At any rate, please keep me posted on your thoughts. ok, Rush Carskadden -----Original Message----- From: Arnold G. Reinhold [mailto:reinhold at world.std.com] Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 3:20 PM To: Carskadden, Rush; Damien Miller Cc: John Kelsey; Bram Cohen; cryptography at c2.net; cypherpunks at cyberpass.net Subject: RE: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) At 1:00 PM -0500 10/27/2000, Carskadden, Rush wrote: >Are you guys still talking about the feasibility of a cipher that >implements each AES candidate in turn with the same key? I don't >really get this idea. Provided you were actually using the same key >with each stage of the encryption, then your system is only gong to >be as secure as the key of the first algorithm. In fact, it seems >that if the key is compromised at any one point, then the entire >system is shot, given that you know the algorithm (Kerckhoff's >principle IIRC). Maybe I am misunderstanding. > That is the theoretical question that I am asking. What you say appears to be the conventional wisdom, and I am claiming that it is wrong. As long as there is some way to make sure that none of the ciphers in a chain are inverses of the others, or close to an inverse, in some sense, then I claim as long as one of the ciphers is strong, there is no way to get any information out about the keys from the other ciphers, even if they are all designed to reveal that information. As a practical matter, you may as well derive the sub keys from the master key using a one-way hash, but I am questioning the theoretical justification for doing that. Massey and Maurer base their paper on oracles that give you the key for all component ciphers but one. I am saying such oracles cannot exist if one of the ciphers is strong and "inverses" of the strong cipher are excluded. Arnold Reinhold -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4303 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sunder at sunder.net Fri Oct 27 12:38:38 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:38:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> <20001025092454.C3521@positron.mit.edu> Message-ID: <39F9D9BE.1F3E20EF@sunder.net> "Riad S. Wahby" wrote: > Ah, but you are forgetting. It was the power from humans "combined > with a form of fusion." Everything, when combined with a form of > fusion, makes a good movie energy source. > > "Their spaceship was powered by goat pornography combined with a form > of fusion." > > See? Doesn't is sound nifty and hi-tech? Yeah, that aspect didn't irk me at all. I thought the premise was flawed Why would they need a world simulator if all they wanted was bioenergy they could just keep all the drones in a coma... :) Yes, your spaceship being powered by goat porno is far more believable. :^) -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Fri Oct 27 13:14:19 2000 From: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com (owner-cypherpunks at toad.com) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 16:14:19 -0400 Subject: CDR: Congratulations on your $25 USD win! Message-ID: <200010272009.NAA05360@toad.com> You are a winner !!! Your email was randomly selected from our opt-in lists and you won $25.00 USD in real casino chips from A1-Casino. Why are they giving away money you ask? Simple...they want you to discover what 1,000's of other people just like you already know...online gambling at A1-Casino is fast-paced, interactive and a whole lot of fun. But that's not all, they are also giving away fabulous instaprizes and bonuses during the download. So don't wait. Click on the link below to collect your $25.00 prize now. http://www.click-collect.com If the link above doesn't work please print, fill in and fax this form to the fax number below. First Name ____________________ Last Name ____________________ Street Address ________________________________________________ City ____________________ State/Province ______________________ Country _________________ ZIP/Postal Code _____________________ E-Mail _________________________________ ############## Send fax to: 1-775-766-2022 ############## ***************************************************************************** Delivered by Segasolution to referrals and opt-ins only. All remove requests are honored. All players must be 18 years and over. Bonus dollars are only available to credit card depositors. A1-Casino guarantees minimum wins. Good luck! ***************************************************************************** Remove mailto:unsubscribeit at softhome.net From djm at mindrot.org Thu Oct 26 22:16:56 2000 From: djm at mindrot.org (Damien Miller) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 16:16:56 +1100 (EST) Subject: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Arnold G. Reinhold wrote: > simple way to combine the AES finalists and take advantage of all the > testing that each has already undergone. And, IMHO, it is an > interesting theoretical question as well. Even if the answer is > "yes," I am not advocating that it be used in most common > applications, e.g network security, because there are so many greater > risks to be dealt with. But it might make sense in some narrow, high > value, applications. What threat model do you propose that would require this? I can't think of anything that isn't contrived and couldn't be served by using 3DES. -d -- | ``We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on | Damien Miller - | a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the | | works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, / | we know this is not true.'' - Robert Wilensky UCB / http://www.mindrot.org From mdpopescu at geocities.com Fri Oct 27 13:19:29 2000 From: mdpopescu at geocities.com (Marcel Popescu) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 16:19:29 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> <200010252024.PAA18122@ecom1.wiu.edu> <20001025165653.B1804@well.com> Message-ID: <025101c04053$062ed690$1d01a8c0@microbilt.com> From reinhold at world.std.com Fri Oct 27 13:20:11 2000 From: reinhold at world.std.com (Arnold G. Reinhold) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 16:20:11 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479E@cobra.netsolve.net> References: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479E@cobra.netsolve.net> Message-ID: At 1:00 PM -0500 10/27/2000, Carskadden, Rush wrote: >Are you guys still talking about the feasibility of a cipher that >implements each AES candidate in turn with the same key? I don't >really get this idea. Provided you were actually using the same key >with each stage of the encryption, then your system is only gong to >be as secure as the key of the first algorithm. In fact, it seems >that if the key is compromised at any one point, then the entire >system is shot, given that you know the algorithm (Kerckhoff's >principle IIRC). Maybe I am misunderstanding. > That is the theoretical question that I am asking. What you say appears to be the conventional wisdom, and I am claiming that it is wrong. As long as there is some way to make sure that none of the ciphers in a chain are inverses of the others, or close to an inverse, in some sense, then I claim as long as one of the ciphers is strong, there is no way to get any information out about the keys from the other ciphers, even if they are all designed to reveal that information. As a practical matter, you may as well derive the sub keys from the master key using a one-way hash, but I am questioning the theoretical justification for doing that. Massey and Maurer base their paper on oracles that give you the key for all component ciphers but one. I am saying such oracles cannot exist if one of the ciphers is strong and "inverses" of the strong cipher are excluded. Arnold Reinhold From sunder at sunder.net Fri Oct 27 13:51:10 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 16:51:10 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> <200010252024.PAA18122@ecom1.wiu.edu> <20001025165653.B1804@well.com> Message-ID: <39F9EABD.CED7EB22@sunder.net> Nathan Saper wrote: > > The reason why I use "the least pain for the greatest number" instead of > "the greatest happiness for the greatest number" is because the latter > justifies many not-so-great acts under act utilitarianism. Consider > this example: I have an even better example for you: Why not euthanize every single human being on the planet by lethan injection. It would be almost painless - just a prick of the needle, and they would never again feel any pain ever. After all, that would fit your socialist goals. :) There's no better plan for achieving the least pain for the greatest number according to your rantings. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 27 17:50:14 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 17:50:14 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 4:37 PM -0400 10/26/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >At 11:59 AM -0700 on 10/26/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: > > >> Here is what I envision, at a cost of something like $10/month. > >Go find the original archived web page for c2.net? > >When privacy costs more than no privacy, we have no privacy. > >Sad, but true. Oh? "When curtains over windows cost more than no curtains over windows, we have no curtains." "When locks on doors cost more than no locks on doors, we have no locks on doors." ...and so on, for a dozen other obvious examples where "privacy" of one form or another costs more than the alternative of no privacy and yet where some, even many, choose the privacy option. The issue with computers and networks is different for a number of reasons. For one thing, most people have poor understandings of what's happening in networks and systems. They assume someone else is doing something to secure them, or they assume the communications must be too difficult to untangle (that is, they don't understand about sniffers, filters, etc.), and they just don't bother to give it much thought. For another, most people have not themelves experience a security problem. While they understand how neighborhood thieves can break in and steal their stuff, they have no similar experience for their computer data. Unless and until this changes, they just won't care very much. Lastly, there's the insurance issue I've written about several times. As with actual physical safes, the motivation for better safes came from insurance companies. (For the obvious reason that insurance companies are conversant with risk, payoffs, and think in terms of unlikely-but-possible events. This means that Joe Merchant sees a "discounted present value" of buying the better Mossler safe.) Sloganeering is always dangerous. First articulated by Epimenides the Cretin (and Cretan). --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 27 18:01:57 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 18:01:57 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: <20001027111608.K18991@slack.lne.com> References: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479D@cobra.netsolve.net> <20001027111608.K18991@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: At 11:16 AM -0700 10/27/00, Eric Murray wrote: >On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 12:54:39PM -0500, Carskadden, Rush wrote: >> Eric, >> Yeah, there is the Libertarian party, and they get a lot of electoral >> votes. In fact, I think that our next president will be Harry Browne. Our >> work is done. Let's go get a drink. >> Seriously, what we are discussing here is the feasibility of >> establishing a credible power base for a third party. I don't think (and >> maybe you disagree with me here) that the Libertarian party has achieved >> this at all. I don't think that the current Libertarian party CAN establish >> this kind of voter confidence. The current presidential candidate for the >> Libertarian party, Harry Browne, has done little to gain voter enthusiasm >> with such bold and impractical claims as the statement that his first action >> in office would be granting executive pardon to drug offenders. > >Well, that gets my vote! > >Why should I vote for someone who doesn't stand for what I beleive >in just because the media says that they're "not electable"? >That's the kind of loser attitude that's gotten us a contest >that'll assuredly elect either an idiot (Bush) or a fool (Gore). >Unfortunately Americans are more interested in voting for a "winner" >than they are in voting their concious. I assume you mean "conscience," though many voters are indeed close to unconscious. Anyway, where did you ever get the idea that voting is about "conscience"? A vote is a chance to minimize damage, financial or in terms of freedoms, as far as I'm concerned. Voting has never been about "voting for the best man." It's been about evaluating the alternatives, estimating the rewards, payoffs, costs, and then voting. Needless to say, any single person's vote is hardly worth spending 4 minutes evaluating the issues. (Beware the logical fallacy of "If _everyone_ thought that way..." What one person actually does in the voting booth will affect no other person. This is separable from what people may say on television that they plan to do, or say here, etc.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 27 18:47:17 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 18:47:17 -0700 Subject: CDR: Dealing with Spam from Esther Dyson In-Reply-To: <20001027185024997.ABI476@gateway.edventure.com@[198.143.31.164]> References: <20001027185024997.ABI476@gateway.edventure.com@[198.143.31.164]> Message-ID: So, Esther Dyson, whom I have never corresponded with, is spamming me with this crap. Any suggestions from Cypherpunks on how to deal with this nuisance? I'm not sure she needs killing, despite her criminal acts with ICANN, but other suggestions are welcome. --Tim May At 10:55 AM -0400 10/27/00, Esther Dyson wrote: >Dear Tim May, > >Intellectual Property on the Net (12/94), the implications of the >Web on privacy in Labels and Disclosure, Part II: Privacy (2/97), >The Open-Source Revolution (11/98), broadband open access in The >Architecture of Internet 2.0 (2-99), new content models in The Web >Goes into Syndication (7-8/99), peer-to-peer networking in Data >Soup: The Client is the Server (4/00). If you were reading Release >1.0, you would have read about these topics early. > >That's the mission of Release 1.0, the monthly newsletter I produce >with editor Kevin Werbach. We take pleasure not just in filtering >the huge amount of news, announcements and products and services >that this market produces, but in figuring out what emerging trends >mean for you before your competitors do. > >Subscribe online today at >www.Release1-0.com and join the other >industry leaders who stay ahead of the curve with an annual >subscription to Release 1.0. For only $795 you will get: > >* 11 monthly issues, >* a Release 1.0 binder in which to file them, >* the PC Forum 2000 transcript (a $300 value), and >* a FREE special-edition Release 1.0 baseball cap. > >Kevin and I fill Release 1.0 with insights on the latest >technologies and the companies that are forging our future. For 15 >years, we've consistently nailed the big ideas and big trends before >they've become the vogue. Isn't it time you joined such industry >leaders as John Doerr, Mary Meeker, Ray Ozzie, Marc Andreessen, >Michael Dell, Jim Barksdale, Ann Winblad, Martin Nisenholtz, Eric >Schmidt and Bill Joy as a Release 1.0 subscriber? > >Visit www.Release1-0.com now and complete >the online subscription form. Be sure to use 900ER1 as your personal >marketing code to get this great offer. > >**Sign up before November 15 and get your PC Forum 2001 invitation >with your November issue.** > >At Release 1.0, we will continue to lead the conversation and to >keep it lively. I hope you ll join us. What we write about now will >start to matter sooner than you think! > >Sincerely yours, > >Esther Dyson >Editor-in-Chief, Release 1.0 > >P.S. If you would prefer not to receive any further information >about EDventure's activities, please let Joanna >(joanna at edventure.com) in my office >know and we will be sure to remove you from our list. -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Fri Oct 27 17:36:19 2000 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 19:36:19 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: <200010280026.e9S0QEZ07418@octarine.itsc.adfa.edu.au> Message-ID: So, everybody's third choice gets elected, or they take turns holding the office, or what? Weighted voting can work for corporate directors or other committees, but for a chief executive? Even the electoral college sounds better. MacN On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, BENHAM TIMOTHY JAMES wrote: > > That's simply a result of the dim-bulb "first past the post" voting system > that the US (and apparently you) endure. In countries with electorates that > are expected to be able to count past 1 (eg Australia) they have > preferential voting and you can express your preferences from 1 to N > (the number of candidates). > > This allows you to express your preference for libertarian drug-taking > pornographers and still have an equal impact on the outcome. > > Tim > > From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 27 19:45:09 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 19:45:09 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Dealing with Spam from Esther Dyson In-Reply-To: References: <20001027185024997.ABI476@gateway.edventure.com@[198.143.31.164]> Message-ID: At 10:19 PM -0400 10/27/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >At 6:47 PM -0700 on 10/27/00, Tim May wrote: > > >> So, Esther Dyson, whom I have never corresponded with, is spamming me >> with this crap. > >Me too. > >Maybe her people just learned about the majordomo "who" command... > >Cheers, >RAH >Clueless is as, etc... You didn't copy her (or the droids who read her mail for her) on your reply. The whole point of my posting my reply to her spam to the Cypherpunks list was to, hopefully, fill her box with what it needs to be filled with. She moralizes about spam and then spams. Fucking twit. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 27 19:51:25 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 19:51:25 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 10:38 PM -0400 10/27/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >At 5:50 PM -0700 on 10/27/00, Tim May tits a tat or two, in detail...: > > >>>When privacy costs more than no privacy, we have no privacy. >>> >>>Sad, but true. >> >> Oh? >> >> "When curtains over windows cost more than no curtains over windows, >> we have no curtains." >> >> "When locks on doors cost more than no locks on doors, we have no >> locks on doors." > > > >Mostly, when I tossed that one off, I was remembering arguments around here >-- more than once -- that anonymity, particularly in anonymous >transactions, will *always* cost more than non-anonymous ones. Something I >dispute rather heatedly, of course, or I wouldn't be spending so much >money, or working so hard, these days to prove otherwise... But then you are tilting at windmills, as no one who is reputable has made such a claim, that anonymity will always cost more than non-anonymity. Sometimes anonymyity costs something. Sometimes traceability (_non_anonymity) has certain benefits worth trading for. Sometimes security costs a lot, sometimes not so much, sometimes almost nothing. In general, these tradeoffs cannot be boiled down to a simple relationship of "anonymity costs more than nonanonymity." As with the lock example, a lock almost always costs more than no lock. But the costs of having no lock may be much higher. Things should not be reduced to simplicities. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 27 19:53:13 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 19:53:13 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Oh Gawd, Tim May... In-Reply-To: <200010280244.WAA14614@www4.aa.psiweb.com> References: <200010280244.WAA14614@www4.aa.psiweb.com> Message-ID: At 10:44 PM -0400 10/27/00, George at Orwellian.Org wrote: >Tim May just spammed the list with a message >from Esther Dyson, as if asking for help. > >Tim May needs killing. Perhaps so. Though two can play your game. I think I have a very good idea who you are. The cool think is that you won't even hear the crack of the rifle shot... --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From nobody at hotmail.com Fri Oct 27 13:07:35 2000 From: nobody at hotmail.com (nobody at hotmail.com) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:07:35 GMT Subject: CDR: AT LAST!!!! BULK-FRIENDLY WEB HOSTING Message-ID: I found this incredible service called HOSTING MATTERS. Hosting Matters is a fantastic way to host adult and bulk email-friendly sites with NO WORRIES about getting shut down as they are only out to try and make money. The service is VERY CHEAP and I reccomend it for the following types of sites: - Bulk emailing - Adult content & services - Controversial/Hate sites As far as I know, they have NEVER shut down above-mentioned types of sites! For more info contact them on the web site below. http://www.hostmatters.com or an alternative URL: http://www.hostingmatters.com Contact sales at hostmatters.com or call TOLL-FREE on 1-877-381-1083 if you have any questions. From Annette at Hosting.Matters Fri Oct 27 13:23:50 2000 From: Annette at Hosting.Matters (Annette at Hosting.Matters) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:23:50 GMT Subject: CDR: Test Message-ID: Life is like a box of chocolates; except for spammers who should be killed. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Fri Oct 27 20:32:04 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:32:04 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: References: <200010280026.e9S0QEZ07418@octarine.itsc.adfa.edu.au> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001027203204.009ae660@idiom.com> That was the nice thing about Ross Perot. If he'd gotten elected, he'd have caused serious chaos in Washington (even though he was basically just another Republicrat), and the worst case is the Second Amendment said we could shoot him if he got too crazy. Unfortunately, he wouldn't let go of the Reform Party, preferring to give the party to the Transcendental Meditation cult if it wasn't going to be run by the Ross Perot personality cult, and now Buchanan has a certain risk of coming out behind the Libertarians :-) (Probably won't happen, since the LP hasn't done enough successful publicity to get mentioned in the media's "oh, yeah, there's also Nader and Buchanan" afterthoughts, but it'd be nice.) At 07:36 PM 10/27/00 -0500, Mac Norton wrote: >So, everybody's third choice gets elected, or they take turns >holding the office, or what? Weighted voting can work for >corporate directors or other committees, but for a chief >executive? Even the electoral college sounds better. >MacN > >On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, BENHAM TIMOTHY JAMES wrote: >> >> That's simply a result of the dim-bulb "first past the post" voting system >> that the US (and apparently you) endure. In countries with electorates that >> are expected to be able to count past 1 (eg Australia) they have >> preferential voting and you can express your preferences from 1 to N >> (the number of candidates). >> >> This allows you to express your preference for libertarian drug-taking >> pornographers and still have an equal impact on the outcome. >> >> Tim >> >> > > > > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From billp at nmol.com Fri Oct 27 19:38:11 2000 From: billp at nmol.com (billp at nmol.com) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:38:11 -0600 Subject: CDR: more wild things Message-ID: <39FA3C12.C10E1321@nmol.com> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/8327/load1.html From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 27 20:40:51 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:40:51 -0700 Subject: CDR: Dealing with Spam from Esther Dyson Message-ID: By the way, a few minutes with Google turned up other instances of Esther Dyson's spamming. Here's just one such URL, along with the opening paragraphs: http://channel.nytimes.com/1998/03/28/technology/28dyson.html March 28, 1998 I Got Spammed by Esther Dyson: Release, the Old-Fashioned Way By LISA NAPOLI ecently, I got a note from the publisher of Release 1.0, the venerable newsletter put out by the venerable (and mythic) godmother of all things digital, Esther Dyson. It wasn't a casual e-mail. It wasn't a letter asking me to write for the newsletter. It wasn't even a personal note asking me to have lunch, or attend her annual conference (which took place this week in Tucson, where, for the first time, non-Release subscribers were permitted to attend.) The note was plain old-fashioned snail mail spam, asking me to fork over nearly 700 bucks for a subscription. Dear Lisa, Esther Dyson and Jerry Michalski believe that someone who's achieved your stature in our industry should be part of the Release 1.0 family. That's why they've suggested I write this letter to you. Stature? How did they measure that? Did Jerry Michalski remember sitting at the same table with me at a conference luncheon once? Did Esther ever read my now deceased column, Hyperwocky? Did some computer notice my name on all those mailing lists? From ulf at fitug.de Fri Oct 27 18:21:23 2000 From: ulf at fitug.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ulf_M=F6ller?=) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:21:23 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Dealing with Spam from Esther Dyson In-Reply-To: ; from rah@shipwright.com on Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:40:07PM -0400 References: <20001027185024997.ABI476@gateway.edventure.com@[198.143.31.164]> Message-ID: <20001027212123.A466@rho.invalid> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:40:07PM -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > At 7:45 PM -0700 on 10/27/00, Tim May wrote: > > > > You didn't copy her (or the droids who read her mail for her) on your reply. > > Actually, I did, but I accidently used the bcc field, in mis-copying same. I think her real address is . From tcmay at got.net Fri Oct 27 18:25:47 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:25:47 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Mac created the modern Internet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 12:58 AM -0400 10/27/00, Peter Tonoli wrote: > >I'm suprised with the amount of Mac users here, that no-one's mentioned >BBS systems such as 'firstclass'. Firstclass was the first GUI based >terminal application I ever used - it allowed you to call BBS'es while >retaining an interface similar to the finder - at a reasonable speed too. >Downloading files was simly a click and a drag away. I used FirstClass sometime around 1989-90, maybe '88. I had a service called "PC-Pursuit" which allowed me to dial-in to my ISP at no charge. However, dialing-in to bulletin boards was not very interesting compared to using Usenet, then mailing lists and gopher and archie. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From baptista at pccf.net Fri Oct 27 18:32:47 2000 From: baptista at pccf.net (!Dr. Joe Baptista) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:32:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Dealing with Spam from Esther Dyson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I missed this. Can you or anyone please forward to me the spam Ester sent you. I know the old crow and i'm sure there are some people on domain policy who would love to read her spam. regards joe On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > At 6:47 PM -0700 on 10/27/00, Tim May wrote: > > > > So, Esther Dyson, whom I have never corresponded with, is spamming me > > with this crap. > > Me too. > > Maybe her people just learned about the majordomo "who" command... > > Cheers, > RAH > Clueless is as, etc... > -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster From k-elliott at wiu.edu Fri Oct 27 19:46:00 2000 From: k-elliott at wiu.edu (Kevin Elliott) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:46:00 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: <39F9D9BE.1F3E20EF@sunder.net> References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> <20001025092454.C3521@positron.mit.edu> <39F9D9BE.1F3E20EF@sunder.net> Message-ID: At 15:38 -0400 10/27/00, sunder wrote: >"Riad S. Wahby" wrote: > > >> Ah, but you are forgetting. It was the power from humans "combined >> with a form of fusion." Everything, when combined with a form of >> fusion, makes a good movie energy source. That really amused me as well. After all, if you've got fusion why bother with the human- cut out the middle man as it were... Somthing along the lines of "they needed substantial neural net capacity for their to improve their RC-5 key rate" would have been more reasonable. -- "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Justice William O. Douglas ____________________________________________________________________ Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott ICQ#23758827 From k-elliott at wiu.edu Fri Oct 27 19:53:39 2000 From: k-elliott at wiu.edu (Kevin Elliott) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:53:39 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Insurance: My Last Post In-Reply-To: <39F9D77D.E8A481A8@sunder.net> References: <20001024235818.I3255@well.com> <39F9D77D.E8A481A8@sunder.net> Message-ID: At 15:29 -0400 10/27/00, sunder wrote: >Your conclusion is at odds with your views. > >Based one 1, it is surprising that you're not advocating humanicide. >Based on 2, it is surprising that you're not advocating being Amish So Nathan, are you Amish? It would explain a lot... I'm not sure you justify using email but to each his own... >Based on 3, it is surprising that you don't support dictatorships. > >Not surprisingly, views 1,2,3 put into political power provide nothing >less than oppression. -- "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Justice William O. Douglas ____________________________________________________________________ Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott ICQ#23758827 From rah at shipwright.com Fri Oct 27 19:19:49 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 22:19:49 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Dealing with Spam from Esther Dyson In-Reply-To: References: <20001027185024997.ABI476@gateway.edventure.com@[198.143.31.164]> Message-ID: At 6:47 PM -0700 on 10/27/00, Tim May wrote: > So, Esther Dyson, whom I have never corresponded with, is spamming me > with this crap. Me too. Maybe her people just learned about the majordomo "who" command... Cheers, RAH Clueless is as, etc... -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From rah at shipwright.com Fri Oct 27 19:38:44 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 22:38:44 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 5:50 PM -0700 on 10/27/00, Tim May tits a tat or two, in detail...: >>When privacy costs more than no privacy, we have no privacy. >> >>Sad, but true. > > Oh? > > "When curtains over windows cost more than no curtains over windows, > we have no curtains." > > "When locks on doors cost more than no locks on doors, we have no > locks on doors." Mostly, when I tossed that one off, I was remembering arguments around here -- more than once -- that anonymity, particularly in anonymous transactions, will *always* cost more than non-anonymous ones. Something I dispute rather heatedly, of course, or I wouldn't be spending so much money, or working so hard, these days to prove otherwise... Which, unfortunately for the level of discourse around here, was my point, and I apologize if my brevity caused confusion. So, to put it another way, when privacy is *cheaper*, on a risk adjusted basis, than we'll have privacy, and not much until then. I expect most of us would agree to that, if they thought about it enough. The "risk adjusted" bit is, of course, the most important one, as noted quite comprehensively, in the above response to a fairly simple, albeit catchy, observation. When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong. --R. Buckminster Fuller Sometimes, the "easy" answer is, in fact, the right one. More to the point, it seems to me that complication is usually the handmaiden of misapprehension. There. *That* should stir things up a bit... Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From George at Orwellian.Org Fri Oct 27 19:44:34 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 22:44:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Oh Gawd, Tim May... Message-ID: <200010280244.WAA14614@www4.aa.psiweb.com> Tim May just spammed the list with a message from Esther Dyson, as if asking for help. Tim May needs killing. From baptista at pccf.net Fri Oct 27 20:03:34 2000 From: baptista at pccf.net (Joe Baptista) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 23:03:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Dealing with Spam from Esther Dyson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Tim - you have to understand that Esther is trying to remain relevant in a world that increasingly sees her as last years meat rack. Ester knowns me, in fact she spent most of her last trip to Cairo trying to convence lawyers that I should be sued for something. She blames me for scaring off president Mubarak from the ICANN show. The woman is unfortunately paranoid and suffers from persecution dementia. Someday someone may wright a comedy on the lady, I consider it more tragedy. I think Ester would of been happier in life being a common housewife - or dominatrix. Unfortunately she was born into the Dyson clan and as a result has always been pushed to excell. But that has not been the case. On a technological front she is all show - no substance. And that show started early in life. She herself can confirm that her schooling at harvard was for no other purpose then socialization. I think meeting the right people was her angle for attendance. I understand her venture capital positions have mainly failed, her chairmanship of ICANN has been an absolute disaster. She's being disposed as the chair this november - that does not mean ICANN will be a better place - just less blond. She's not a blond you know - but she certainly has disposition of one. But alas Tim - I like her. I think she's sexy in her own special way. Ol gals ya know have some of the softtest skin ;-) Joe On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > > By the way, a few minutes with Google turned up other instances of > Esther Dyson's spamming. > > Here's just one such URL, along with the opening paragraphs: > > http://channel.nytimes.com/1998/03/28/technology/28dyson.html > > March 28, 1998 > > I Got Spammed by Esther Dyson: > Release, the Old-Fashioned Way > > By LISA NAPOLI > ecently, I got a note from the publisher of Release 1.0, the > venerable newsletter put out by the venerable (and mythic) godmother > of all things digital, Esther Dyson. > > It wasn't a casual e-mail. It wasn't a letter asking me to write for > the newsletter. It wasn't even a personal note asking me to have > lunch, or attend her annual conference (which took place this week in > Tucson, where, for the first time, non-Release subscribers were > permitted to attend.) > > The note was plain old-fashioned snail mail spam, asking me to fork > over nearly 700 bucks for a subscription. > > Dear Lisa, > > Esther Dyson and Jerry Michalski believe that someone who's achieved > your stature in our industry should be part of the Release 1.0 > family. That's why they've suggested I write this letter to you. > > > Stature? How did they measure that? Did Jerry Michalski remember > sitting at the same table with me at a conference luncheon once? Did > Esther ever read my now deceased column, Hyperwocky? Did some > computer notice my name on all those mailing lists? > -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697 From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 27 13:30:26 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 23:30:26 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: <20001027111608.K18991@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Eric Murray wrote: >Why should I vote for someone who doesn't stand for what I beleive >in just because the media says that they're "not electable"? >That's the kind of loser attitude that's gotten us a contest >that'll assuredly elect either an idiot (Bush) or a fool (Gore). >Unfortunately Americans are more interested in voting for a "winner" >than they are in voting their concious. That's commendable idealism, but in most modern countries the electorial process is practically guaranteed - and in fact mostly designed - to in essence round out dissent. The fact that voting for the loser implies casting your vote for nothing, *even in matters which had nothing to do with the winner being elected*, simply means that there is absolutely no point in voting for someone who cannot win. It's a nasty side effect of the present implementation of democracy based on a mix of representative democracy, political parties, the relative voting system (dunno if you guys have this) and what have you. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Fri Oct 27 13:33:03 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 23:33:03 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Re: Re: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes cypherpunk?) In-Reply-To: <39F9D9BE.1F3E20EF@sunder.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, sunder wrote: >Why would they need a world simulator if all they wanted was bioenergy they >could just keep all the drones in a coma... :) It would have made rather a boring spectacle? >Yes, your spaceship being powered by goat porno is far more believable. :^) And far more suiting for theatre distribution. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From w_alin001 at hotmail.com Fri Oct 27 16:34:16 2000 From: w_alin001 at hotmail.com (Alin Werner) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 23:34:16 GMT Subject: No subject Message-ID: Dear Sir, For the begineing please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Werner Alin. I am a graduate student who has started a small company along with four others.We are only four but with a very good organization we can keep a high standard. It all started with a simple observation: most of the computer system produceing companies didn't made personalised computers. They only sell already made systems. So we found out that a segment of the computer system market is almost uncovered. As you might know all the Romanian market is still under developement. Despite the fact that we have found a big buisness oportunity we have encontered a problem. Since almost all the resellers here produce computer systems the prices for computer hardware are very high. Our only solution is to look for resellers ousite Romania. We have established only a few contacts but with encoureging results. As you might know, in the past there have been some companies in Romania who had took advantage of the helping hand that foreign companies gave them, but I can asure you that all has ended in the past. A hard legislation and the strong hand of the authorties ended the fraud in the computer industry. The fact that we represent the new generation differentiates us from thouse companies. As I said earlier we have established a few contacts outside Romania but we think that there is room for better. Due to the fact we do not pay taxes for computer hardware imports all that interests us is the price of the components and the cost of shipping. We usualy chouse for shipping fast couriers like UPS, DHL, FedEx. The most used payment methos are wire transfer but we can use as a fast payment methoh credit cards. If you think that we can aquire from you computer hardware components please send us a catalog or a price list. We will compare your prices with the prices of our other distributioners and if your price is better we will choose to buy from you the computer hardware that we need for our systems. In our quest for best prices we are now looking on the internet. We haven't yet bought a domain becaouse we still are evaluating the opportunities that the internet gives us, but you can find a site about us, still under developent, at : romcomp.angelfire.com. If you have any sugestions, advises about our site or about haw to establishe conections with foreign trades please contact me. I hope my e-mail didn't bored you and I expect ypur answer. Werner Anlin Director Manager of RomComp P.S. Please forgive any spelling errors _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. From rah at shipwright.com Fri Oct 27 20:40:07 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 23:40:07 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Dealing with Spam from Esther Dyson In-Reply-To: References: <20001027185024997.ABI476@gateway.edventure.com@[198.143.31.164]> Message-ID: At 7:45 PM -0700 on 10/27/00, Tim May wrote: > You didn't copy her (or the droids who read her mail for her) on your reply. Actually, I did, but I accidently used the bcc field, in mis-copying same. Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From rah at shipwright.com Fri Oct 27 20:42:56 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 23:42:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 7:51 PM -0700 on 10/27/00, Tim May wrote: > But then you are tilting at windmills, as no one who is reputable has > made such a claim, that anonymity will always cost more than > non-anonymity. Actually, Wei Dei, and others of reputation, used to say it here quite frequently... And, no, I don't think I tilt at windmills anymore than than the average cypherpunk. Finally, I think we're both saying the same thing, and you're the one arguing the rather distinctionless difference. viz, At 10:38 PM -0400 10/27/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > So, to put it another way, when privacy is *cheaper*, on a risk adjusted > basis, than we'll have privacy, and not much until then. > > I expect most of us would agree to that, if they thought about it enough. > > The "risk adjusted" bit is, of course, the most important one, as noted > quite comprehensively, in the above response to a fairly simple, albeit > catchy, observation. ...which you seem to have conveniently ignored seemingly to perpetuate the discussion, versus At 7:51 PM -0700 10/27/00, Tim May wrote: > As with the lock example, a lock almost always costs more than no > lock. But the costs of having no lock may be much higher. The cost of anything is the foregone alternative? Nawwwwww... Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From jimdbell at home.com Fri Oct 27 23:47:14 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 23:47:14 -0700 Subject: CDR: Fw: CIA in Oregon, Intelink Message-ID: <002701c040aa$e89d1300$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> > > Would anyone in the Oregon area know about > > a CIA organization acronymed ISTAC? > > > > Here's the NIC entry, which includes a CIA rep > > in Bend, OR. Note that the other CIA rep used > > only a last name initial. > > > > Designated Agency Rep, Requester, Sr. Registration > Official: > > Mueller, Deforest X. (DXM2) > > (541) 385-6836 > > MUELLER at BENDNET.COM > > Record last updated on 13-Apr-99. > > Mueller, Deforest X. (DXM2) > > cia > > 63350 majestic loop > > bend, OR 97701 > > (541) 385-6836 > > MUELLER at BENDNET.COM > > Here is a list of all driver's licenses in Oregon in 1996 that contain > "DEFOREST". Notice the last entry: > > "MC CAULEY, DALE DEFOREST","3314 SE > TAYLOR","","PORTLAND","OR",26,97214,15,12,24,"M",600,180,"A","0199503" > "MC FARLAND, DAVID DEFOREST","36003 E CROWN PT > HWY","","CORBETT","OR",26,97019,42,3,21,"M",510,230,"","0738491" > "MCFARLAND, DANIEL DEFOREST","36003 E CROWN POINT > HWY","","CORBETT","OR",26,97019,75,12,18,"M",511,150,"A","5323237" > "MILBURN, DONALD DEFOREST","653 SMITH ROCK > WAY","","TERREBONNE","OR",9,97760,59,6,19,"M",601,190,"","2256445" > "MUELLER, SCOTT DEFOREST","1823 GARNET PL WA","PO BOX > 486","CHELAN","WA",60,98816,50,7,10,"M",600,174,"","2005706" > > Here is a car for "Scott Deforest Mueller", registered in Oregon but with > the Chelan, Washington, address. > ---------- s.txt > "SAL903","1","CHEV","SV2","VA","1GBEG25H5G7185373","9535286527",86,1,97,9,16 > ,"MUELLER, SCOTT DEFOREST",50,7,10,2005706,"MUELLER, KIM > MARIE",59,11,8,3772314,"1823 GARNET PL WA","PO BOX > 486","CHELAN","WA",98816,60,"",1,95,12,18,0,0,"","","","","","","",0 Notice the DOB's: 7/10/1959 for Scott Mueller, 11/8/1959 for Kim Mueller > > And here is the data from 1997 license plates. > SAL903 1CHEV VA1GBEG25H5G7185373 9535286527861990916MUELLER, SCOTT > DEFOREST MUELLER, KIM MARIE 20830 DIONE WAY > BENDPO BOX 486 CHELAN WA9881660 > > I'll look up the information for "Kim Marie Mueller" later on today. > Jim Bell Sorry about the extra delay. Very interesting results for year 2000. Looks like the Muellers got a new Chevy, from SAL903 to the current VCV976 "VCV976","1","CHEV","SV2","VA","1GBEG25K3SF156657","9830708131",1995,1,2000, 8,11,"MUELLER, DEFOREST SCOTT",0,0,0,9638546,"",0,0,0,0,"20830 DIONE WAY","","BEND","OR",97701,9,"",2,1999,2,11,0,0,"","BANK OF THE CASCADES","","2542 N HIGHWAY 97 RDMD","PO BOX 1236","REDMOND","OR",97756,0 Here's an interesting addition. I ran a year 2000 license plate search for all Oregon plates registered to 20830 Dione Way, Bend OR, and this popped up as well. "WSN592","1","TOYT","RUN","UT","JT3HN86R3X0197687","9829222474",1999,1,2000, 10,13,"ASHE, JOHN R",1953,4,2,6699949,"ASHE, ANNA E",1960,1,14,6699973,"20830 DIONE WAY","","BEND","OR",97701,9,"",1,1999,2,10,0,0,"","","","","","","",0,0 Interestingly enough, GO.COM lists a John Ashe at 8 Todd Ln, Bend, OR, 97707, phone number 541-593-2784 More later Jim Bell From jimdbell at home.com Sat Oct 28 00:44:33 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 00:44:33 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: CIA in Oregon, Intelink References: <002701c040aa$e89d1300$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <003201c040b2$ea3879e0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> > > > Would anyone in the Oregon area know about > > > a CIA organization acronymed ISTAC? [stuff deleted] > > > Mueller, Deforest X. (DXM2) > > > (541) 385-6836 > > > MUELLER at BENDNET.COM > > > Record last updated on 13-Apr-99. > > > Mueller, Deforest X. (DXM2) > > > cia > > > 63350 majestic loop > > > bend, OR 97701 > > > (541) 385-6836 > > > MUELLER at BENDNET.COM > > > > Here is a list of all driver's licenses in Oregon in 1996 that contain > > "DEFOREST". Notice the last entry: [stuff deleted] > > "MUELLER, SCOTT DEFOREST","1823 GARNET PL WA","PO BOX > > 486","CHELAN","WA",60,98816,50,7,10,"M",600,174,"","2005706" > > > > Here is a car for "Scott Deforest Mueller", registered in Oregon but with > > the Chelan, Washington, address. > "SAL903","1","CHEV","SV2","VA","1GBEG25H5G7185373","9535286527",86,1,97,9,16 > > ,"MUELLER, SCOTT DEFOREST",50,7,10,2005706,"MUELLER, KIM > > MARIE",59,11,8,3772314,"1823 GARNET PL WA","PO BOX > > 486","CHELAN","WA",98816,60,"",1,95,12,18,0,0,"","","","","","","",0 > > Notice the DOB's: 7/10/1959 for Scott Mueller, 11/8/1959 for Kim Mueller > > > > And here is the data from 1997 license plates. > > SAL903 1CHEV VA1GBEG25H5G7185373 9535286527861990916MUELLER, SCOTT > > DEFOREST MUELLER, KIM MARIE 20830 DIONE WAY > > BENDPO BOX 486 CHELAN WA9881660 > Sorry about the extra delay. Very interesting results for year 2000. Looks > like the Muellers got a new Chevy, from SAL903 to the current VCV976 > > "VCV976","1","CHEV","SV2","VA","1GBEG25K3SF156657","9830708131",1995,1,2000, > 8,11,"MUELLER, DEFOREST SCOTT",0,0,0,9638546,"",0,0,0,0,"20830 DIONE > WAY","","BEND","OR",97701,9,"",2,1999,2,11,0,0,"","BANK OF THE > CASCADES","","2542 N HIGHWAY 97 RDMD","PO BOX > 1236","REDMOND","OR",97756,0 > > > Here's an interesting addition. I ran a year 2000 license plate search for > all Oregon plates registered to 20830 Dione Way, Bend OR, and this popped up > as well. > > "WSN592","1","TOYT","RUN","UT","JT3HN86R3X0197687","9829222474",1999,1,2000, > 10,13,"ASHE, JOHN R",1953,4,2,6699949,"ASHE, ANNA > E",1960,1,14,6699973,"20830 DIONE > WAY","","BEND","OR",97701,9,"",1,1999,2,10,0,0,"","","","","","","",0,0 Notice the DOB for John is 4/2/1953, Anna's is 1/14/1960. > Interestingly enough, GO.COM lists a John Ashe at 8 Todd Ln, Bend, OR, > 97707, phone number 541-593-2784 Turns out that there is no "John Ashe" nor "Anna Ashe" in either the year 2000 nor year 1996 Oregon DMV databases. They are probably just aliases for the Muellers. From declan at well.com Fri Oct 27 23:32:43 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 02:32:43 -0400 Subject: CDR: Clinton signs executive order on workers & new economy Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001028023228.01b834a0@mail.well.com> THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary _______________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release October 27, 2000 STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT Today, I am pleased to sign an Executive Order creating a Commission on Workers, Communities, and Economic Change in the New Economy. I would like to thank Representative Ken Bentsen for his leadership in helping workers and communities adapt to the new economy and for working with my Administration to form this Commission. International trade, technology, globalization, and the changing nature of work present extraordinary new opportunities for Americans, but can also create real disruptions for American workers and communities. Vice President Gore and I have worked hard to empower workers and communities to take advantage of the many opportunities in this new economy, but there is still more we can do. This Commission will undertake a careful examination of the effectiveness of existing federal programs to help workers and communities adjust to economic change, and will identify the best practices of employers, communities, and public-private partnerships that have responded successfully to economic dislocations. The commission?s report, due next year, will help communities, employers, and workers respond to and benefit from these changes in our economy. 30-30-30 From petro at bounty.org Sat Oct 28 04:35:08 2000 From: petro at bounty.org (petro) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 04:35:08 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >At 4:37 PM -0400 10/26/00, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >>At 11:59 AM -0700 on 10/26/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: >> >> >>> Here is what I envision, at a cost of something like $10/month. >> >>Go find the original archived web page for c2.net? >> >>When privacy costs more than no privacy, we have no privacy. >> >>Sad, but true. > >Oh? > >"When curtains over windows cost more than no curtains over windows, >we have no curtains." > >"When locks on doors cost more than no locks on doors, we have no >locks on doors." Locks on doors are (in most areas) much cheaper than replacing the contents of ones home. It is quite possible that Sameer was just a little early with C2.net, between higher overhead and a smaller/less mature (in terms of experience) market it might be possible that a small business could be started today that could be self sustaining. -- A quote from Petro's Archives: ********************************************** "We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." --Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women s Studies, Bowling Green State University From jya at pipeline.com Sat Oct 28 03:27:31 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 06:27:31 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: CIA in Oregon, Intelink Message-ID: Anonymous writes that there is a CIA facility in Bend, Oregon, called CPIC/West, balancing one in Miami called CPIC/Miami. FAS offers a description of Miami which references Bend: http://www.fas.org/irp/facility/cia_miami.htm And to possibly flesh out the operations run out of the Bend base, Anon points to a statement which alleges black and criminal government doings in which Bend is mentioned: http://www.dcia.com/evergree.html Nothing in these accounts about CIA's ISTAC. Informative data-mining, A P, but to avoid nailing the innocent, double check the Mueller names and aliases, for the person listed on the NIC.gov records has a different middle initial from the Mueller you're dogging. That name might be deception, no doubt, but it could also be a stolen name and identity, even address, from a real person who is unaware. If stolen, or fictional, that might explain why the personal info was provided in the clear at NIC. Still, there may be no reason to conceal anything about the Bend faciltiy or Mr. Mueller's participation. Perhaps an email to Mr. Mueller would be the way to find out, so this will be cc'd to him (and Dan S at ISTAC) for a response. Dear Mr. Mueller and Mr. S, Would you please confirm that there is a CIA facility in Bend, OR, and that the terms CPIC/West and ISTAC are applicable to it? Also, could you clarify whether CIA's ISTAC is related to the ISTAC of the Bureau of Export Administration? Thanks very much, John Young 212-873-8700 --- It turns out mail to dan at istac.gov refused to go from here, so Dan S is safely SCIF. From jya at pipeline.com Sat Oct 28 03:52:35 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 06:52:35 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: CIA in Oregon, Intelink In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200010281105.HAA30873@smtp6.mindspring.com> Mail to mueller at bendnet.com bounced. Rather a bounce message was returned from bendnet.com, and surely cloaks delivery of the message. And the cc to dan at istac.gov would not even leave this mailer. So it seemed. But the window glass shivered. Spookery is awesome. From md98-osa at nada.kth.se Sat Oct 28 05:17:38 2000 From: md98-osa at nada.kth.se (Oskar Sandberg) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 08:17:38 -0400 Subject: CDR: Gort in granny-shades (was Re: Al Gore goes In-Reply-To: ; from k-elliott@wiu.edu on Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 10:48:35PM -0400 References: <001601c03deb$be8833e0$1301a8c0@rms.acroloop.com> <39F9D9BE.1F3E20EF@sunder.net> Message-ID: <20001028142009.E751@hobbex.localdomain> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 10:48:35PM -0400, Kevin Elliott wrote: > At 15:38 -0400 10/27/00, sunder wrote: > >"Riad S. Wahby" wrote: > > > > > >> Ah, but you are forgetting. It was the power from humans "combined > >> with a form of fusion." Everything, when combined with a form of > >> fusion, makes a good movie energy source. > > That really amused me as well. After all, if you've got fusion why > bother with the human- cut out the middle man as it were... Somthing > along the lines of "they needed substantial neural net capacity for > their to improve their RC-5 key rate" would have been more reasonable. Maybe they really were being used as batteries, for portability. After all, it is beginning to seem obvious that electronics will never produce a battery that can power a laptop for more than like 2 minutes - even if the AI had fixed fusion stations, they may need to load up a couple of humans whenever they wanted to go walkabout (or sentinelling or whatever). "The new Human-Smasher toy with 200 easily breakable features - every little AIlings dream! (2 AA humans required and sold seperately.)" > -- > > "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both > instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly > unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware > of change in the air--however slight--lest we become unwitting > victims of the darkness." > -- Justice William O. Douglas > ____________________________________________________________________ > Kevin "The Cubbie" Elliott > ICQ#23758827 > > -- 'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?' 'Here,' Montag touched his head. 'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded. Oskar Sandberg md98-osa at nada.kth.se From info0809 at myered.com Sat Oct 28 06:46:44 2000 From: info0809 at myered.com (info0809 at myered.com) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 08:46:44 -0500 Subject: CDR: Enjoy the ride!!!!!!! Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 1277 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcmay at got.net Sat Oct 28 09:31:43 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 09:31:43 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> References: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: At 11:19 AM -0500 10/28/00, Igor Chudov wrote: >I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have >a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy >in order to avoid seeing my banners. > >I do not want to serve such users at all and I do not want them to use >my bandwidth. > >Is there any way to detect a user of Junkbusters in a CGI/mod_perl script? Your presumably-misspelled subject line, "Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users," seems ironically appropriate. Though some prefer the spelling "Hoe." As for finding ways to see who is avoiding looking at yoiur advertisements, most of the ad filtering is done at the recipient's machine, right? Gonna be hard for you to reach into their machines to see if they're running ad busters in a local script. As for the ads themselves, who ever looks at them? The doc com ad stream model has been collapsing since its inception...only in the last six months has the message gotten nearer to the dinosaur's brain. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Sat Oct 28 09:33:49 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 09:33:49 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Stealth Mass Mailer, 10 Million E-Addresses & More.. 17999 In-Reply-To: <068b95516161ca0WLGPROXY1@wlgsmtp.AdvantageGroup.co.nz> References: <068b95516161ca0WLGPROXY1@wlgsmtp.AdvantageGroup.co.nz> Message-ID: At 9:26 AM -0700 10/29/00, xs24 at netease.com wrote: >Email advertising WORKS! >Email Advertise your product or website to millions for only $99. > >For $99.00 you will receive the Stealth Mass Mailer Software, >List Manager, Over 10 million email addresses, and as a free bonus, >a Bulletproof mail server to send your mail through. >NEVER, lose your ISP service again. "As used by Esther Dyson." --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From bear at sonic.net Sat Oct 28 11:03:02 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 11:03:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Nyms and reputations. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: >Mostly, when I tossed that one off, I was remembering arguments around here >-- more than once -- that anonymity, particularly in anonymous >transactions, will *always* cost more than non-anonymous ones. Something I >dispute rather heatedly, of course, or I wouldn't be spending so much >money, or working so hard, these days to prove otherwise... I've been thinking pretty much the same thing lately. When you do business with someone, you want to know his/her True Name, so that if they 'defect' (ie, take your money on a long trip to the bahamas without delivering the goods, or take your goods on a long trip to the bahamas without giving you the promised money) you can drag their asses into court and get what they promised you. Clearly, there is no such recourse when dealing with a Nym. And the hellish thing about Nyms is, they don't cost anything. If the guy (or gal) steals from you using a Nym, you can spread the word about that nym and trash its reputation. But they don't have to care, because by this time they'll be using another nym. With Nyms, somebody who has ripped off a hundred people for a million dollars each is indistinguishable from someone who's just new to the system. While Nyms have zero cost, they will never simultaneously be in use and have negative reputation. It is also very hard to get a positive reputation with a nym; (switching to didactic mode). Either you are doing a legal business or an illegal business. If you are doing a Legal business: A customer can go to either a nym or a true name. If a customer goes to a nym, there is no legal recourse, but if a customer goes to a true name, there is legal recourse. Therefore it is clearly better for the customer to go to a true name. If you are doing an illegal business: You either do, or do not, create a "reference" as a result of the transaction. If no reference is created, no reputation can be gained. QED. If a reference is created, then it either does, or does not, identify the principals and the deal consummated. If the reference identifies the principals and the deal then it can also be used as conclusive proof in court against them if the owner of either nym is ever discovered. And this is the best kind of "digital reputation" I can find in this system. It will be significant to someone else who has dealt with one of the principals as an introduction to the other, but cannot really be useful beyond that. If the reference does not identify the principals and the deal consummated, then either it does not identify the principals or it does not identify the deal consummated. If the reference does not identify the principals in the deal, then it can be duplicated at will by anyone who creates a few Nyms and puts them through the paces of a few pretended deals, and is therefore meaningless. If the reference does not identify the deal consummated, then it becomes impossible to make judgements based upon it. -- a cocaine dealer with a million-dollar shipment is hardly going to accept a "reference" which might be based on the purchase or sale of a pocketknife. Such references are also meaningless. Bear From ichudov at Algebra.Com Sat Oct 28 09:19:52 2000 From: ichudov at Algebra.Com (Igor Chudov) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 11:19:52 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users Message-ID: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy in order to avoid seeing my banners. I do not want to serve such users at all and I do not want them to use my bandwidth. Is there any way to detect a user of Junkbusters in a CGI/mod_perl script? Thanks - Igor. From bentj93 at itsc.adfa.edu.au Fri Oct 27 17:26:14 2000 From: bentj93 at itsc.adfa.edu.au (BENHAM TIMOTHY JAMES) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 11:26:14 +1100 (EST) Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: from "Sampo A Syreeni" at Oct 27, 2000 11:30:26 PM Message-ID: <200010280026.e9S0QEZ07418@octarine.itsc.adfa.edu.au> Sampo writes: > On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Eric Murray wrote: > > >Why should I vote for someone who doesn't stand for what I beleive > >in just because the media says that they're "not electable"? > >That's the kind of loser attitude that's gotten us a contest > >that'll assuredly elect either an idiot (Bush) or a fool (Gore). > >Unfortunately Americans are more interested in voting for a "winner" > >than they are in voting their concious. > > That's commendable idealism, but in most modern countries the electorial > process is practically guaranteed - and in fact mostly designed - to in > essence round out dissent. The fact that voting for the loser implies > casting your vote for nothing, *even in matters which had nothing to do > with the winner being elected*, simply means that there is absolutely no That's simply a result of the dim-bulb "first past the post" voting system that the US (and apparently you) endure. In countries with electorates that are expected to be able to count past 1 (eg Australia) they have preferential voting and you can express your preferences from 1 to N (the number of candidates). This allows you to express your preference for libertarian drug-taking pornographers and still have an equal impact on the outcome. Tim From tcmay at got.net Sat Oct 28 11:34:45 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 11:34:45 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <200010281704.MAA30926@manifold.algebra.com> References: <200010281704.MAA30926@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: At 12:04 PM -0500 10/28/00, Igor Chudov wrote: > > > As for finding ways to see who is avoiding looking at yoiur >> advertisements, most of the ad filtering is done at the recipient's >> machine, right? Gonna be hard for you to reach into their machines to >> see if they're running ad busters in a local script. > >This may or may not be true. This all depends on how junkbusters script >works. Perhaps junkbusters filters out all 480x90 images, for instance. In >which case I can place a 480x90 transparent gif at the bottom of my >entrance page, and upon request of such gif I can set something in the >user's cookie that would allow him/her further browsing. A lot of things >are computer detectable. Well, you have it completely within your power to do experiments yourself, right now, at your own site. Visit a site like www.junkbusters.com and download their filters and then apply them against your own site. Everything you need to experiment with blocking their cookie-blocking tools is right there. (I just visited this site, and your own site, www.algebra.com, to see what it is you're so worried about people filtering out. Frankly, your ads were not nearly as obtrusive as some are, e.g., those ads running across the top, the bottom, and on both _sides_. Why you are worried that ads for "Gel Mouse Pads" will get blocked is beyond me...most clueless high school students trying to get your site to do their algebra homework for them will not be bothering with ad-busting proxies and other such filters.) --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From George at Orwellian.Org Sat Oct 28 09:03:27 2000 From: George at Orwellian.Org (George at Orwellian.Org) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 12:03:27 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Oh Gawd, Tim May... Message-ID: <200010281603.MAA03867@www8.aa.psiweb.com> # From: Tim May # To: George at Orwellian.Org, cypherpunks at cyberpass.net Yo, Ding Dong, no need to send it to me twice. # I think I have a very good idea who you are. I should hope so, since I'm not anonymous. Ask Declan or Gilmore if you get stuck. # The cool thing is that you won't even # hear the crack of the rifle shot... No! I insist you terrorize me by shooting my legs first! Oh, I'm hit! Tim May has finally come to kill me! Oh, my other leg! I'll be dead soon! Terror!!! [redacted by Tim May] From ichudov at Algebra.Com Sat Oct 28 10:04:11 2000 From: ichudov at Algebra.Com (Igor Chudov) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 12:04:11 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: from "Tim May" at Oct 28, 2000 09:31:43 AM Message-ID: <200010281704.MAA30926@manifold.algebra.com> Tim May wrote: > > At 11:19 AM -0500 10/28/00, Igor Chudov wrote: > >I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have > >a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy > >in order to avoid seeing my banners. > > > >I do not want to serve such users at all and I do not want them to use > >my bandwidth. > > > >Is there any way to detect a user of Junkbusters in a CGI/mod_perl script? > > Your presumably-misspelled subject line, "Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters > users," seems ironically appropriate. > > Though some prefer the spelling "Hoe." > > As for finding ways to see who is avoiding looking at yoiur > advertisements, most of the ad filtering is done at the recipient's > machine, right? Gonna be hard for you to reach into their machines to > see if they're running ad busters in a local script. This may or may not be true. This all depends on how junkbusters script works. Perhaps junkbusters filters out all 480x90 images, for instance. In which case I can place a 480x90 transparent gif at the bottom of my entrance page, and upon request of such gif I can set something in the user's cookie that would allow him/her further browsing. A lot of things are computer detectable. > As for the ads themselves, who ever looks at them? The doc com ad > stream model has been collapsing since its inception...only in the > last six months has the message gotten nearer to the dinosaur's brain. You are correct, for the most part, but your statement does not apply to all sites. Maybe it is collapsing for companies who hire dozens of programmers to create some trivial nonsensical sites, e.g. drkoop.com. I created my site by myself, with no costs other than my time involved (and I enjoyed doing it anyway, so the true cost is near zero), and banners nicely supplement my income. I am not looking for a multimillion IPO, just looking to make some $$ after all expenses. I have the benefit of a nice name (www.algebra.com), so I do not need to spend any $$ at all to attract visitors. Practically, my site is making money after all expenses (dsl fees etc). One of the most popular features, aside from math help, is "Talk to Splotchy", which is a conversation with an Eliza-like AI program. But unlike Eliza, Spltchy is more like a chatterbox with a lot more personality. Some people even have cybersex with Splotchy. Also, I have a "talk to George W Bush LIVE" section at bush-2000.algebra.com. Basically the same thing but politically educated. - Igor. From maxinux at openpgp.net Sat Oct 28 12:32:33 2000 From: maxinux at openpgp.net (Max Inux) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 12:32:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: >I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have >a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy >in order to avoid seeing my banners. > >I do not want to serve such users at all and I do not want them to use >my bandwidth. > >Is there any way to detect a user of Junkbusters in a CGI/mod_perl script? > >Thanks > > - Igor. Are you payed per impression or display? Odds are blocking them wont make them leave anyways, if there is something of value, they will outsmart your blocking. A common thing for people to do also is to use DNS entries for doublclick and all the other add servers so they dont talk to the hsots, or use other software, JunkBuster is not the only solution. Max Inux 0xE42A7FB1 http://www.openpgp.net Key fingerprint = E4CA 2B4F 24FC B1BF E671 52D0 9E4B A590 E42A 7FB1 If crypto is outlawed only outlaws will have crypto. 'An it harm none, let it be done' From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 28 13:19:16 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A. Donald) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 13:19:16 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: References: <20001027111608.K18991@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001028130920.01aa2880@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 11:30 PM 10/27/2000 +0300, Sampo A Syreeni wrote: > in most modern countries the electorial process is practically > guaranteed - and in fact mostly designed - to in essence round out > dissent. It is an inherent problem with any democratic system, that it must be designed to produce and enforce a single definite decision on a multitude of matters where "the people" do not have any one clear opinion. This leads to the well known voting paradoxes. Thus democracy is inherently biased towards statism, towards imposing a single solution from above on everyone, regardless of their diverse desires. One solution to this is severe limits on the power of the majority. The government should require a ten to one majority for any use force. To collect taxes, incur debts, or expend money for any purpose, or to make war, should require ten yes votes for any no vote. The problem is that those whose job it is to enforce such limits on government, personally benefit from escaping those limits, thus all attempts to limit government ultimately fail. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG j+h/l7f0pDDoNI1phEWOzQWEulQg7v81oOiTA5n 4PoHTxaUuw6KBxhk0rYlIfCoHe+OyO2n2pjyTMuMx From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 28 13:24:12 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A. Donald) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 13:24:12 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: References: <20001027111608.K18991@slack.lne.com> <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479D@cobra.netsolve.net> <20001027111608.K18991@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001028132235.026d7d88@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 06:01 PM 10/27/2000 -0700, Tim May wrote: > Needless to say, any single person's vote is hardly worth spending 4 > minutes evaluating the issues. Do you believe that the average person spends four minutes evaluating the issues? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG QpV14VbJS7QzF4iIp0eJYWlfR9b38R66Mi+sjvqZ 42siuFKjU9z0rocY9PX1z13HOnwuoXA/wWynL0WwQ From ultratrim2000 at aol.com Sat Oct 28 13:26:52 2000 From: ultratrim2000 at aol.com (ultratrim2000 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 13:26:52 Subject: CDR: LOSE 30 POUNDS IN 30 DAYS, GUARANTEED! Message-ID: <658.224280.457507@mail01.homewknow.com> *****AMAZING MELT AWAY FAT ABSORBER CAPSULES***** LOSE 30 POUNDS IN 30 DAYS... GUARANTEED!!! All Natural Weight-Loss Program, Speeds Up The Metabolism Safely Rated #1 In Both Categories of SAFETY & EFFECTIVENESS In (THE USA TODAY) WE'LL HELP YOU GET THINNER IN WINTER!!! WE'RE GOING TO HELP YOU LOOK GOOD, FEEL GOOD AND TAKE CONTROL IN 2000 ***** Receive 1 Free Bottle Of Ultra Trim 2000 & Your Bonus Supply, With Every Order Of 2 Or More Bottles. Offer Good Until November 12, 2000! WE GLADLY SHIP TO ALL FOREIGN COUNTRIES! ***** You will be losing by tomorrow! Don't Wait, visit our web page below, and join now! ***************** http://www.angelfire.com/biz6/ultraweightzone/ ***************** This is the easiest, fastest, and most effective way to lose both pounds and inches permanently!!! This weight loss program is designed specifically to "boost" weight-loss efforts by assisting body metabolism, and helping the body's ability to manage weight. A powerful, safe, 30 Day Program. This is one program you won't feel starved on. Complete program for one amazing low price! Program includes: BONUS AMAZING FAT ABSORBER CAPSULES, 30 DAY - WEIGHT REDUCTION PLAN, PROGRESS REPORT, AND MUCH MORE!!! SPECIAL BONUS..."FAT ABSORBERS", AS SEEN ON TV With every order...AMAZING MELT AWAY FAT ABSORBER CAPSULES with directions (1 Month Supply, Absolutely Free ) ...With these capsules you can eat what you enjoy, without the worry of fat in your diet. 2 to 3 capsules 15 minutes before eating or snack, and the fat will be absorbed and passed through the body without the digestion of fat into the body. You will be losing by tomorrow! Don't Wait, visit our web page below, and join now! ***************** http://www.angelfire.com/biz6/ultraweightzone/ ***************** ___1 Month Supply $32.95 plus $3.75 S & H, 100 Amazing MegaTrim Capsules. ___2 Month Supply $47.95 plus $3.75 S & H, 200 Amazing MegaTrim Capsules. (A $9.95 Savings, Free Bottle)! ___3 Month Supply $62.95, Plus $3.75 S & H, 300 Amazing MegaTrim Capsules. (A $19.90 Savings, Free Bottle)! To Order by postal mail, please send to the below address. Make payable to MegaTrim. Ultra Trim 2000 4132 Pompton Ct. Dayton, Ohio 45405 (937) 567-9807 Order by 24 Hour Fax!!! (775) 414-7455 ***** Important Credit Card Information! Please Read Below! * Credit Card Address, City, State and Zip Code, must match billing address to be processed. CHECK____ MONEYORDER____ VISA____ MASTERCARD____ AmericanExpress___ Debt Card___ Name_______________________________________________________ (As it appears on Check or Credit Card) Address____________________________________________________ (As it appears on Check or Credit Card) ___________________________________________________ City,State,Zip(As it appears on Check or Credit Card) ___________________________________________________ Country ___________________________________________________ (Credit Card Number) ___________________________________________________ Authorized Signature Expiration Month_____ Year_____ *****IMPORTANT NOTE***** If Shipping Address Is Different From The Billing Address Above, Please Fill Out Information Below. Shipping Name______________________________________________ Shipping Address___________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Shipping City,State,Zip ___________________________________________________________ Country ___________________________________________________________ Email Address & Phone Number(Please Write Neat) From jamesd at echeque.com Sat Oct 28 13:44:04 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A. Donald) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 13:44:04 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001028132607.026c4318@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 10:38 PM 10/27/2000 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > So, to put it another way, when privacy is *cheaper*, on a risk > adjusted basis, than we'll have privacy, and not much until then. Transactions on the internet need reputational enforcement. Most of us cannot afford the cost and effort required to generate a widely known reputation. So we rent the reputation of a widely known entity, usually Visa or Paypal. If that entity is implementing chargebacks, implementing a dispute arbitration service, as Visa has long done, and Paypal now does, then it must know us, and know everything about us. That entity, being large, is vulnerable to the state, and so what it knows, the state knows. Anonymous transactions must be transactions that do not require, and are not charged for, an arbitration service applying chargebacks. Such a service is inherently cheaper than the true name based service provided by Paypal and Visa. Internet shopping and internet auctions such as Ebay tend to require an arbitration service and chargebacks. However many regular Ebay sellers have established a good name, and could successfully operate, and would prefer to operate, with a system that does not provide for chargebacks. Similarly micropayments do not need a facility for arbitration and chargebacks, and could not afford the cost of such a facility. Any entity that facilitates transactions tends to be the deep pockets party that gets dragged into every quarrel, and thus is forced to implement a chargeback and arbitration policy regardless of whether it or its customers want such a service, regardless of whether they desire to pay for such a service. An entity that provides truly anonymous transactions has the great strength that its no chargebacks policy is credible, that it cannot be dragged into the arbitration business against its desires and the desires of its customers. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG OLA7vdEb/UfbsQMrSWYy8AHmV/2UITEt32g9J6IG 486m1oVWEs2lm3apL5uK4JYB2UFyZDKJmZrDM0+8f From zog at IULX.esn.net Sat Oct 28 14:03:29 2000 From: zog at IULX.esn.net (zog at IULX.esn.net) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 14:03:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: CDR: Internet Home Work and Own Busines, Free and Low Cost Advertising Tools! for You - cypherpunks -OEKB Message-ID: <200010282103.OAA16696@cyberpass.net> Dear cypherpunks! If You are interested in Learning and Starting Home Work! If You want Own Internet Home Business! If You need know about REAL MONEY from Internet! If You need Traffic, Advertising and Promotion Tools! If would Online shoping and Medicine! At last - Relax! Just go to any of mirrors: http://www.geocities.com/realhits/ http://www.virtue.nu/realhits/ or send blank email: realhits at GetResponse.com ************************************************************************ Under Bill 1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th U.S. Congress this letter can not be considered spam as long as we include: Contact and a Remove information. To be removed from future mailings send a blank email with REMOVE in subject line and email address to be removed in the body to: rwremove at themail.com or realwrk at altavista.com From ichudov at Algebra.Com Sat Oct 28 12:08:55 2000 From: ichudov at Algebra.Com (Igor Chudov) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 14:08:55 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: from "Nomen Nescio" at Oct 28, 2000 07:40:05 PM Message-ID: <200010281908.OAA02318@manifold.algebra.com> Nomen Nescio wrote: > > > Igor Chudov wrote: > > > One of the most popular features, aside from math help, is "Talk to > > Splotchy", which is a conversation with an Eliza-like AI program. But > > unlike Eliza, Spltchy is more like a chatterbox with a lot more > > personality. Some people even have cybersex with Splotchy. > > > Also, I have a "talk to George W Bush LIVE" section at > > bush-2000.algebra.com. Basically the same thing but politically > > educated. > > Has anyone had cybersex with your incarnation of G W Bush? [shudder] > yep, numerous times. the funny thing is that the "AI" program that is georgewbush has no state at all, it just replies to the user's last phrase according to the rules. But I tried to make sure that georgewbush is well prepared politically. My experience with splotchy and georgewbush illustrates ridiculousness of most human conversations. User: have you had sex befor Answer: ooohh I'm getting hot! User: yes you are hot Answer: I don't think so... User: yes Answer: are you being totally honest? User: yes Answer: you sound quite positive User: ya baby Answer: you are beginning to act like a baby User: on sexy Answer: continue, please User: have you had sibersex befor Answer: Are you having a good day? User: yes Answer: are you being totally honest? User: yes Answer: you sound quite positive User: have you had sibersex befor Answer: I like talking to you User: do you want to have sibersex Answer: quite often User: lets have sibersex Answer: Are you having a good day? User: suck my ass Answer: that's quite nasty User: suck my dick Answer: geez User: you were beter yesterday Answer: we can not live in the past User: are you gay Answer: No, I am not gay User: who are you Answer: I am a k-rad person! User: so why do you not whant to have sex with me Answer: none of your business User: are you gorge bush Answer: Glad you know me by my name. Ever been to Texas? User: mabe Answer: hugh? User: sexy sexy sexy Answer: that's interesting User: why arnt you gay Answer: who knows User: have you met a gay person Answer: that's nice User: suck my brest Answer: It smells like a lion in here!! yuck! User: where are you Answer: It's really none of your business User: do you whant to have sex with me Answer: I want hooters! User: I got hooters bigg ones biger than you have seen Answer: you wouldn't know it User: tell me how big you seen Answer: Don't you know how big me seen User: mabe Answer: I know nothing about that! User: so do you whant to have sex Answer: ever seen Debbie does Endor? User: yes Answer: yes?! User: yes Answer: ok User: are you gay or not Answer: none of your business User: why not Answer: because it is bad for your heart User: no its not you dont know how old i am Answer: is your dog old? User: no Answer: you seem awfully sure of yourself User: i am a sexy teen Answer: why do you think you are a sexy teen ? User: because i have gig brest Answer: why have you? User: i also have a hot ass Answer: why do you keep bringing up your ass User: because i like other peoples asses Answer: yea, that is cool. User: are you a boy or a girl Answer: I prefer blondes myself User: are you a lesbeion Answer: why, are you? User: because i like stiking my finger up other wemons things Answer: why do you like that? User: because it feels good Answer: does that explain things? User: things are the front prifet part of a women Answer: what is it about girls that you like? User: everthing Answer: I am confused User: everthing Answer: hmm...exciting User: do like having sex Answer: Sex is a team competition! User: are you marred Answer: I might be. User: coman tell me Answer: tell you what? User: are you marred Answer: none of your business User: ok strip then put your dick to the screen and we will be having sex Answer: fine User: 1,2,3 Answer: Do you hate math? User: mabe Answer: like I care User: are you having sex Answer: do you think I am sexy? User: yes Answer: are you being totally honest? User: send me a picher of you Answer: are you just babbling? User: no Answer: do you expect me to believe that? User: yes Answer: ok User: are you having sex with me Answer: I want hooters! User: iv got hooters Answer: I hate life. User: me to Answer: I see User: have sex with me Answer: Sex is a team competition! User: lay on the floor and hump it and it will be like having sex Answer: ooohh I'm getting hot! User: so am i Answer: I like talking to you User: so doi Answer: like I care User: mabe Answer: Where are you from? Not Louisiana I hope? User: i am from Louisiana Answer: And how do you like it in louisiana User: great Answer: haven't the foggiest User: yes Answer: are you positive? User: yes Answer: o.k. User: are you on the floor Answer: why, are you? User: because we are having sex Answer: babes? User: sexy babes Answer: I don't seem to understand you. User: grab your wenny and go uh uh uh Answer: Are you having a good day? User: yes Answer: yes?! User: my parent arnt home so i am nude Answer: does anyone know you are nude ? User: no Answer: you are very negative today User: no Answer: are you sure? User: yes Answer: allright User: so what do you want to do Answer: what difference does it make what I want to do ? User: because i whant to have sex Answer: ever seen Debbie does Jellystone park? User: you already asked me that ? Answer: I never! User: yes you did Answer: yes?! User: yes Answer: o.k. User: kiss my ass Answer: I don't think I'd enjoy that at all User: stick your tung up my ass Answer: are you an anal compulsive type? User: mabe Answer: I don't seem to understand you. User: mabe Answer: I want a joystick User: so do i Answer: ask Pink Floyd, they may know User: ok Answer: okey-dokey User: same here Answer: Hey you are a smart person. User: yes Answer: are you being totally honest? User: yes Answer: o.k. User: are you sexy Answer: of course not, don't be silly User: you are not sexy Answer: maybe I am not sexy User: i whant to hup you Answer: you may think you whant to hup, but you don't User: are you old Answer: do you worry about becoming old? User: no Answer: I think you are lying User: no im not Answer: maybe someday you will User: ya Answer: are you just babbling? User: are you on the compuder Answer: why, are you? User: yes Answer: allright User: do you act like a girl Answer: you're not a woman are you? User: yes i am Answer: does anyone know you are ? User: yes Answer: really? User: no Answer: you are very negative today User: no Answer: are you sure? User: no Answer: explain User: i am horny Answer: I'm horny, too User: lets get down Answer: Hey you are a smart person. User: you already asked me that ? Answer: no I don't User: do you like playimg with your dick Answer: If I did like playimg with my dick , would I tell you? User: yes Answer: That's what I thought User: so do you Answer: If I did , would I tell you? User: you arnt a girl are you Answer: women? where? User: are you horny Answer: just keep your pants on...please User: sorry there on the floor because i am nude Answer: why are you nude ? User: because we were having sex Answer: ever seen Debbie does Baltimore? User: yes Answer: gotcha--I understand User: great Answer: I like talking to you User: so do i Answer: I wonder what a gorilla would taste like? User: i wonder what it would feel like having sex with a gorilla Answer: male User: yes Answer: yes?! User: have you ever gon skiny dipping Answer: are you new here? You seem confused... User: no Answer: do you expect me to believe that? User: yes Answer: allright User: allright Answer: Do kangaroos bite? User: yes Answer: are you sure? User: yes Answer: That's what I thought User: are you horny Answer: I'm horny, too User: let get horny Answer: I really don't care about your sex life User: you are my sex life Answer: life is a long song, but the tune ends too soon for us all... User: kiss me Answer: not with others around! User: who is oround Answer: Not sure who, exactly User: where are you Answer: It's really none of your business User: ok Answer: OK! User: do you have eny pets Answer: what difference does it make whether or not I have eny pets ? User: because you can hup your pet like i am Answer: why do you think you are ? User: because i am Answer: I can see you are . that's obvious User: horny horny Answer: maybe you should take a cold shower User: no a hot shower with you Answer: why not? User: because hot feels better to peoples privets Answer: you could be right User: let have sex in the shower Answer: I am quite a stud, if I do say so myself User: are you Answer: of course not, don't be silly User: coman Answer: aaaaaah User: sex with me Answer: Sex is a team competition! User: good bey i am going to have sex Answer: where are the babes!!? - Igor. From ichudov at Algebra.Com Sat Oct 28 12:09:52 2000 From: ichudov at Algebra.Com (Igor Chudov) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 14:09:52 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Nyms and reputations. In-Reply-To: from "Ray Dillinger" at Oct 28, 2000 11:03:02 AM Message-ID: <200010281909.OAA02342@manifold.algebra.com> Most of these problems are solved by the use of bonds posted by parties. igor Ray Dillinger wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, R. A. Hettinga wrote: > > >Mostly, when I tossed that one off, I was remembering arguments around here > >-- more than once -- that anonymity, particularly in anonymous > >transactions, will *always* cost more than non-anonymous ones. Something I > >dispute rather heatedly, of course, or I wouldn't be spending so much > >money, or working so hard, these days to prove otherwise... > > I've been thinking pretty much the same thing lately. When you > do business with someone, you want to know his/her True Name, so > that if they 'defect' (ie, take your money on a long trip to the > bahamas without delivering the goods, or take your goods on a long > trip to the bahamas without giving you the promised money) you can > drag their asses into court and get what they promised you. > > Clearly, there is no such recourse when dealing with a Nym. And > the hellish thing about Nyms is, they don't cost anything. If the > guy (or gal) steals from you using a Nym, you can spread the word > about that nym and trash its reputation. But they don't have to > care, because by this time they'll be using another nym. With > Nyms, somebody who has ripped off a hundred people for a million > dollars each is indistinguishable from someone who's just new to > the system. While Nyms have zero cost, they will never simultaneously > be in use and have negative reputation. > > It is also very hard to get a positive reputation with a nym; > (switching to didactic mode). > > Either you are doing a legal business or an illegal business. > If you are doing a Legal business: > A customer can go to either a nym or a true name. > If a customer goes to a nym, there is no legal recourse, > but if a customer goes to a true name, there is legal recourse. > Therefore it is clearly better for the customer to go to a true > name. > > If you are doing an illegal business: > You either do, or do not, create a "reference" as a result > of the transaction. > > If no reference is created, no reputation can be gained. QED. > > If a reference is created, then it either does, or does not, > identify the principals and the deal consummated. > > If the reference identifies the principals and the deal > then it can also be used as conclusive proof in court > against them if the owner of either nym is ever discovered. > And this is the best kind of "digital reputation" I can > find in this system. It will be significant to someone > else who has dealt with one of the principals as an > introduction to the other, but cannot really be useful > beyond that. > > If the reference does not identify the principals and the > deal consummated, then either it does not identify the principals > or it does not identify the deal consummated. > > If the reference does not identify the principals in the > deal, then it can be duplicated at will by anyone who > creates a few Nyms and puts them through the paces of a > few pretended deals, and is therefore meaningless. > > If the reference does not identify the deal consummated, > then it becomes impossible to make judgements based upon > it. -- a cocaine dealer with a million-dollar shipment is > hardly going to accept a "reference" which might be based > on the purchase or sale of a pocketknife. Such references > are also meaningless. > > Bear > - Igor. From ichudov at Algebra.Com Sat Oct 28 12:28:14 2000 From: ichudov at Algebra.Com (Igor Chudov) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 14:28:14 -0500 (CDT) Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: from "Max Inux" at Oct 28, 2000 12:32:33 PM Message-ID: <200010281928.OAA02996@manifold.algebra.com> Max Inux wrote: > >I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have > >a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy > >in order to avoid seeing my banners. > > > >I do not want to serve such users at all and I do not want them to use > >my bandwidth. > > > >Is there any way to detect a user of Junkbusters in a CGI/mod_perl script? > > > >Thanks > > > > - Igor. > > > Are you payed per impression or display? Odds are blocking them wont make Did you mean "per impression or per click"? I am paid for both, t is a mixture, about 60% are per impression and 40% or so are per click. > them leave anyways, if there is something of value, they will outsmart > your blocking. A common thing for people to do also is to use DNS entries > for doublclick and all the other add servers so they dont talk to the > hsots, or use other software, JunkBuster is not the only solution. I tried blicking doubleclick via DNS, it did not work well because of their javascript. - Igor. From bentj93 at itsc.adfa.edu.au Fri Oct 27 21:23:16 2000 From: bentj93 at itsc.adfa.edu.au (BENHAM TIMOTHY JAMES) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 15:23:16 +1100 (EST) Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: from "Mac Norton" at Oct 27, 2000 07:36:19 PM Message-ID: <200010280423.e9S4NGq24220@octarine.itsc.adfa.edu.au> > > So, everybody's third choice gets elected, or they take turns > holding the office, or what? Weighted voting can work for > corporate directors or other committees, but for a chief > executive? Even the electoral college sounds better. In single transferable vote systems the winner is almost always one of the two candidates with the most first preferences; the minor party candidates get progressively eliminated and the corresponding votes distributed to the next in preference order (instead of being thrown away). In US terms such a system might have got Bush senior over the line against Clinton because he would (I presume) have been preferred by most voters who voted for that fellow with big ears. In the coming election it might help Gore overcome Bush because Gore would be strongly preferred by most voters who are planning to waste their votes on Nadir. A system based on weights would, as you suggest, have an excessive (political) centrist tendency. Tim From steve at greenend.org.uk Sat Oct 28 08:11:43 2000 From: steve at greenend.org.uk (Stephen Early) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 16:11:43 +0100 (BST) Subject: Administrivia: old submission address to cease working Message-ID: Oxford University Computing Service have notified me that they intend to cease forwarding mail sent to the old UKcrypto submission address, ukcrypto at maillist.ox.ac.uk, as of 31st October. Please check that you are no longer using that address. Another request: if you mention UKcrypto on a website, please make sure you are sending people to the right place! I receive a couple of subscription requests per day bounced through the Oxford address, which I currently deal with manually. If you link to UKcrypto, please link to the URL http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukcrypto or for the archives: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/ Thanks, Steve Early -- "...as we transfer our whole being to the data bank, privacy will become a ghost or echo of its former self and what remains of community will disappear"...Marshal McLuhan -- Robert Guerra , Fax: +1(303) 484-0302 WWW Page , ICQ # 10266626 PGPKeys From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sat Oct 28 07:14:13 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 17:14:13 +0300 (EEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Hard Shelled ISP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: >For another, most people have not themelves experience a security >problem. While they understand how neighborhood thieves can break in >and steal their stuff, they have no similar experience for their >computer data. Unless and until this changes, they just won't care >very much. Of course, a substantial part of real privacy problems never manifest themselves as such. The bits leak and do their damage (Men with Guns mysteriously knowing precisely on whose door to knock, companies suddenly not having a job opening after all, competitors making highly informed decisions etc.) without people even realising what hit them. It's no wonder few people ever come to think of privacy, expect perhaps with financial transactions. Given the widespread habit of spreading VISA numbers around, even that isn't a given. Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From bill.stewart at pobox.com Sat Oct 28 17:52:39 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 17:52:39 -0700 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001028175239.00aab330@idiom.com> At 11:19 AM 10/28/00 -0500, Igor Chudov wrote: >Is there any way to detect a user of Junkbusters in a CGI/mod_perl script? Most advertising banners come from one of three sources - - advertiser.com/whatever - ads.website.com/whatever (IP address may belong to advertiser.com) - website.com/whatever (website.com's IP address and CGI.) The usual way banner-killers work is to recognize advertiser.com's name and not download pages or accept cookies from there. Some may be fancier and check the IP address as well as the name. It's much harder to junkblock banners that are really on your site - but that means that your advertiser needs to have a setup that lets you work that way, which most don't (partly for fraud prevention, though I suppose it's less of an issue for clickthroughs.) Others may look for banner-shaped things - that's hard to stop. And then there are folks who turn off images entirely :-) Your goal can probably be interpreted as "how to detect whether a user downloaded my advertising banner before showing them real content?". You can't keep them from seeing the text of your main page before they download the banner, because that's what includes the call for the banner image. (You could do one of those initial pages that flashes up briefly and then calls the real page, though.) If your webserver is bright enough (or if you hack it enough yourself), you could keep it from showing future images if the caller hasn't read the image. That's only possible if you know whether they've downloaded your banner, which usually means that the banner has to be hosted on your site rather than the advertiser's. Lots of people turn off cookies - you'd mentioned the issue of using cookies to tell if people have fetched your banner. But even for people who accept cookies, the cookie protocols will only let you fetch cookies with your second-level domain, so you also need to use one of the banner locations with your domain. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From nobody at dizum.com Sat Oct 28 10:40:05 2000 From: nobody at dizum.com (Nomen Nescio) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 19:40:05 +0200 (CEST) Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users Message-ID: Igor Chudov wrote: > One of the most popular features, aside from math help, is "Talk to > Splotchy", which is a conversation with an Eliza-like AI program. But > unlike Eliza, Spltchy is more like a chatterbox with a lot more > personality. Some people even have cybersex with Splotchy. > Also, I have a "talk to George W Bush LIVE" section at > bush-2000.algebra.com. Basically the same thing but politically > educated. Has anyone had cybersex with your incarnation of G W Bush? [shudder] From gbnewby at ils.unc.edu Sat Oct 28 17:15:22 2000 From: gbnewby at ils.unc.edu (Greg Newby) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 20:15:22 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com>; from ichudov@Algebra.Com on Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 11:19:52AM -0500 References: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <20001028201521.G9082@ils.unc.edu> On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 11:19:52AM -0500, Igor Chudov wrote: > > I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have > a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy > in order to avoid seeing my banners. > > I do not want to serve such users at all and I do not want them to use > my bandwidth. I don't think you're going to get a lot of sympathy by wanting to force people to view ads. Although it's your bandwidth at the server end, it's the USER's bandwidth (& time) at their end. I nearly always leave images turned off in Netscape so I don't need to wait for ads to download via a modem. > Is there any way to detect a user of Junkbusters in a CGI/mod_perl script? Good question, I'd say the answer is 'yes' but it's but probably not worth the effort. Your basis would be what files they download (and yes, it seems you could automate assessing this). It seems that you could configure your Web server software to stop serving data to hosts that don't also download the banner images (if the images are coming from YOUR server; this isn't clear -- if not, you might be able to redirect through your server to get the images). This would also block: - people using Lynx (e.g., many blind users or people at public access text-only stations) - people with their images turned off - people who press their browser's STOP button before everything is downloaded Let's assume you could catch Junkbusters users this way. Their workaround might be to GET the banner file, but abort the connection before the file transfers. Much tougher to catch.. You're be burning far more CPU cycles than just for regular Web serving. It's not clear to me that the current Junkbusters (or their Guidescope) software could do be modified to work around such blocking. Your question was whether you could do this type of detection using a CGI/mod_perl script. It seems you could "tail" the server log file to get the data you'd need (& combine with the regular client info you can get from the Web server). You'd also need to maintain a state variable across multiple hits to the server so you know what clients have downloaded the whole set of files you're testing. Seems feasible, but potentially error-prone. -- Greg From rah at shipwright.com Sat Oct 28 17:43:04 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 20:43:04 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Nyms and reputations. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:03 AM -0700 on 10/28/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: > Clearly, there is no such recourse when dealing with a Nym. Unless, of course, you're selling bits on the wire (bearer-held asset titles, information, software, wetware) for bits on the wire (bearer cash). ...and, of course, in a geodesic economy, where the plans to make something are worth more than the materials to make it, bits on the wire are the only things that really matters, right? Hint: Financial assets constitute the majority of all asset classes, and, of course, financial assets are already "dematerialized", albeit only in book-entry form. Remember, it's only *book-entry* transactions that require your, as Vinge would say, true name, your biometric identity, physical coordinates, whatever. As Doug Barnes has noted, "...and then you go to jail" a bad terminating step for an internet transaction protocol. Bearer transactions execute, clear and settle instantaneously. Thus, jail is not the error-handler. Finally, in a bearer protocol, you trust the reputation of the issuer of a given financial instrument, not the people you're doing business with. With the "jail" bit out of the way there's only the veracity of the information good/service, or asset, at issue, and, with lots of crypto stuff like zero knowlege proofs, anonymous escrow agents, and so on, that's fairly testable in realtime. It's going to get pretty wierd pretty soon, I think. Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From rah at shipwright.com Sat Oct 28 17:44:28 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 20:44:28 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Nyms and reputations. In-Reply-To: <200010281909.OAA02342@manifold.algebra.com> References: <200010281909.OAA02342@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: At 2:09 PM -0500 on 10/28/00, Igor Chudov wrote: > Most of these problems are solved by the use of bonds posted by parties. That's what I get for answering before reading the rest of the traffic. Yeah, what he said. Cheers, RAH -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From kelsey.j at ix.netcom.com Sat Oct 28 18:16:13 2000 From: kelsey.j at ix.netcom.com (John Kelsey) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 21:16:13 -0400 Subject: CDR: RE: Paranoid Encryption Standard (was Re: Rijndael & Hitachi) In-Reply-To: References: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479E@cobra.netsolve.net> <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479E@cobra.netsolve.net> Message-ID: <4.1.20001028204425.009b9280@pop.ix.netcom.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 3970 bytes Desc: not available URL: From camo at gogo.net.au Sat Oct 28 04:41:27 2000 From: camo at gogo.net.au (cameron garth) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 21:41:27 +1000 Subject: CDR: envelope stuffing Message-ID: <200010282141.AA2555948@gogo.net.au> To whom it may concern We would like some more information on your subject, as it makes no sence to us as we thought that when you do envelope stuffing you supply all product and knowledge. From nobody at remailer.privacy.at Sat Oct 28 13:17:00 2000 From: nobody at remailer.privacy.at (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 22:17:00 +0200 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users Message-ID: Igor Chudov wrote: > yep, numerous times. the funny thing is that the "AI" program that is > georgewbush has no state at all, it just replies to the user's last > phrase according to the rules. But I tried to make sure that georgewbush > is well prepared politically. > My experience with splotchy and georgewbush illustrates ridiculousness > of most human conversations. ...snip... What kinds of logs do you keep of interactions with Splotchy/GWB? Are users made aware of any such logs? (Not that I particularly care about the privacy of users who want to have "sibersex" with "marred" people.) I also wonder how many times Eliza has been rewritten into Sheila the Sex Kitten, and to what degree of success. From rguerra at yahoo.com Sat Oct 28 20:34:56 2000 From: rguerra at yahoo.com (Robert Guerra) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 23:34:56 -0400 Subject: CDR: UK Crypto - old submission address to cease working Message-ID: From anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net Sat Oct 28 20:59:34 2000 From: anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net (An Metet) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 23:59:34 -0400 Subject: CDR: Mobile phone guns seized Message-ID: <3780a972f62c805f998c9cedd4bcecec@mixmaster.shinn.net> FROM DAVID LISTER IN BRUSSELS HANDGUNS made to look like mobile phones and activated by tapping a button on the keypad are among a stockpile of deadly gadgets seized by police after being smuggled into The Netherlands from Yugoslavia. The special Arrow unit of the Dutch police disclosed yesterday that it had seized eight of the Rshooting phonesS in raids on five Amsterdam addresses during the past three weeks. It also found 29 guns disguised as key rings. Cees Rameau, a spokesman for the Amsterdam police, said that each of the mobile phones, clearly intended to be used at close range, contained four .22 calibre bullets. RFor each shot, you have to press one of the numbers on the keypad. If you didnUt know they were guns, you wouldnUt suspect anything,S he said. Although police confirmed that most of the weapons had come from Yugoslavia, they did not know for whom they were intended. Mr Rameau said that five men and one woman had been arrested, including two from Yugoslavia, one from Croatia and one from Turkey. At one address in west Amsterdam, police seized 28 key-ring guns, 26lb of explosives, a machinegun, a pistol, a revolver, 2,000 bullets and 20 hand grenades. Police also discovered 19lb of heroin, a stash of fake Dutch banknotes and blank identification papers. From spike6787 at hotmail.com Sun Oct 29 00:31:23 2000 From: spike6787 at hotmail.com (mike hale) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 00:31:23 -0700 Subject: CDR: hey Message-ID: hey can u get the passwrod for this email address for me please i really need it here is the email address Tongueking27 at yahoo.com write me back i really need this password c-ya later and please write back. Skid___________________________________________________________ Get more from your time online. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 1071 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jimdbell at home.com Sat Oct 28 22:02:42 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 01:02:42 -0400 Subject: CDR: Re: Mobile phone guns seized References: <3780a972f62c805f998c9cedd4bcecec@mixmaster.shinn.net> Message-ID: <001201c04165$6ccdc1a0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> ----- Original Message ----- X-Loop: openpgp.net From: An Metet Subject: Mobile phone guns seized > FROM DAVID LISTER IN BRUSSELS > HANDGUNS made to look like mobile phones and activated by tapping a button on the keypad are among a stockpile of deadly gadgets seized by police after being smuggled into The Netherlands from Yugoslavia. Okay, but how many cents per minute, huh? Do I gotta sign a contract? Is the data stream encrypted with GSM? What's the talk-time? Roaming charges? Jim Bell From spike6787 at hotmail.com Sat Oct 28 22:35:14 2000 From: spike6787 at hotmail.com (mike hale) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 01:35:14 EDT Subject: CDR: hey Message-ID: ___________________________________________________________ Get more from your time online. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com From spike6787 at hotmail.com Sat Oct 28 22:36:42 2000 From: spike6787 at hotmail.com (mike hale) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 01:36:42 EDT Subject: CDR: hey Message-ID: can you get the password for this email address Tongueking27 at yahoo.com i really need it if you could just send it back to me bye and dont forget to write back $$MIKE$$ ___________________________________________________________ Get more from your time online. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com From alan at clueserver.org Sun Oct 29 10:42:46 2000 From: alan at clueserver.org (Alan Olsen) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 10:42:46 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: References: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001029103756.055f2340@clueserver.org> At 09:31 AM 10/28/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: >At 11:19 AM -0500 10/28/00, Igor Chudov wrote: >>I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have >>a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy >>in order to avoid seeing my banners. >> >>I do not want to serve such users at all and I do not want them to use >>my bandwidth. >> >>Is there any way to detect a user of Junkbusters in a CGI/mod_perl script? > >Your presumably-misspelled subject line, "Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters >users," seems ironically appropriate. > >Though some prefer the spelling "Hoe." When I first saw the subject, I was thinking it was some DOE weirdness. I was disappointed to find it was just a typo. >As for finding ways to see who is avoiding looking at yoiur >advertisements, most of the ad filtering is done at the recipient's >machine, right? Gonna be hard for you to reach into their machines to see >if they're running ad busters in a local script. Actually you can. Junkbusters mucks with the http headers for client type. Figuring out what it does is left as an exercise for the cgi programmer. (As well as getting around the problem of how to do it without cutting off anyone behind a proxy or similar firewall.) >As for the ads themselves, who ever looks at them? The doc com ad stream >model has been collapsing since its inception...only in the last six >months has the message gotten nearer to the dinosaur's brain. Sounds like he is trying to squeeze out as much as he can while he can. --- | Terrorists - The Boogiemen for a new Millennium. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | | | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From alan at clueserver.org Sun Oct 29 10:45:20 2000 From: alan at clueserver.org (Alan Olsen) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 10:45:20 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: References: <200010281704.MAA30926@manifold.algebra.com> <200010281704.MAA30926@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20001029104445.053e2500@clueserver.org> At 11:34 AM 10/28/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: >(I just visited this site, and your own site, www.algebra.com, to see what >it is you're so worried about people filtering out. Frankly, your ads were >not nearly as obtrusive as some are, e.g., those ads running across the >top, the bottom, and on both _sides_. Why you are worried that ads for >"Gel Mouse Pads" will get blocked is beyond me...most clueless high school >students trying to get your site to do their algebra homework for them >will not be bothering with ad-busting proxies and other such filters.) "We handle banner ads the old fashion way -- we ignore them!" --- | Terrorists - The Boogiemen for a new Millennium. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | | | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From ericm at lne.com Sun Oct 29 11:24:50 2000 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 11:24:50 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20001029103756.055f2340@clueserver.org>; from alan@clueserver.org on Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 10:42:46AM -0800 References: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> <4.2.2.20001029103756.055f2340@clueserver.org> Message-ID: <20001029112450.G724@slack.lne.com> On Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 10:42:46AM -0800, Alan Olsen wrote: > > At 09:31 AM 10/28/00 -0700, Tim May wrote: > >At 11:19 AM -0500 10/28/00, Igor Chudov wrote: > >>I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have > >>a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy > >>in order to avoid seeing my banners. > >> > >>I do not want to serve such users at all and I do not want them to use > >>my bandwidth. > >> > >>Is there any way to detect a user of Junkbusters in a CGI/mod_perl script? > > > >Your presumably-misspelled subject line, "Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters > >users," seems ironically appropriate. > > > >Though some prefer the spelling "Hoe." > > >As for finding ways to see who is avoiding looking at yoiur > >advertisements, most of the ad filtering is done at the recipient's > >machine, right? Gonna be hard for you to reach into their machines to see > >if they're running ad busters in a local script. > > Actually you can. Junkbusters mucks with the http headers for client type. Other filtering proxies don't mess with the Agent line, or let you send whatever you want there ("Hi! I'm running X10 on MVS!"). I don't think that a high percentage of people use filtering proxies. You could make a rough guess by analyzing your log files to see which users are reading the content pages and not requesting the ads... but that's only possible if you're serving the ads yourself. You'd have to account for people who end the session early, therefore don't request the ads. If many sites implement anti-filtering methods, the ad filter writers will figure out a way to get around it. I'd do it. It'd be pretty easy- simply request the ads but don't send them to the browser. I suppose that you could then add 1x1 stealth gifs to the ads to see if the ads are getting to the browser, but then I'd just code the filter to parse the HTML stream and request those .gifs.... you can't win. Besides, if the market for web ads is a free market, the number of people who filter out ads is already factored into the price that you're getting. It's probably about $1.25 a month. :-) -- Eric Murray Consulting Security Architect SecureDesign LLC http://www.securedesignllc.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From eyad1970 at hotmail.com Sun Oct 29 04:56:01 2000 From: eyad1970 at hotmail.com (sam ram) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:56:01 GMT Subject: CDR: thanx my friend Message-ID: : Hi, can you please show me a easy way to make a home made bomb by using things from the house. so please write back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. From eyad1970 at hotmail.com Sun Oct 29 04:57:48 2000 From: eyad1970 at hotmail.com (sam ram) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:57:48 GMT Subject: CDR: thanx my friend Message-ID: : Hi, can you please show me a easy way to make a home made bomb by using things from the house. so please write back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. From ichudov at Algebra.Com Sun Oct 29 12:03:38 2000 From: ichudov at Algebra.Com (Igor Chudov) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 14:03:38 -0600 (CST) Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001028175239.00aab330@idiom.com> from "Bill Stewart" at Oct 28, 2000 05:52:39 PM Message-ID: <200010292003.OAA10466@manifold.algebra.com> Bill Stewart wrote: > > At 11:19 AM 10/28/00 -0500, Igor Chudov wrote: > >Is there any way to detect a user of Junkbusters in a CGI/mod_perl script? > > Most advertising banners come from one of three sources - > - advertiser.com/whatever > - ads.website.com/whatever (IP address may belong to advertiser.com) > - website.com/whatever (website.com's IP address and CGI.) > > The usual way banner-killers work is to recognize advertiser.com's name > and not download pages or accept cookies from there. > Some may be fancier and check the IP address as well as the name. > It's much harder to junkblock banners that are really on your site - > but that means that your advertiser needs to have a setup that > lets you work that way, which most don't (partly for fraud prevention, > though I suppose it's less of an issue for clickthroughs.) > Others may look for banner-shaped things - that's hard to stop. > And then there are folks who turn off images entirely :-) > > Your goal can probably be interpreted as "how to detect whether > a user downloaded my advertising banner before showing them real content?". > You can't keep them from seeing the text of your main page before they > download the banner, because that's what includes the call > for the banner image. (You could do one of those initial pages > that flashes up briefly and then calls the real page, though.) > If your webserver is bright enough (or if you hack it enough yourself), > you could keep it from showing future images if the caller > hasn't read the image. That's only possible if you know whether they've > downloaded your banner, which usually means that the banner > has to be hosted on your site rather than the advertiser's. > > Lots of people turn off cookies - you'd mentioned the issue of > using cookies to tell if people have fetched your banner. > But even for people who accept cookies, the cookie protocols > will only let you fetch cookies with your second-level domain, > so you also need to use one of the banner locations with your domain. A thoughtful message. Thanks. Basically my site absolutely relies on cookies for several things, such as the linear algebra workbench, standardized testing, and "My Homework". Maybe the desire to reject junkbusters users is due to my asshole personality rather than arational business thinking. I think that Tim is right, the clueless kiddos who visit algebra.com do not run junkbusters. - Igor. From newsletters at worldwidelists.com Sun Oct 29 11:05:06 2000 From: newsletters at worldwidelists.com (newsletters at worldwidelists.com) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 14:05:06 -0500 (EST) Subject: CDR: Cypherpunks, Free newsletters added to Worldwidelists.com! Message-ID: <200010291905.OAA22303@whbsd003.webhosting.com> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cypherpunks, this message is brought to you by Worldwidelists.com The E-mail Newsletter Network. We appreciate your subscription. This e-mail message is never sent unsolicited. You asked us to notify you when more Free newsletters were added to the online directory at http://www.worldwidelists.com/. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cypherpunks, the following Free newsletters were added to Worldwidelists.com during the period September 15-30. THE WEEKLY PUZZLER The famous Weekly Puzzler - we'll keep you puzzled! Once a week, we'll send you a sample of riddles, puzzles, trivia, and brain teasers - fun for all - free and always rated 'G'! Find it in the Entertainment category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/entertainment.html ~~~~~ WEALTHWORLD GAZETTE MAKE MORE MONEY online! Get SMART with FREE Internet Tips, Opportunities & Humor News, get insider secrets, tips, articles, special deals, Internet resources, great FREEBIES, and more! FREE "Magic Letters" Report to next 100 new subscribers to WealthWorld Gazette Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ MONEYMAKER NEWS MoneyMaker News is a FREE newsletter providing the latest information on Internet marketing strategies, traffic generating tips, Internet FREEBIES and other resources YOU need to make money online without the HYPE. New Subscribers get a FREE 40 word ad and a FREE ebook "Unlimited Traffic". Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ MOC NEWS MOC News is full of Internet Marketing articles, tips and offers especially designed to help the New Netpreneur start and operate their online business. We also offer contests and Cash Give-Away. Find it in the Education category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/education.html ~~~~~ ALL THE SECRETS Phil Wiley's All the Secrets is listed in many Top 10 Internet Business ezine lists. Hype free affiliate program advice, marketing and web promotion tips, free publicity help. Find it in the Internet category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/internet.html ~~~~~ GRIN A DAY Remember a Grin A Day keeps the Blues Away! In YOUR mail box 5 times a week by 6:00AM (ET). Subscribe NOW to a Grin A Day! Get YOUR daily "Grin"! Find it in the Jokes & Humor category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/jokes-humor.html ~~~~~ AD PROMOTER This is a safelist where people can exchange their business opportunities, advertisements,and tips to fellow business people. Find it in the Business category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/business.html ~~~~~ AAA SOFTWARE E-ZINE The best free- and shareware tips for Windows 95/98/NT and Macintosh PC's. Sent out monthly. Find it in the Computers category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/computers.html ~~~~~ Weird Side E-zine A classy selection of the weirdest web sites, news facts and quotes from around the world. Also containing free PC, software and webmaster tips. Find it in the News & Media category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/news-media.html ~~~~~ DAILY SPICE Spice up your day with something free. Find out about getting something for nothing. Daily News on what you can win, get for free, or just plain interesting sites found on the WWW. Find it in the Free Stuff category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/freestuff.html ~~~~~ SWEEP THE NET Monday - Friday Sweepstakes newsletter to let you get the latest word on Sweepstakes on the Net. Get notice of Contests, Drawings and Giveaways you can enter and win everything from cash to cars for free! Find it in the Contests & Sweepstakes category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/contests-sweepstakes.html ~~~~~ 50+ INSPIRATIONAL QUOTATIONS Receive inspirational quotations on more than 50 different topics each week in one email message! Topic areas include: motivation, angels, hope, character, women, happiness, leadership, success. You'll even find quotes about such interesting topics as fishing, and cowboys, and cooking! Subscribe today! Find it in the Self-Improvement category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/self-improvement.html ~~~~~ SHOPPINGSTOP.COM MONTHLY Have the latest discounts delivered directly to your inbox, read interesting Web shopping articles ("safety", "finding discounts", etc.), learn about the new services of TheShoppingStop.com's website, free monthly drawing from subscribers for prizes, and more. Find it in the Shopping category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/shopping.html ~~~~~ FREE RECIPES What for dinner? MightyCool.com is here to help. Join and you will receive a free recipe served to you fresh each day from great basic recipes, gourmet, taste of the southwest, spiced, healthy, Cajun, quick n' easy, recipe tips, and many others to inspire and delight you. Find it in the Food category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/food.html ~~~~~ TRIVIAL FACTOIDS Lateral thinking too easy for you? Do you know the truth about the mating habits of wildebeasts? Cheap quizzes, unusual facts, if this is you, then get on this list! Find it in the Entertainment category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/entertainment.html ~~~~~ THE CLASSICS (JOKES, THAT IS) This joke mailer will bring back memories - some of these I remember from grade school! If my mother only knew... Find it in the Jokes & Humor category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/jokes-humor.html ~~~~~ JUST ASK JEN Dr. Laura has gone commercial - Dear Abbey is getting old, so now where do you go? Anything goes in this free- for-all advice(?) column - be prepared! Not for the timid, or those under 18... Find it in the Women category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/women.html ~~~~~ WEEKLY RIDDLE CLUB Join the famous Weekly Riddle Club and every Wednesday we will email a riddle to you. Some are silly - as riddles sometimes are; some may force you to think a little; all are fun and free to you! Join the Weekly Riddle Club and entertain your brain! Find it in the Education category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/education.html ~~~~~ KLEAN KARTOONS Klean-Jokes.com offers a variation in the normal cartoon mailers - klean content! Yes, that's right, family safe cartoons, fun for everyone! Find it in the Cartoons & Comics category: http://www.worldwidelists.com/cartoons-comics.html P.S. Cypherpunks, forward this message to your friends so they don't miss out on these great newsletters! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To remove yourself from future Worldwidelists.com updates, click on the following link while connected to the Web: http://www.worldwidelists.com/cgi-bin/unsubs.cgi?46848=cypherpunks at toad.com/99999_updatenotify From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 29 11:11:30 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 14:11:30 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Mobile phone guns seized In-Reply-To: <001201c04165$6ccdc1a0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> References: <3780a972f62c805f998c9cedd4bcecec@mixmaster.shinn.net> Message-ID: At 1:02 AM -0400 10/29/00, jim bell wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >X-Loop: openpgp.net >From: An Metet >Subject: Mobile phone guns seized >> FROM DAVID LISTER IN BRUSSELS >> HANDGUNS made to look like mobile phones and activated by tapping a button >on the keypad are among a stockpile of deadly gadgets seized by police after >being smuggled into The Netherlands from Yugoslavia. > >Okay, but how many cents per minute, huh? Do I gotta sign a contract? Is >the data stream encrypted with GSM? What's the talk-time? Roaming charges? > Their product is _targeted_ at those who want _shell_ accounts and who have the right _cartridge_ drives. Sounds like a _bullseye_ to me. This may _trigger_ more such products, according to a _magazine_ article I read. Scraping the _barrel_, I'd say, so maybe we need to _muzzle_ the reporters. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From ericm at lne.com Sun Oct 29 14:33:16 2000 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 14:33:16 -0800 Subject: CDR: digital angel (tracking device) Message-ID: <20001029143316.H724@slack.lne.com> Straight from the "if we can do it, we should" dept, comes the latest in personal tracking devices: http://www.digitalangel.net/index.htm >Applied Digital Solutions has developed a new technology that we believe >will revolutionize E-Business security, emergency location and medical >monitoring and commodities supply chain management (food safety). That >technology has been named Digital Angel?. ADS is actively seeking joint >venture partners to develop and market this technology. We expect to >produce a prototype of the device by the end of 2000. We believe the >potential global market for this device - in all of its applications - >could exceed $100 billion. > > >Basic Features of Digital Angel? > >The idea behind the initial version of Digital Angel[tm] is to build >a microchip that can be worn close to the body. This microchip will >include biosensors that will measure the biological parameters of the >body and store this information. [..] >The chip will be equipped with a micro battery. This battery >will be self-rechargeable taking energy from the body or from its >surroundings. All these components will be combined into a unit the size >of a dime. [..] >The unit can be turned off by the wearer, thereby making the monitoring >voluntary. It will not intrude on personal privacy except in applications >applied to the tracking of criminals. Heh. >Digital Angel[tm] measures bodily parameters. It does not interact with >the body chemically or biologically. Designed to be completely harmless, >Digital Angel will not interfere with bodily functions in any way... at least in this version. -- Eric Murray Consulting Security Architect SecureDesign LLC http://www.securedesignllc.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From rah at shipwright.com Sun Oct 29 12:06:01 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 15:06:01 -0500 Subject: CDR: Phil Agre on "trusted" intermediaries (was Re: [RRE]notes and recommendations) In-Reply-To: <200010291415.GAA40712@alpha.oac.ucla.edu> References: <200010291415.GAA40712@alpha.oac.ucla.edu> Message-ID: At 6:15 AM -0800 on 10/29/00, Phil Agre wrote: > It is often held that Internet privacy problems will be eliminated by > a new class of online third parties called "trusted intermediaries". > The idea is that, instead of visiting Amazon.com directly, you would > visit Trustme.com, and then you would go "through" that site to get to > Amazon. Now, this scheme can work at a basic level if Amazon doesn't > have to know anything about it. That's what Zero Knowledge Systems > is doing. But that only works if the > relationship between the customer and the vendor is relatively simple. > A third party that requires Amazon's cooperation, for example because > of its distinctive interface for processing pseudonymous requests for > sensitive personal information, seems much less plausible to me. What > company is going to allow an intermediary to get between it and its > customers? Amazon? Bank of America? It doesn't seem likely. They'd > have to worry that the intermediary would add its own services or take > money to redirect the customer to competitors. Those firms could feel > compelled to cooperate with an intermediary if the intermediary became > well-established, but if most online marketplaces become monopolies > or near-monopolies then this isn't likely. Trusted intermediaries > are not an entirely useless idea. But like most companies pioneering > new technologies they will have to establish themselves niches in the > short term before they can even understand the nature of the problem > in the long term. -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From honig at sprynet.com Sun Oct 29 13:18:30 2000 From: honig at sprynet.com (David Honig) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 16:18:30 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Mobile phone guns seized In-Reply-To: References: <001201c04165$6ccdc1a0$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20001029131513.007de100@pop.sprynet.com> At 02:11 PM 10/29/00 -0500, Tim May wrote: >At 1:02 AM -0400 10/29/00, jim bell wrote: >>Subject: Mobile phone guns seized >>> FROM DAVID LISTER IN BRUSSELS >>> HANDGUNS made to look like mobile phones and activated by tapping a button >> >>Okay, but how many cents per minute, huh? Do I gotta sign a contract? Is >>the data stream encrypted with GSM? What's the talk-time? Roaming charges? >> > >Their product is _targeted_ at those who want _shell_ accounts and >who have the right _cartridge_ drives. Sounds like a _bullseye_ to >me. This may _trigger_ more such products, according to a _magazine_ >article I read. Scraping the _barrel_, I'd say, so maybe we need to >_muzzle_ the reporters. Cute, but if you want real bang for your cellphone buck, dial 1-800-MOSSAD. Their phones will really make (what's left of) your head spin. And "all the minutes you'll need" too... From baptista at pccf.net Sun Oct 29 14:06:36 2000 From: baptista at pccf.net (!Dr. Joe Baptista) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 17:06:36 -0500 (EST) Subject: CDR: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson Message-ID: John Palmer is on the right track .. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 16:04:02 -0600 From: John Palmer To: ga at dnso.org Subject: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton Mr. Touton, This is to inform you that AGN Domain Name Service, Inc is asserting legals rights to the top level domains .USA, .EARTH and .Z. We have operated a registry for these top-level domains since late 1995. If you check the famous "Postel List", you can see that we were one of the first applicants for new top level domains in late 1995. At that time, we established our registry and have been in operation since that time taking registrations in .EARTH and .USA. In March of 1997, we added the .Z top-level domain. ADNS disagrees with the direction that ICANN is taking the Domain Name System and we do not choose to participate in the ICANN process. Instead, we are supporting alternative root server networks and will continue to do so. Although none of our three top-level domains have been entered into the ICANN application process at this time, we would like to inform you that we are asserting legal ownership of these top level domains. Any attempt to add them to the ICANN controlled root zone under the control and ownership of any other party will be considered by ADNS to be an infringement of our legal rights and we will take appropriate action. For ICANN to assign these top-level domains to another party in the ICANN root would dilute our service mark and damage our company financially. In addition to this, it would also fragment the internet as there would be two different versions of the same top-level domain. In spite of Ms.Dyson's claim, alternative root networks take great care not to allow fragmentation by allowing competing versions of top level domains into their root zones if they are already in existence in another root zone. We would expect ICANN to take the same care and consideration to avoid fragmentation. There is room for all of us on the internet. Please respect our rights to operate our business and respect the rights of alternative root networks. If you have any questions, you can contact me by e-mail. You may consider this an "open letter" and can publish it if you wish. John P. Palmer President AGN Domain Name Service (ADNS), Inc. Chicago, IL --- You are currently subscribed to ncdnhc-discuss as: baptista at pccf.net To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ncdnhc-discuss-2645B at lyris.isoc.org From abs at squig.org Sun Oct 29 17:12:06 2000 From: abs at squig.org (Alex B. Shepardsen) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 17:12:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > As for finding ways to see who is avoiding looking at yoiur > advertisements, most of the ad filtering is done at the recipient's > machine, right? Gonna be hard for you to reach into their machines to > see if they're running ad busters in a local script. Unless they're running Windows with one of the numerous vulnerabilities announced this month. Then it becomes rather easy to reach into their system and do all sorts of nice things. Alexandra From tratmall at home.com Sun Oct 29 17:42:48 2000 From: tratmall at home.com (tratmall at home.com) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 17:42:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: TRUE OR FALSE: "You can't possibly earn a living by shopping on the web"... Message-ID: <200010300142.RAA29618@cyberpass.net> You're smart, entrepreneurial and persevering. That's why, by the end of this message, you will appreciate why it IS reasonable and realistic to earn compounding residual income simply by shopping on-line and inviting others to do the same. THE "OfferGiant.Com" PROGRAM IS SIMPLE AND EFFECTIVE A large number of major retailers (475 and rapidly growing -- and most of whom you'll recognize) are motivated to grow their new eCommerce business. Instead of expensive advertising, they would rather pay generous commissions simply for buying from them through a single, well organized web site, and for recommending others to do the same. When you do introduce others, you are further incented with cumulative and residual commissions. Although you may correctly assume a multi-level structure, this program nearly eliminates the drawbacks of most MLMs: - No inventory to work with: thanks to eCommerce, everything is drop-shipped and sales volume is automatically calculated - No up-lines or down-lines to coordinate with: the program is so simple there's nothing to organize -- all the instructions and commission rates are plainly spelled out right on the web site - Even if you don't plan to introduce the program, it is a nicely designed "on-line mall" to find and save on just about anything you can imagine - No hard selling: Just introduce it and the web site does the rest - This is the chance to be at the leading edge of a new network which can pay generous monthly commissions for little effort beyond referring those you know and buying what you already purchase at the mall or over the web LET'S DO THE MATH AND PROVE THAT IT CAN BE DONE! Now that you've got the basics of this program, let's see how the subject line can quickly become a reality. 1. You buy $40 worth of books and $60 worth of gifts through your own "on-line mall" which you can purchase for $50. So, you're out $150, but you've got your books and gifts which you would have spent $100 on anyway. 2. You tell a dozen friends about your mall, and six buy their own mall. At the end of the following full month, you receive $25 for each friend who bought a mall and you receive about $15 back for your $100 of on-line purchases -- grossing $165: already putting you in the black! 3. Your six friends end up buying books, equipment, gifts, long distance service, food, travel and plenty of other merchandise through their own on-line malls, earning you residual commissions: not to mention the extra referral fees you receive when they introduce their own contacts who buy malls. As I'm sure you deduced, this process is compounding and potentially exponential! IT'S YOUR MOVE You can be earning while you're shopping from your own home and building your network of referred shoppers with no products to move, and nothing further to do other than buy through your mall with companies you know and trust, collect your monthly commission check and tell others - which you'll be excited to do anyway! This is an opportunity whose potential is clear to understand, and will only demand the time you choose to invest. This program is so self-supportive that you won't even need my guidance: just as the people you introduce won't require yours. Everything is detailed at the OfferGiant.com's web site. However, I am here to personally answer any questions you have. You will find my contact information at the web page referenced below, as well as a link to my on-line mall which can answer your remaining questions and set you up instantly with your own mall. So... get paid for buying books, gifts, long distance service, food, travel, sports equipment and tons of other stuff that you and your friends buy anyway! Now the choice is yours... LET IT GO, OR CLICK BELOW! http://members.home.net/trataiczak ___________________________________________________________ If you wish to be removed from future mailings, please reply with the subject "Remove" and you will automatically be removed from future mailings. From declan at well.com Sun Oct 29 14:47:27 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 17:47:27 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479F@cobra.netsolve.net>; from carskar@netsolve.net on Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 03:23:31PM -0500 References: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479F@cobra.netsolve.net> Message-ID: <20001029174727.A15476@cluebot.com> On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 03:23:31PM -0500, Carskadden, Rush wrote: > Eric, > Glad to hear that all it takes to "get your vote" is a reckless > executive pardon of criminals that is designed to utilize executive power to > bypass the checks and balances system and negate the efforts of the > legislative and judicial branches of government (known in some circles as > "saying 'fuck the constitution'"). So to clarify (because I am completely This is amusing. If people were locked up for being gay, or black, or somesuch, if there were such a law prohibiting those conditions on the books, and a less statist president took office, you would presumably oppose the pardoning of all such "criminals." Oh, you wouldn't? Then you're not concerned about "checks and balances," but you just don't like full drug legalization. -Declan From bill.stewart at pobox.com Sun Oct 29 18:10:57 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 18:10:57 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <200010292003.OAA10466@manifold.algebra.com> References: <3.0.5.32.20001028175239.00aab330@idiom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001029181057.00a75b40@idiom.com> At 02:03 PM 10/29/00 -0600, Igor Chudov wrote: >A thoughtful message. Thanks. Basically my site absolutely relies >on cookies for several things, such as the linear algebra workbench, >standardized testing, and "My Homework". Using cookies for maintaining state in applications like that is what cookies were originally intended for; it's reasonable to check and remind people to turn them on for those applications. But in general, they won't be useful for determining whether somebody's running a junk buster or not because lots of people do turn them off. >Maybe the desire to reject junkbusters users is due to my asshole >personality rather than arational business thinking. I think that Tim is >right, the clueless kiddos who visit algebra.com do not run junkbusters. If 10% of them run junkbusters, it's no real problem for you. If 90% of them do, that'd be a different issue. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From declan at well.com Sun Oct 29 15:17:06 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 18:17:06 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479B@cobra.netsolve.net>; from carskar@netsolve.net on Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:09:40AM -0500 References: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A3530555479B@cobra.netsolve.net> Message-ID: <20001029181705.A15803@cluebot.com> Rush is clearly someone with too much time on his hands and too little (demonstrated) ability to think things through. I apologize for being uncharacteristically blunt, but the essay below is terribly naive. You might as well try to draft C.J Parker for president. First, political parties are not single-issue parties, at least not right now. Education and taxes and health care will likely continue to be more important in most people's lives than technology policy for the foreseeable future. Second, privacy is an amorphous issue. It's used by leftists to regulate the private sector and outlaw transactions between consenting adults. Liberals use it to talk about abortion. Conservatives link it to everything from the FBI files under Clinton to Carnivore. What do *you* mean? And why do you think everyone else is going to agree? Third, there already is (as others have suggested) a party that's concerned about personal freedom: the LP. If you mirror their positions -- or even a substantial subset -- you will be similarly marginalized. If not, don't look for support -- I humbly suggest -- on the cpunx list. Fourth, nowadays it seems that political parties can be formed (Ross Perot, Ralph Nader) or popularized only by a strong and well-known personality. It will help if they're a billionaire. May I suggest a recruiting trip to the Redmond suburbs? Fifth, and perhaps most importantly, technology issues are an outgrowth of a canadidates' general stand on regulation. If they don't like taxes, you can bet they'll be against Internet taxes. If they're a national security hawk, they'll probably like encryption and supercomputer export regs. Etc. Sixth, you don't seem to need a political party but a thinktank or similar creature. Why not try that instead? I was thinking of starting a nonproit group devoted to a subset of cypherpunkly topics; perhaps I still will. -Declan On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:09:40AM -0500, Carskadden, Rush wrote: > Scott and I have been discussing (from a theoretical standpoint) the > possibility of a third party that focuses on privacy and personal freedom, > and the difficulties in gaining creedence for this third party, as opposed > to the difficulties associated with influencing existing major parties > (either of them) to take a stronger stance on these issues. Assuming that > you could reconcile your differences with either Democrats or Republicans in > order to gain a strong Washington D.C. presence on a few key issues, would > that approach be easier than creating a viable "third" party? What > percentage of the voters do you think are holding on to a very few key > issues from their party of choice, and would be willing to vote for another > party that could give them equally strong representation on those issues? > > ok, > Rush Carskadden > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Schram [mailto:scott at schram.net] > Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 4:14 PM > To: Carskadden, Rush > Subject: RE: Bachus > > > Hi Rush, > > I mentioned the "third party", inspired by my frustration with the two > leading parties, and their apparent lack of understanding about technology, > and privacy issues. > > Some thoughts about the current parties: > > Al Gore's populist rhetoric about drug companies which completely overlooks > the fact that we're on the eve of incredible discoveries and it costs lots > of money to research and bring new drugs to market. Despite what Gore has > indicated, big pharma spends about 4 times as much on research as they do on > advertising. > > George W. Bush's hints at dropping the Microsoft suit (and the tobacco suit > for that matter.) The recent Republican (I think) proposals to link Social > Security information to IRS information. > > Our government is (probably justifiably) paranoid about attacks from > external and internal terrorists. It is easier for terrorists to cause > problems than it is for the government to prevent them. Each time an > incident happens, people call for more preventative measures, thus we have: > Secret searches (and bugging) of homes, no-knock entries, the Carnivore IP > monitoring system, etc. Did you see the recent HBO special about extremist > groups and their use of the internet to encourage action by "lone wolf" > sociopaths? Nobody wants to appear soft on this kind of crime. > > Libertarians have some cool ideas (at least they sound cool), but I can't > imagine withdrawing all of our military force from the world and limit > ourselves to defending our borders. Our enemies would have a field day. > Further, while I'm pro-business, I'm all for them playing "in bounds" and > only a strong referee can keep some of them from dumping PCBs at the local > playground. > > The Reform Party is basically an old-time circus freak show, and I mean no > disrespect to circus freaks. > > A number of issues are no longer "Right" or "Left". > > So, back to your question: > > The third party route would probably be very difficult. It's not clear > whether it would actually dilute efforts to influence the major parties. I > offer this hypothesis: The way the system works now, with third parties > being excluded from debates, often excluded from matching funds, the > electoral college that makes for artificial "landslide" elections for the > major candidates... all of these things tend to squash the life out of any > third party. > > I believe that people interested in the new issues are growing, and we might > find allies in unexpected places. For example, my southern baptist friends > were not very happy with the long census form. > > I have used the following techniques with some success: > > Letter writing to congress still works. I have written to other > representatives in the state if they happened to be the only one on a > committee, or even representatives for other states. www.smokefree.org > is an excellent example of publicizing issues > and encouraging people to write letters. > > I don't think phone calls work quite as well, but I recall influencing an > issue in this way. It was a niche issue, and I got some attention with a > careful explanation. (The issue was: For a while, songwriters and authors > were not able to deduct business expenses unless they were able to relate > directly to the song or work that was produced with that expense.) > > One of my favorite things to do is write a short, punchy (often satirical) > letter to the editor. Their paper starts out blank every day, and I have > yet to get one rejected doing it this way. If it's a technology issue, you > might be the only one writing in on that topic, and thus more likely to get > in print. > > Give money, either to candidates or groups like EFF or whatever. > > There's some random thoughts for you Rush, and you can repost any of them if > you see fit. Thanks for your questions! What do you think? What are the > most important issues in your mind? > > Scott > http://schram.net > > At 09:41 AM 10/25/00, you wrote: > > > > Scott, > Thank you for the link and the clarification of my info. I agree about > your assertion that a "third" party may better see to our concerns, but do > we think it would be easier to create a third party and give it enough > creedance to fill our needs, or do you think it would be easier to influence > existing party members to take a stronger stance? My assumption has been > that existing party members are not very concrete about the technology > issues. I don't think there is an old school party line in regards to > technology in and of itself on either side. Do you think that we can sway > them? Or are we forced to create a new party just to get an issue addressed > as we wish it could be? Possibly a harder question still is whether we could > live with either of the parties even if they did take a strong stance on > technological issues... Maybe a question for the entire list, but I didn't > want to stick your private reply up there without asking you. What do you > think, though? > > ok, > Rush Carskadden > > From declan at well.com Sun Oct 29 15:29:38 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 18:29:38 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <20001028201521.G9082@ils.unc.edu>; from gbnewby@ils.unc.edu on Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 08:15:22PM -0400 References: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> <20001028201521.G9082@ils.unc.edu> Message-ID: <20001029182938.B15803@cluebot.com> On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 08:15:22PM -0400, Greg Newby wrote: > Let's assume you could catch Junkbusters users this way. Their > workaround might be to GET the banner file, but abort the connection > before the file transfers. Much tougher to catch.. You're be burning > far more CPU cycles than just for regular Web serving. It's not clear Interrupted downloads may be reported in Apache's error log... -Declan From bill.stewart at pobox.com Sun Oct 29 18:37:52 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 18:37:52 -0800 Subject: CDR: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson In-Reply-To: <972866515.39fcc3d35f225@webmail.cotse.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001029183752.00b02a90@idiom.com> At 07:41 PM 10/29/00 -0500, brflgnk at cotse.com wrote: >At 05:06 PM 10/29/00 -0500, Joe said: > >> John Palmer is on the right track .. > >This is the same John Palmer that once tried to unmoderate all of alt.*. I >guess age does bring wisdom. > This is also the same Joe Baptista who's not supposed to email or fax the government* of (Ontario, I think?) because he used to contact _all_ of them when they (collectively) did or failed to do something that they need to be told to do or not do or do differently or whatever. Apparently the Canadian equivalent to "needs killing" is "needs faxing".... and they weren't prepared to deal with that. [*I'm using "government" in the US sense, which includes everybody in the civil service working for them, rather than the British sense, which refers to the top office-holders in the ruling party, (US-speak "The Administration".) I'm not sure which term Canada tends to use. ] Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From abs at squig.org Sun Oct 29 18:44:06 2000 From: abs at squig.org (Alex B. Shepardsen) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 18:44:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <200010281908.OAA02318@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Igor Chudov wrote: > > Has anyone had cybersex with your incarnation of G W Bush? [shudder] > > > > yep, numerous times. the funny thing is that the "AI" program that is I don't know who's more screwed up: the people who attempt cybersex with your AI GWB, you for programming the AI to respond to people initiating cybersex, or us for finding it fascinating that this occurs. [snip] > My experience with splotchy and georgewbush illustrates ridiculousness > of most human conversations. [snip] > Answer: I like talking to you > User: so do i I had the opportunity several years ago to have dinner with author Gentry Lee. We discussed the state of employment in the coming century if it presented a future where automation was ubiquitous. Lee hypothesized that less than 10% of the population would be employed at any given time. All labor and services that could be done by machines and computers would be. (This was about the time that NeXT Cubes were running the NeXT manufacturing plant, and everyone found that so amazing...) The intelligentsia would become the working class. Humans would only need to "work" as architects of the automation system. People in these roles would work for a small period of time, but spend most of their lives unemployed. He predicted that the unemployed masses would spend their time in reality simulation programs, living out fantasy lives. This had the benefit of limiting the visible effects of overpopulation, crime, and other social problems. He presented this as a utopian view of the future. I disagreed for two main reasons. I didn't see it likely that 10% of the world's population would be interested in working to support the other 90%, without receiving something in return. (_The Matrix_ was still a few years from being released, so the thought of using people as a fuel source hadn't occurred to me. I did suggest that perhaps a Soylent Green type scenario might provide some justification for such a lop-sided burden on this working minority, but not enough.) I don't recall that Lee had any really solid answer to this argument. The other issue I had, and the one that applies to this thread, is that I found it impossible to believe that AI personalities and VR environments would have developed far enough to provide systems capable of passing the Turing test [is there an equivalent test for VR systems? A user should not be able to distinguish between VR and reality... ] and thus the 90% of idle masses would not be content to be fed brain candy, rotting their lives away in computer generated fantasies. I'm becoming convinced that I was wrong. I've heard of people dropping out of college because they have spent too much time on text-based MUDs. I've seen teenagers go into debt so that they could spend most of their waking moments in the arcades. And now, I've read a transcript of a person getting herself off through a text conversation with a stateless program designed to emulate one of the most boring presidential candidates in years. People like this would be more than happy to embrace Lee's virtual reality existence, and would be more than willing to exist on the donations provided by the productive few. I doubt they would be motivated enough to cause any trouble for this plan. Our "human rights" measures are counteracting the natural protections against laziness and stupidity. The human species is in trouble if people like "User" breed. God, I hate welfare. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Sun Oct 29 18:44:49 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 18:44:49 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: thanx my friend In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001029184449.00b018f0@idiom.com> Abuse at hotmail.com kindly agreed to teach this particular bomb some phenomenology. So either he's a clueless kid who'll have to get a new Hotmail or Yahoo account after being whacked, or he's a clueless Law Entrapment Officer who'll have to do so, or he's a troll who's had an afternoon's entertainment :-) At 01:17 AM 10/30/00 +0000, David E. Smith wrote: >On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, sam ram wrote: > >> : Hi, can you please show me a easy way to make a home made bomb by using >> things from the house. so please write back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > >This depends largely on whether your home is equipped with a >camcorder. Assuming it is, here's the instructions: > >1. Get a piece of Scotch tape, and your copy of last month's WWF >Pay-Per-View that you foolishly bought. Put the tape over the little notch >on the end of the tape, so you can record over the TLC ("Tables, Ladders, >and Chairs") (oh my!) match. > >2. Call up five of your friends (assuming one of your friends is Paul >Anderson and another one is Kurt Russell). > >3. Get some guns. These should be easy to acquire. If you already have one >gun, you can use it to acquire more; this, however, is beyond the scope of >these Step By Step (TM) instructions. > >4. Go to your local junkyard at night. > >5. Have random people start shooting the guns at Kurt, while he mutters >and grunts but doesn't say anything. Have Paul point the camera at random >stuff. > >There you go. You've just re-created the bomb "Soldier." > >HTH. HAND. > >...dave > > > > > >---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151 >http://www.technopagan.org/ dave at technopagan.org > >"I must remember to destroy those children after my > breakfast has been eaten." -- Mojo Jojo > > > > > Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From abs at squig.org Sun Oct 29 19:09:14 2000 From: abs at squig.org (Alex B. Shepardsen) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 19:09:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: Re: CIA in Oregon, Intelink In-Reply-To: <200010281105.HAA30873@smtp6.mindspring.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, John Young wrote: > Mail to mueller at bendnet.com bounced. Rather a > bounce message was returned from bendnet.com, > and surely cloaks delivery of the message. I tried @bend.com. (bendnet.com is rewritten to bend.com when accessed via http). abs at suffy:/home/abs$ telnet mail.bend.com 25 Trying 199.2.205.69... Connected to mail.bend.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 X1 NT-ESMTP Server mail.bend.com (IMail 6.04 64477-1) expn mueller 550 list not found vrfy mueller 252 Cannot VRFY user quit 221 Goodbye Connection closed by foreign host. abs at suffy:/home/abs$ mueller doesn't exist as one of the webpages on http://www.bend.com/bendnet/users.php either. > And the cc to dan at istac.gov would not even leave this > mailer. So it seemed. But the window glass shivered. What's the whois server for .gov? I could have sworn it was whois.nic.gov... but that appears to be nonexistant at the moment. > Spookery is awesome. Isn't it? From abs at squig.org Sun Oct 29 19:10:55 2000 From: abs at squig.org (Alex B. Shepardsen) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 19:10:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: thanx my friend In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Baking soda. Vinegar. Mix. Fizzle. On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, sam ram wrote: > : Hi, can you please show me a easy way to make a home made bomb by using > things from the house. so please write back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > _________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. > From abs at squig.org Sun Oct 29 19:16:08 2000 From: abs at squig.org (Alex B. Shepardsen) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 19:16:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001028130920.01aa2880@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, James A. Donald wrote: > The problem is that those whose job it is to enforce such limits on > government, personally benefit from escaping those limits, thus all > attempts to limit government ultimately fail. Additionally, any group wishing to overthrow a current government to establish a replacement sympathetic to its own issues and concerns will likewise be unresponsive to the needs of the people it is ruling, regardless of its intentions. This is why revolution will never go out of style. Alex From baptista at pccf.net Sun Oct 29 16:26:10 2000 From: baptista at pccf.net (Joe Baptista) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 19:26:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: CDR: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson In-Reply-To: <972866515.39fcc3d35f225@webmail.cotse.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 brflgnk at cotse.com wrote: > At 05:06 PM 10/29/00 -0500, Joe said: > > > John Palmer is on the right track .. > > This is the same John Palmer that once tried to unmoderate all of alt.*. I > guess age does bring wisdom. I don't know - I'll ask. -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697 From brflgnk at cotse.com Sun Oct 29 16:41:55 2000 From: brflgnk at cotse.com (brflgnk at cotse.com) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 19:41:55 -0500 Subject: CDR: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson Message-ID: <972866515.39fcc3d35f225@webmail.cotse.com> At 05:06 PM 10/29/00 -0500, Joe said: > John Palmer is on the right track .. This is the same John Palmer that once tried to unmoderate all of alt.*. I guess age does bring wisdom. From abs at squig.org Sun Oct 29 20:14:16 2000 From: abs at squig.org (Alex B. Shepardsen) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 20:14:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: Re: CIA in Oregon, Intelink In-Reply-To: <972877759.39fcefbf0cd3e@webmail.cotse.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 brflgnk at cotse.com wrote: > Quoting "Alex B. Shepardsen" : > Many SMTP servers disable EXPN and VRFY for security reasons, > typically by returning failure messages. True. (Well, most actually return access denied messages.) But in this case, the user most likely doesn't exist. I was on the wrong trail with mail.bend.com. mail.bendnet.com exists as well, and is a sendmail server. Note the successful EXPN operation for "root" on that server, but the failed VRFY and EXPN for mueller. abs at snuffy abs]$ telnet mail.bend.com 25 Trying 199.2.205.69... Connected to mail.bend.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 X1 NT-ESMTP Server mail.bend.com (IMail 6.04 64563-1) helo squig.org 250 hello mail.bend.com mail from: nobody at squig.org 250 ok rcpt to:mueller 550 unknown user rcpt to:mueller at bendnet.com 550 not local host bendnet.com, not a gateway rcpt to:mueller at bend.com 550 unknown user quit 221 Goodbye Connection closed by foreign host. [abs at snuffy abs]$ telnet mail.bendnet.com 25 Trying 199.2.205.68... Connected to mail.bendnet.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 mail.bendnet.com ESMTP Sendmail 8.10.0/8.10.0/BENDNET-MX.wh; Sun, 29 Oct 2000 20:08:10 -0800 (PST) helo squig.org 250 mail.bendnet.com Hello adsl-63-202-76-26.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.202.76.26], pleased to meet you expn mueller 550 5.1.1 mueller... User unknown vrfy mueller 550 5.1.1 mueller... User unknown expn mueller at bendnet.com 550 5.1.1 mueller at bendnet.com... User unknown expn root 250-2.1.5 Spencer Dahl 250 2.1.5 quit 221 2.0.0 mail.bendnet.com closing connection Connection closed by foreign host. [abs at snuffy abs]$ Alexandra From nick.bantock at netcom.ca Sun Oct 29 20:24:27 2000 From: nick.bantock at netcom.ca (nick.bantock at netcom.ca) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 20:24:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: The Artful Dodger Message-ID: <200010300424.UAA03262@cyberpass.net> Hi , THE ARTFUL DODGER, my new book, has just been published. If you would like to see a gallery slide show, read excerpts or check out my new line of rubberstamps, then visit my personal website at: http://www.fan-dango.com/Bantock/Dodger/Art.html Don't forget to enter the contest to win autographed books and posters before the October 31st deadline. Yours, Nick Bantock (Creator of the Griffin & Sabine Trilogy) P.S. To be removed from my address book, send a blank reply and put "A FIG" in the subject box. From anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net Sun Oct 29 17:47:12 2000 From: anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net (An Metet) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 20:47:12 -0500 Subject: CDR: NZ: Sweeping powers for spy agencies Message-ID: http://www.stuff.co.nz/inl/print/0,1103,460236a10,FF.html 29 OCTOBER 2000 Police and government spy agencies are pushing for major new surveillance powers - including the ability to intercept e-mails. In a move the Council for Civil Liberties labels a "major and disturbing intrusion" new surveillance laws are being planned which will allow police and intelligence agencies to hack covertly into home computers and intercept email and other electronic communication. Researcher and author Nicky Hager, says the proposed legislation strongly resembles the British Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act passed amid huge controversy three months ago. But he says unlike the British experience, the New Zealand legislation is being slipped through in stages, as extensions of present laws. The first is to be tabled in parliament in about 10 days. The laws were devised under the National government and can be traced back to a push by the FBI in the United States for standardised spy systems to intercept mobile phones and emails. The changes are now being promoted by Associate Justice Minister Paul Swain, and would also impose "requirements" on Internet service providers and phone companies to co-operate with intelligence agencies and police and install systems to assist spying on their customers. Hager, whose 1996 book on the global Echelon surveillance network prompted a year-long investigation by the European parliament, said the public had a right to demand proof that the new intrusive powers were so crucial that individuals had to give up privacy and freedoms. He said the way the changes were being introduced, piecemeal and in secret, was "a model of bad government". The first legislation expands the interception powers of the police and the Government Communications Security Bureau to cover all forms of electronic communications (including email, faxes and text messaging) and, for the Security Intelligence Service as well, to cover hacking into computer systems to view and copy people's files. This would be achieved by amending the Crimes Act to make it illegal to intercept emails or hack into computers - and then exempting all the intelligence and law enforcement agencies from the new law. The legislation will also increase the status of the GCSB, moving its existing powers into the Crimes Act. The other half of the plan is changes to the Telecommunications Act, requiring telephone companies to make systems "interceptable". Hager says New Zealand officials secretly agreed to implement the surveillance changes after attending a meeting at the FBI headquarters in Quantico, south of Washington DC, in 1993. Swain says the driving force of the law changes is the wish to protect privacy because there is no legislation to say "wandering into someone's internal communications system is illegal". The exemptions for the government agencies came later, he said. From baptista at pccf.net Sun Oct 29 18:01:03 2000 From: baptista at pccf.net (!Dr. Joe Baptista) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 21:01:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: CDR: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001029183752.00b02a90@idiom.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Bill Stewart wrote: > At 07:41 PM 10/29/00 -0500, brflgnk at cotse.com wrote: > >At 05:06 PM 10/29/00 -0500, Joe said: > > > >> John Palmer is on the right track .. > > > >This is the same John Palmer that once tried to unmoderate all of alt.*. I > >guess age does bring wisdom. > > > > This is also the same Joe Baptista who's not supposed to > email or fax the government* of (Ontario, I think?) Actually no - that's not the case. The fax thing is part of legend - or fame whatever, right. I used to fax the government of ontario via my own designed fax balasting facilities. This was before the advent of email, which I find more effecient. Although fax is more expensive for government. I used to cost them about $5,000,000 $CAN per year in fax stationary costs. But email is more efficient. I recently emailed the entire US govenment expressing my concerns to the civil servants over the US govenment action on domains (ICANN). That went over well. I also emailed all of the egyptian government over ICANN and president mubarek ended up standing them up (he was going to speak at the opeining meeting). Now - the only court order I am under is from Judge Edmond Brown of London. I am under a gag order to not discuss the abuse of children in fort lauderdale florida and cornwall ontario, including the government coverup involved nor can I reveal the names of the senior law officers involved both in the abuse of children and in conceilment and destruction of the evidence. Up here in Canada it's OK to fuck children as yonge as 8 - provided your part of the establishment. So that's about it for that. > because he used to contact _all_ of them when they > (collectively) did or failed to do something that they need > to be told to do or not do or do differently or whatever. No - you might be getting that confused with the Dr. baptista's Freedom Of Information campaign which resulted in an overhaul of the entire FOIR system in Ontario. That one cost my governments in excess of 500 million $CND, so they decided to stream line the system - and now our FOIR commissioner practices interior decore in her offices. The commissioner who was the senior FOIR officer under my campaign ended up adjudicating tribunals for used car sales. A great way to end ones carrer. For the longest time he disappeared, and we though he was dead. You know politicians will kill each other if necessary. If blackmail don't work ... etc. > Apparently the Canadian equivalent to "needs killing" is "needs faxing".... > and they weren't prepared to deal with that. were a very civil society. but canadians have been bombing politicians recently (and for the last five years). So who knows what's going to happen. There's only so much those poor canuks can get pissed on before they hang their prime minister. > > [*I'm using "government" in the US sense, which includes everybody > in the civil service working for them, rather than the British sense, > which refers to the top office-holders in the ruling party, > (US-speak "The Administration".) > I'm not sure which term Canada tends to use. ] the cabnet ?? me thinks. > Thanks! > Bill > Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com > PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 > -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697 From baptista at pccf.net Sun Oct 29 18:15:10 2000 From: baptista at pccf.net (Joe Baptista) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 21:15:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: CDR: Re: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson In-Reply-To: <011a01c0421d$957b8980$0100a8c0@matthew> Message-ID: It is a pleasure to advise that I am under a gag order issued by Judge Edmond Brown and as such am unable to take the bait ;-) No can I defend myself ;-) Nor can I discuss any details concerning civil servants sticking candles up little boy bums ;-). How about that for justice - make ya sick - does it not? regards joe On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Me wrote: > From: "Bill Stewart" > > This is also the same Joe Baptista who's not supposed to > > email or fax the government* of (Ontario, I think?) > > Yes, but this is also the Joe Baptista who was served with this: > > CLAIM > > > 1. The Plaintiff claims: > > > (a) damages for libel in the amount of $500,000.00; > > > (b) damages for malicious falsehood in the amount of > $500,000.00; > > > (c) punitive and exemplary damages in the amount of > $500,000.00; > > > (d) an interim, interlocutory and final injunction > restraining the Defendant from communicating with > any person, group of persons, associations or > corporations by facsimile transmission, computer > facilities, including electronic mail and the > "Internet" or in any manner whatsoever except > direct individual communication, wherein such > communication, either directly or indirectly, > refers to or concerns the Plaintiff; > > > (e) costs on a solicitor and client basis; > > > (f) such further and other relief as this Honourable > Court deems just. > > > > 2. The Plaintiff is and at all material times was the Chief > of Police of the City of London Police. > > > > > 3. The Defendant resides in the City of Toronto and is a > self-described: harasser of the police; critic of > government; bulk user of government services; and, > administrative burden to the police. > > > > 4. On or about the 5th day of February, 1995, the Defendant > falsely and maliciously wrote and published of and > concerning the Plaintiff and of him in the way of his > office as Chief of Police to Robert Riley and the public > at large by electronic mail over the Internet, the message > set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto. > > > > 5. On or about June 27th, 1995, the Defendant falsely and > maliciously wrote of and concerning the Plaintiff and of > him in the way of his office as Chief of Police by > letter addressed to the attention of "all concerned > citizens" > as set out in Schedule "B" hereto. > > > > 6. The said letter was published by the Defendant by facsimile > transmission to: > > > (a) the police departments of the following municipalities > in > the Province of Ontario: > (i) LaSalle > (ii) Durham Region; > (iii) Kingston; > (iv) Lakefield; > (v) Brockville; > (vi) Desoronto; > (vii) York Region; > (viii) Anderdon Township; > (ix) Chatham; > (x) Niagara Region; > (xi) Amherstburg; > (xii) Essex; > (xiii) Kemptville; > (xiv) Sudbury Region; > (xv) Lindsay; > (xvi) Windsor; > (xvii) Gananoque; > (xviii) Collingwood; > > > and others not presently known to the Plaintiff; and > > > > (b) the following media outlets in the City of London: > > > (i) 6X Radio, Fanshawe College; > (ii) CJBK Radio 1290; > (iii) CKSL Radio 1410; > (iv) CFPL Radio 98; > (v) CFPL Television; > (vi) The London free Press; > > > and other outlets not presently known to the Plaintiff. > > > > 7. At or about the same time, the aforesaid or similar letter > was further published electronically by the Defendant to the > public at large over the medium of the Internet, > a global computer network. > > > > 8. On or about the 6th day of July, 1995, the Defendant > falsely and maliciously wrote of and concerning the > Plaintiff and of him in the way of his office as > Chief of Police, as set out in Schedule "C" attached > hereto, submissions to the Information and Privacy > Commissioner of Ontario, purportedly pursuant to an Inquiry > being conducted under the Municipal Freedom of Information > and > Protection of Privacy Act. > > > > 9. On or about July 10th, 1995, the Defendant published the > document > attached as Schedule "C" to all of those parties referred to > in paragraph 5 above and others, by facsimile transmission > and > other means of communication. > > > > 10. With respect to the complained of words contained in Schedule > "A", > the Plaintiff pleads that the defamatory sting is contained > within the said communication as a whole and in conjunction > with the complained of words contained in Schedules "B" and " > c ". > > > > 11. With respect to the complained of words contained in Schedule > "B", > the Plaintiff pleads that the defamatory sting is contained > within the said communication as a whole and in conjunction > with the complained of words contained in Schedules "A" and > "C" but particularly in the following words: > (a) "Dr. "; > > > (b) "Attention: all concerned citizens"; > > > (c) "an upcoming inquisition"; > > > (d) "an investigation into the background and > activities of Julian Fantino"; > > > (e) "family and employment history"; > > > (f) "known, suspected or rumoured criminal > activities"; > > > (g) "known, suspected or rumoured homophobic, > sexist, or racist activities > (including actions and statements)"; > > > (h) "any other information of a nature that > might bring Mr. Fantino into > disrepute, and/or before justice". > > > > 12. With respect to the complained of words contained in Schedule > "C", > the Plaintiff pleads that the following words, on their own > and in > conjunction with the complained of words contained in > Schedules > "A" and "B", are maliciously false and defamatory of him: > > > > > (a) "the Information and Privacy Commissioner has been > victim to a criminal conspiracy from within the > ranks > of the London Police Services Board"; > > > (b) "This process is nothing more than the police version > of the silent scream. A futile and miscalculated > adventure by them to avoid or minimalize > prosecution > under the Criminal Code of Canada."; > > > > (c) "Although the old Chief is a principal in this > crime - > he has not been a driving force in its > application. > That honour goes to another who will be > later named." (referring to the Plaintiff); > > > (d) "the actions by the various police agencies to the > court application only merit consideration as > they > relate to criminal behaviour"; > > > (e) "this action has only been taken by the police with > the > intent of avoiding and deflecting criminal > responsibility"; > > > (f) "I only present these facts in support of any claims > of wrongdoing I herein level against the various > irresponsible police authorities as they respect > the > Commissions inquiry."; > > > (g) "I accuse former chief McCormick and chief Julian > Fantino of an offence against authority and > public > order. Both have conspired to maintain > confidences > with respect to my criminal activities and as a > result have assisted me in achieving my goals ... > the police have at all times known and been aware > of my criminal activity ... the police abstained > from the proper criminal procedures and that said > actions were with intent."; > > > (h) "Apart from having his private telephone ... > disclosed > to me and details of a dysfunctional family life, > I was > also able to confirmed(sic) Fantino is not > altogether a > law abiding citizen."; > > > (i) "they (referring to the police and the Plaintiff) > have > in turn become criminal". > > > > 13. The Plaintiff pleads that the words set out in Schedule "A" > are defamatory of him and, in their natural and ordinary > meaning, > meant and were understood to mean and were maliciously > written > and published by the Defendant to be understood to mean, > in and of themselves and in conjunction with the words set > out > in Schedules "B" and illicit that the Plaintiff is: > > (a) porcine; > (b) greedy; > (c) dirty; > (d) an annoying person; > (e) an unpleasant person; > (f) a slovenly person; > (g) a slob; > (h) a despicable person; > (i) a Neanderthal; > (j) primitive; > (k) unintelligent; > (l) aesthetically challenged; > (m) intellectually challenged; and > (n) prehistoric. > > > > 14. The Plaintiff pleads that the complained of words as > contained > in Schedule "B" and particularized in paragraph 11 above, in > their natural and ordinary meaning, meant and were > understood > to mean and were maliciously written and published by the > Defendant to be understood to mean, in and of themselves and > in > conjunction with the words set out in Schedules "A" and "C" > that the Plaintiff: > > > > (a) was guilty of wrongdoing and is the subject of an > officially sanctioned investigation being > conducted > by the Defendant; > > > (b) was and is engaged in criminal activity; > > > (c) is homophobic and was and is engaged in homophobic > activities; > > > > (d) is sexist and was and is engaged in sexist > activities; > > > (e) is racist and was and is engaged in racist > activities; > > > (f) does engage in and has engaged in disreputable > and discreditable activities; > > > (g) has engaged in unlawful activities that should be > subject to judicial sanction; > > > (h) has breached his oath and duty as a police officer > and Chief of Police; and > > > (i) has not conducted himself as a police officer and > Chief > of Police in accordance with law, honesty and > integrity. > > > > 15. The Plaintiff pleads that the complained of words in Schedule > "C" > hereto, as particularized in paragraph 12 above, in their > natural > and ordinary meaning, meant and were understood to mean and > were > maliciously written and published by the Defendant to be > understood > to mean, in and of themselves and in conjunction with the > words set > out in Schedules "A" and "B", that the Plaintiff: > > > > (a) has contravened the criminal law; > > > (b) is a criminal; > > > (c) has engaged in a criminal conspiracy; > > > (d) has, by a criminal action, victimized the > Information > and Privacy Commissioner; > > > (e) has breached his public duty as a police officer > and > Chief of Police; > > > (f) has engaged in civil proceedings involving the > Information and Privacy Commissioner in order > to > subvert the criminal law and/or to prevent > exposure and prosecution for his own criminal > acts; > > > (g) is a criminal ringleader; > > > > (h) is participating in wrongdoing and unlawful > activities; > > (i) has covered up criminal wrongdoing; and > is an unfit husband and father. > > > > 17. The Plaintiff pleads that the complained of words published > by the > Defendant were calculated to and did disparage the Plaintiff > in his > calling as a police officer and Chief of Police. > > > > 18. Furthermore, the Plaintiff pleads that the Defendant > published the > complained of words out of malevolence or spite towards the > Plaintiff, > > > > 19. By reason of the publication of the complained of words by > the > Defendant, the Plaintiff has been much injured in his credit > and > reputation and has been brought into scandal, odium and > contempt > and has thereby suffered damage. > > > > 20. The Defendant intends to continue the publication of the same > or > similar defamatory charges against the Plaintiff; > > > > 21. Further and in the alternative, the Plaintiff pleads that the > complained of words set out in Schedules "A", "B" and "C" > and as > particularized in paragraphs 11, 12 and 13 are untrue, were > published with express malice and constitute malicious > falsehoods. > > > > 22. The Plaintiff pleads and relies upon Section 19 of the Libel > & > Slander Act, R. S. 0. 1990, Chapter L12 as amended. > > > > > 23. The Plaintiff proposes that this action be tried at the City > of > London, in the County of Middlesex. > > > > > > > > > > And responded, unsuccessfully, with this: > > > > STATEMENT OF DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM > > > 1. The defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraphs > 2, 3 > and 8 of the statement of claim. > 2. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraphs > 1, 7 > (page 3), 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20 and 21 of the > statement > of claim. > 3. The defendant has no knowledge in respect of the allegations > contained in paragraphs 6, 7 (page 5), 9 and 19 of the statement > of claim. > 4. The defendant is the system administrator to planet earth. > 5. The defendant is an internet god. > 6. The defendant is at war with the government of Canada du jour. > 7. The defendant is the government of Canada de facto. > 8. The defendant is inquisitor to Alberto Araujo Cunha, sometimes > known as Albert Araujo, Albert Cunha, Alberto Cunha, and Alberto > Araujo, > a priest to the roman catholic order and reformed cocaine dealer. > 9. The defendant is inquisitor to Julian Fantino the plaintiff to > this action. > 10. The defendant by act of war warns this court that it has no > jurisdiction in this action. > 11. The defendant by inquisition advises the court that limited > jurisdiction is granted this court with respect to facilitating > the > continued inquisition of Julian Fantino a plaintiff to this > action. > 12. The defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 2 > of > the statement of claim. The defendant has been successfully at > war with > the government of Canada du jour, and associated entities since > April 1993. > 13. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 7 > (page 3) of the statement of claim. The electronic mail > communication > set out in Schedule A of the plaintiffs statement of claim is a > forged > communication which does not comply with network news transfer > protocol > standards employed by the posting agent at the host server at > planet.earth.org. > 14. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 5 > of > the statement of claim. The defendant believes the document set > out in > schedule B to the plaintiffs statement of claim originated from > the > ExtraTerrestrial Archives (ETA) an independent agent and > archivists to > the inquisition of Julian Fantino. The defendant however is > unable to > verify the ETAs authorship of the stated document since ETA > archive > access to internet public inquisitors is denied. > 15. The defendant further claims that any individual with an > internet > account may access the necessary documents and files that can > reproduce > the defendants letterhead and signature in electronic form. > 16. The defendant further claims that the document set out in > schedule B to the plaintiffs statement of claim is in form and > content > acceptable to the defendant as a inquisition document. > 17. The defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 8 > of > the statement of claim but denies that the submissions made under > the > Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act to > the > Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario were in any way > false or > malicious. The defendant further claims that the document set out > in > schedule C to the plaintiffs statement of claim is not a true > copy of the > original text published by the Information and Privacy > Commissioner of > Ontario. > 18. The defendant further claims that the plaintiff has > contravened > the criminal law of Canada, is a criminal and has engaged in a > criminal > conspiracy with one William McCormick a former police chief to > the > Metropolitan Toronto Police. > 19. The defendant further claims that the plaintiff has engaged > in > unlawful activities and has breached his public duty as a police > officer > and Chief of Police. > 20. The defendant further claims that as a result of this > criminal > activity the public and the Information and Privacy Commissioner > have > been victimized by the plaintiff. > 21. The defendant further claims that as a result of this > criminal > activity government processes and democratic principals have been > jeopardized by the plaintiff. > 22. The defendant by declaration of war further claims that the > criminal behavior exhibited by the plaintiff is good and has > served the > defendants purposes and goals in destabilizing government > structures and > systems. > 23. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph > 10, > 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 21 of the plaintiffs statement of claim. > The > defendant did not author the documents contained in schedule A > and B to > the plaintiffs statement of claim and therefore any reference to > these > documents in support of any allegation is void and irrelevant. > 24. The defendant pleads that he agrees with the interpretation > of > schedule C to the plaintiffs statement of claim contained in > paragraphs > 15. (a), 15. (b), 15. (c), 15. (d), 15. (e), 15. (f), 15. (h) and > 15. (i). > 25. The defendant has no knowledge of the allegation contained in > paragraph 15. (g) of the plaintiffs statement of claim. The > defendant > pleads and believes that the plaintiff does not have the > necessary skills > or competence to be a criminal ringleader. > 26. The defendant has no knowledge of the allegations contained > in > paragraph 15. (j). > 27. The defendant pleads that as inquisitor to Julian Fantino, > the > defendant has received privileged information concerning the > sexual and > private activities of the plaintiffs family. > 28. The defendant further pleads that this information was > discussed > at length with the defendants associates. > 29. The defendant further pleads that these conversations were > private and have not yet been placed on the public record. > 30. The defendant further pleads that the plaintiff has > unlawfully > gained access to transcripts of these conversations. > 31. The defendant further pleads the plaintiffs allegations > contained > in paragraph 15. (j) that he is an unfit husband and father is a > reflection not of the plaintiffs interpretation of schedule C but > an > interpretation of information from transcripts unlawfully > obtained. > 32. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph > 18 > of the plaintiffs statement of claim. The plaintiff at all times > has > been manipulated and directed to serve the defendants authority. > The > defendant further pleads the plaintiff has been instrumental in > furthering the defendants objectives. > 33. The defendant pleads that he has no malevolence or spite > towards > the plaintiff. > COUNTERCLAIM > 34. The defendant claims: > (a) damages for libel in the amount of $500,000.00; > (b) damages for malicious falsehood in the amount of > $500,000.00; > (c) punitive and exemplary damages in the amount of > $500,000.00; > (d) an interim, interlocutory and final injunction > restraining the plaintiff from communicating with any person, > group of > persons, associations, police forces, governments agencies and > departments or media in any manner, including individual > communication, > either directly or indirectly, as it refers to or concerns the > defendant; > (e) a autographed color picture of the plaintiffs anus; > (f) costs on a solicitor and client basis; > (g) such further and other relief as this court deems > just, > or unjust. > 35. The defendant is an inquisitor of the order of arcon. > 36. The defendant as inquisitor has conducted himself > professionally, > honestly, with integrity and in keeping with the principals and > teachings > of the arconian committee of inquisition. > 37. The defendant as inquisitor has conducted various aspects of > inquisition on behalf of the committee of inquisition: > (a) Robert George Spencer, being the investigation and > promotion of political activities in fraud; > (b) Thomas Clifford, being a report into political > activities > and crimes against children, inquisition pending due to health of > subject; > (c) John Eakins, being a report into political activities > and > crimes against children; > (d) Roy McMurtry, being the purchase of the same, > inquisition > inactive; > (e) James Kalan, being the purchase of the same, > inquisition > terminated due to death by random violence; > (f) Sid Balcom, being a report into guardianship and > crimes > against children, application for inquisition pending the > availability of > an inquisitor; > (g) Marion Boyd, being an investigation and application > for > inquisition pending the availability of an inquisitor; > (h) Alberto Araujo Cunha, inquisition active and pending > the > investigation of the roman catholic order; > (i) Julian Fantino, inquisition active and moved to > public > forum at the request of the subject. > 38. The defendant claims the plaintiff has made wild, insane and > malicious accusations against the defendant as an individual and > inquisitor. > 39. On or about September 1st, 1995 the plaintiff gave an > interview > to XTRA magazine, set out in schedule A, in which he referred to > the > defendant as: > (a) This is a situation out of control,; > (b) The hate mongering, the spreading of propaganda and > malicious attacks on the institution of policing.; > (c) Its more then societys prepared to take.; > (d) I am a victim, am I not.; > (e) I have merely incurred his wrath because I have > professionally, honestly, with integrity, in keeping with my oath > of > office, brought to bring some relief to this anarchist movement > he > promotes - and got in his way.; > (f) That suggestion is unfair.; > (g) Mr. Baptista is attacking me for what I have done in > my > capacity as police chief. > 40. On or about September 1st, 1995, Dianne Haskett, mayor to the > city of London, in the county of Middlesex, did also give an > interview to > XTRA magazine in which she said of the defendant: > (a) I believe other action would of been more effective.; > (b) We have heard a lot about threatening communications > made > by Mr. Baptista.; > (c) I think they should be explored to see if they > violate > the Criminal Code.; > (d) To try to curtail someones access to the internet > goes > beyond what we are capable of, even in this lawsuit.; > (e) This is something not even the computer community > agrees > you can do. > 41. The defendant pleads that the plaintiff, and individuals > associated and under the direction of the plaintiff, have with > purpose > and malice given interviews to various press and media persons > with the > intention of harming and damaging the defendants reputation. > 42. The defendant pleads that the plaintiff has used his office > as > chief of police to the city of London, in the county of Middlesex > to > cause hatred and harm towards the defendant through hate > mongering and > the spreading of malicious propaganda. > 43. The defendant pleads that the complained of words contained > in > schedule A are maliciously false and defamatory of him. > 44. The defendant pleads that the plaintiff is a disgrace to his > office and profession. > 45. The defendant proposes that this action be tried before a > jury at > the city of London, in the county of Middlesex. > > > > > > > > Date: September 12th, 1995 Dr. Joe Baptista > Inquisitor to Julian > Fantino > > > -- Joe Baptista http://www.dot.god/ dot.GOD Hostmaster +1 (805) 753-8697 From tcmay at got.net Sun Oct 29 21:29:32 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 21:29:32 -0800 Subject: CDR: Senator Blowhardt needs killing In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001029183752.00b02a90@idiom.com> References: <3.0.5.32.20001029183752.00b02a90@idiom.com> Message-ID: At 6:37 PM -0800 10/29/00, Bill Stewart wrote: > >This is also the same Joe Baptista who's not supposed to >email or fax the government* of (Ontario, I think?) >because he used to contact _all_ of them when they >(collectively) did or failed to do something that they need >to be told to do or not do or do differently or whatever. >Apparently the Canadian equivalent to "needs killing" is "needs faxing".... >and they weren't prepared to deal with that. Not really. It's still fully legal in these United States to say that "Senator Blowhardt needs killing." I believe there are specifics about the President and his Immediate Family which do not allow one to say the same with equal candidness. I'm not saying that saying Senator Blowhardt needs killing won't get some kind of Official Attention, just that there are no laws banning such expressions of opinion. The lawyers and lawyer larvae can comment on what it takes for such speech acts to cross the "bright line" (or whatever the offical lawspeak is) for such an expression of opinion to become illegal. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From editor at weeklytelegraphmail.co.uk Sun Oct 29 13:31:28 2000 From: editor at weeklytelegraphmail.co.uk (Keith Jenkins) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 21:31:28 +0000 Subject: CDR: User Feedback Wanted - Electronic Telegraph/Global Network (23670091) Message-ID: <20001029213238Z201875-2405+5665@derek.widearea.co.uk> We are seeking the help of overseas users of The Electronic Telegraph to better understand how we may develop our Expat Portal, Global Network to suit their needs. As someone who has previously registered with the Electronic Telegraph, you are well placed to provide us with the feedback we require and I would really appreciate your participation. This is part of a major exercise to review our plans for the site and its relationship with the Weekly Telegraph newspaper. We would very much appreciate your co-operation in completing our survey since we need responses from users from all around the world. The survey may be completed on-line at: http://www.info-e.com/wtinfo Please either click on this link, or cut and paste the address into the address line of your browser. MPG International, an independent market research firm, is running the survey on our behalf, and it is by this means that we can ensure absolute confidentiality for the information you provide. As a reward, all respondents will be entered into a prize draw* for one of ten $100 vouchers at amazon.com which you may spend on any of the products available from them - books, CDs, games, etc.. May I thank you in advance for your help. Yours sincerely, Keith Jenkins, Editor, The Weekly Telegraph *Promoter is Telegraph Group Limited, 1 Canada Square, Canary Wharf, London E14 5DT If you do not wish to receive more email messages from the Telegraph Group then send a message with subject 'unsubscribe cypherpunks at toad.com' to unsubscribe at weeklytelegraphmail.co.uk From commerce at home.com Sun Oct 29 19:00:37 2000 From: commerce at home.com (Me) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 22:00:37 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson References: <3.0.5.32.20001029183752.00b02a90@idiom.com> Message-ID: <011a01c0421d$957b8980$0100a8c0@matthew> From: "Bill Stewart" > This is also the same Joe Baptista who's not supposed to > email or fax the government* of (Ontario, I think?) Yes, but this is also the Joe Baptista who was served with this: CLAIM 1. The Plaintiff claims: (a) damages for libel in the amount of $500,000.00; (b) damages for malicious falsehood in the amount of $500,000.00; (c) punitive and exemplary damages in the amount of $500,000.00; (d) an interim, interlocutory and final injunction restraining the Defendant from communicating with any person, group of persons, associations or corporations by facsimile transmission, computer facilities, including electronic mail and the "Internet" or in any manner whatsoever except direct individual communication, wherein such communication, either directly or indirectly, refers to or concerns the Plaintiff; (e) costs on a solicitor and client basis; (f) such further and other relief as this Honourable Court deems just. 2. The Plaintiff is and at all material times was the Chief of Police of the City of London Police. 3. The Defendant resides in the City of Toronto and is a self-described: harasser of the police; critic of government; bulk user of government services; and, administrative burden to the police. 4. On or about the 5th day of February, 1995, the Defendant falsely and maliciously wrote and published of and concerning the Plaintiff and of him in the way of his office as Chief of Police to Robert Riley and the public at large by electronic mail over the Internet, the message set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto. 5. On or about June 27th, 1995, the Defendant falsely and maliciously wrote of and concerning the Plaintiff and of him in the way of his office as Chief of Police by letter addressed to the attention of "all concerned citizens" as set out in Schedule "B" hereto. 6. The said letter was published by the Defendant by facsimile transmission to: (a) the police departments of the following municipalities in the Province of Ontario: (i) LaSalle (ii) Durham Region; (iii) Kingston; (iv) Lakefield; (v) Brockville; (vi) Desoronto; (vii) York Region; (viii) Anderdon Township; (ix) Chatham; (x) Niagara Region; (xi) Amherstburg; (xii) Essex; (xiii) Kemptville; (xiv) Sudbury Region; (xv) Lindsay; (xvi) Windsor; (xvii) Gananoque; (xviii) Collingwood; and others not presently known to the Plaintiff; and (b) the following media outlets in the City of London: (i) 6X Radio, Fanshawe College; (ii) CJBK Radio 1290; (iii) CKSL Radio 1410; (iv) CFPL Radio 98; (v) CFPL Television; (vi) The London free Press; and other outlets not presently known to the Plaintiff. 7. At or about the same time, the aforesaid or similar letter was further published electronically by the Defendant to the public at large over the medium of the Internet, a global computer network. 8. On or about the 6th day of July, 1995, the Defendant falsely and maliciously wrote of and concerning the Plaintiff and of him in the way of his office as Chief of Police, as set out in Schedule "C" attached hereto, submissions to the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, purportedly pursuant to an Inquiry being conducted under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. 9. On or about July 10th, 1995, the Defendant published the document attached as Schedule "C" to all of those parties referred to in paragraph 5 above and others, by facsimile transmission and other means of communication. 10. With respect to the complained of words contained in Schedule "A", the Plaintiff pleads that the defamatory sting is contained within the said communication as a whole and in conjunction with the complained of words contained in Schedules "B" and " c ". 11. With respect to the complained of words contained in Schedule "B", the Plaintiff pleads that the defamatory sting is contained within the said communication as a whole and in conjunction with the complained of words contained in Schedules "A" and "C" but particularly in the following words: (a) "Dr. "; (b) "Attention: all concerned citizens"; (c) "an upcoming inquisition"; (d) "an investigation into the background and activities of Julian Fantino"; (e) "family and employment history"; (f) "known, suspected or rumoured criminal activities"; (g) "known, suspected or rumoured homophobic, sexist, or racist activities (including actions and statements)"; (h) "any other information of a nature that might bring Mr. Fantino into disrepute, and/or before justice". 12. With respect to the complained of words contained in Schedule "C", the Plaintiff pleads that the following words, on their own and in conjunction with the complained of words contained in Schedules "A" and "B", are maliciously false and defamatory of him: (a) "the Information and Privacy Commissioner has been victim to a criminal conspiracy from within the ranks of the London Police Services Board"; (b) "This process is nothing more than the police version of the silent scream. A futile and miscalculated adventure by them to avoid or minimalize prosecution under the Criminal Code of Canada."; (c) "Although the old Chief is a principal in this crime - he has not been a driving force in its application. That honour goes to another who will be later named." (referring to the Plaintiff); (d) "the actions by the various police agencies to the court application only merit consideration as they relate to criminal behaviour"; (e) "this action has only been taken by the police with the intent of avoiding and deflecting criminal responsibility"; (f) "I only present these facts in support of any claims of wrongdoing I herein level against the various irresponsible police authorities as they respect the Commissions inquiry."; (g) "I accuse former chief McCormick and chief Julian Fantino of an offence against authority and public order. Both have conspired to maintain confidences with respect to my criminal activities and as a result have assisted me in achieving my goals ... the police have at all times known and been aware of my criminal activity ... the police abstained from the proper criminal procedures and that said actions were with intent."; (h) "Apart from having his private telephone ... disclosed to me and details of a dysfunctional family life, I was also able to confirmed(sic) Fantino is not altogether a law abiding citizen."; (i) "they (referring to the police and the Plaintiff) have in turn become criminal". 13. The Plaintiff pleads that the words set out in Schedule "A" are defamatory of him and, in their natural and ordinary meaning, meant and were understood to mean and were maliciously written and published by the Defendant to be understood to mean, in and of themselves and in conjunction with the words set out in Schedules "B" and illicit that the Plaintiff is: (a) porcine; (b) greedy; (c) dirty; (d) an annoying person; (e) an unpleasant person; (f) a slovenly person; (g) a slob; (h) a despicable person; (i) a Neanderthal; (j) primitive; (k) unintelligent; (l) aesthetically challenged; (m) intellectually challenged; and (n) prehistoric. 14. The Plaintiff pleads that the complained of words as contained in Schedule "B" and particularized in paragraph 11 above, in their natural and ordinary meaning, meant and were understood to mean and were maliciously written and published by the Defendant to be understood to mean, in and of themselves and in conjunction with the words set out in Schedules "A" and "C" that the Plaintiff: (a) was guilty of wrongdoing and is the subject of an officially sanctioned investigation being conducted by the Defendant; (b) was and is engaged in criminal activity; (c) is homophobic and was and is engaged in homophobic activities; (d) is sexist and was and is engaged in sexist activities; (e) is racist and was and is engaged in racist activities; (f) does engage in and has engaged in disreputable and discreditable activities; (g) has engaged in unlawful activities that should be subject to judicial sanction; (h) has breached his oath and duty as a police officer and Chief of Police; and (i) has not conducted himself as a police officer and Chief of Police in accordance with law, honesty and integrity. 15. The Plaintiff pleads that the complained of words in Schedule "C" hereto, as particularized in paragraph 12 above, in their natural and ordinary meaning, meant and were understood to mean and were maliciously written and published by the Defendant to be understood to mean, in and of themselves and in conjunction with the words set out in Schedules "A" and "B", that the Plaintiff: (a) has contravened the criminal law; (b) is a criminal; (c) has engaged in a criminal conspiracy; (d) has, by a criminal action, victimized the Information and Privacy Commissioner; (e) has breached his public duty as a police officer and Chief of Police; (f) has engaged in civil proceedings involving the Information and Privacy Commissioner in order to subvert the criminal law and/or to prevent exposure and prosecution for his own criminal acts; (g) is a criminal ringleader; (h) is participating in wrongdoing and unlawful activities; (i) has covered up criminal wrongdoing; and is an unfit husband and father. 17. The Plaintiff pleads that the complained of words published by the Defendant were calculated to and did disparage the Plaintiff in his calling as a police officer and Chief of Police. 18. Furthermore, the Plaintiff pleads that the Defendant published the complained of words out of malevolence or spite towards the Plaintiff, 19. By reason of the publication of the complained of words by the Defendant, the Plaintiff has been much injured in his credit and reputation and has been brought into scandal, odium and contempt and has thereby suffered damage. 20. The Defendant intends to continue the publication of the same or similar defamatory charges against the Plaintiff; 21. Further and in the alternative, the Plaintiff pleads that the complained of words set out in Schedules "A", "B" and "C" and as particularized in paragraphs 11, 12 and 13 are untrue, were published with express malice and constitute malicious falsehoods. 22. The Plaintiff pleads and relies upon Section 19 of the Libel & Slander Act, R. S. 0. 1990, Chapter L12 as amended. 23. The Plaintiff proposes that this action be tried at the City of London, in the County of Middlesex. And responded, unsuccessfully, with this: STATEMENT OF DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM 1. The defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraphs 2, 3 and 8 of the statement of claim. 2. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 1, 7 (page 3), 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20 and 21 of the statement of claim. 3. The defendant has no knowledge in respect of the allegations contained in paragraphs 6, 7 (page 5), 9 and 19 of the statement of claim. 4. The defendant is the system administrator to planet earth. 5. The defendant is an internet god. 6. The defendant is at war with the government of Canada du jour. 7. The defendant is the government of Canada de facto. 8. The defendant is inquisitor to Alberto Araujo Cunha, sometimes known as Albert Araujo, Albert Cunha, Alberto Cunha, and Alberto Araujo, a priest to the roman catholic order and reformed cocaine dealer. 9. The defendant is inquisitor to Julian Fantino the plaintiff to this action. 10. The defendant by act of war warns this court that it has no jurisdiction in this action. 11. The defendant by inquisition advises the court that limited jurisdiction is granted this court with respect to facilitating the continued inquisition of Julian Fantino a plaintiff to this action. 12. The defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the statement of claim. The defendant has been successfully at war with the government of Canada du jour, and associated entities since April 1993. 13. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 7 (page 3) of the statement of claim. The electronic mail communication set out in Schedule A of the plaintiffs statement of claim is a forged communication which does not comply with network news transfer protocol standards employed by the posting agent at the host server at planet.earth.org. 14. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of the statement of claim. The defendant believes the document set out in schedule B to the plaintiffs statement of claim originated from the ExtraTerrestrial Archives (ETA) an independent agent and archivists to the inquisition of Julian Fantino. The defendant however is unable to verify the ETAs authorship of the stated document since ETA archive access to internet public inquisitors is denied. 15. The defendant further claims that any individual with an internet account may access the necessary documents and files that can reproduce the defendants letterhead and signature in electronic form. 16. The defendant further claims that the document set out in schedule B to the plaintiffs statement of claim is in form and content acceptable to the defendant as a inquisition document. 17. The defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the statement of claim but denies that the submissions made under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act to the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario were in any way false or malicious. The defendant further claims that the document set out in schedule C to the plaintiffs statement of claim is not a true copy of the original text published by the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. 18. The defendant further claims that the plaintiff has contravened the criminal law of Canada, is a criminal and has engaged in a criminal conspiracy with one William McCormick a former police chief to the Metropolitan Toronto Police. 19. The defendant further claims that the plaintiff has engaged in unlawful activities and has breached his public duty as a police officer and Chief of Police. 20. The defendant further claims that as a result of this criminal activity the public and the Information and Privacy Commissioner have been victimized by the plaintiff. 21. The defendant further claims that as a result of this criminal activity government processes and democratic principals have been jeopardized by the plaintiff. 22. The defendant by declaration of war further claims that the criminal behavior exhibited by the plaintiff is good and has served the defendants purposes and goals in destabilizing government structures and systems. 23. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 21 of the plaintiffs statement of claim. The defendant did not author the documents contained in schedule A and B to the plaintiffs statement of claim and therefore any reference to these documents in support of any allegation is void and irrelevant. 24. The defendant pleads that he agrees with the interpretation of schedule C to the plaintiffs statement of claim contained in paragraphs 15. (a), 15. (b), 15. (c), 15. (d), 15. (e), 15. (f), 15. (h) and 15. (i). 25. The defendant has no knowledge of the allegation contained in paragraph 15. (g) of the plaintiffs statement of claim. The defendant pleads and believes that the plaintiff does not have the necessary skills or competence to be a criminal ringleader. 26. The defendant has no knowledge of the allegations contained in paragraph 15. (j). 27. The defendant pleads that as inquisitor to Julian Fantino, the defendant has received privileged information concerning the sexual and private activities of the plaintiffs family. 28. The defendant further pleads that this information was discussed at length with the defendants associates. 29. The defendant further pleads that these conversations were private and have not yet been placed on the public record. 30. The defendant further pleads that the plaintiff has unlawfully gained access to transcripts of these conversations. 31. The defendant further pleads the plaintiffs allegations contained in paragraph 15. (j) that he is an unfit husband and father is a reflection not of the plaintiffs interpretation of schedule C but an interpretation of information from transcripts unlawfully obtained. 32. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 18 of the plaintiffs statement of claim. The plaintiff at all times has been manipulated and directed to serve the defendants authority. The defendant further pleads the plaintiff has been instrumental in furthering the defendants objectives. 33. The defendant pleads that he has no malevolence or spite towards the plaintiff. COUNTERCLAIM 34. The defendant claims: (a) damages for libel in the amount of $500,000.00; (b) damages for malicious falsehood in the amount of $500,000.00; (c) punitive and exemplary damages in the amount of $500,000.00; (d) an interim, interlocutory and final injunction restraining the plaintiff from communicating with any person, group of persons, associations, police forces, governments agencies and departments or media in any manner, including individual communication, either directly or indirectly, as it refers to or concerns the defendant; (e) a autographed color picture of the plaintiffs anus; (f) costs on a solicitor and client basis; (g) such further and other relief as this court deems just, or unjust. 35. The defendant is an inquisitor of the order of arcon. 36. The defendant as inquisitor has conducted himself professionally, honestly, with integrity and in keeping with the principals and teachings of the arconian committee of inquisition. 37. The defendant as inquisitor has conducted various aspects of inquisition on behalf of the committee of inquisition: (a) Robert George Spencer, being the investigation and promotion of political activities in fraud; (b) Thomas Clifford, being a report into political activities and crimes against children, inquisition pending due to health of subject; (c) John Eakins, being a report into political activities and crimes against children; (d) Roy McMurtry, being the purchase of the same, inquisition inactive; (e) James Kalan, being the purchase of the same, inquisition terminated due to death by random violence; (f) Sid Balcom, being a report into guardianship and crimes against children, application for inquisition pending the availability of an inquisitor; (g) Marion Boyd, being an investigation and application for inquisition pending the availability of an inquisitor; (h) Alberto Araujo Cunha, inquisition active and pending the investigation of the roman catholic order; (i) Julian Fantino, inquisition active and moved to public forum at the request of the subject. 38. The defendant claims the plaintiff has made wild, insane and malicious accusations against the defendant as an individual and inquisitor. 39. On or about September 1st, 1995 the plaintiff gave an interview to XTRA magazine, set out in schedule A, in which he referred to the defendant as: (a) This is a situation out of control,; (b) The hate mongering, the spreading of propaganda and malicious attacks on the institution of policing.; (c) Its more then societys prepared to take.; (d) I am a victim, am I not.; (e) I have merely incurred his wrath because I have professionally, honestly, with integrity, in keeping with my oath of office, brought to bring some relief to this anarchist movement he promotes - and got in his way.; (f) That suggestion is unfair.; (g) Mr. Baptista is attacking me for what I have done in my capacity as police chief. 40. On or about September 1st, 1995, Dianne Haskett, mayor to the city of London, in the county of Middlesex, did also give an interview to XTRA magazine in which she said of the defendant: (a) I believe other action would of been more effective.; (b) We have heard a lot about threatening communications made by Mr. Baptista.; (c) I think they should be explored to see if they violate the Criminal Code.; (d) To try to curtail someones access to the internet goes beyond what we are capable of, even in this lawsuit.; (e) This is something not even the computer community agrees you can do. 41. The defendant pleads that the plaintiff, and individuals associated and under the direction of the plaintiff, have with purpose and malice given interviews to various press and media persons with the intention of harming and damaging the defendants reputation. 42. The defendant pleads that the plaintiff has used his office as chief of police to the city of London, in the county of Middlesex to cause hatred and harm towards the defendant through hate mongering and the spreading of malicious propaganda. 43. The defendant pleads that the complained of words contained in schedule A are maliciously false and defamatory of him. 44. The defendant pleads that the plaintiff is a disgrace to his office and profession. 45. The defendant proposes that this action be tried before a jury at the city of London, in the county of Middlesex. Date: September 12th, 1995 Dr. Joe Baptista Inquisitor to Julian Fantino From brflgnk at cotse.com Sun Oct 29 19:39:40 2000 From: brflgnk at cotse.com (brflgnk at cotse.com) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 22:39:40 -0500 Subject: CDR: [ga] An open letter to Louis Touton (was) www.ester.dyson In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <972877180.39fced7c18c22@webmail.cotse.com> Quoting Joe Baptista : > On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 brflgnk at cotse.com wrote: > > > At 05:06 PM 10/29/00 -0500, Joe said: > > > > > John Palmer is on the right track .. > > > > This is the same John Palmer that once tried to unmoderate all of > alt.*. I > > guess age does bring wisdom. > > I don't know - I'll ask. Actually, that wasn't a question. It's also the same John Palmer who mined UUCP maps and spammed paper junk mail to several thousand sysadmins offering the services of his Rabbit Network (whose logo Kibo once described as the ugliest in history). He was often described as Usenet's Best Bad Example, and was semi-immortalized with his own alt.fan newsgroup. I remember when he first started pushing alternative TLDs and urging people to use "sane" DNS that recognized them. At the time, I dismissed it as more of Mr. Palmer's wackiness. Little did I know that ICANN would rise up as it has, nor did I predict the Open Root Server Project. As I said, age brings wisdom (for all, it seems). You are correct that John Palmer is on the right track. I wish him success in his endeavour. From brflgnk at cotse.com Sun Oct 29 19:49:19 2000 From: brflgnk at cotse.com (brflgnk at cotse.com) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 22:49:19 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: CIA in Oregon, Intelink In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20001029214723.00ab3790@pop3.idt.net> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001029214723.00ab3790@pop3.idt.net> Message-ID: <972877759.39fcefbf0cd3e@webmail.cotse.com> Quoting "Alex B. Shepardsen" : > abs at suffy:/home/abs$ telnet mail.bend.com 25 > Trying 199.2.205.69... > Connected to mail.bend.com. > Escape character is '^]'. > 220 X1 NT-ESMTP Server mail.bend.com (IMail 6.04 64477-1) > expn mueller > 550 list not found > vrfy mueller > 252 Cannot VRFY user > quit > 221 Goodbye Many SMTP servers disable EXPN and VRFY for security reasons, typically by returning failure messages. From dave at technopagan.org Sun Oct 29 17:17:53 2000 From: dave at technopagan.org (David E. Smith) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 01:17:53 +0000 (GMT) Subject: CDR: thanx my friend In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, sam ram wrote: > : Hi, can you please show me a easy way to make a home made bomb by using > things from the house. so please write back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This depends largely on whether your home is equipped with a camcorder. Assuming it is, here's the instructions: 1. Get a piece of Scotch tape, and your copy of last month's WWF Pay-Per-View that you foolishly bought. Put the tape over the little notch on the end of the tape, so you can record over the TLC ("Tables, Ladders, and Chairs") (oh my!) match. 2. Call up five of your friends (assuming one of your friends is Paul Anderson and another one is Kurt Russell). 3. Get some guns. These should be easy to acquire. If you already have one gun, you can use it to acquire more; this, however, is beyond the scope of these Step By Step (TM) instructions. 4. Go to your local junkyard at night. 5. Have random people start shooting the guns at Kurt, while he mutters and grunts but doesn't say anything. Have Paul point the camera at random stuff. There you go. You've just re-created the bomb "Soldier." HTH. HAND. ...dave ---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151 http://www.technopagan.org/ dave at technopagan.org "I must remember to destroy those children after my breakfast has been eaten." -- Mojo Jojo From jya at pipeline.com Mon Oct 30 03:36:34 2000 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 06:36:34 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: NZ: Sweeping powers for spy agencies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200010301142.GAA24105@smtp6.mindspring.com> This report is consistent with DoJ's advocacy of a US national, as well as international, system for police agencies to collect and share criminal justice information, and to do so while there is no law against using advanced technology for this purpose. As noted here recently, see a presentation by DoJ on how to override with a PR campaign citizens' concerns with privacy violations of such systems: http://cryptome.org/doj-ji-pi.ppt This continues the transfer and use of technology developed for national security purposes to law enforcement agencies, worldwide, with the initiative being taken by DoJ and FBI, assisted and advised by DoD and the intel community (with former members of the latter now employed by domestic agencies or running companies selling natsec-derived services to domestic customers). What is fascinating about this evolution is the screaming by domestic victims when they learn that means and methods are being applied to them that they wholeheartedly approve when aimed at foreigners, immigrants, criminals and other stigmatized targets such as radicals, anarchists, commies, neo-nazis, dissidents and whoever is different from you and me, well, no doubt you include me in your bullseye and me you when we get a whiff of the terrifying scent spread by the malodor-spreading criminal justice mongerers. Nothing about this whipsawing of terror and anti-terror technology is new to this forum, but the news reports do confirm the need to keep grinding out new outlaw means and methods to defy the inlaw ("justice", crime-fighting) initiatives that just cant spend money fast enough to abrade and salve. The invention of new (advanced-tech) criminality is high on the agenda, right up there with the propagation of assurance that only governments can combat burgeoning national and economic security-threatening outlawry. What is not said, or maybe only whispered to oversighters hairy ears, is do not ask us to look into mirrors to see true outlaws agrinning. Do not ask us to conduct our affairs in non-outlaw secret settings. Turncoats are a special feature of the official outlaw cartel, when those who once faught official criminality are recruited to ID, track, provoke, gather evidence, indict and convict former associates. Read Michael Froomkin on ICANN's board members who cant forgo power- wielding: http://personal.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/boardsquat.htm This is a tip of the iceberg of large numbers of means and methods technicians being drawn into the global justice system with sweetheart contracts and jobs and places on advisory boards. To serve the national interest and to get regular whisperings from those in the know it all business. Here's a recent article on the price paid by scholars to see CIA classified material: http://cryptome.org/cia-price.htm From measl at mfn.org Mon Oct 30 05:14:41 2000 From: measl at mfn.org (J.A. Terranson) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 07:14:41 -0600 (CST) Subject: CDR: Re: Sagan's V-Chips In-Reply-To: <3e069e101f8616edfb87383556849bf3@generalprotectionfault.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Ann Onim wrote: > BTW: Can Uncle Sam slap a secrecy order on GPL/public domain code, or > do you have to actually apply to the patent office to risk this > happening? He can slap that order on anything he likes, even if it is an unpublished (literally, not the copyright meaning) private work. This is a common method used by the fedz to avoid having to do a complete "site clearance" on certain new defense contractors (at least this was true in the late 80's - I have no reason to think it has changed). If work is expected to yeild "national secrets", but it is expected to do so without utilizing previously classified materials ("classified" being over "Sensitive"), the work is normally allowed to progress until such time as a "secret" work product is produced, at which time it is retroactively classified to it's appropriate level(s). These shenanigans work in the fedz favor because it costs real dollars to send out the men with the little plastic ID cards to do site surveys and personnel background checks. If the work is unsuccessful, they have not wasted the $$. If it comes to fruition, they impart a "temporary" site and personnel classification, classify the work product, and only then spend the necessary money and D.I.S. hours. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin at mfn.org -- If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... -------------------------------------------------------------------- From juicy at melontraffickers.com Mon Oct 30 07:30:28 2000 From: juicy at melontraffickers.com (A. Melon) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 07:30:28 -0800 Subject: CDR: Parties Message-ID: <3420c87418ad501ededf2fde83f0fb46@melontraffickers.com> Rush rapped: > Glad to hear that all it takes to "get your vote" is a reckless executive > pardon of criminals that is designed to utilize executive > power to bypass the checks and balances system and negate the efforts of the > legislative and judicial branches of government Spoken like a true fascist. What the fuck do you think executive pardon is but just another "checks and balances"? The fact is that it's the criminal scum in power at the moment who are fucking the constitution with their dirty little "war on some drugs". Basic 1st Amemdment freedom of religion went right down the drain with the very first drug law. It's religious persecution pure and simple, nothing more, nothing less. Harry Browne should go further, if elected he should not only pardon every person ever convicted of a drug or gun offense, but he should order the immediate arrest of anyone who ever voted for a drug or gun law, and who ever enforced these despicable illegal laws. Take your stupid babbling about your phoney politics elsewhere -- it has no relativity to cypherpunks. From tcmay at got.net Mon Oct 30 08:11:05 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 08:11:05 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: NZ: Sweeping powers for spy agencies In-Reply-To: <200010301142.GAA24105@smtp6.mindspring.com> References: <200010301142.GAA24105@smtp6.mindspring.com> Message-ID: At 6:36 AM -0500 10/30/00, John Young wrote: > >What is fascinating about this evolution is the screaming >by domestic victims when they learn that means and methods >are being applied to them that they wholeheartedly approve >when aimed at foreigners, immigrants, criminals and other >stigmatized targets such as radicals, anarchists, commies, >neo-nazis, dissidents and whoever is different from you and >me, well, no doubt you include me in your bullseye and me >you when we get a whiff of the terrifying scent spread >by the malodor-spreading criminal justice mongerers. Just to respond to this particular part of your good rant, the U.S. Government has not been pushing what we think of as Constitutional rights in other countries for many decades. (Yes, I understand that other countries are not bound by the U.S. Constitution...) For example: -- the aforementioned spying agreements...the U.S. gets around the limits imposed by the C. by having foreign governments do the spying, a la the UKUSA Agreement, etc. -- when the U.S. invades Somalia, they disarm the population -- when the U.S. moves into South America, as "advisors," they educate the secret police in how to create death squads, how to torture suspects, how to assassinate opposition leaders. (Cf. the CIA manuals, College of the Americas, direct testimony, etc.) -- when the U.S. casts its lot with the Zionists, the U.S. supports the forcible movement of Palestinians from their land -- similar anti-B.O.R. measures supported in other parts of Europe, most of Africa, much of Asia, including support for limitations on press freedom, local censorship (so long as it suppresses the opponents of "our" interests), licensing, etc. Basically, the position of U.S. officials is that the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights are meant to apply to U.S. persons. Somalians are to be disarmed, Columbians are to be assassinated, Palestinians are to be herded into camps, and so on. I'm not arguing that U.S.-style approaches should be extended by force into foreign countries, only that certainly the U.S. Government should not be party to setting up regimes inimical to our stated beliefs in what civil rights should be. ---Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From bill.stewart at pobox.com Mon Oct 30 08:33:39 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 08:33:39 -0800 Subject: CDR: Esther's reply on spamming Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001030083339.009a7a60@idiom.com> >To: Bill Stewart >From: edyson at edventure.com (Esther Dyson) >Subject: Re: Were you really spamming people? I'm surprised. >Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 07:14:13 -0500 > >You might as well. It won't fix anything, I'm sure, but at least I had the >courage to respond. And what I say below is the truth; we still do talk >about this internally and I'm not sure what's the ideal approach. (A number >of people *do* say what you said: It's interesting to know what I'm up to. >I respond to everyone who responds to the mailing other than bounces.) So, >yes, I'd be happy to engage in argument (as opposed to flaming). > >Esther > >At 10:42 AM 10/29/00 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >>Esther - thanks. Actually, no need to remove me; while I'm not >>going to subscribe to Release 1.0, it's still interesting to know >>what you're doing. Is it ok if I forward your mail on to Cypherpunks, >>or alternatively to Tim? >> >> Thanks; Bill >> >>At 08:37 AM 10/29/00 -0500, Esther wrote: >>>Your definition may vary, but yes, we sent out a mailing to people who one >>>way or another have given me cards, corresponded with me, etc. I don't >>>honestly know how Tim got onto our list, but we'll take him off right away. >>> >>>In fact, as you can see below, we invite people to ask to be removed, and if >>>they do, we remove them immediately. (It's nicer when they ask us >>>directly, but we'll treat this as a removal request from both you and Tim!) >>> >>>And yes, this troubles me a little, but overall I am more concerned about >>>the use of confidential data to invade someone's privacy, than about the >>>issue of spam. (I get enough of it, especially over ICANN, to know that >>>it's annoying.....but harmless.) I'm on record that people should (and will) >>>be able to filter their own spam, but that they do need to be able to rely >>>on promises of confidentiality when they deal with others. That's a somewhat >>>different issue. >>> >>>Esther >>> >>>At 01:21 AM 10/29/00 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: >>>>Hi, Esther - this message got sent to the Cypherpunks list, >>>>and several other people pointed to references about you sending out >>>>advertising email to people other than your conference attendees >>>>or people who'd requested more information. >>>>I'm really surprised - it doesn't sound like something you'd do. >>>> >>>>Also, I tried to check out the release1-0.com web site, >>>>and it said something about the RPC server being too busy. >>>> >>>> Thanks; Bill Stewart >>>> ... [Tim's message, deleted] >>> >>>HIGH-TECH-FORUM, BARCELONA, NOVEMBER 1 TO 3 >>>http://www.edventure.com/htforum2000.html >>> >>>Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes! >>>chairman, EDventure Holdings >>>chairman, Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers >>>edyson at edventure.com >>>1 (212) 924-8800 -- 1 (212) 924-0240 fax >>>104 Fifth Avenue (between 15th and 16th Streets; 20th floor) >>>New York, NY 10011 USA >>>http://www.edventure.com http://www.icann.org >>> >>>PC Forum: 25 to 28 March 2001, Scottsdale (Phoenix), Arizona Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi Sun Oct 29 23:25:50 2000 From: ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi (Sampo A Syreeni) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 09:25:50 +0200 (EET) Subject: CDR: Re: digital angel (tracking device) In-Reply-To: <20001029143316.H724@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Eric Murray wrote: >>The unit can be turned off by the wearer, thereby making the monitoring >>voluntary. It will not intrude on personal privacy except in applications >>applied to the tracking of criminals. > >Heh. > >>Digital Angel[tm] measures bodily parameters. It does not interact with >>the body chemically or biologically. Designed to be completely harmless, >>Digital Angel will not interfere with bodily functions in any way... > >at least in this version. And pulling the last two together, we have Digital Angel/IE (Instant Execution), for those really Bad Seeds. The plus model will zap the offender if brought near Digital Angel/FC (For Children). Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Mon Oct 30 07:02:36 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 10:02:36 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: digital angel (tracking device) Message-ID: > Sampo A Syreeni[SMTP:ssyreeni at cc.helsinki.fi] wrote > On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Eric Murray wrote: > > >>The unit can be turned off by the wearer, thereby making the monitoring > >>voluntary. It will not intrude on personal privacy except in > applications > >>applied to the tracking of criminals. > > > >Heh. > > > >>Digital Angel[tm] measures bodily parameters. It does not interact with > >>the body chemically or biologically. Designed to be completely harmless, > >>Digital Angel will not interfere with bodily functions in any way... > > > >at least in this version. > > And pulling the last two together, we have Digital Angel/IE (Instant > Execution), for those really Bad Seeds. The plus model will zap the > offender if brought near Digital Angel/FC (For Children). > > Sampo Syreeni , aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university > Go check out Harlan Ellison's short story "Repent Harlequin! cried the Tick Tock Man". This is really life imitating art. Peter Trei From declan at well.com Mon Oct 30 07:10:11 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 10:10:11 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Parties In-Reply-To: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A353055547A5@cobra.netsolve.ne t> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001030100937.01b3e100@mail.well.com> At 09:04 10/30/2000 -0600, Carskadden, Rush wrote: >where he actually says this himself). Under no circumstances do I consider >it wise to fly in the face of checks and balances when your cause is >"right" but you do not have the majority power. There is a reason that >Congress makes laws, just as there is a reason that the Presidents can >veto, as there is a reason that the Judicial system interprets the law. >It's designed to create a balance that protects us from a loose cannon >government going off and acting recklessly. Ah, but they already have. Your beloved "checks and balances" don't work. -Declan From declan at well.com Mon Oct 30 07:41:44 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 10:41:44 -0500 Subject: CDR: White House and Congress: Hard at work Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001030104129.01b3df00@mail.well.com> On Saturday, October 28th, 2000, the White House has received: H.J.Res. 118 - Continuing Resolution FY 2001, (Continuing Resolution # 8 thru October 29, 2000) *Note: H.J.Res. 118 - Received and Signed today 10/28/2000) H.R. 2780 Kristen's Act H.R. 2884 To Extend Energy conservation Programs under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act H.R. 4404 U.S. Park Police Medical Expenses H.R. 4957 Black Patriots Memorial Extension Act H.R. 5083 Los Angeles School District Lands Act H.R. 5157 Freedmen's Bureau Records Preservation Act of 2000 H.R. 5314 Adoption of Retired Military retired Dogs H.R. 5331 Frederick douglas Memorial and Gardens Act Last Day for the President's Action - 11/9/2000 From declan at well.com Mon Oct 30 08:30:25 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 11:30:25 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Parties In-Reply-To: <59816DD7DAE9D11184E400104B66A353055547A7@cobra.netsolve.ne t> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001030112403.01b0f030@mail.well.com> Rush, You certainly are an earnest fellow, but that doesn't get you very far. It seems to me that folks like you, who are college sophomores with the unfortunate experience of one or two undergraduate political science classes, don't have much to contribute to cypherpunkly discussions. Your points, such as they are, might be better made on alt.politics.banal-ideas. You: * Don't seem to understand the nature of modern political parties * Don't seem to understand the nature of checks and balances * Don't seem to understand how Washington works, and the interplay between the legislative branch, executive branch, lobbyists, and advocacy groups * Have not read the basic literature that would enable us to take you seriously My participation in this sad discussion is now over, except that I will volunteer a reading list for you at some later point. -Declan At 10:10 10/30/2000 -0600, Carskadden, Rush wrote: >Comments below: > >-----Original Message----- >From: Declan McCullagh [mailto:declan at well.com] >Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 5:17 PM >To: Carskadden, Rush >Cc: 'cypherpunks at algebra.com' >Subject: Re: Parties > > > >Rush is clearly someone with too much time on his hands and too little > >(demonstrated) ability to think things through. I apologize for being > >uncharacteristically blunt, but the essay below is terribly > >naive. You might as well try to draft C.J Parker for president. > >I appreciate your candid approach. I am admittedly pretty young and >uninformed compared to you, which is why I sought opinions anyway. It can >only lead to more information and access to varied points of view. > > >First, political parties are not single-issue parties, at least not > >right now. Education and taxes and health care will likely continue to > >be more important in most people's lives than technology policy for > >the foreseeable future. > >Agreed. > > >Second, privacy is an amorphous issue. It's used by leftists to > >regulate the private sector and outlaw transactions between consenting > >adults. Liberals use it to talk about abortion. Conservatives link it > >to everything from the FBI files under Clinton to Carnivore. What do > >*you* mean? And why do you think everyone else is going to agree? > >By no means do I think that everyone will agree with me on my own personal >views. I started out by pointing out in the house voting record that the >actual rift between Democrats and Republicans in voting records (based on >scores that I believe you put together) in technology issues was not too >large. I then further hypothesized, based on this observation, that >partisan politics were not creating a strong stance regarding privacy and >technological freedom either way on either side. So, the conclusion I drew >was that if I were to have a strong view on technology (EITHER a 100 OR a >0 on your scale), then that strong view would not be fit to serve as a >factor that may align me in any reliable way with either party. A second, >personal, conclusion was that I was not content with the relatively >mediocre (according to your scores) standing on technology by both >parties. I do not feel I am being represented on this issue, though I do >feel I am represented strongly on other issues, such as education, taxes, >and health care. What I was looking for on this list was not agreement. I >was looking for some points of view on a question that this line of >reasoning left me with. If I want stronger representation in Washington on >technology issues (EITHER WAY), is it easier to try to influence an >existing party to take up my stance, or would it be easier to align myself >with a "third" party that already has a strong stance on the topic (EITHER >WAY) and try to maneuver it into a position where it could provide the >needed strong representation. I would have liked to be able to say to >myself, for instance, "Gee, certain vocal members of the cypherpunks list >seem to think that it would be easier to just try to gain partisan support >than to get a "third" party the strength it needs to represent me, and >here's why...", but I can't because my naive nature is so overpowering >that people would rather try to inform me of the Libertarian party, in >which I have been active for years, than answer my question. > > >Third, there already is (as others have suggested) a party that's > >concerned about personal freedom: the LP. If you mirror their > >positions -- or even a substantial subset -- you will be similarly > >marginalized. If not, don't look for support -- I humbly suggest -- > >on the cpunx list. > >The Libertarian party does not have enough power to strongly represent me, >assuming that I agree with their stance on technology, which I don't know >that I have said. This does not answer my question at all. > > >Fourth, nowadays it seems that political parties can be formed (Ross > >Perot, Ralph Nader) or popularized only by a strong and well-known > >personality. It will help if they're a billionaire. May I suggest a > >recruiting trip to the Redmond suburbs? > >You seem to think that I am trying to start a political party. I am not. I >specifically said that I was not. > > >Fifth, and perhaps most importantly, technology issues are an > >outgrowth of a canadidates' general stand on regulation. If they don't > >like taxes, you can bet they'll be against Internet taxes. If they're > >a national security hawk, they'll probably like encryption and > >supercomputer export regs. Etc. > >This is the kind of opinion I was looking for. Thank you. > > >Sixth, you don't seem to need a political party but a thinktank or > >similar creature. Why not try that instead? I was thinking of starting > >a nonproit group devoted to a subset of cypherpunkly topics; perhaps I > >still will. > >I don't see how a thinktank would represent strong views on technology. >Unless this thinktank happened to be a subset of Congress, I don't see how >this has anything to do with representation, which is what I was talking >about. However, if you did put together such a group, I would be >interested to know. I am trying to overcome my naive tendencies and >achieve a level of knowledge that will enable me to be confident in these >areas. At that point, I may very well ask you for a position. In the >meantime, however, I am still learning and trying to get opinions from >ornery bastards on mailing lists. > >ok, >Rush > > > > > > > > > > >On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:09:40AM -0500, Carskadden, Rush wrote: > > Scott and I have been discussing (from a theoretical standpoint) the > > possibility of a third party that focuses on privacy and personal freedom, > > and the difficulties in gaining creedence for this third party, as opposed > > to the difficulties associated with influencing existing major parties > > (either of them) to take a stronger stance on these issues. Assuming that > > you could reconcile your differences with either Democrats or > Republicans in > > order to gain a strong Washington D.C. presence on a few key issues, would > > that approach be easier than creating a viable "third" party? What > > percentage of the voters do you think are holding on to a very few key > > issues from their party of choice, and would be willing to vote for > another > > party that could give them equally strong representation on those issues? > > > > ok, > > Rush Carskadden > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Scott Schram [mailto:scott at schram.net] > > Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 4:14 PM > > To: Carskadden, Rush > > Subject: RE: Bachus > > > > > > Hi Rush, > > > > I mentioned the "third party", inspired by my frustration with the two > > leading parties, and their apparent lack of understanding about > technology, > > and privacy issues. > > > > Some thoughts about the current parties: > > > > Al Gore's populist rhetoric about drug companies which completely > overlooks > > the fact that we're on the eve of incredible discoveries and it costs lots > > of money to research and bring new drugs to market. Despite what Gore has > > indicated, big pharma spends about 4 times as much on research as they > do on > > advertising. > > > > George W. Bush's hints at dropping the Microsoft suit (and the tobacco > suit > > for that matter.) The recent Republican (I think) proposals to link > Social > > Security information to IRS information. > > > > Our government is (probably justifiably) paranoid about attacks from > > external and internal terrorists. It is easier for terrorists to cause > > problems than it is for the government to prevent them. Each time an > > incident happens, people call for more preventative measures, thus we > have: > > Secret searches (and bugging) of homes, no-knock entries, the Carnivore IP > > monitoring system, etc. Did you see the recent HBO special about > extremist > > groups and their use of the internet to encourage action by "lone wolf" > > sociopaths? Nobody wants to appear soft on this kind of crime. > > > > Libertarians have some cool ideas (at least they sound cool), but I can't > > imagine withdrawing all of our military force from the world and limit > > ourselves to defending our borders. Our enemies would have a field day. > > Further, while I'm pro-business, I'm all for them playing "in bounds" and > > only a strong referee can keep some of them from dumping PCBs at the local > > playground. > > > > The Reform Party is basically an old-time circus freak show, and I mean no > > disrespect to circus freaks. > > > > A number of issues are no longer "Right" or "Left". > > > > So, back to your question: > > > > The third party route would probably be very difficult. It's not clear > > whether it would actually dilute efforts to influence the major > parties. I > > offer this hypothesis: The way the system works now, with third parties > > being excluded from debates, often excluded from matching funds, the > > electoral college that makes for artificial "landslide" elections for the > > major candidates... all of these things tend to squash the life out of any > > third party. > > > > I believe that people interested in the new issues are growing, and we > might > > find allies in unexpected places. For example, my southern baptist > friends > > were not very happy with the long census form. > > > > I have used the following techniques with some success: > > > > Letter writing to congress still works. I have written to other > > representatives in the state if they happened to be the only one on a > > committee, or even representatives for other states. www.smokefree.org > > <http://www.smokefree.org/> is an excellent > example of publicizing issues > > and encouraging people to write letters. > > > > I don't think phone calls work quite as well, but I recall influencing an > > issue in this way. It was a niche issue, and I got some attention with a > > careful explanation. (The issue was: For a while, songwriters and > authors > > were not able to deduct business expenses unless they were able to relate > > directly to the song or work that was produced with that expense.) > > > > One of my favorite things to do is write a short, punchy (often satirical) > > letter to the editor. Their paper starts out blank every day, and I have > > yet to get one rejected doing it this way. If it's a technology issue, > you > > might be the only one writing in on that topic, and thus more likely to > get > > in print. > > > > Give money, either to candidates or groups like EFF or whatever. > > > > There's some random thoughts for you Rush, and you can repost any of > them if > > you see fit. Thanks for your questions! What do you think? What are > the > > most important issues in your mind? > > > > Scott > > http://schram.net > > > > At 09:41 AM 10/25/00, you wrote: > > > > > > > > Scott, > > Thank you for the link and the clarification of my info. I agree > about > > your assertion that a "third" party may better see to our concerns, but do > > we think it would be easier to create a third party and give it enough > > creedance to fill our needs, or do you think it would be easier to > influence > > existing party members to take a stronger stance? My assumption has been > > that existing party members are not very concrete about the technology > > issues. I don't think there is an old school party line in regards to > > technology in and of itself on either side. Do you think that we can sway > > them? Or are we forced to create a new party just to get an issue > addressed > > as we wish it could be? Possibly a harder question still is whether we > could > > live with either of the parties even if they did take a strong stance on > > technological issues... Maybe a question for the entire list, but I didn't > > want to stick your private reply up there without asking you. What do you > > think, though? > > > > ok, > > Rush Carskadden > > > > From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 30 02:57:13 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 11:57:13 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users References: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <39FD5409.746BCA9D@ricardo.de> Igor Chudov wrote: > > I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have > a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy > in order to avoid seeing my banners. too bad, you lost. no, there's no way you can do that. I'm operating a junkbuster proxy for 100+ people in the company and let's just say that if you find a way to block us out, I'll find a way to get in again and send the patch in. From anonymous at openpgp.net Mon Oct 30 09:00:13 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:00:13 -0500 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <4a6b477f4794fa32178b73112a301887@mixmaster.ceti.pl> >And now, Ive read a transcript of a person getting herself off through a >text conversation with a stateless program designed to emulate one of the >most boring presidential candidates in years. >Our "human rights" measures are counteracting the natural protections >against laziness and stupidity. The human species is in trouble if people >like "User" breed. Thats why we invented retrovirii, bub. -The Management From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 30 03:00:28 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:00:28 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users References: <200010281704.MAA30926@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <39FD54CC.8F720FF2@ricardo.de> Igor Chudov wrote: > This may or may not be true. This all depends on how junkbusters script > works. Perhaps junkbusters filters out all 480x90 images, for instance. In > which case I can place a 480x90 transparent gif at the bottom of my > entrance page, and upon request of such gif I can set something in the > user's cookie that would allow him/her further browsing. A lot of things > are computer detectable. why don't you simply look at the source? > Maybe it is collapsing for companies who hire dozens of programmers > to create some trivial nonsensical sites, e.g. drkoop.com. I created my > site by myself, with no costs other than my time involved (and I > enjoyed doing it anyway, so the true cost is near zero), and banners > nicely supplement my income. I am not looking for a multimillion IPO, > just looking to make some $$ after all expenses. I have the benefit of a > nice name (www.algebra.com), so I do not need to spend any $$ at all to > attract visitors. without sparking a political discussion about the PC of banner ads, your main problem is that banner services (i.e. external sources) are undetectable to you because junkbuster never does anything to YOUR site - it just refuses to grab the ads from the external site. you may have a way if you would serve the banners yourself. but I doubt there's money in that. From tom at ricardo.de Mon Oct 30 03:10:12 2000 From: tom at ricardo.de (Tom Vogt) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:10:12 +0100 Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users References: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> <4.2.2.20001029103756.055f2340@clueserver.org> Message-ID: <39FD5714.313E6A80@ricardo.de> Alan Olsen wrote: > Actually you can. Junkbusters mucks with the http headers for client type. > subject to configuration. not reliable. From apoio at giganetstore.com Mon Oct 30 05:02:48 2000 From: apoio at giganetstore.com (apoio at giganetstore.com) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 13:02:48 -0000 Subject: CDR: Um Som Envolvente Message-ID: <02b993804131ea0WWWNETSTORE@wwwnetstore> A maior CAMPANHA DE SOM online na giganetstore.com , estas são algumas das nossas propostas... Leitor MP3 32MB gigapreço 31.990$00 MP3 Station Plus gigapreço 4.990$00 Walkman RQ-E11 gigapreço 5.690$00 Leitor de CD's SL-S214 gigapreço 15.390$00 Micro MC115 gigapreço 29.900$00 Mini SC-AK18 gigapreço 49.900$00 Mini Hifi PrologicFW-P75/22 gigapreço 61.900$00 Leitor DVD 711 gigapreço 68.900$00 DVD LV75 gigapreço 339.900$00 Amplificador SU-A909 gigapreço 88.900$00 Equalizador SH-GE90 gigapreço 46.900$00 Kit Colunas FB201 gigapreço 21.900$00 Campanha válida entre 30/10 e 5/11 Para retirar o seu email desta mailing list deverá entrar no nosso site http://www.giganetstore.com , ir à edição do seu registo e retirar a opção de receber informação acerca das nossas promoções e novos serviços. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 5305 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sunder at sunder.net Mon Oct 30 10:07:05 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 13:07:05 -0500 Subject: CDR: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users References: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <39FDB8C9.2CBDF3F0@sunder.net> Igor Chudov wrote: > > I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have > a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy > in order to avoid seeing my banners. And what's so special about your website that viewers couldn't find the same content elsewhere, or would be willing to turn out viewing the ads just for your site? If someone's actively filtering out ads from your site, it is of course your right to not let them have access, but it's not likely that they would bend over backwards to tell JunkBusters or one of the other filters to let them view your banners. So unless you have some unique and very compelling/attractive content, you're just going to alienate more users. And setting a cookie on a web tracking GIF is not likely to win you any friends either. Look at it this way, if they're filtering banner ads, they're likely filtering cookies also. Even if you redirect them to a page that says "To view my great wonderous site, turn on cookies and allow banner ads" you are now forcing users to go through even more contortions. At which point the smarter ones will realize that they need a specific cookie, and will just set it by hand. At which point you're likely going to set up dynamic cookies to keep them from reusing old ones, and at which point, someone will add a patch to JunkBusters to allow you to set your cookie, start and abort the downloading of banner ads, and then you're fucked again, until you write an Apache module that checks for aborted banner ads, ad nauseum, etc... Ho indeed. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From jimdbell at home.com Mon Oct 30 13:21:44 2000 From: jimdbell at home.com (jim bell) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 13:21:44 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Parties References: <3420c87418ad501ededf2fde83f0fb46@melontraffickers.com> Message-ID: <004201c042b7$676b2f60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> > Rush rapped: > > Glad to hear that all it takes to "get your vote" is a reckless executive > > pardon of criminals that is designed to utilize executive > > power to bypass the checks and balances system and negate the efforts of the > > legislative and judicial branches of government > > > Spoken like a true fascist. What the fuck do you think executive pardon > is but just another "checks and balances"? The fact is that it's the criminal > scum in power at the moment who are fucking the constitution with their dirty > little "war on some drugs". Basic 1st Amemdment freedom of religion went > right down the drain with the very first drug law. It's religious persecution > pure and simple, nothing more, nothing less. Harry Browne should go further, > if elected he should not only pardon every person ever convicted of a drug or > gun offense, but he should order the immediate arrest of anyone who ever voted > for a drug or gun law, and who ever enforced these despicable illegal laws. Exactly correct. Under libertarian principles they are fully guilty of initiating "force and/or fraud". And there are no "statutes of limitation" on our response to these people regardless of current law. Now would be an excellent time for anyone to go to their county voter's registration office, and order a copy of the voter's registration database for current and future use. Jim Bell From nobody at generalprotectionfault.net Mon Oct 30 04:23:15 2000 From: nobody at generalprotectionfault.net (Ann Onim) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 13:23:15 +0100 Subject: CDR: Sagan's V-Chips Message-ID: <3e069e101f8616edfb87383556849bf3@generalprotectionfault.net> >"Neil Johnson" wrote > >As for the V-Chip. I've seen enough programs rated "For All Ages" that are >not appropriate for young kids to know that they are worthless. (By the way >I want a P-chip to filter Politicians, a BB-(Bible Beater) chip to filter >out the 700 Club. etc. I seem to remember that's what made the billions for >the character in Sagan's "Contact" ). > [From memory] The device you describe is called Ad-nix (mutes the sound when the commercials come on) which was closely followed by Preach-nix (mutes sound when televangelists appear). This device was made possible by impossibly good speech/context recognition software running in a set top box. And, when I first heard about the set top dirty word filters mentioned in Wired, I assumed these were a hoax... In the book, advertisers and televangelists fought back against the loss of their income with a suit claiming that THEIR first amendment protected rights were being infringed. Imagine the AFA whining about not being able to inflict their speech on the unwilling. (All that TV has rotted my long term memory :-) The lawsuit was unsuccessful, although the NSA eventually snatched the speech recognition algorithms away in the interests of national security. BTW: Can Uncle Sam slap a secrecy order on GPL/public domain code, or do you have to actually apply to the patent office to risk this happening? [Also from memory] There was a short film (first shown in the UK in 1998? I think it won some kind of award) called King of Chaos, in which a small time programmer works his way up to become an international software and media magnate. His crowning achievement was the invention of a set top box, which retransmitted subscription channels to other boxes for free. After destroying traditional media, he then made his fortune selling ratings and searching for content that matched the user's requirements, selling this service for a fee. Using this fortune he diversified into other markets (health, education, pensions, unemployment insurance) and attempted to replace the government's role in all these fields. He fell foul of the UK government when he refused to inflict 'party political broadcasts' on his unwilling customers. All very Cyphernomiconish... If anyone can knows where I can get a script of this could you please tell the list? From k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk Mon Oct 30 06:15:03 2000 From: k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk (Ken Brown) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 14:15:03 +0000 Subject: CDR: Mootos References: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> <4.2.2.20001029103756.055f2340@clueserver.org> <39FD5714.313E6A80@ricardo.de> Message-ID: <39FD8267.443F8D77@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> There has recently been some discussion on UKcrypto of a hypothesised eavesdropping-safe boot CD containing OS & necessary software to get encrypted IP links to a (predetermined?) safe site. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/peter.fairbrother/ The "won't be able to import files" and so on sounds familiar from a long time ago. Isn't this the case in the maximum implementation of the old coloured book standards? (Too boring to look it up) Also I'd like to see a "multi-platform CD that users boot from" that would work with OC, Mac, Sun etc... Ken first few lines: > Moot! is a cryptosuite designed to avoid RIPA pt3 > and govermnent access to keys/plaintext in general. > All storage is in an offshore data haven. > Moot! is designed to consist of a multi-platform > CD that users boot from. It is designed to be hard to > emulate in software. > It's also open-source, free if I can get enough help, > or at least cheap, and I plan to publish the security > designs and ask for comments and suggestions > (and help!) before actually implementing anything. > It works sort of like this: > in the box (on the CD): w/p, spreadsheet, > database s/w etc: crypto package: comms s/w eg TCP/IP, > modem and ethernet drivers etc.: minimal operating > system: no local storage From declan at well.com Mon Oct 30 12:34:48 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:34:48 -0500 Subject: CDR: Libertarians and political parties Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001030153349.00ae4f00@mail.well.com> Speaking of such, here are some actual facts. I wrote about Rasmussen in a recent Wired article. Here's what their polls say: http://www.portraitofamerica.com/html/poll-1468.html Earlier this year, Rasmussen Research conducted a survey measuring the electorate along a scale favored by many libertarians. This survey found 16% of American voters are functionally libertarian. However, only 2% of voters claim the title of libertarian to describe their own views. -Declan From camping at quickleads.com Mon Oct 30 12:49:37 2000 From: camping at quickleads.com (camping at quickleads.com) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:49:37 -0500 Subject: CDR: Your 60 day Free offer! Message-ID: <200010302049.PAA27487@tri-2.gtbd.com> Plan ahead and get a jump on the competition! Get next season's campers interested in you NOW! Take advantage of 60 days FREE advertising on the world's first 100% graphic-based, travel-dedicated search engine! http://www.travel-its.net/join_gtbd/camping LeadBlaster Marketing Group Inc. 5503 Green Valley Drive Suite 200 Bloomington MN 55437 In the US call 1 800 GET FREE (438-3733) International call 1 952 831 9194 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To be removed from this mailing list email opt-in at quickleads.com with the subject line "Remove" or click on the link below http://tri-2.gtbd.com/maillist/camping.cgi?cypherpunks at cyberpass.net From camping at quickleads.com Mon Oct 30 12:49:37 2000 From: camping at quickleads.com (camping at quickleads.com) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:49:37 -0500 Subject: CDR: Your 60 day Free offer! Message-ID: <200010302049.PAA27483@tri-2.gtbd.com> Plan ahead and get a jump on the competition! Get next season's campers interested in you NOW! Take advantage of 60 days FREE advertising on the world's first 100% graphic-based, travel-dedicated search engine! http://www.travel-its.net/join_gtbd/camping LeadBlaster Marketing Group Inc. 5503 Green Valley Drive Suite 200 Bloomington MN 55437 In the US call 1 800 GET FREE (438-3733) International call 1 952 831 9194 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To be removed from this mailing list email opt-in at quickleads.com with the subject line "Remove" or click on the link below http://tri-2.gtbd.com/maillist/camping.cgi?cypherpunks at algebra.com From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 30 14:47:30 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:47:30 -0600 (CST) Subject: CDR: RE: Parties In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001030100937.01b3e100@mail.well.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: > At 09:04 10/30/2000 -0600, Carskadden, Rush wrote: > >where he actually says this himself). Under no circumstances do I consider > >it wise to fly in the face of checks and balances when your cause is > >"right" but you do not have the majority power. There is a reason that > >Congress makes laws, just as there is a reason that the Presidents can > >veto, as there is a reason that the Judicial system interprets the law. > >It's designed to create a balance that protects us from a loose cannon > >government going off and acting recklessly. > > Ah, but they already have. Your beloved "checks and balances" don't work. They work well enough that you're not sitting in a jail cell for sedition or treason. The checks and balances do work, remarkably well considering the amount of effort spent on trying to subvert them. There are clearly several issues, neither innumerable or irresolvable, that need addressing but a depiction as an abject and total failure is simply mis-representation; typical Declan. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 30 14:52:49 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:52:49 -0600 (CST) Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: <3420c87418ad501ededf2fde83f0fb46@melontraffickers.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, A. Melon wrote: > Spoken like a true fascist. What the fuck do you think executive pardon > is but just another "checks and balances"? The fact is that it's the criminal > scum in power at the moment who are fucking the constitution with their dirty > little "war on some drugs". Basic 1st Amemdment freedom of religion went > right down the drain with the very first drug law. It's religious persecution > pure and simple, nothing more, nothing less. Harry Browne should go further, > if elected he should not only pardon every person ever convicted of a drug or > gun offense, but he should order the immediate arrest of anyone who ever voted > for a drug or gun law, and who ever enforced these despicable illegal laws. > Take your stupid babbling about your phoney politics elsewhere -- it has no > relativity to cypherpunks. Actualy you mis-represent. The fundamental issues that trouble this country are not an effect of the war on drugs, but rather it an effect of them. There are many. A few, The acceptance by the rank and file of Lincoln's 'fundamental law of nations'. This has laid the basic groundwork for the ever increasing 'federalism' (and as a consequence socialism/fascism). The change in life style (e.g. loss of state power) we see a loss of power in one of the fundamental component pieces of our democracy. An increase in technology that has placed the ability to harm a large group of poeple in the hands of the individual like no previous time in history. etc. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 30 14:57:30 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:57:30 -0600 (CST) Subject: CDR: Libertarians and political parties In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001030153349.00ae4f00@mail.well.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Declan McCullagh wrote: > Speaking of such, here are some actual facts. I wrote about Rasmussen in a > recent Wired article. Here's what their polls say: > > http://www.portraitofamerica.com/html/poll-1468.html > Earlier this year, Rasmussen Research conducted a survey > measuring the electorate along a scale favored by many > libertarians. This survey found 16% of American voters are > functionally libertarian. However, only 2% of voters claim > the title of libertarian to describe their own views. Which means nothing other than a clear demonstration that these terms are inaccurate or mis-represented. Hell, I can't be more anti-libertarian yet on many surveys I take that is exactly what they list me. Why? Because they don't have a section for 'strict constitutionalist'. It isn't a question of category but rather a responce to limited categories and the requirement that each participant fit into one of them. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Mon Oct 30 14:58:38 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 16:58:38 -0600 (CST) Subject: CDR: Re: Parties In-Reply-To: <004201c042b7$676b2f60$a6d11018@vncvr1.wa.home.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, jim bell wrote: > Exactly correct. Under libertarian principles they are fully guilty of > initiating "force and/or fraud". And there are no "statutes of limitation" > on our response to these people regardless of current law. > > Now would be an excellent time for anyone to go to their county voter's > registration office, and order a copy of the voter's registration database > for current and future use. And what principles might those be? ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From declan at well.com Mon Oct 30 14:45:32 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 17:45:32 -0500 Subject: CDR: Why Bill Joy is elitist, myopic, and wrong Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001030174526.01bfb210@mail.well.com> http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/30/2058257&mode=nested Why Bill Joy is Elitist, Myopic, and Wrong By Lizard October 30, 2000 The smallpox vaccine will cause people to turn into cows. Trains cannot be permitted to travel more than 20 miles per hour, or else the passengers will asphyxiate. The atomic bomb will detonate the entire atmosphere of Earth. The history of science is filled with dire predictions of the consequences of technology, few of which ever come true. (Granted, many of the more lofty hopes for technology likewise fail to appear. Where's my personal helicopter and laser gun, dammit?) But fear sells papers, which explains why Bill Joy is given far more column-inches than he deserves. (Joy, the cofounder of Sun Microsystems, spoke at a Camden Technology conference over the weekend.) The most distressing thing about his Luddite stand is the undercurrent of elitism which flows by without criticism. The common man must not be permitted access to the glorious fruits of science, he says, because out there among the teeming masses might be murderers and madmen. Well, we'd probably better make sure they don't get their hands on fire and the wheel, too -- who knows what might happen? Joy is wrong on a wide range of levels, but his most egregious error is that he has precisely the wrong solution to the alleged problem. If he fears the misuse of biotech or nanotech, the last thing that should be done is to turn these technologies into state secrets, because that puts the knowledge right into the hands of those with a history of using it for evil, namely, politicians. If something can be done, it will be done, and all that suppressing information will achieve is ensuring there is not ready access to counter-measures to whatever devious plots Joy's hypothetical supercriminals may devise. "Open sourcing" technology will all but guarantee that for every uber-anthrax, there's an uber-vaccine; for every bit of world-devouring grey-goo, there's something that will eat it even faster. Locking technology away is no solution. If the public knowledge base of the world has reached the point where one scientist can make the next breakthrough, then there are dozens of other scientists who can do likewise. And, of course, who will watch the watchers? We've already seen that secrets aren't: There are more leaks in the U.S. national security apparatus than in a Russian space station. Better to simply open it up and be done with it. There is nothing dehumanizing about the probable merger of flesh and silicon. It simply continues the path man began when the first barely-erect hairy ape realized a fist holding a rock got you more than a fist alone. From that moment on, we became defined by our tools. There is no point and no purpose in trying to stop now. Joy is fond of saying "the future doesn't need us." He is almost completely wrong. The future needs most of us. It's just that the future -- and the present -- doesn't need him. To post your response or contact the author, visit: http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/30/2058257&mode=nested From shamrock at cypherpunks.to Mon Oct 30 18:33:19 2000 From: shamrock at cypherpunks.to (Lucky Green) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 18:33:19 -0800 Subject: CDR: Info on Sun key compromise? Message-ID: Does anybody on this list have details about the key compromise Sun experienced? See http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/1851 AFIK, this is the first published private key compromise of a major vendor. How did it happen? Thanks, -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted email preferred. From billp at nmol.com Mon Oct 30 20:02:41 2000 From: billp at nmol.com (billp at nmol.com) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 21:02:41 -0700 Subject: CDR: the wild ones Message-ID: <39FE4461.427D012C@nmol.com> http://members.tripod.com/bill_3_2/load2.htm Us wild ones are having FUN From abs at squig.org Mon Oct 30 21:40:47 2000 From: abs at squig.org (Alex B. Shepardsen) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 21:40:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: Info on Sun key compromise? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Perhaps this will clue users into the fact that they need to be vigilant about monitoring the trusted roots in their browsers. Perhaps this will clue the browser vendors into the fact that there needs to be a revocation distribution method for compromised certificates. Perhaps this will clue the CAs and other trusted root holders into the fact that they need to protect their roots. Or perhaps I ask too much from an industry accustomed to doing so little. Alexandra On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Lucky Green wrote: > Does anybody on this list have details about the key compromise Sun > experienced? See http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/1851 > > AFIK, this is the first published private key compromise of a major > vendor. How did it happen? > > Thanks, > -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted email preferred. > From jamesd at echeque.com Mon Oct 30 22:15:27 2000 From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A, Donald) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 22:15:27 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: NZ: Sweeping powers for spy agencies In-Reply-To: References: <200010301142.GAA24105@smtp6.mindspring.com> <200010301142.GAA24105@smtp6.mindspring.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20001030215754.02a48530@shell11.ba.best.com> -- At 08:11 AM 10/30/2000 -0800, Tim May wrote: > -- when the U.S. invades Somalia, they disarm the population The major objective of the intervention was to arrest Aidid, who whatever his sins may have been, was a hero of the revolutionary war against a Soviet aligned tyrant, and the major figure in the revolution that overthrew socialist tyranny in Somalia. A major tactic in this US intervention was to forcibly close down presses and radio stations that gave politically incorrect news -- which tended to be pro capitalist and anti socialist news. Bush's peculiar foreign policy was in line with some of Clinton's recent foreign interventions, notably his installation of a Marxist dictator in Haiti -- though Haiti is fortunately too corrupt to actually practice Marxism. The dictator of Haiti is merely a Batista, not a Castro. The same was to some extent true of Biarre, the muderous tyrant who Aidid helped overthrow. > -- when the U.S. moves into South America, as "advisors," they educate the secret police in how to create death squads, how to torture suspects, how > to assassinate opposition leaders. (Cf. the CIA manuals, College of the Americas, direct testimony, etc.) You should also recall the "Alliance for Progress", which did so much to advance communism and socialism in South America. It seems that the good progressives in the state department believed that communists were popular because the peasants were eager to participate in Stalin style collectives, so if the US would provide stalinist collectivism for the peasants, that would make the US popular. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG lVJaQLVcGe46yIXnzqbi8PZ5ihIkwl8GKC4l/sNH 4D99by0sIbMOXYgBa6MN6RGQo275zttfL/9WauIGs From anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net Mon Oct 30 20:23:54 2000 From: anmetet at mixmaster.shinn.net (An Metet) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 23:23:54 -0500 Subject: CDR: Copyright Office Backs Digital Law Message-ID: http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/30/technology/30LIBE.html By AMY HARMON In a decision giving copyright holders greater control over the way people use books, movies and music that are distributed in digital form, the United States Copyright Office on Friday endorsed a new federal law making it illegal to break the technological safeguards for such works. The statute goes into effect immediately. The ruling was a defeat for several constituencies � including universities, libraries and computer programmers � that had argued that the law should preserve traditional rights to archive and lend out copyrighted material or to use so-called reverse-engineering to understand how a piece of technology works. The provision endorsed by the copyright office is part of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Congress passed the act to update the copyright law for the digital era, when copying on a mass scale is far easier than it has ever been. Under the act, it is illegal to create or distribute a device like a computer program that can crack the copy- protection security code on an electronic book or a DVD movie disc. This year, a federal judge found that the Web site of 2600 magazine, whose publisher is Eric Corley, had violated the law by distributing a program designed to break the security code on DVD's so that they could be played on computers running the Linux software operating system. But when the judge issued the ruling, the law did not prohibit the actual use of such a device by individuals because of the pending review by the copyright office. Congress had asked the copyright office to determine whether any exemptions were necessary to ensure that the rights of the users of copyrighted works were balanced with those of copyright holders. Media companies including Sony and Time Warner had argued that the statute was necessary to protect their digital material, like computer games and movies, from widespread unauthorized use. But groups like the Association of American Universities, the American Library Association and the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration maintained that broad exemptions were necessary to preserve the "fair use" rights of individuals. After holding several hearings and receiving comments for almost two years, the copyright office said repeatedly in its ruling that the proponents of various kinds of exemptions had not demonstrated evidence that there would be "substantial harm" if an exemption was not granted. The ruling, issued by the Library of Congress, which oversees the copyright office, will be in effect for three years, during which the copyright office will continue to examine its effect. In a statement, the Library of Congress said that it intended to ask Congress to reconsider that time frame, noting the "potential damage to scholarship may well ensue in the course of a three-year period." Under the law, civil statutory damages for gaining access to a piece of copyrighted material secured by computer code range from $200 to $2,500. Criminal penalties includes fines of as much as $1 million or 10 years in jail for repeat offenses. From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 31 05:14:45 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 07:14:45 -0600 (CST) Subject: CDR: Re: NZ: Sweeping powers for spy agencies In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20001030215754.02a48530@shell11.ba.best.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, James A, Donald wrote: > The major objective of the intervention was to arrest Aidid, who whatever > his sins may have been, was a hero of the revolutionary war against a > Soviet aligned tyrant, and the major figure in the revolution that > overthrew socialist tyranny in Somalia. Bullshit. He was a petty war-lord who would have promised anything to anyone who would then sell him the tools he needed to continue his killing of his opponents. Whether the glass is half full or half empty isn't the issue. It's that it's all the water there is. ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 31 05:53:47 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 08:53:47 -0500 Subject: CDR: Bush Calls Administration Encryption Policy "Outdated" (was Re: GigaLaw.com Daily News, October 31, 2000) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 5:19 AM -0800 on 10/31/00, GigaLaw.com wrote: > [POLITICS] > Bush Calls Administration Encryption Policy "Outdated" > Responding to a question about encryption technology in an ongoing > Internet debate, Texas Gov. George W. Bush castigated President Clinton > and Vice President Gore for what he called "outdated" technology policy. > "The Clinton administration has repeatedly been slow to recognize the > realities of the international market for encryption products regulated by > our nationís export laws," Bush said in a written response posted on the > Web White & Blue Web page. > Read the article: Newsbytes @ > http://www.newsbytes.com/news/00/157435.html -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From holovacs at idt.net Tue Oct 31 05:57:28 2000 From: holovacs at idt.net (Jay Holovacs) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 08:57:28 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Why Bill Joy is elitist, myopic, and wrong References: <4.3.0.20001030174526.01bfb210@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <006901c04342$84eb75a0$1501a8c0@ang394> Maybe this has appeared on this list, but check http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/lanier/lanier_index.html for another take from someone on the inside (Jaron Lanier). He does not buy Bill Joy's view but raises his own set of cautions. jay ----- Original Message ----- From: Declan McCullagh To: Cypherpunks Mailing List Cc: Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 5:45 PM Subject: Why Bill Joy is elitist, myopic, and wrong From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 31 09:11:23 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 09:11:23 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release) In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> References: <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 10:03 AM -0500 10/31/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >> >>ZERO-KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS INTRODUCES MANAGED PRIVACY SERVICES >>TO SOLVE THE PRIVACY CHALLENGES OF BUSINESSES >> >> >>Montreal -- October 31, 2000 -- Zero-Knowledge(R) Systems, >>the leading developer of privacy solutions, today >>introduced its new Managed Privacy Services(TM) offering to >>solve the privacy challenges of businesses and enable >>enterprise to thrive in a privacy-conscious climate. >>Delivering a unique combination of technology, policy and >>strategy expertise, Zero-Knowledge Managed Privacy Services >>(MPS) enables clients to turn privacy into a competitive >>advantage by leveraging rich data resources while building >>stronger and more profitable relationships with customers, >>employees and partners. MPS is based on responsible and >>ethical information management in accordance with relevant >>legislation and industry standards. "Relevant legislation"? In Canada, in Iran, in Denmark, where? Surely ZKS is not claiming that they will be somehow targetting each instance of their product to specific countries. If not, if the product is a general one, then just _whose_ "relevant legislation" applies? (I presume this is related to their split key/key escrow/"trusted third parties" nonsense.) >> >>* ASSESS AND ADVISE -- Managed Privacy Services begins with >>a thorough assessment of each client's data storage and >>usage patterns, as well as their business objectives. From >>this assessment, recommendations are made regarding areas >>where data can be better utilized through the addition of a >>strong privacy layer, and areas of potential privacy risk >>are identified. This is beginning to sound like ZKS is restructuring itself as a consulting company, a la Arthur Anderson or the (now in the process of divorce) Kroll-O'Gara outfit. >> >>Zero-Knowledge is committed to deploying systems that are >>transparent and accountable. In keeping with this policy, >>MPS will incorporate third party verification and split >>encryption key structures Split encryption key. I think that says it all. >>, as well as provide consumers >>with access to white papers, independent auditors' reports >>or other materials that assure a company is doing what it >>claims. With MPS Zero-Knowledge strengthens its commitment >>to building responsible systems that empower consumers to >>control the disclosure and use of their personal >>information, while still enabling businesses to thrive in a >>data and relationship-driven marketplace. "Empower consumers"? "Responsible systems"? "Strengthens its commitment"? How about: -- no key escrow, no split keys, no trusted third parties -- public key crypto With strong crypto widely available, what business (or knowledgeable private person) is going to want or need this "ASSESS AND ADVISE" and "COMMIT AND CAPITULATE" (ok, I'm changing their stages) stuff/ I can't see how a large company, like an Intel or an Amgen, is going to move away from mathematically robust PKS systems and adopt some throwback to the 1940s, some kind of split key or key escrow system. And I can't see how Joe Consumer is going to pay for the (apparent) "review" of his (presumed) needs and then get some key escrow package tailored to his (presumed) needs. So, what sort of customer is this product tailored for? Some middle-sized company which is clueless on crypto and which wants hand-holding? Some company in a country which _requires_ key escrow? Is ZKS setting itself up to be the premier supplier of key escrow and LEAF tools? Sounds like it. The "relevant legislation" language is the real kicker. Sounds like the many former government types working at ZKS got the focus shifted from truly secure systems to basically uninteresting--and even pernicious!--systems which "meet the legitimate needs of law enforcement." Key escrow, in other words. "Big Brother Inside" Whew. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 31 09:40:43 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 09:40:43 -0800 Subject: CDR: ZKS goes GAK In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:06 AM -0500 10/31/00, Trei, Peter wrote: > >I don't want to be 'assured that a company is doing what it >claims' (with my personal information). Companies change >policies at whim. What a firm's founder may fervently >believe could become a curio of corporate history after the >next board meeting. Look at Amazon's recent policy >change, for example. Also, data in the possession of a >corporation and me is always less secure than information >possessed only by me. And sensitive data held by "trusted third parties" is always subject to subpoena by authorities, litigants (in some cases), and by national security access. (Not surprisingly, this is precisely why the U.K. was pushing "trusted third parties" so strongly.) In the United States, for example, the holder of information generally has less power to assert Fourth Amendment protections than the actual owner of that information has. (That is, if Alice the Storage Company is holding stuff for Bob, Alice cannot assert Fourth Amendment rights on behalf of Bob. Greg Broiles, IIRC, wrote up some nice stuff on this a few years ago.) A bank may disclose financial records of a customer subject to the banking laws, not subject to the Fourth and other such amendments. Wanna bet that the "trusted third parties" being talked about in Britain, Europe, and other countries will be treated in this light? In France and Iran for sure, and probably in the U.S. Will a company like Intel feel secure knowing that "trusted third parties" have the ability to access its most important secrets? Gimme a fucking break. Any such key sharing, key splitting, key escrow, GAK, trusted third parties, or "legitmate needs of law enforcement" completely guts the underlying crypto. Why bother trying to break a 128-bit key when court orders--often delivered secretly, as with banks, naational security concerns, etc.--will do the trick? GAK beats crack. (Carl Ellison's term for "government access to keys") > >Instead of being assured that the company is acting in >accordance with their stated policy du jour (or at least, >their lawyers' spin on it), I want to know that they CAN'T >abuse my personal data, because the don't have any. >That is the confidence which ZK's original scheme was >intended to produce, and which the introduction of this >plan seems to seems to suggest is no longer considered >a high priority at ZKS. If the original Freedom product is: a. as unbreakable/untraceable as was originally planned (verdict is out, IMO) and b. is continued to be supported and distributed then why would the new "trusted third parties" system be needed? Unless mandated by law, why would any company or organization place its secrets in the hands of others? Which may explain the language in the ZKS release about "in accord with relevant legislation." Of course, if local relevant legislation requires third party key escrow, what happens to the legality of the Freedom product? Hmmmhhh. > >It may be that the ZK's product 'Freedom' is proving a >financial bust (I won't use it until I can buy nyms >for cash at CompUSA). I understand the drive to meet >payroll and pay off VCs, but I can't help but be >saddened. I'm saddened as well. Many fine folks work for ZKS, including some folks I count as friends. And Austin Hill is a fine person, from what I have seen (one face-to-face meeting a couple of years ago, one long phone conversation, a few e-mails). Freedom was a sort of interesting product, though the "terms and conditions" for cancelling the prepaid nyms were unacceptable to me. I'm not shelling out $50 for a nym only to find it cancelled because I said something banned by Canada's laws about hate speech, as just one example. The requirement to buy with a credit card or other noncash instrument bothered me, as it bothers Peter. Lastly, the Mac issue. It may be that this new product is just being floated as a trial balloon, that Freedom and other "unbreakable" (so to speak) products will be their main focus. History shows that such trial balloons in the direction of key escrow, GAK, and key-splitting will be devastating. Recall how PGP got sidetracked into discussions of its limited key escrow feature set, with many people speaking out against the GAKware aspects; whether this contributed to what happened to the commercial prospects for PGP is unclear. I know that most of the Cypherpunks folks drifted away from Network Associates. If ZKS is seen as "building in Big Brother," then the PR consequences for them will be devastating. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 31 09:56:23 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 09:56:23 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model to Split Key Escrow(NSA-Key (press release) In-Reply-To: <20001031122755.A15355@weathership.homeport.org> References: <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> <20001031160718.A15515@shannon.permutation.net> <20001031122755.A15355@weathership.homeport.org> Message-ID: At 12:27 PM -0500 10/31/00, Adam Shostack wrote: >On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 04:07:18PM +0100, cyphrpnk wrote: >| > >Privacy is good business. Companies in every industry are >| > >realizing they must institute the proper privacy policies, >| > >practices and infrastructures in order to succeed in >| > >today's digital economy. Zero-Knowledge Managed Privacy >| > >Services provides the tools and strategies that enable >| > >business to establish private customer relationships and >| > >earn consumer trust while ensuring legislative compliance >| > >and mitigating risk. >| legistlative Compliance... >| Guess Lew Giles or the CSE came to visit > >By legislative compliance, we mean compliance with laws. There are no >key escrow laws in Canada. There is a privacy law, bill C-6, and we >will help companies comply with that. Let's look at the key splitting aspect. Alice has some secrets she wishes to protect with your product. Or Alice is communicating with Bob and wishes the contents kept secret. Standard stuff. Of course, she could just use conventional PKS tools. Or even Freedom, should she wish the fact of the communication itself to be protected. Standard stuff. But let us say she, for whatever reason, uses key splitting. Charles and Debby are the holders of the split keys. (If either Alice or Bob is the holder of one of the split keys, this is as if the key is not split at all, of course. Modulo some slight work factor issues.) "Ensuring legislative compliance" now talks on a meaning which is completely separate from whether key escrow laws have been passed. Charles and Debby can be suboenaed (not sure what the Canadian, or Iranian, or Baloneystan equivalents are). This subpoena may be in secret, unknown to Alice. Or Alice and Bob. And this process may not happen with just subpoenas. It will likely happen with national security agencies. Without Alice knowing. This is what happens when Alice or any other customer of your product uses "trusted third parties." GAK beats crack any day. This is the danger of building a "trusted third parties" system. And is precisely the reason the United Kingdom was campaigning for this kind of system. By building precisely the tools they and other governments would need to implement such a system, you are making such a system more likely to happen. --Tim May --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From declan at well.com Tue Oct 31 07:03:59 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:03:59 -0500 Subject: CDR: Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release) Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> >From: kcory at redwhistle.com >To: declan at well.com >Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 06:55:11 -0800 >Subject: Zero-Knowledge Introduces Managed Privacy Services for Businesses > > > >Hi Declan, >Today, Zero-Knowledge Systems is introducing its Managed Privacy >Services (MPS) offering to solve the privacy challenges >that businesses face in today's privacy-conscious business >environment. > >Privacy is good business. Companies in every industry are >realizing they must institute the proper privacy policies, >practices and infrastructures in order to succeed in >today's digital economy. Zero-Knowledge Managed Privacy >Services provides the tools and strategies that enable >business to establish private customer relationships and >earn consumer trust while ensuring legislative compliance >and mitigating risk. > >As companies have become aware of the privacy risks and >legislative hurdles facing them, many have turned to Zero- >Knowledge for advice and solutions, and the MPS offering is >the natural response to companies' needs for comprehensive >privacy solutions. > >I've included the press release about MPS below. If you >have any questions about Zero-Knowledge's Managed Privacy >Services offering or would like to set up a conversation >with Zero-Knowledge President Austin Hill, please give me a >call at 503-552-3749. > >Best regards, >Kristy Cory >503-552-3749 > >ZERO-KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS INTRODUCES MANAGED PRIVACY SERVICES >TO SOLVE THE PRIVACY CHALLENGES OF BUSINESSES > > >Montreal -- October 31, 2000 -- Zero-Knowledge(R) Systems, >the leading developer of privacy solutions, today >introduced its new Managed Privacy Services(TM) offering to >solve the privacy challenges of businesses and enable >enterprise to thrive in a privacy-conscious climate. >Delivering a unique combination of technology, policy and >strategy expertise, Zero-Knowledge Managed Privacy Services >(MPS) enables clients to turn privacy into a competitive >advantage by leveraging rich data resources while building >stronger and more profitable relationships with customers, >employees and partners. MPS is based on responsible and >ethical information management in accordance with relevant >legislation and industry standards. > >"Privacy is good business -- and Zero-Knowledge Systems is >the company that can deliver continued privacy value to >companies that want to succeed in today's digital economy," >said Austin Hill, president of Zero-Knowledge >Systems. "Through expert professional services and >technological solutions, Zero-Knowledge Systems works with >companies to leverage and develop the rich data resources >they need, while ensuring that their customers' personal >information will not be abused, misused or sold without >their permission." > >Employing a broad toolkit of privacy-enhancing technologies >that control and protect data, MPS brings privacy-based >services to a variety of markets for the first time. These >include: financial services, health care, wireless, >marketing, CRM and hosted solutions (ASPs). > >The Managed Privacy Services Process >Zero-Knowledge MPS fuses sophisticated infrastructure >design, advanced cryptographic systems and world-class >privacy expertise to deliver strong privacy integration to >a wide variety of business processes and system designs. >Following a period of assessment and design, MPS culminates >in the deployment of a tailored privacy layer that >integrates seamlessly with the client's existing enterprise >applications. > >* ASSESS AND ADVISE -- Managed Privacy Services begins with >a thorough assessment of each client's data storage and >usage patterns, as well as their business objectives. From >this assessment, recommendations are made regarding areas >where data can be better utilized through the addition of a >strong privacy layer, and areas of potential privacy risk >are identified. > >* DESIGN AND IMPLEMENT -- The assessment stage provides the >framework for all aspects of the infrastructure design, and >determines which Zero-Knowledge privacy technologies are >best suited to the client's needs. The result is a solution >that not only secures and protects the client's data, but >also allows for a wider array of data-driven activities. >Professional systems integration ensures that all the >client's business requirements are met, and guarantees the >final design will result in the most robust and flexible >system possible. > >* VERIFY AND MANAGE -- Zero-Knowledge is able to manage all >elements of the privacy infrastructure, allowing clients to >focus on their core competencies, and providing third-party >credibility to a client's privacy initiatives. Independent >audits ensure that the system deployed is in compliance >with stated policies, and that all controls are functioning >as per the design specifications. > >Zero-Knowledge is committed to deploying systems that are >transparent and accountable. In keeping with this policy, >MPS will incorporate third party verification and split >encryption key structures, as well as provide consumers >with access to white papers, independent auditors' reports >or other materials that assure a company is doing what it >claims. With MPS Zero-Knowledge strengthens its commitment >to building responsible systems that empower consumers to >control the disclosure and use of their personal >information, while still enabling businesses to thrive in a >data and relationship-driven marketplace. > >Zero-Knowledge Systems Leads Privacy Education >Zero-Knowledge Systems is also presenting the "Privacy by >Design: The Future of Privacy Compliance and Business" >conference sponsored by Royal Bank Financial Group, IBM, >Merrill Lynch, and PricewaterhouseCoopers. Incorporating >the privacy expertise of leading business, technology and >privacy figures, Privacy by Design will advise attendees on >how to develop, execute and market a successful privacy >strategy that will avoid regulatory breaches and >differentiate their business in the marketplace with a >demonstrable commitment to privacy. The conference will be >held at Le Chateau Montebello, Quebec from November 19 to >21, 2000. For more information on Privacy by Design, >including a detailed agenda, visit the conference Web site: >http://www.zeroknowledge.com/privacybydesign.html > >About Zero-Knowledge Systems, Inc. >Founded in 1997, Zero-Knowledge Systems >(http://www.zeroknowledge.com) is laying the digital >infrastructure for privacy-enabled communications and >commerce between individuals, companies, governments and >organizations. Zero-Knowledge creates products and services >that enable privacy through advanced mathematics, >cryptography and source code: the only reliable way to >ensure privacy. > >In December 1999, Zero-Knowledge launched Freedom(R), the >only privacy system that empowers Internet users to surf >the Web, send email, chat and post to newsgroups in total >privacy without having to trust third parties with their >personal information. Freedom can be downloaded at >http://www.freedom.net and Freedom source code is available >at http://opensource.zeroknowledge.com. In October 2000, >Zero-Knowledge launched its Managed Privacy Services(TM) >offering to provide expert consultation and privacy- >enhancing solutions that enable businesses to comply with >privacy legislation, maximize customer relationships and >build consumer trust without violating privacy. More >information about MPS can be found at >http://www.zeroknowledge.com/business. > >Journalists can visit the Zero-Knowledge pressroom at >http://www.zeroknowledge.com/media. > > (Freedom, Zero-Knowledge and Managed Privacy Services are >registered trademarks of Zero-Knowledge Systems, Inc. All >other names may be trademarks of their respective owners.) > >For more information >Dov Smith >Director of Public Relations >514.350.7553 >dov at zeroknowledge.com > >Kristy Cory >Red Whistle Communications >503.552.3749 >kcory at redwhistle.com > > > > > > From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 31 10:30:33 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:30:33 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release) In-Reply-To: <20001031130634.A15637@weathership.homeport.org> References: <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> <20001031130634.A15637@weathership.homeport.org> Message-ID: At 1:06 PM -0500 10/31/00, Adam Shostack wrote: >On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 09:11:23AM -0800, Tim May wrote: >| >>Zero-Knowledge is committed to deploying systems that are >| >>transparent and accountable. In keeping with this policy, >| >>MPS will incorporate third party verification and split >| >>encryption key structures >| >| Split encryption key. I think that says it all. > >Geez. I don't know how we ended up with that wording. Multiple key >would have made more sense. The goal is to have a set of keys which >are held by different entities. Thus, your data is encrypted such >that each of those entities needs to be involved to decrypt it. > >By split key encryption, we mean: E_a(E_b(E_c(data))) where E is a >strong algorithm (3des, twofish, AES), and the keys (abc) are full >strength, properly generated and stored keys for the system. Let's stipulate that the split keys are as strong as one can imagine. OK, let's set the stage with some players: * Alice, a consumer or customer * Bobco, a giant corporation dealing with Alice, collecting information on her, and all the usual stuff involving corporations dealing online with consumers like Alice. * Chuck and Debby, the holders of the "split encryption key," aka the "trusted third parties." (Extending the set to 3 or 4 or N such trusted third parties does not alter the basic discussion. Nor, by the way, does just having a _single_ trusted third party alter the basics of the legal/GAK structure: if the legal or national security system can force two parties to disclose, forcing one is easier, forcing 3 is slightly easier, and so on. But these are "polynomial" issues, so to speak.) I want to set the state so I can better understand just how and where this new ZKS system might be useful (to Alice, to Bobco, to governments). > >Given that we're doing this for businesses that are collecting data >now, if you consider those parties 'trusted third parties,' then we're >increasing the assurance that surrounds them. This business is what I called Bobco above. Now, suppose Bobco is using the ZKS system. I can see three regimes for any use of a crypto product: -- storage, at either Alice's or Bobco's site -- transit, between Alice and Bobco -- unlinkability: something to do with the linkage of purchase information with identity; how Bobco collects and disseminates information about customers like Alice The first two are conventional crypto issues, and don't need a new system. Both Alice and Bobco are responsible for securing their own data. Should laws require Bobco to secure Alice's data in some specific way, split key systems are still a poor solution. As near as I can tell, your concern about "privacy laws" has something to with the third main use for crypto: unlinkability. Am I right? Before I proceed further, let's see if this is where we're going. >We consider them >'merchants,' 'shipping companes' and other such businesses who today >get data from you. They're not trusted third parties in the Clipper >chip sense, but they are parties who store information about you, >often in very insecure and unprivate ways, as MCI, CDnow, and others >have found out. This sounds like the unlinkability again. If so, this is a tough, tough nut to crack. If Bobco is shipping products to Alice, Bobco knows her address and what she is buying. Fill in whatever examples one wishes. And if Alice answers a questionnaire about her buying preferences, her income, her age, etc., then Bobco will have this information. Hard to imagine how adding Charles and Debby to the system as trusted third parties helps things. Now, if Alice goes through a complicated procedure of dealing with Charles and Debby to only selectively reveal her preferences, or if Charles or Debby act as "third party shipping agents," so that Bobco doesn't know who he shipped a product to, then some unlinkability has been gotten. Anyway, I could ramble on about whether or not this makes for an interesting and profitable market niche, but it doesn't seem to be the thrust of where ZKS is going with this new product. Fact is, third party secrets are not interesting IF Bobco can aggregate the secret information AT ANY TIME. Unless some kind of unlinkability or blinding (a la Joan Feigenbaum's work on "computing with encrypted instances") is done, the trusted third parties don't serve much purpose that I can see. Maybe I'm missing something. How will Alice's privacy be protected from Bobco by having Charles and Debby (or just Charles, or Charles, Debby, Edward, Fred, and Greta, etc.) hold split keys? Wouldn't a better approach be for Alice to protect her own privacy? --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From mmotyka at lsil.com Tue Oct 31 11:00:10 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (mmotyka at lsil.com) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:00:10 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Bush Calls Administration Encryption Policy "Outdated" Message-ID: <39FF16BA.1CBC1F3E@lsil.com> > Bush Calls Administration Encryption Policy "Outdated" > Responding to a question about encryption technology in an ongoing > Internet debate, Texas Gov. George W. Bush castigated President Clinton > and Vice President Gore for what he called "outdated" technology policy. > "The Clinton administration has repeatedly been slow to recognize the > realities of the international market for encryption products regulated by > our nationís export laws," Bush said in a written response posted on the > Web White & Blue Web page. > Read the article: Newsbytes @ > http://www.newsbytes.com/news/00/157435.html > This Bush bit may sound positive but I expect increasingly draconian legitimate access legislation from both parties. Neither of them can be trusted and they will settle for nothing less than an absolute right to gather information and force key disclosure when they can't read it. If they can't have what they want today they will work towards tomorrow. Nonstop, like ants or termites. Mike From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 31 11:04:16 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:04:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model to Split Key Escrow(NSA-Key (press release) In-Reply-To: <20001031122755.A15355@weathership.homeport.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Adam Shostack wrote: >On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 04:07:18PM +0100, cyphrpnk wrote: >| p.s. that freedom source code 2.0 for linux I was porting to BSD >| I guess will go into the bit bucket!! 1984 speak my ass!! > >Sorry to hear that. I guess your porting the code isn't enough for >you to trust it. Odd. > >Adam The trust issue is not the code, the trust issue is the company. If he doesn't feel that the company is committed to maintaining appropriate levels of privacy, he chooses not to expend labor in support of the company's software. And he may trust version 2, without trusting the company to produce a version 3 that he can in good conscience recommend to anyone to use. I have designed and built code for free for people who told me they were going to use it one way -- and sent it to /dev/null when I discovered that they intended to use it another. It's as simple as that. These days, I tend to restrict my coding-for-free effort to projects that will be useful *only* in the ways I think are beneficial to society at large, or to projects that, used by everyone according to their own whim, will at least cause society more good than harm. (Note, I did not say "nations" or "governments" or "businesses" or even "citizens" -- I have a peculiar idea of society and what is beneficial to it). Bear From hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us Tue Oct 31 08:05:36 2000 From: hseaver at harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us (Harmon Seaver) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:05:36 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Mootos References: <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> <200010281619.LAA29112@manifold.algebra.com> <4.2.2.20001029103756.055f2340@clueserver.org> <39FD5714.313E6A80@ricardo.de> <39FD8267.443F8D77@ccs.bbk.ac.uk> Message-ID: <39FEEDB5.4BFC8BF4@harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us> That looks like an interesting approach, but what if your keyboard (motherboard, monitor, whatever) is bugged? -- Harmon Seaver, MLIS Systems Librarian Arrowhead Library System Virginia, MN (218) 741-3840 hseaver at arrowhead.lib.mn.us http://harmon.arrowhead.lib.mn.us From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 31 08:06:32 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:06:32 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release) Message-ID: I can't help but feel that this is a weakening of ZK's position regarding privacy. The critical paragraph is: > >Zero-Knowledge is committed to deploying systems that are > >transparent and accountable. In keeping with this policy, > >MPS will incorporate third party verification and split > >encryption key structures, as well as provide consumers > >with access to white papers, independent auditors' reports > >or other materials that assure a company is doing what it > >claims. With MPS Zero-Knowledge strengthens its commitment > >to building responsible systems that empower consumers to > >control the disclosure and use of their personal > >information, while still enabling businesses to thrive in a > >data and relationship-driven marketplace. > I don't want to be 'assured that a company is doing what it claims' (with my personal information). Companies change policies at whim. What a firm's founder may fervently believe could become a curio of corporate history after the next board meeting. Look at Amazon's recent policy change, for example. Also, data in the possession of a corporation and me is always less secure than information possessed only by me. Instead of being assured that the company is acting in accordance with their stated policy du jour (or at least, their lawyers' spin on it), I want to know that they CAN'T abuse my personal data, because the don't have any. That is the confidence which ZK's original scheme was intended to produce, and which the introduction of this plan seems to seems to suggest is no longer considered a high priority at ZKS. It may be that the ZK's product 'Freedom' is proving a financial bust (I won't use it until I can buy nyms for cash at CompUSA). I understand the drive to meet payroll and pay off VCs, but I can't help but be saddened. I understand that some transactions require more state than "Here's an order, some money, and a shipping address", but in a great many cases, corporations by policy ask far more than this. The most egregious example I've seen is a cheap travel site which, when you register, suggests that you tell them your 'favorite internet password' as a key to get get back to your account. I hope that ZKS's new service doesn't simply "culminate in the deployment of a tailored privacy layer that integrates seamlessly with the client's existing enterprise applications".... but rather looks at their business and informs them of the absolute minimum of data they need to acquire, and how long to keep that data, if they need to keep it at all. I don't want to rely on a 'privacy layer' under the control of an entity which will profit from silently circumventing it, or be subject to leaks and third party seizures of data. Peter Trei Disclaimer: The above represents my personal opinions only. From ichudov at Algebra.Com Tue Oct 31 09:13:55 2000 From: ichudov at Algebra.Com (Igor Chudov) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:13:55 -0600 (CST) Subject: CDR: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: <39FDB8C9.2CBDF3F0@sunder.net> from "sunder" at Oct 30, 2000 01:07:05 PM Message-ID: <200010311713.LAA32175@manifold.algebra.com> sunder wrote: > > > Igor Chudov wrote: > > > > I have a website (www.algebra.com) that makes money from banners. I have > > a suspicion that a small percentage of my users uses Junkbusters proxy > > in order to avoid seeing my banners. > > And what's so special about your website that viewers couldn't find the > same content elsewhere, or would be willing to turn out viewing the ads > just for your site? Maybe there is nothing special about my site. And I don't mind junkbusters users going elsewhere. I just do not want them to waste my precious bandwidth. > If someone's actively filtering out ads from your site, it is of course > your right to not let them have access, but it's not likely that they > would bend over backwards to tell JunkBusters or one of the other filters > to let them view your banners. So unless you have some unique and very > compelling/attractive content, you're just going to alienate more users. Well, they are pretty useless to me anyway. > And setting a cookie on a web tracking GIF is not likely to win you any > friends either. Look at it this way, if they're filtering banner ads, > they're likely filtering cookies also. Even if you redirect them to a > page that says "To view my great wonderous site, turn on cookies and > allow banner ads" you are now forcing users to go through even more > contortions. They cannot use many features of my site without cookies anyway. These features include a linear algebra workbench (a unique service as far as I was able to determine), standardized testing, "My Homework" and so on. These features store a lot of session information about the users and use cookies to reference the stored data. > At which point the smarter ones will realize that they need a specific > cookie, and will just set it by hand. I am not interested in a war of wits. I think that if 1) I indeed have a nmeasurable part of bandwidth being used by junkbusters users, and 2) junkbusters are easy to detect, then I woul dlike to do it and kick them out. I do not have the mania grandioza to believe that Junkbusters will do anything just because Algebra.com found a smart ass way to detect their users. - Igor. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 31 11:34:23 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:34:23 -0800 Subject: CDR: California bars free speech of those cutting deals on votes Message-ID: California has "shut down"--through a threatening letter--a site which matches up folks who are willing to say they'll vote for Nader in states where Gore is sure to win if other folks who had hoped to vote for Nader will instead vote for Gore in order to help him in swing states. (Sounds complicated. But it's really simple. "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine." No money is changing hands, no actual "ballots" are being traded.) The Web site doing this is/was: http://www.voteswap2000.com/ The article on California's actions is: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001031/wr/campaign_traders_dc_1.html BTW, I just "expressed my preference" at the site: http://Winchell.com/NaderTrader/default.asp No doubt I am even now more of a speech criminal. I wonder if a raid is imminent. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From bear at sonic.net Tue Oct 31 11:54:48 2000 From: bear at sonic.net (Ray Dillinger) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:54:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model to Split Key Escrow(NSA-Key (press release) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: >And this process may not happen with just subpoenas. It will likely >happen with national security agencies. Without Alice knowing. > >This is what happens when Alice or any other customer of your product >uses "trusted third parties." GAK beats crack any day. > >This is the danger of building a "trusted third parties" system. And >is precisely the reason the United Kingdom was campaigning for this >kind of system. > >By building precisely the tools they and other governments would need >to implement such a system, you are making such a system more likely >to happen. 'scuse me, but this gets a big raspberry. The tools governments would need to implement such a system are already out there, in droves and gobs. What ZKS does or does not contribute to that brew has little to do with whether broken security gets rammed down everyone's throats or not. Asking for crypto systems that cannot be used in such plans is a lot like asking for bricks that cannot be used to build unsound structures. Somebody might be able to develop such a brick: but it wouldn't be a general, flexible component, and there'd be so many *sound* structures you couldn't build with it, or had to expend a lot of head-sweat figuring out *how* to build with it, that all the construction workers would hate it and ignore it to death. I think that crypto tools ought to support whatever the hell crypto operations the people using them want. Including third party access to keys and the use of monoalphabetic substitution ciphers to encrypt correspondence if they're stupid enough to want that. There is no foolproof system, and attempting to make foolproof systems only limits the uses to which they can be put by non-fools. Alice cannot give her private info to Bob and then expect Bob not to know it in some other situation; it has passed out of her control and any policy or tool Bob has in place to "maintain privacy" is equally out of Alice's control. If Bob is trustworthy, there is no need for crypto at all because Bob will religiously *not* look at those records for any unauthorized purposes. If Bob is untrustworthy, Bob will claim to be using crypto whether or not Bob is actually using it, and claim to have a privacy policy that he follows whether or not he actually does. Either way, there is no reliable protection for Alice the consumer once she has passed her personal info in the clear to Bob. Bear From ichudov at Algebra.Com Tue Oct 31 10:01:29 2000 From: ichudov at Algebra.Com (Igor Chudov) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12:01:29 -0600 (CST) Subject: CDR: Re: Re: Ho to KICK OUT Junkbusters users In-Reply-To: from "Alex B. Shepardsen" at Oct 29, 2000 06:44:06 PM Message-ID: <200010311801.MAA00848@manifold.algebra.com> Yep, it is the fact that my conversation programs are stateless that makes the situation most appalling. But the point it, the illusion that Splotchy (see www.algebra.com) is a human is created because a lot of humans participate in conversations without even keeping their own "state". Remarks like "oh realy", "that's terrible", etc etc, are stateless form of conversation. igor Alex B. Shepardsen wrote: > > > On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Igor Chudov wrote: > > > > Has anyone had cybersex with your incarnation of G W Bush? [shudder] > > > > > > > yep, numerous times. the funny thing is that the "AI" program that is > > I don't know who's more screwed up: the people who attempt cybersex with > your AI GWB, you for programming the AI to respond to people initiating > cybersex, or us for finding it fascinating that this occurs. > > [snip] > > > My experience with splotchy and georgewbush illustrates ridiculousness > > of most human conversations. > > [snip] > > > Answer: I like talking to you > > User: so do i > > I had the opportunity several years ago to have dinner with author Gentry > Lee. We discussed the state of employment in the coming century if it > presented a future where automation was ubiquitous. > > Lee hypothesized that less than 10% of the population would be employed at > any given time. All labor and services that could be done by machines and > computers would be. (This was about the time that NeXT Cubes were running > the NeXT manufacturing plant, and everyone found that so amazing...) The > intelligentsia would become the working class. Humans would only need to > "work" as architects of the automation system. People in these roles would > work for a small period of time, but spend most of their lives unemployed. > > He predicted that the unemployed masses would spend their time in reality > simulation programs, living out fantasy lives. This had the benefit of > limiting the visible effects of overpopulation, crime, and other social > problems. He presented this as a utopian view of the future. > > I disagreed for two main reasons. I didn't see it likely that 10% of the > world's population would be interested in working to support the other > 90%, without receiving something in return. (_The Matrix_ was still a few > years from being released, so the thought of using people as a fuel source > hadn't occurred to me. I did suggest that perhaps a Soylent Green type > scenario might provide some justification for such a lop-sided burden > on this working minority, but not enough.) I don't recall that Lee had any > really solid answer to this argument. > > The other issue I had, and the one that applies to this thread, is that I > found it impossible to believe that AI personalities and VR environments > would have developed far enough to provide systems capable of passing the > Turing test [is there an equivalent test for VR systems? A user should > not be able to distinguish between VR and reality... ] and thus the 90% > of idle masses would not be content to be fed brain candy, rotting their > lives away in computer generated fantasies. > > I'm becoming convinced that I was wrong. > > I've heard of people dropping out of college because they have spent too > much time on text-based MUDs. I've seen teenagers go into debt so that > they could spend most of their waking moments in the arcades. > > And now, I've read a transcript of a person getting herself off through a > text conversation with a stateless program designed to emulate one of the > most boring presidential candidates in years. > > People like this would be more than happy to embrace Lee's virtual reality > existence, and would be more than willing to exist on the donations > provided by the productive few. I doubt they would be motivated enough to > cause any trouble for this plan. > > Our "human rights" measures are counteracting the natural protections > against laziness and stupidity. The human species is in trouble if people > like "User" breed. > > God, I hate welfare. > > - Igor. From christof at ece.WPI.EDU Tue Oct 31 09:13:50 2000 From: christof at ece.WPI.EDU (Christof Paar) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12:13:50 -0500 (EST) Subject: Susan Landau on crypto policy Message-ID: Please note the different day, time, and *building* of this seminar talk. For those coming from outside: Fuller Labs is the large concrete building next to Atwater Kent. - Christof *********************************************************************** ECE GRADUATE SEMINAR TITLE: Have the Crypto Wars Been Won? PRESENTER: Dr. Susan Landau Sun Microsystems Laboratories Place: Fuller Labs, Rm 320 Date and Time: Thursday, Nov. 9, 11 AM ABSTRACT: Telecommunication has never been perfectly secure, as the Cold War culture of wiretaps and international spying taught us. Yet many of us still take our privacy for granted, even as we become ever more reliant on telephones and the Internet. The security of these transactions has become a source of wide public concern and debate. Cryptography is a solution, but because cryptography can provide perfectly concealable communications, over the last quarter century the U.S. government has sought to prevent its proliferation. As a result there have been numerous battles between academics and industry on the one hand, and the U.S. government on the other, over the publication and deployment of strong cryptographic systems. In January of this year, in a major change, the U.S. government removed a number of export restrictions on cryptography. In this talk I will put current cryptography policy in the context of decisions over the last twenty-five years, and I will discuss the legal background behind the government controls, the purpose of the export regulations, and the subtleties behind the remaining restrictions. I will examine: is the battle over, and have the crypto wars been won? BIOGRAPHY: Susan Landau is Senior Staff Engineer at Sun Microsystems Laboratories. Before joining Sun, she was a faculty member at the University of Massachusetts and Wesleyan University, and held visiting positions at Yale, Cornell, and the Mathematical Sciences Research Institute at Berkeley. She and Whitfield Diffie have written ``Privacy on the Line: The Politics of Wiretapping and Encryption,'' which won 1998 Donald McGannon Communication Policy Research Award. Landau is also primary author of the 1994 Association for Computing Machinery report ``Codes, Keys, and Conflicts: Issues in US Crypto Policy.'' ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DIRECTIONS: The WPI Cryptoseminar is being held in the Atwater Kent building on the WPI campus. The Atwater Kent building is at the intersection of the extension of West Street (labeled "Private Way") and Salisbury Street. Directions to the campus can be found at http://www.wpi.edu/About/Visitors/directions.html ATTENDANCE: The seminar is open to everyone and free of charge. Simply send me a brief email if you plan to attend. TALKS IN THE FALL 2000 SEMESTER: 9/27 Christof Paar et al., WPI Elliptic Curve Cryptography on Smart Cards without Coprocessors 10/11 Prof. William Martin, WPI Introduction to resilient and correlation-immune boolean functions 10/25 Prof. Berk Sunar, WPI Implementing New Public-Key Schemes 11/9 Susan Landau, Sun Microsystems Laboratories Have the Crypto Wars Been Won? 11/22 Seth Hardy, WPI Elliptic Curve Point Counting with the CM Method in Java 12/6 Scott Guthery, Mobile-Mind Who are You? Novel Means of Human Authentication TBA Adam Woodbury, WPI Public-key Cryptography in Constraint Environments (MS Thesis presentation) See http://www.ece.WPI.EDU/Research/crypt/seminar/index.html for talk abstracts. MAILING LIST: If you want to be added to the mailing list and receive talk announcements together with abstracts, please send me a short email. Likewise, if you want to be removed from the list, just send me a short email. Regards, Christof Paar ! WORKSHOP ON CRYPTOGRAPHIC HARDWARE AND EMBEDDED SYSTEMS (CHES 2001) ! ! Paris, France, May 13-16, 2001 ! ! www.chesworkshop.org ! *********************************************************************** Christof Paar, Assistant Professor Cryptography and Information Security (CRIS) Group ECE Dept., WPI, 100 Institute Rd., Worcester, MA 01609, USA fon: (508) 831 5061 email: christof at ece.wpi.edu fax: (508) 831 5491 www: http://ee.wpi.edu/People/faculty/cxp.html *********************************************************************** For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "dcsb-request at reservoir.com" with one line of text: "help". --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From mmotyka at lsil.com Tue Oct 31 12:19:52 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (mmotyka at lsil.com) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12:19:52 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Visit a hacked site, loose your computers. Message-ID: <39FF2967.1F52E1E0@lsil.com> Wouldn't the time of the hack be pretty well known and wouldn't the RPI firewall logs be timestamped or am I naive? Is knowledge being used as evidence of guilt? Mike >Andres Salomon, a fairly clued in RPI student, heard on > IRC that the Yankees website had been hacked. He > checked it out, noted some well-known Red Hat > security holes, and came to the conclusion that > there had been a DNS redirect attack. Total time: > 5 minutes. > > The next day, the FBI raided his dorm room and > seized his computers (along with a copy of ORA's > DNS & BIND). > > Peter Trei > From adam at homeport.org Tue Oct 31 09:19:56 2000 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12:19:56 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20001031121955.A15291@weathership.homeport.org> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 11:06:32AM -0500, Trei, Peter wrote: | | I can't help but feel that this is a weakening of ZK's position | regarding privacy. The critical paragraph is: | | > >Zero-Knowledge is committed to deploying systems that are | > >transparent and accountable. In keeping with this policy, | > >MPS will incorporate third party verification and split | > >encryption key structures, as well as provide consumers | > >with access to white papers, independent auditors' reports | > >or other materials that assure a company is doing what it | > >claims. With MPS Zero-Knowledge strengthens its commitment | > >to building responsible systems that empower consumers to | > >control the disclosure and use of their personal | > >information, while still enabling businesses to thrive in a | > >data and relationship-driven marketplace. | > | I don't want to be 'assured that a company is doing what it | claims' (with my personal information). Companies change | policies at whim. What a firm's founder may fervently | believe could become a curio of corporate history after the | next board meeting. Look at Amazon's recent policy | change, for example. Also, data in the possession of a | corporation and me is always less secure than information | possessed only by me. | | Instead of being assured that the company is acting in | accordance with their stated policy du jour (or at least, | their lawyers' spin on it), I want to know that they CAN'T | abuse my personal data, because the don't have any. | That is the confidence which ZK's original scheme was | intended to produce, and which the introduction of this | plan seems to seems to suggest is no longer considered | a high priority at ZKS. Peter, You're reading too much in here. We're still working hard on Freedom v2, having released the linux source and install rpms, new windows versions are coming, etc. This is an additional business line, not a change in our commitment to produce the coolest, strongest privacy systems available. | I hope that ZKS's new service doesn't simply | "culminate in the deployment of a tailored privacy layer that | integrates seamlessly with the client's existing enterprise | applications".... | | but rather looks at their business and informs them of the | absolute minimum of data they need to acquire, and how | long to keep that data, if they need to keep it at all. I don't | want to rely on a 'privacy layer' under the control of an | entity which will profit from silently circumventing it, or | be subject to leaks and third party seizures of data. We really hope to be able to do both seamless integration and help the business figure out what personal information it actually needs to collect, how long they need to keep it, etc. We also work hard to ensure that the company doesn't have the information to leak, for example by storing encrypted versions for which we, they, and other parties, like auditors, need to be involved in decrypting. This doesn't change the reality that we're focused on protecting the privacy of individuals through the strongest mechanisms, it adds additional ways that we can do that. If a business isn't willing to meet certain standards, then we're not going to be able to work with them. It would be too damaging to us, and the trust that people place in us. Those standards include disclosing what the privacy systems in place are, and what the limits of their protection is. We don't feel that you can put trust in a company that isn't willing to disclose those things. The systems that we're going to put in place are going to be technically solid and trustworthy. We have a fair number of smart people here who are dedicated to proving that you can move information around with privacy built in, in ways that range from the Brands credentials systems to encrypted database entries, etc. Its hard to talk in the abstract about this, but until we announce deals, thats all I can do. I can say that we will be having some of our best security people, including Ian, Adam Back, Ulf Muller, Stefan Brands, and myself look at the systems before they leave the design phase. Who looks at which system depends on the design and the particular expertise needed. It won't be silently circumventable. Adam PS: Clearly, adding a new product line requires more outstanding security folks. We'll be happy to whisk you away from wherever you are, and you can help ensure that we do this right. :) -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 31 12:25:20 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12:25:20 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model to Split Key Escrow(NSA-Key (press release) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:54 AM -0800 10/31/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: >On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Tim May wrote: > > > >>By building precisely the tools they and other governments would need >>to implement such a system, you are making such a system more likely >>to happen. > >'scuse me, but this gets a big raspberry. The tools governments would >need to implement such a system are already out there, in droves and >gobs. What ZKS does or does not contribute to that brew has little to >do with whether broken security gets rammed down everyone's throats or >not. And I disagree with your big raspberry. Suppose auto makers started building in the "radio signal ignition cutoff" feature that has been discussed here, where a remote signal can disable a running vehicle. Suppose that this is done without any legal regime in place to give law enforcement access. Would it be fair to say that building this technology into a product has made it more likely that lawmakers would make such a system mandatory? I think the answer is clearly "Yes." This is why Cypherpunks were so adamantly against PGP/NAI building-in the capability for escrowing of keys. > >Asking for crypto systems that cannot be used in such plans is a lot >like asking for bricks that cannot be used to build unsound structures. >Somebody might be able to develop such a brick: but it wouldn't be a >general, flexible component, and there'd be so many *sound* structures >you couldn't build with it, or had to expend a lot of head-sweat figuring >out *how* to build with it, that all the construction workers would >hate it and ignore it to death. I think you are missing the point. Think in terms of the ignition cutoff example above, or similar examples involving building video surveillance into hotel rooms, or building keystroke capture and storage tools into PCs, whatever. No one is suggesting limiting research into video technology, for example, just saying it's a Very Bad Idea for hotels or apartment buildings to build-in a capability very widely which could then be mandated by law at some later time. (Loosely related to why so many folks fear gun registration: gun registration often has led to gun confiscation.) > >I think that crypto tools ought to support whatever the hell crypto >operations the people using them want. Including third party access >to keys and the use of monoalphabetic substitution ciphers to encrypt >correspondence if they're stupid enough to want that. Yes, people and companies should be free to do as they wish. I've never claimed otherwise...nowhere have I said that ZKS should be constrained by men with guns to not develop such products! However, others of us are free to comment on the dangers of company plans and to urge changes in policies. Sounds fair to me. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From adam at homeport.org Tue Oct 31 09:27:56 2000 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12:27:56 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model to Split Key Escrow(NSA-Key (press release) In-Reply-To: <20001031160718.A15515@shannon.permutation.net> References: <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> <20001031160718.A15515@shannon.permutation.net> Message-ID: <20001031122755.A15355@weathership.homeport.org> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 04:07:18PM +0100, cyphrpnk wrote: | > >Privacy is good business. Companies in every industry are | > >realizing they must institute the proper privacy policies, | > >practices and infrastructures in order to succeed in | > >today's digital economy. Zero-Knowledge Managed Privacy | > >Services provides the tools and strategies that enable | > >business to establish private customer relationships and | > >earn consumer trust while ensuring legislative compliance | > >and mitigating risk. | legistlative Compliance... | Guess Lew Giles or the CSE came to visit By legislative compliance, we mean compliance with laws. There are no key escrow laws in Canada. There is a privacy law, bill C-6, and we will help companies comply with that. We also will help companies with HIPPA, GLB, the EU privacy directive, and other laws. There is also no key escrow law in the US or the EU to date, and we spend time and energy lobbying to keep it that way. | look at the following | | >MPS will incorporate third party verification and split | >encryption key structures, as well as provide consumers | >with access to white papers, independent auditors' reports | >or other materials that assure a company is doing what it | >claims. | | third party verification and split encryption key structures, | | Here we get to the meat of the issue... the | item that NAI tried to force down our throats...Corporate Key Escrow.. | this time via key splitting... Shades of the NSA Key!! Umm, so if we split a key three ways (or use three keys to sequentially encrypt a blob), then no party can decrypt without the cooperation of the others. By three keys to sequentially encrypt, I mean the stored cyphertext is (E_a(E_b(E_c(data)), not that we store (E_a(data), E_b(data), E_c(data), which would be silly. | Sick em Adam!! | A cypherpunk whois tiring of government schemes to shell out | privacy companies. | p.s. that freedom source code 2.0 for linux I was porting to BSD I guess will go | into the bit bucket!! 1984 speak my ass!! Sorry to hear that. I guess your porting the code isn't enough for you to trust it. Odd. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From adam at homeport.org Tue Oct 31 10:06:34 2000 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:06:34 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release) In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20001031130634.A15637@weathership.homeport.org> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 09:11:23AM -0800, Tim May wrote: | >>Zero-Knowledge is committed to deploying systems that are | >>transparent and accountable. In keeping with this policy, | >>MPS will incorporate third party verification and split | >>encryption key structures | | Split encryption key. I think that says it all. Geez. I don't know how we ended up with that wording. Multiple key would have made more sense. The goal is to have a set of keys which are held by different entities. Thus, your data is encrypted such that each of those entities needs to be involved to decrypt it. By split key encryption, we mean: E_a(E_b(E_c(data))) where E is a strong algorithm (3des, twofish, AES), and the keys (abc) are full strength, properly generated and stored keys for the system. | >>, as well as provide consumers | >>with access to white papers, independent auditors' reports | >>or other materials that assure a company is doing what it | >>claims. With MPS Zero-Knowledge strengthens its commitment | >>to building responsible systems that empower consumers to | >>control the disclosure and use of their personal | >>information, while still enabling businesses to thrive in a | >>data and relationship-driven marketplace. | | "Empower consumers"? "Responsible systems"? "Strengthens its commitment"? | | How about: | | -- no key escrow, no split keys, no trusted third parties Ok. No key escrow. No split keys in that (a,b) is used as the encryption key for a single encrypt, where Alice and Bob each have half the key. Multiple key systems, as I explained above. Given that we're doing this for businesses that are collecting data now, if you consider those parties 'trusted third parties,' then we're increasing the assurance that surrounds them. We consider them 'merchants,' 'shipping companes' and other such businesses who today get data from you. They're not trusted third parties in the Clipper chip sense, but they are parties who store information about you, often in very insecure and unprivate ways, as MCI, CDnow, and others have found out. | -- public key crypto Sure. | With strong crypto widely available, what business (or knowledgeable | private person) is going to want or need this "ASSESS AND ADVISE" and | "COMMIT AND CAPITULATE" (ok, I'm changing their stages) stuff/ | | I can't see how a large company, like an Intel or an Amgen, is going | to move away from mathematically robust PKS systems and adopt some | throwback to the 1940s, some kind of split key or key escrow system. | And I can't see how Joe Consumer is going to pay for the (apparent) | "review" of his (presumed) needs and then get some key escrow package | tailored to his (presumed) needs. We can't either. | So, what sort of customer is this product tailored for? Some | middle-sized company which is clueless on crypto and which wants | hand-holding? Some company in a country which _requires_ key escrow? | Is ZKS setting itself up to be the premier supplier of key escrow and | LEAF tools? Sounds like it. This isn't primarily a crypto solution, its an integrated set of things, including an understanding of what data a company ought to collect, what the advantages of minimization are, and then help implementing it. We are not selling any key escrow, leaf, GAK, clipper, capstone, redcreek, or other such trust-me solution. We see a huge market in companies which are discovering that policies are not enough. We see them hiring CPOs, and looking for assistance. We're not abandoning Freedom--we think that controlling information about yourself is still the best approach. But we do get regular requests from businesses for something else, and we're going to provide it. We fully intend to provide explanations of what we build for each customer, a fair assessment of what we've built, and source where we can. We see those as essential for building trust in the system. We intend to build systems which we can be proud of. | The "relevant legislation" language is the real kicker. Sounds like | the many former government types working at ZKS got the focus shifted | from truly secure systems to basically uninteresting--and even | pernicious!--systems which "meet the legitimate needs of law | enforcement." We are meeting the needs of law enforcement the same way we always have. By building systems that protect people's privacy. By telling the world what we've built. And explaining, in great detail, why we think that key escrow, et cetera ad nauseum, is a mistake, and that we don't build it, don't ship it, don't support it. | Key escrow, in other words. | | | "Big Brother Inside" | | | Whew. | | | --Tim May | -- | ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- | Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, | ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero | W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, | "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From anonymous at openpgp.net Tue Oct 31 10:10:26 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:10:26 -0500 Subject: CDR: when the Fedz come.. Message-ID: <149ccab7b18920ce0a6b4cef0cb9606a@mixmaster.ceti.pl> you are not being paranoid enough. The FBI managed to get a search warrant based on logs from a firewall, that showed my IP only connecting, not even logging in, hours after news of the cracking had appeared on news sites. If they can get a search warrant this easily, your data is not safe, sitting on your hard drive. For the past two months Ive been living in this dorm, I locked my doors, securified my boxes, and backed up my essential things. I never even imagined the federal government would just let themselves in and take it. excerpt from http://devrandom.net/~dilinger/ as seen on /. From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 31 10:16:51 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:16:51 -0500 Subject: CDR: Visit a hacked site, loose your computers. Message-ID: It'll probably be slashdotted by the time you get to it, but see: http://devrandom.net/~dilinger/ Andres Salomon, a fairly clued in RPI student, heard on IRC that the Yankees website had been hacked. He checked it out, noted some well-known Red Hat security holes, and came to the conclusion that there had been a DNS redirect attack. Total time: 5 minutes. The next day, the FBI raided his dorm room and seized his computers (along with a copy of ORA's DNS & BIND). He described them as 'nice' -after all, they left him his CD-Rs of mp3, divx & pr0n. Peter Trei From refertofriend at reply.yahoo.com Tue Oct 31 11:20:44 2000 From: refertofriend at reply.yahoo.com (Yahoo! News) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:20:44 -0600 Subject: CDR: Yahoo! News Story - $1 Million Pot Tax Bill Stirs Fight Message-ID: <200010311920.NAA02810@einstein.ssz.com> IRS (nobody at zedz.net) has sent you a news article ------------------------------------------------------------ Personal message: $1 Million Pot Tax Bill Stirs Fight http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/ao/20001027/cr/_1_million_pot_tax_bill_stirs_fight_1.html ============================================================ Yahoo! News http://dailynews.yahoo.com/ From refertofriend at reply.yahoo.com Tue Oct 31 11:21:47 2000 From: refertofriend at reply.yahoo.com (Yahoo! News) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:21:47 -0600 Subject: CDR: Yahoo! News Story - $1 Million Pot Tax Bill Stirs Fight Message-ID: <200010311921.NAA02860@einstein.ssz.com> IRS (nobody at zedz.net) has sent you a news article ------------------------------------------------------------ Personal message: $1 Million Pot Tax Bill Stirs Fight http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/ao/20001027/cr/_1_million_pot_tax_bill_stirs_fight_1.html ============================================================ Yahoo! News http://dailynews.yahoo.com/ From anonymous at openpgp.net Tue Oct 31 10:30:29 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:30:29 -0500 Subject: CDR: identity theft Message-ID: <95f28c04c6b2850f0d853b3fb945a917@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Bruce McKim DOB: 2/26/69 Soc Sec. No.: 212-04-8280 Martin Benjamin (for classified) DOB: 7/6/68 Soc. Sec. No.: 089-56-3596 Mary De Wolfe Stone DOB: 7/7/63 Soc. Sec. No. : 047-60-6209 http://cryptome.org/usa-v-qaeda-po.htm From anonymous at openpgp.net Tue Oct 31 10:35:36 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:35:36 -0500 Subject: CDR: Words to live by Message-ID: "The advantage of lone wolf and small cell activity is that it is untraceable and is the best use of our meager resources- no membership dues, rental of meeting halls, driving, lodging and time-off for endless conventions," Curtis says in an article on his Web site. "All of your personal and cell resources go to exactly what you want them for, not to a "leader" who lives off you." And rather than terrorizing people in public, the 26-year-old Curtis says, racists should strive to work in secrecy. His site includes articles advising against answering police questions under any circumstances. "Remember, talk is cheap!" one article says. "But when it involves law enforcement authorities, it may cost you, or someone close to you, dearly. Remember the 5 words -- I have nothing to say. It has worked for us many, MANY times." "Hate site threat to public, group says" http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cti722.htm From anonymous at openpgp.net Tue Oct 31 10:40:07 2000 From: anonymous at openpgp.net (anonymous at openpgp.net) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:40:07 -0500 Subject: CDR: IRS Tentacles grow Message-ID: IRS Can Access Offshore Credit Info By Catherine Wilson AP Business Writer Tuesday, Oct. 31, 2000 7:38 a.m. EST MIAMI In a sweeping tax-evasion probe, the IRS has been granted access to thousands of MasterCard and American Express credit card accounts held by U.S. taxpayers in three offshore banking havens. U.S. District Judge Adalberto Jordan on Monday agreed with the IRS that cardholders may have violated U.S. tax laws and that their identities are not readily available from other sources. The court order allows the IRS to issue summonses for charge, debit and credit cards issued by banks in the Bahamas, the Cayman Islands and the country of Antigua and Barbuda in 1998 and 1999. Investigators want to look at such things as car, boat and airline ticket purchases and hotel and car rentals to learn whether the account holders are living beyond their reported means. The investigation is one of the largest targeting offshore accounts in the history of the Internal Revenue Service. MasterCard International spokeswoman Sharon Gamsin said in a statement that the company has "a long history of cooperating with governmental agencies." But she also said MasterCard keeps transaction records only by account number, with the bank keeping personal information. Judy Tenzer, a spokeswoman for American Express Travel Related Services Co., said, "We are now speaking to the IRS to get a better idea of what theyre looking at." Neither spokeswoman would answer questions. Offshore accounts are legal for U.S. taxpayers, but they must file forms with the IRS about them and pay taxes on income earned in the United States. The three nations targeted by the IRS have long been known as offshore tax havens and favorite spots for drug money launderers. Promoters of offshore accounts boast that income can be sheltered because the U.S. government cannot penetrate some foreign banking secrecy laws. But the IRS believed it could avoid those laws by getting records through the Miami headquarters of the companies Caribbean operations. The IRS does not know how many accounts created by U.S. citizens and residents are involved but believes the number to be in the thousands. Banks in the targeted islands require customers to open bank accounts before obtaining credit cards. So obtaining the names of the cardholders produces the names of the bank account holders as well. Fifteen countries and territories have been blacklisted by a 29-nation task force for failing to cooperate in the fight against money laundering. The Bahamas and Cayman Islands are among them, but officials in the Cayman Islands promised in June to end tax-haven practices within five years. Daniel Mitchell, a tax expert at the conservative Heritage Foundation, worried that the IRSs blanket record request would affect financial privacy. "We should not be trying to enforce a worldwide tax regime," he said. "It tends to lead to cartel-like behavior, OPEC for politicians, for lack of a better phrase." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20001031/aponline073856_000.htm From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 31 10:46:20 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:46:20 -0500 Subject: CDR: Susan Landau on crypto policy Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From vinnie at vmeng.com Tue Oct 31 13:55:16 2000 From: vinnie at vmeng.com (Vinnie Moscaritolo) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:55:16 -0800 Subject: CALL for Papers: The Millennium Mac-Crypto Conference Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Take out your calendars, It's that time again folks. I am starting to put together the schedule for the Millennium Edition of the Mac Crypto/ Internet commerce workshop. The dates should be the week of Jan 29th, 2001. I have booked us space for that whole week, on the Apple Cupertino Campus . Henceforth, I am looking for folks to give talks, papers etc. This year's overall theme could cover "Security in a MacOS X world". I would like to see a number of talks related to how MacOS X changes the Macintosh threat model. In addition I would also like to see a few talks about lessons learned in the last few years about developing crypto related products. Maybe something about digital rights management or music. Digital cash talks are always welcome. I would like both technical and tutorial material. As usual I discourage simple marketing presentations without content, this is a technical group. Please try to keep the talks no more than 40 minutes with an additional 10 minutes allocated for for Q&A.. I suspect that there a a number of new people who have never been to a Mac Crypto. To get an idea about what this is all about take a look at the past three conference archives at http://www.vmeng.com/mc/ I will be posting a preliminary schedule, formal announcements and registration form in a month. In the meantime if you would like to give a talk, please send me the Title, Author's full name and email address and a small abstract I can post on the web-page. Once you have slides or possibly a pdf, please send me a copy I post or link to.. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 7.0 iQA/AwUBOf8/EtixAAkLPvBCEQIIfgCfR3RHnib58GqZ03fbb+m0Ngvw3nQAmwUl F1r76c977zboKxAIK+l6xw5C =0Tx+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Vinnie Moscaritolo KF6WPJ ITCB-IMSH PGP: 3F903472C3AF622D5D918D9BD8B100090B3EF042 ------------------------------------------------------- --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From mmotyka at lsil.com Tue Oct 31 14:41:51 2000 From: mmotyka at lsil.com (mmotyka at lsil.com) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 14:41:51 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Visit a hacked site, loose your computers. References: Message-ID: <39FF4AAF.FD83D415@lsil.com> "Trei, Peter" wrote: > Read the article. Of course the time is well known, and the logs > are stamped. I meant naive in my guess at what level of detail was recorded. Wouldn't those same logs and those of the Yankee's ISP also show that his IP address and equipment was NOT connected at the time of the break-in? Shouldn't his lawyer immediately go after those records before they are conveniently erased? > You are naive, though, if you beleive that will stop > an LEA from trashing the lives of innocents... I've -never- underestimated to potential for abuse of power wherever it concentrates. > ...and of course they'll get away with it. This is the biggest problem.And also the greatest weakness. > Peter > > [Now, I'm not excusing the FBI's jackboot tactics in this case, > but I will point out that Mr. Salomon poked at 'unusual' ports, > and zone transfered yankee.com during his investigation. An > IDS might well trigger an attack alert under those conditions. Poking at ports is no crime. Or is it? > The government's theft of his property after all this was > explained, is of course inexcusable.] No crime a'tall - we're just GovCorp property these days. Mike From jello42 at hotmail.com Tue Oct 31 14:54:06 2000 From: jello42 at hotmail.com (bob bob2) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 14:54:06 PST Subject: CDR: public keyrings Message-ID: if you have the url for an active public keyring site please forward it. thanks, bob dobs _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 31 14:57:43 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 14:57:43 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release) In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001031165942.0165fba0@mail.well.com> References: <20001031130634.A15637@weathership.homeport.org> <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> <20001031130634.A15637@weathership.homeport.org> <4.3.0.20001031165942.0165fba0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: At 5:14 PM -0500 10/31/00, Declan McCullagh wrote: >I spent perhaps half an hour on the phone with Austin Hill this >afternoon. Here's what we discussed. >... >* ZKS will offer to store keys. "That includes us holding encryption >keys." Austin described the key-splitting the same way Adam has >here. He refused to say whether or not a third-party (Joe's Escrow >Service) would ever hold keys. Except for the very specialized case of protecting against loss/forgetting of passphrases and keys, it's hard to imagine how Alice's privacy is ever enhanced by having a third party hold keys. I'm assuming there's some byzantine protocol being planned in which Alice's secrets (medical files, purchasing preferences, tax information, etc.) are somehow distributed such that various hospitals, insurance companies, etc., cannot link information to Alice. A worthy research topic. But maybe a bit ambitious for a start-up company with a (reportedly) high burn rate to be launching, it seems to me. If not this byzantine protocol, what? If Alice supplies personal information to Bobco, he has it, period. A hospital, for example, has this personal information. Hospitals leaking or selling or sharing this information is indeed a pressing concern, but one not readily solvable with technology. It's like the various schemes to delete information before it can be saved to hard disk..these schemes just don't work: if human eyes can see something, or if ears can hear it, then cameras and sound capture cards and so on can bypass the attempted erasures. Likewise, if Bob's General Hospital knows who Alice is, then the game is up. Period. Technology can't do much about it. Stuff about splitting keys or having third parties involved just doesn't change this basic ontological fact. (There are, of course, cryptographically respectable protocols for anonymous testing, for blinding of test results, etc. Some even use coin-flipping protocols. But I gather that this is not the market ZKS is seeking to enter.) I look forward to hearing more from ZKS about what, exactly, this new system is. Much of the press release was typical press release junk about privacy being important, corporations seeking to fully maximize their paradigms, etc., etc. But some of it talked about key splitting and local laws, which is usually worrisome to paranoid folks like us. > >* ZKS appears to be targeting heavily-regulated areas like medical >and financial sectors. They will come in, set up a >privacy-protective system, perhaps provide some ongoing service, and >(if so) collect ongoing fees. In those cases, "a consumer solution >like Freedom allowing anonymity doesn't fit that market." "Collect ongoing fees." I'm not knocking free enterprise, but there are often problems with business plans which seek to find ways to collect fees. The most successful companies I've seen have started with a product idea, often already in prototype form (Cisco, Sun, Intel, Apple, etc.) and have then gone very quickly into production. Having 100 engineers working on Freedom, as was claimed today, and yet having essentially no users of Freedom nyms visible a year later, suggests... And moving toward a vague focus on solving customer privacy problems... Well, I have no reason to wish them poor luck. But it doesn't sound too promising. I really do hope I'm wrong and that they provide interesting products for customer privacy and do well with them. > >* Austin mentioned cell phones/wireless as a major area. He >envisions services such as if you call 911, your info is revealed, >but not when phoning other numbers. A fair enough analogy. One worth pursuing. The whole CallerID situation, and various state and national laws re; 9-1-1 services, took years and years to unfold. I would expect the same thing with online ordering, except that it will take even longer, IMO. There are some interesting "credentials without identity" protocols which desperately need to be implemented. An example: a credential which someone can present to a pharmacist which allows a drug, e.g, an AIDS drug, to be picked up...without revealing identity. Alas, so many pieces need to be put together to do this that it seems almost hopeless; certainly a startup company cannot afford to spend the many years it would take to deploy this kind of system. > >* Tim below suggests that "Wouldn't a better approach be for Alice >to protect her own privacy?" The answer, generally, is yes. I >suspect the Brands patents can do much to that end. But Austin seems >to be envisioning a market in which *some* third party in the >transaction, be it a business, intermediary, or ZKS, possesses >personal info about customers and only receives what is necessary. The first level of protection is for Alice to reveal as little as she wishes and to not trust others with information which may damage her. So she should not give out her passwords over the phone, or online. And she should not reveal her AIDS diagnosis by buying AIDS drugs at her local pharmacy. And she should not be ordering books on bomb-making and terrorism through Amazon. However, once Alice has given Bob this damaging information, the jig is up. Bob knows her passwords or her AIDS status or her preferences in books, whatever. And Charles may know other things. And Dave still other things. Now, can any protocol stop Bob and Charles and Dave from pooling their information they each have collected on Alice? Nope. The point is to unlink Alice's identity with the items she purchases, the medicines she needs, the books she buys. Which is why remailers, digital cash, proxies, and suchlike are interesting. Perhaps ZKS is planning to unveil robust versions of all of these things. If so, I applaud them. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From adam at homeport.org Tue Oct 31 12:20:19 2000 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 15:20:19 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: ZKS goes GAK In-Reply-To: <378da2681d6746c01ef2bdaf8a9f699b@mixmaster.ceti.pl> References: <378da2681d6746c01ef2bdaf8a9f699b@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <20001031152018.A16612@weathership.homeport.org> This is just plain silly. If I thought Zero-Knowledge had been subverted, or was shipping or encouraging GAK, I would quit. I'm still here. Adam On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 08:25:01PM +0100, Anonymous Remailer wrote: | Risking to fall into the doomsayer trap, I would call this a | classical "bait switch" technique. | | Bait was a genuine product, probably developed by the genuine | company and people. | | Switch happened later, when men with guns decided to pick up | this thing. | | But what really pisses me off is that seemengly intelligent | people keep on ranting about their intentions. Who the fuck | cares what the intentions are/were ? Establishing trust with | the crypto-savvy is what ZKS did. That asset is owned by | whoever owns the company, not by hired hands. And the use of | that asset will be whatever they decide. | | Creating such an asset brings responsibility, and ZKS folks failed | there: their work will be used for other purposes, and there is | nothing they can do about it. | | Assuming that one can make money by providing protection from | the people that print that money is just plain silly. -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From abs at squig.org Tue Oct 31 15:23:58 2000 From: abs at squig.org (Alex B. Shepardsen) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 15:23:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: (no subject) In-Reply-To: <31.be2fb63.2730a047@aol.com> Message-ID: Is there a "bomb-building FAQ" out there on the web that lists cypherpunks at toad.com as the definitive place to ask these moronic questions? Where do these people come from? (I know a lot of you think they're law enforcement agents attempting entrapment. I think you're too optimistic; these people are just stupid.) Alex On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 ShamrockAgent at aol.com wrote: > Could you posibly send me instructions on how to construct a bomb and what > materials that are needed? Thank you~ > From ptrei at rsasecurity.com Tue Oct 31 12:49:21 2000 From: ptrei at rsasecurity.com (Trei, Peter) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 15:49:21 -0500 Subject: CDR: RE: Re: Visit a hacked site, loose your computers. Message-ID: Read the article. Of course the time is well known, and the logs are stamped. You are naive, though, if you beleive that will stop an LEA from trashing the lives of innocents... ...and of course they'll get away with it. Peter [Now, I'm not excusing the FBI's jackboot tactics in this case, but I will point out that Mr. Salomon poked at 'unusual' ports, and zone transfered yankee.com during his investigation. An IDS might well trigger an attack alert under those conditions. The government's theft of his property after all this was explained, is of course inexcusable.] > ---------- > From: mmotyka at lsil.com[SMTP:mmotyka at lsil.com] > Reply To: mmotyka at lsil.com > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 3:19 PM > To: cypherpunks at cyberpass.net > Subject: CDR: Re: Visit a hacked site, loose your computers. > > Wouldn't the time of the hack be pretty well known and wouldn't the RPI > firewall logs be timestamped or am I naive? > > Is knowledge being used as evidence of guilt? > > Mike > > >Andres Salomon, a fairly clued in RPI student, heard on > > IRC that the Yankees website had been hacked. He > > checked it out, noted some well-known Red Hat > > security holes, and came to the conclusion that > > there had been a DNS redirect attack. Total time: > > 5 minutes. > > > > The next day, the FBI raided his dorm room and > > seized his computers (along with a copy of ORA's > > DNS & BIND). > > > > Peter Trei > > > From gbroiles at netbox.com Tue Oct 31 16:06:12 2000 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 16:06:12 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release) In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001031165942.0165fba0@mail.well.com>; from declan@well.com on Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 05:14:49PM -0500 References: <20001031130634.A15637@weathership.homeport.org> <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> <20001031130634.A15637@weathership.homeport.org> <4.3.0.20001031165942.0165fba0@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20001031160612.B8657@ideath.parrhesia.com> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 05:14:49PM -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: > * I suggested that Freedom had been somewhat less than successful in the > marketplace. (Out of 3,500 cypherpunks messages I have stored here, only > one nym appears, and this is presumably one of the target audiences.) I > suggested that this is a change of strategy for ZKS in an era where > investors want profitability. Austin denied it, and said that over 100 > engineers "right now" were still working on Freedom. Sounds like he's denying the notion of a change in strategy, not your underlying premise - that the market for Freedom isn't what they'd hoped for. That seems difficult to deny, though I'd love to see sales figures to the contrary. I'm one of the people who has paid for Freedom, but gave up on it after it trashed a Win 98 installation twice, and I was unable to get a response from ZKS tech support. Austin is very good at answering the questions he thinks someone should ask, not the questions actually asked. > * I suggested the model they were moving toward was Andersen Consulting. > Austin said no, "Verisign is the better analogy." He said one difference > was that he anticipated ongoing licensing/fee arrangements between ZKS and > clients after original work is complete. I don't know what Andersen is doing re privacy, but I know that D&T, E&Y, and PWC are all operating privacy-consulting arms which do more or less what ZKS seems to be describing, except that they don't get so deep into the technical operations, as far as I know - they don't operate key shares, etc. While I think it's really sensible for ZKS to think about this approach - they've assembled a bunch of smart people who are apparently working on something nobody's buying. They've got to be burning cash pretty quickly, and it only makes sense to repurpose those people into providing their analysis and information to other people who need it. (And, for what it's worth, Adam, it's HIPAA, not HIPPA. :) > * ZKS appears to be targeting heavily-regulated areas like medical and > financial sectors. They will come in, set up a privacy-protective system, > perhaps provide some ongoing service, and (if so) collect ongoing fees. In > those cases, "a consumer solution like Freedom allowing anonymity doesn't > fit that market." That seems like a sensible idea, but I'm a little skeptical that they'll pull it off when competing with big well-known accounting firms - the accounting firms have built reputations around maintaining client confidentiality, while ZKS has been pretty aggressively and conspicuously hiring wild-eyed cypherpunk types, who won't necessarily inspire a lot of confidence or trust in accoutant and risk-manager types. Me, I'd trust the cypherpunk over the Big 5 guy, but I'm not the customer. Cf. the moderate and slow success enjoyed by the hackers-cum-security consulting firms - they seem to make enough to pay themselves, which is more than can be said for a lot of businesses, but they haven't been as successful as firms with law enforcement and private security backgrounds - not because of lack of knowledge, but because the ex-cops know how to create and maintain an image of reliability and predictability and trustworthiness, which is harder for people who aren't even accustomed to using an apparently "real" name. > But Austin seems to be envisioning > a market in which *some* third party in the transaction, be it a business, > intermediary, or ZKS, possesses personal info about customers and only > receives what is necessary. This does seem to be the direction they've always been going - at the cpunks meeting prior to RSA in Jan of 2000, Austin was talking about something I'd call "mediated pseudonymity" or "managed pseudonymity", where ZKS ends up as a trusted privacy intermediary. This seems to dovetail well with Stefan Brands' ideas about privacy and anonymity. I'm pretty skeptical that there's a real market for that - cypherpunks won't trust it, because it's effectively a contract or reputation-based privacy guarantee, instead of a mathematical or information-theory based privacy guarantee. To the consumer market, it's going to look like a prickly complicated version of those "magic wallet" things which promise to fill out web forms for you, but only with your permission .. which don't really solve a compelling problem for anyone even though they're a nice hack. To law enforcement, they'll get what they want via subpoenas or search warrants - I wonder how careful ZKS is about making sure that their US operations aren't subjecting them to extra liability or search/discovery exposure, cf. this week's news re Amex and Mastercard forced to reveal purchase data for offshore cardholders to the IRS. To private litigants seeking discovery, ditto. And to private or public actors uninterested in legal rules, there's old fashioned burglary, a la Watergate hotel and thousands of smaller less well-known examples. This all comes back to the old Benjamin Franklin saw - "Three men can keep a secret, if two of them are dead." Building the kind of trust that's needed to do the sorts of things ZKS proposes to do takes years or decades; and maintaining good security and a good reputation across that long period of time is very difficult, as Sun recently demonstrated in the key compromise mentioned by Lucky. -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at netbox.com PO Box 897 Oakland CA 94604 From cyphrpnk at shannon.permutation.net Tue Oct 31 07:07:18 2000 From: cyphrpnk at shannon.permutation.net (cyphrpnk) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 16:07:18 +0100 Subject: CDR: Zero Knowledge changes business model to Split Key Escrow(NSA-Key (press release) In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com>; from declan@well.com on Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 10:03:59AM -0500 References: <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> Message-ID: <20001031160718.A15515@shannon.permutation.net> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 10:03:59AM -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > > >From: kcory at redwhistle.com > >To: declan at well.com > >Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 06:55:11 -0800 > >Subject: Zero-Knowledge Introduces Managed Privacy Services for Businesses > > > > > > > >Hi Declan, > >Today, Zero-Knowledge Systems is introducing its Managed Privacy > >Services (MPS) offering to solve the privacy challenges > >that businesses face in today's privacy-conscious business > >environment. > > > >Privacy is good business. Companies in every industry are > >realizing they must institute the proper privacy policies, > >practices and infrastructures in order to succeed in > >today's digital economy. Zero-Knowledge Managed Privacy > >Services provides the tools and strategies that enable > >business to establish private customer relationships and > >earn consumer trust while ensuring legislative compliance > >and mitigating risk. legistlative Compliance... Guess Lew Giles or the CSE came to visit look at the following >MPS will incorporate third party verification and split >encryption key structures, as well as provide consumers >with access to white papers, independent auditors' reports >or other materials that assure a company is doing what it >claims. third party verification and split encryption key structures, Here we get to the meat of the issue... the item that NAI tried to force down our throats...Corporate Key Escrow.. this time via key splitting... Shades of the NSA Key!! Sick em Adam!! A cypherpunk whois tiring of government schemes to shell out privacy companies. p.s. that freedom source code 2.0 for linux I was porting to BSD I guess will go into the bit bucket!! 1984 speak my ass!! From boo at datashopper.dk Tue Oct 31 07:22:01 2000 From: boo at datashopper.dk (Bo Elkjaer) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 16:22:01 +0100 (CET) Subject: CDR: ELIXIR automated signal collection Message-ID: Hi I'm looking for information concerning a SIGINT system with the codename ELIXIR. I don't know much about it except that was (is?) deployed by the US Air Force, probably in the United Kingdom, initially in the late 80'ies. I have located one former USAF Analyst who claims to have worked with the system. He's in Florida now, but was in the UK 1983-1987. Any info on ELIXIR will be much appreciated. Yours Bo Elkjaer, Denmark >>Bevar naturen: Sylt et egern.<< >>URL: http://www.datashopper.dk/~boo/index.html<< >>ECHELON URL:<< >>http://www1.ekstrabladet.dk/netdetect/echelon.iasp<< From eventseries at match.com Tue Oct 31 14:49:43 2000 From: eventseries at match.com (eventseries at match.com) Date: 31 Oct 2000 16:49:43 -0600 Subject: CDR: Seattle Match.com Gallery Mixer Message-ID: <050594349221fa0MASSMAIL2@onlymail4.oneandonly.com> Dear Joe3058 Attention Seattle: We have an exclusive event for you! Match.com and NextMonet.com invite you to fall in love through art at their Seattle Gallery Mixer. The event will take place on Thursday, November 9th from 6-8pm at the Ballard/Fetherston Gallery, 818 E. Pike Street (corner of E. Broadway and E. Pike). Members and their guests can enjoy fabulous art, food, drinks, and interesting people and conversation. This is definitely a don't miss event, so RSVP today - http://www.evite.com/larad at match.com/seattlemixer. Space is limited, so be sure and get your RSVP today (please fill out all the information and RSVP yes to ensure that you are on the list!) Thanks, Lara Duncan Community Marketing Manager Match.com ********************************** Thank you for choosing Match. Where you're always just a few clicks away from meeting thousands of interesting,intelligent, and successful people just like you! http://www.match.com/index.htm?AssociateID=1911&FooterID=454&MessageID=467 For billing inquiries, email us at: billing at match.com For general questions, email us at: customercare at match.com Wanna make the most of your city? Citysearch it! http://www.citysearch.com From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 31 14:04:38 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:04:38 -0500 Subject: CALL for Papers: The Millennium Mac-Crypto Conference Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp Size: 28 bytes Desc: not available URL: From declan at well.com Tue Oct 31 14:14:49 2000 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:14:49 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: Zero Knowledge changes business model (press release) In-Reply-To: References: <20001031130634.A15637@weathership.homeport.org> <4.3.0.20001031100154.01638920@mail.well.com> <20001031130634.A15637@weathership.homeport.org> Message-ID: <4.3.0.20001031165942.0165fba0@mail.well.com> I spent perhaps half an hour on the phone with Austin Hill this afternoon. Here's what we discussed. * I suggested that Freedom had been somewhat less than successful in the marketplace. (Out of 3,500 cypherpunks messages I have stored here, only one nym appears, and this is presumably one of the target audiences.) I suggested that this is a change of strategy for ZKS in an era where investors want profitability. Austin denied it, and said that over 100 engineers "right now" were still working on Freedom. * I suggested the model they were moving toward was Andersen Consulting. Austin said no, "Verisign is the better analogy." He said one difference was that he anticipated ongoing licensing/fee arrangements between ZKS and clients after original work is complete. * ZKS will offer to store keys. "That includes us holding encryption keys." Austin described the key-splitting the same way Adam has here. He refused to say whether or not a third-party (Joe's Escrow Service) would ever hold keys. * ZKS appears to be targeting heavily-regulated areas like medical and financial sectors. They will come in, set up a privacy-protective system, perhaps provide some ongoing service, and (if so) collect ongoing fees. In those cases, "a consumer solution like Freedom allowing anonymity doesn't fit that market." * Austin mentioned cell phones/wireless as a major area. He envisions services such as if you call 911, your info is revealed, but not when phoning other numbers. * Tim below suggests that "Wouldn't a better approach be for Alice to protect her own privacy?" The answer, generally, is yes. I suspect the Brands patents can do much to that end. But Austin seems to be envisioning a market in which *some* third party in the transaction, be it a business, intermediary, or ZKS, possesses personal info about customers and only receives what is necessary. I welcome responses. -Declan At 10:30 10/31/2000 -0800, Tim May wrote: >At 1:06 PM -0500 10/31/00, Adam Shostack wrote: >>On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 09:11:23AM -0800, Tim May wrote: >>| >>Zero-Knowledge is committed to deploying systems that are >>| >>transparent and accountable. In keeping with this policy, >>| >>MPS will incorporate third party verification and split >>| >>encryption key structures >>| >>| Split encryption key. I think that says it all. >> >>Geez. I don't know how we ended up with that wording. Multiple key >>would have made more sense. The goal is to have a set of keys which >>are held by different entities. Thus, your data is encrypted such >>that each of those entities needs to be involved to decrypt it. > >> >>By split key encryption, we mean: E_a(E_b(E_c(data))) where E is a >>strong algorithm (3des, twofish, AES), and the keys (abc) are full >>strength, properly generated and stored keys for the system. > >Let's stipulate that the split keys are as strong as one can imagine. > >OK, let's set the stage with some players: > >* Alice, a consumer or customer > >* Bobco, a giant corporation dealing with Alice, collecting information on >her, and all the usual stuff involving corporations dealing online with >consumers like Alice. > >* Chuck and Debby, the holders of the "split encryption key," aka the >"trusted third parties." (Extending the set to 3 or 4 or N such trusted >third parties does not alter the basic discussion. Nor, by the way, does >just having a _single_ trusted third party alter the basics of the >legal/GAK structure: if the legal or national security system can force >two parties to disclose, forcing one is easier, forcing 3 is slightly >easier, and so on. But these are "polynomial" issues, so to speak.) > >I want to set the state so I can better understand just how and where this >new ZKS system might be useful (to Alice, to Bobco, to governments). > >> >>Given that we're doing this for businesses that are collecting data >>now, if you consider those parties 'trusted third parties,' then we're >>increasing the assurance that surrounds them. > >This business is what I called Bobco above. > >Now, suppose Bobco is using the ZKS system. I can see three regimes for >any use of a crypto product: > >-- storage, at either Alice's or Bobco's site > >-- transit, between Alice and Bobco > >-- unlinkability: something to do with the linkage of purchase information >with identity; how Bobco collects and disseminates information about >customers like Alice > >The first two are conventional crypto issues, and don't need a new system. >Both Alice and Bobco are responsible for securing their own data. Should >laws require Bobco to secure Alice's data in some specific way, split key >systems are still a poor solution. > >As near as I can tell, your concern about "privacy laws" has something to >with the third main use for crypto: unlinkability. Am I right? > >Before I proceed further, let's see if this is where we're going. > >>We consider them >>'merchants,' 'shipping companes' and other such businesses who today >>get data from you. They're not trusted third parties in the Clipper >>chip sense, but they are parties who store information about you, >>often in very insecure and unprivate ways, as MCI, CDnow, and others >>have found out. > >This sounds like the unlinkability again. If so, this is a tough, tough >nut to crack. > >If Bobco is shipping products to Alice, Bobco knows her address and what >she is buying. Fill in whatever examples one wishes. > >And if Alice answers a questionnaire about her buying preferences, her >income, her age, etc., then Bobco will have this information. > >Hard to imagine how adding Charles and Debby to the system as trusted >third parties helps things. Now, if Alice goes through a complicated >procedure of dealing with Charles and Debby to only selectively reveal her >preferences, or if Charles or Debby act as "third party shipping agents," >so that Bobco doesn't know who he shipped a product to, then some >unlinkability has been gotten. > >Anyway, I could ramble on about whether or not this makes for an >interesting and profitable market niche, but it doesn't seem to be the >thrust of where ZKS is going with this new product. > >Fact is, third party secrets are not interesting IF Bobco can aggregate >the secret information AT ANY TIME. Unless some kind of unlinkability or >blinding (a la Joan Feigenbaum's work on "computing with encrypted >instances") is done, the trusted third parties don't serve much purpose >that I can see. > >Maybe I'm missing something. > >How will Alice's privacy be protected from Bobco by having Charles and >Debby (or just Charles, or Charles, Debby, Edward, Fred, and Greta, etc.) >hold split keys? > >Wouldn't a better approach be for Alice to protect her own privacy? > > >--Tim May > >-- >---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- >Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, >ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero >W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, >"Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. > From ShamrockAgent at aol.com Tue Oct 31 14:23:03 2000 From: ShamrockAgent at aol.com (ShamrockAgent at aol.com) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:23:03 EST Subject: CDR: (no subject) Message-ID: <31.be2fb63.2730a047@aol.com> Could you posibly send me instructions on how to construct a bomb and what materials that are needed? Thank you~ From mstalbot at newsguy.com Tue Oct 31 17:34:23 2000 From: mstalbot at newsguy.com (Mark Talbot) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 17:34:23 -0800 Subject: Bush & Gore On Crypto Message-ID: Bush: http://www.webwhiteblue.org/debate/2000-10-30/bush/question/ Gore: http://www.webwhiteblue.org/debate/2000-10-30/gore/question/ MST --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 31 18:15:19 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 18:15:19 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: public keyrings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001031181519.009a9230@idiom.com> Some Slightly Slack-on-Slack Version of Bob Dobbs wrote: At 02:54 PM 10/31/00 PST, bob bob2 wrote: >if you have the url for an active public keyring site please forward it. ldap://certserver.pgp.com http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/ Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From sunder at sunder.net Tue Oct 31 16:05:43 2000 From: sunder at sunder.net (sunder) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 19:05:43 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: (no subject) References: <0dc65d3bb924282b89e93045e50189b2@dizum.com> Message-ID: <39FF5E57.EBF67D8E@sunder.net> Nomen Nescio wrote: > > ShamrockAgent at aol.com wrote: > > > Could you posibly send me instructions on how to construct a bomb and > > what materials that are needed? Thank you~ > > *snort* Ask HettingaAgent at aol.com or SunderAgent at aol.com. You rang? Herr Agent Provocateur Shamrock, here you go: http://209.215.174.122/recipes/re-c1/0,1724,9694,00.html IMHO, this is the best bomb making recipie in the world. It's amazing how destructive it can be. I think this is a much more better thing for you LEO's to be doing than sitting around eating donuts all day and looking for porn. Yes, the world would be a much better place if you guys made more of these kinds of bombs. They work well whether you drop them from airplanes, or send them through the mail, or hell even better, just deliver them in person. -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_ at _sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ From ravage at ssz.com Tue Oct 31 17:11:55 2000 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 19:11:55 -0600 Subject: CDR: Autarchic Creed, The Message-ID: <39FF6DDB.7628FC35@ssz.com> http://www.paganlibrary.com/editorials/autarchic_creed.php3 -- ____________________________________________________________________ He is able who thinks he is able. Buddha The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage at ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: autarchic_creed.php3 Type: text/html Size: 9739 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcmay at got.net Tue Oct 31 19:31:12 2000 From: tcmay at got.net (Tim May) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 19:31:12 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: California bars free speech of those cutting deals ... In-Reply-To: <7ebce68da0fa56af098f4c512638afd6@mixmaster.ceti.pl> References: <7ebce68da0fa56af098f4c512638afd6@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: At 2:55 AM +0100 11/1/00, Anonymous Remailer wrote: > >California has "shut down"--through a threatening letter--a site >>which matches up folks who are willing to say theyll vote for Nader >>in states where Gore is sure to win if other folks who had hoped to > >So now it is illegal to provide a public forum with specific >capabilities. > >Is it also illegal for me to privately arrange this with a particular >sheeHHHHvoter from the other state ? Gangs can legally call for >voters to vote for them and not for the other gang, but voters >themselves cannot talk to each other and make arrangements that they >see fit. > Just another nail in the coffin of free speech in America. Perhaps it is best if Nader wins, or, failing that, one of the Gush-Bore tag team. The worse things get, the faster the collapse. --Tim May -- ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments. From mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl Tue Oct 31 11:25:01 2000 From: mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl (Anonymous Remailer) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 20:25:01 +0100 (CET) Subject: CDR: Re: ZKS goes GAK Message-ID: <378da2681d6746c01ef2bdaf8a9f699b@mixmaster.ceti.pl> >If the original Freedom product is: > >a. as unbreakable/untraceable as was originally planned (verdict is out, IMO) > >and > >b. is continued to be supported and distributed > >then why would the new "trusted third parties" system be needed? Risking to fall into the doomsayer trap, I would call this a classical "bait switch" technique. Bait was a genuine product, probably developed by the genuine company and people. Switch happened later, when men with guns decided to pick up this thing. But what really pisses me off is that seemengly intelligent people keep on ranting about their intentions. Who the fuck cares what the intentions are/were ? Establishing trust with the crypto-savvy is what ZKS did. That asset is owned by whoever owns the company, not by hired hands. And the use of that asset will be whatever they decide. Creating such an asset brings responsibility, and ZKS folks failed there: their work will be used for other purposes, and there is nothing they can do about it. Assuming that one can make money by providing protection from the people that print that money is just plain silly. From rah at shipwright.com Tue Oct 31 18:06:08 2000 From: rah at shipwright.com (R. A. Hettinga) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:06:08 -0500 Subject: Bush & Gore On Crypto Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text From bill.stewart at pobox.com Tue Oct 31 22:19:19 2000 From: bill.stewart at pobox.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 22:19:19 -0800 Subject: CDR: Re: California bars free speech of those cutting deals ... In-Reply-To: References: <7ebce68da0fa56af098f4c512638afd6@mixmaster.ceti.pl> <7ebce68da0fa56af098f4c512638afd6@mixmaster.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20001031221919.00a386e0@idiom.com> And it isn't even shut down through law - just FUD, letting them create a chilling effect without the need for a full-scale argument in court. At 07:31 PM 10/31/00 -0800, Tim May wrote: >At 2:55 AM +0100 11/1/00, Anonymous Remailer wrote: >> >California has "shut down"--through a threatening letter--a site >>>which matches up folks who are willing to say theyll vote for Nader >>>in states where Gore is sure to win if other folks who had hoped to >> >>So now it is illegal to provide a public forum with specific >>capabilities. >> >>Is it also illegal for me to privately arrange this with a particular >>sheeHHHHvoter from the other state ? Gangs can legally call for >>voters to vote for them and not for the other gang, but voters >>themselves cannot talk to each other and make arrangements that they >>see fit. > >Just another nail in the coffin of free speech in America. > >Perhaps it is best if Nader wins, or, failing that, one of the >Gush-Bore tag team. The worse things get, the faster the collapse. As with Perot, Nader's certainly no worse than the major parties. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From alan at clueserver.org Tue Oct 31 22:26:10 2000 From: alan at clueserver.org (Alan Olsen) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 22:26:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: CDR: Re: public keyrings In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001031181519.009a9230@idiom.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Bill Stewart wrote: > Some Slightly Slack-on-Slack Version of Bob Dobbs wrote: > > At 02:54 PM 10/31/00 PST, bob bob2 wrote: > >if you have the url for an active public keyring site please forward it. > > ldap://certserver.pgp.com > http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/ Know of any good documentation for using LDAP as a key server? I have seen references that you can and sites that do, but none on how it is done. alan at ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply Alan Olsen | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys. "In the future, everything will have its 15 minutes of blame." From adam at r00t.besiex.org Tue Oct 31 20:07:51 2000 From: adam at r00t.besiex.org (Adam Back) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 23:07:51 -0500 Subject: CDR: ZKS "Smart Privacy Policies" Message-ID: <200011010407.XAA16812@r00t.besiex.org> cypherpunk agent X wrote: > Here we get to the meat of the issue... the > item that NAI tried to force down our throats...Corporate Key Escrow.. > this time via key splitting... Shades of the NSA Key!! > > Sick em Adam!! This is referring to me right -- as I was involved in the big fight about NAI's corporate message key escrow proposal? Disclaimer: note I work for ZKS now, below are my personal opinions. It's not key escrow, and it's not building tools for key escrow. Greg wrote: > ZKS has been pretty aggressively and conspicuously hiring wild-eyed > cypherpunk types, who won't necessarily inspire a lot of confidence > or trust in accoutant and risk-manager types. Yeah but the company's goal should be to satisfy users that there is a reason to trust the solution, and ZKS has brand recognition for building "trust no-one" (or at least distributed trust) solutions. Tim wrote: > [...] >By building precisely the tools they and other governments would need >to implement such a system, you are making such a system more likely >to happen. I agree with this argument. I wrote up some GAK-resistant design principles during the NAI/PGP key escrow argument (http://www.cypherspace.org/~adam/grdesign/), in an attempt to get people thinking about the social implications of protocols they write -- and to show that actually crypto protocols are not neutral -- a protocol could even be deliberately designed to frustrate later imposition of GAK -- for example end-to-end forward secrecy. Not suprisingly trying to frustrate GAK typically increases the security of your protocol, because the GAK aspect is a kind of attack, which could be perpetrated by others. This is one of the conclusions of the 11 cryptographers report on the risks of key escrow (http://www.cdt.org/crypto/risks98/). Here's my personal take on the design of privacy systems. It's basically an elaboration of "trust no-one", and "write code not laws" (aka cypherpunks write code). The desired trust model for privacy in order of preferred solution: - best: don't reveal the information in the first place -- critically rexamine whether is it necessary to reveal the personal data in the first place - if it is necessary to do some processing on data, examine the users processing and storing their own profile (client side applications) - try to operate pseudonymously (persistent anonymous) - if you can't do that at least split the data up (think reply-blocks) -- this is what the "split-key" thing is talking about (more on this below). - if possible make the protocols publicly auditable (as in time-stamp servers where if a server lies the users get a signed transcript proving it cheated). - if you can't do that have ombudsmen and traditional auditing of processes. - government laws come into it in the sense that some governments have or are starting to try to regulate companies handling of data. The UK Data Protection Act would be one example, where companies are supposed to forget data. We've discussed in the past the demerits of government laws wrt "forgetting" data -- if there is a business need for the data, the data service will move off shore. Still some companies will try to comply. - only lastly rely on contract law. Even with contract law it's problematic -- you're asking the company to forget something. For contract law, even though private contracting is a nice way to approach it, in practice it may be pretty hard to prove the company broke a contract, and anyway it's always better to prevent than detect and then argue it out in court. It's all a bit vague to talk about this stuff without some concrete example -- the above is talking loosely about areas where the user would currently be asked to reveal some info to a company. There are other applications one could apply crypto to. Also bear in mind that currently often the situation is no privacy at all -- data mining, sharing, reselling data against claimed privacy policies, weak non-technical "privacy seals", etc. Technical steps to ensure the user doesn't have to trust the company privacy policy is a good thing -- if the privacy policy is implemented in the form of cryptographic prevention. If they have the code and the protocols and they can see that they aren't trusting the company because the data doesn't leave their own computer, or is given pseudonymously through a mix net is a good thing. Even if nothing else technical is possible, and they have to trust a few third parties not to collude and there is no way to conduct the business without revealing the info to someone, that's an improvement, as previously they would have trusted the company alone. Hence the subject line -- using crypto to make cryptographic prevention is analogous to Nick Szabo's "Smart Contracts". (http://www.best.com/~szabo/smart.contracts.2.html) Now specifically about "key-splitting" -- the press release includes that one odd semi-technical snippet kind of out-of-context and ambiguously. The context is a system which is pretty much a reply-block. So as Adam Shostack says: it's not key splitting, it's multiple layered encryption -- the onion skin analogy. But as I say IMO it's imbalanced and ambiguous to mention that one technical approach without explaining at all, and without mentioning any of numerous other approaches. Adam From adam at cypherspace.org Tue Oct 31 20:08:49 2000 From: adam at cypherspace.org (Adam Back) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 23:08:49 -0500 Subject: CDR: ZKS "Smart Privacy Policies" Message-ID: <200011010408.XAA16826@r00t.besiex.org> [Sent this once from a dud address trying to work around a mail problem -- apologies for duplicates] cypherpunk agent X wrote: > Here we get to the meat of the issue... the > item that NAI tried to force down our throats...Corporate Key Escrow.. > this time via key splitting... Shades of the NSA Key!! > > Sick em Adam!! This is referring to me right -- as I was involved in the big fight about NAI's corporate message key escrow proposal? Disclaimer: note I work for ZKS now, below are my personal opinions. It's not key escrow, and it's not building tools for key escrow. Greg wrote: > ZKS has been pretty aggressively and conspicuously hiring wild-eyed > cypherpunk types, who won't necessarily inspire a lot of confidence > or trust in accoutant and risk-manager types. Yeah but the company's goal should be to satisfy users that there is a reason to trust the solution, and ZKS has brand recognition for building "trust no-one" (or at least distributed trust) solutions. Tim wrote: > [...] >By building precisely the tools they and other governments would need >to implement such a system, you are making such a system more likely >to happen. I agree with this argument. I wrote up some GAK-resistant design principles during the NAI/PGP key escrow argument (http://www.cypherspace.org/~adam/grdesign/), in an attempt to get people thinking about the social implications of protocols they write -- and to show that actually crypto protocols are not neutral -- a protocol could even be deliberately designed to frustrate later imposition of GAK -- for example end-to-end forward secrecy. Not suprisingly trying to frustrate GAK typically increases the security of your protocol, because the GAK aspect is a kind of attack, which could be perpetrated by others. This is one of the conclusions of the 11 cryptographers report on the risks of key escrow (http://www.cdt.org/crypto/risks98/). Here's my personal take on the design of privacy systems. It's basically an elaboration of "trust no-one", and "write code not laws" (aka cypherpunks write code). The desired trust model for privacy in order of preferred solution: - best: don't reveal the information in the first place -- critically rexamine whether is it necessary to reveal the personal data in the first place - if it is necessary to do some processing on data, examine the users processing and storing their own profile (client side applications) - try to operate pseudonymously (persistent anonymous) - if you can't do that at least split the data up (think reply-blocks) -- this is what the "split-key" thing is talking about (more on this below). - if possible make the protocols publicly auditable (as in time-stamp servers where if a server lies the users get a signed transcript proving it cheated). - if you can't do that have ombudsmen and traditional auditing of processes. - government laws come into it in the sense that some governments have or are starting to try to regulate companies handling of data. The UK Data Protection Act would be one example, where companies are supposed to forget data. We've discussed in the past the demerits of government laws wrt "forgetting" data -- if there is a business need for the data, the data service will move off shore. Still some companies will try to comply. - only lastly rely on contract law. Even with contract law it's problematic -- you're asking the company to forget something. For contract law, even though private contracting is a nice way to approach it, in practice it may be pretty hard to prove the company broke a contract, and anyway it's always better to prevent than detect and then argue it out in court. It's all a bit vague to talk about this stuff without some concrete example -- the above is talking loosely about areas where the user would currently be asked to reveal some info to a company. There are other applications one could apply crypto to. Also bear in mind that currently often the situation is no privacy at all -- data mining, sharing, reselling data against claimed privacy policies, weak non-technical "privacy seals", etc. Technical steps to ensure the user doesn't have to trust the company privacy policy is a good thing -- if the privacy policy is implemented in the form of cryptographic prevention. If they have the code and the protocols and they can see that they aren't trusting the company because the data doesn't leave their own computer, or is given pseudonymously through a mix net is a good thing. Even if nothing else technical is possible, and they have to trust a few third parties not to collude and there is no way to conduct the business without revealing the info to someone, that's an improvement, as previously they would have trusted the company alone. Hence the subject line -- using crypto to make cryptographic prevention is analogous to Nick Szabo's "Smart Contracts". (http://www.best.com/~szabo/smart.contracts.2.html) Now specifically about "key-splitting" -- the press release includes that one odd semi-technical snippet kind of out-of-context and ambiguously. The context is a system which is pretty much a reply-block. So as Adam Shostack says: it's not key splitting, it's multiple layered encryption -- the onion skin analogy. But as I say IMO it's imbalanced and ambiguous to mention that one technical approach without explaining at all, and without mentioning any of numerous other approaches. Adam From nobody at dizum.com Tue Oct 31 15:10:10 2000 From: nobody at dizum.com (Nomen Nescio) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 00:10:10 +0100 (CET) Subject: CDR: Re: (no subject) Message-ID: <0dc65d3bb924282b89e93045e50189b2@dizum.com> ShamrockAgent at aol.com wrote: > Could you posibly send me instructions on how to construct a bomb and > what materials that are needed? Thank you~ *snort* Ask HettingaAgent at aol.com or SunderAgent at aol.com. From openpgp at openpgp.net Tue Oct 31 22:08:33 2000 From: openpgp at openpgp.net (Openpgp) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 01:08:33 -0500 Subject: CDR: Re: public keyrings In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20001031181519.009a9230@idiom.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Bill Stewart wrote: > Some Slightly Slack-on-Slack Version of Bob Dobbs wrote: > > At 02:54 PM 10/31/00 PST, bob bob2 wrote: > >if you have the url for an active public keyring site please forward it. > > ldap://certserver.pgp.com > http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/ > I maintain a list of PGP keyservers at: http://www.openpgp.net/pgpsrv.html -- --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Data Security & Cryptology Consulting Programming, Networking, Analysis PGP for OS/2: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html --------------------------------------------------------------- From mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl Tue Oct 31 17:55:02 2000 From: mix at mixmaster.ceti.pl (Anonymous Remailer) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 02:55:02 +0100 (CET) Subject: CDR: Re: California bars free speech of those cutting deals ... Message-ID: <7ebce68da0fa56af098f4c512638afd6@mixmaster.ceti.pl> >California has "shut down"--through a threatening letter--a site >which matches up folks who are willing to say theyll vote for Nader >in states where Gore is sure to win if other folks who had hoped to So now it is illegal to provide a public forum with specific capabilities. Is it also illegal for me to privately arrange this with a particular sheeHHHHvoter from the other state ? Gangs can legally call for voters to vote for them and not for the other gang, but voters themselves cannot talk to each other and make arrangements that they see fit. This is the official recognition of the brainwashing monopolies. Time to setup servers in Lybia and Iraq. Too bad their gangs are too stupid to do it themselves. Or maybe I am missing something.