Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying customers?

Travis Biehn tbiehn at gmail.com
Sun Oct 11 15:25:39 PDT 2015


I choose my words for my own amusement. You got the other neophytes riled
up - they're not sure how to respond to chaotic disclosure, they want to
know; "what does it all mean". The old guard grumbles, SSDD.

I don't think you're COINTELPRO/JTRIG Mike. It does amuse me, however, how
quick everyone is to defend/attack on a non-event, spitting someone out of
this community would be pretty easy, should the powers be deem it important
enough.

-Travis

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com> wrote:

> Used to be you'd be accused of being COINTELPRO, now it's JTRIG.
> "Differing opinion"? Almost never an option.
> Different=wrong-bad-evil-enemy-hate-suspect-accuse.
>
> On technical issues, I'm definitely a neophyte, but I'd been in contact
> with JYA for quite sometime, he'd published a few documents I supplied and
> shared many links on twitter. You'd think that would get him to look at the
> data before smearing me. As for off-message? That's a spin term. I'm not
> anti-authoritarian enough, I guess - that's quite possible by some
> standards.
>
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:43 PM, <cypherpunks-request at cpunks.org> wrote:
>
>> Send cypherpunks mailing list submissions to
>>         cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>         https://cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         cypherpunks-request at cpunks.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         cypherpunks-owner at cpunks.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of cypherpunks digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>       customers? (Razer)
>>    2. Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>       customers? (bbrewer)
>>    3. Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>       customers? (Shelley)
>>    4. Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>       customers? (John Young)
>>    5. Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying customers?
>>       (Alfie John)
>>    6. Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>       customers? (Michael Best)
>>    7. Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying customers?
>>       (Dr. J Feinstein)
>>    8. Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>       customers? (Dr. J Feinstein)
>>    9. Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying customers?
>>       (Travis Biehn)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 13:25:03 -0700
>> From: Razer <Rayzer at riseup.net>
>> To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>         customers?
>> Message-ID: <561AC59F.9070508 at riseup.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/11/2015 01:04 PM, Michael Best wrote:
>> > That would explain keeping silent, *NOT* making up lies about me and
>> > saying the data is fake.
>>
>> I'm not going to make JYA's argument here, even if what's been assumed
>> is fact, but the strategy would be a stall at least with the potential
>> for redirection from the 'dead canary' hypothesis because it's typical
>> for people to explode into useless flame wars over the 'leakage' instead
>> of giving serious thought beyond ego/profit motives to why the leak
>> occurred.
>>
>> But, as a notable scientist once said... "Yes, but the whole point of
>> the warrant canary is lost if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell
>> the world, eh!?!"
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmCKJi3CKGE
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>> Name: signature.asc
>> Type: application/pgp-signature
>> Size: 836 bytes
>> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
>> URL: <
>> http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151011/9f2ef65a/attachment-0001.sig
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 16:30:00 -0400
>> From: bbrewer <bbrewer at littledystopia.net>
>> To: Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com>
>> Cc: cpunks <cypherpunks at cpunks.org>, cryptome <cryptome at freelists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>         customers?
>> Message-ID: <29FDC0FF-712A-4048-AA64-67845A7CDECA at littledystopia.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 11, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Anyway to rule this out other than hearing it from John? How long
>> before we begin to seriously consider it or assume it?
>> >
>> > And if there was a NSL, why not shut down? Why put users at ongoing
>> risk??
>>
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavabit
>>
>> "Levison said that he could be arrested for closing the site instead of
>> releasing the information, and it was reported that the federal
>> prosecutor's office had sent Levison's lawyer an e-mail to that effect.”
>>
>> I’m just blabbering on suppositions here, but I wouldn’t be surprised by…
>> anything.
>>
>> -benjamin
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 13:49:08 -0700
>> From: Shelley <shelley at misanthropia.org>
>> To: bbrewer <bbrewer at littledystopia.net>, Michael Best
>>         <themikebest at gmail.com>
>> Cc: cpunks <cypherpunks at cpunks.org>, cryptome <cryptome at freelists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>         customers?
>> Message-ID: <20151011204851.D5DBAC00016 at frontend1.nyi.internal>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
>>
>>
>> On October 11, 2015 1:35:42 PM bbrewer <bbrewer at littledystopia.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > > On Oct 11, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Anyway to rule this out other than hearing it from John? How long
>> before
>> > we begin to seriously consider it or assume it?
>> > >
>> > > And if there was a NSL, why not shut down? Why put users at ongoing
>> risk??
>> >
>> >
>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavabit
>> >
>> > "Levison said that he could be arrested for closing the site instead of
>> > releasing the information, and it was reported that the federal
>> > prosecutor's office had sent Levison's lawyer an e-mail to that effect.”
>> >
>> > I’m just blabbering on suppositions here, but I wouldn’t be surprised
>> by…
>> > anything.
>> >
>> > -benjamin
>>
>> That's exactly the example I was going to post, thank you.  Yes, the feds
>> can force you to keep your compromised site up; basically, anything you
>> might do to warn users is verboten.
>>
>> Someone flaming uncharacteristically could be one of the only ways... and,
>> it *is* old data.
>>
>> If this is the case, and that's a very tentative IF, there is not much
>> else
>> he can do (and he did as much as he could without putting himself in legal
>> hot water.)
>>
>> -S
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 17:03:37 -0400
>> From: John Young <jya at pipeline.com>
>> To: cpunks <cypherpunks at cpunks.org>, cryptome <cryptome at freelists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>         customers?
>> Message-ID: <E1ZlNmH-0000VV-40 at elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>>
>> https://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm
>>
>> 25 February 2014. Related: GCHQ Full-Spectrum Cyber Effects:
>>
>> <http://cryptome.org/2014/02/gchq-cyber-effects.pdf>
>> http://cryptome.org/2014/02/gchq-cyber-effects.pdf
>>
>>
>> 24 February 2014. Related: GCHQ Online Deception:
>>
>> <http://cryptome.org/2014/02/gchq-online-deception.pdf>
>> http://cryptome.org/2014/02/gchq-online-deception.pdf
>>
>>
>> GCHQ DISRUPTION Operational Playbook:
>>
>> <http://cryptome.org/2014/02/gchq-disruption.pdf>
>> http://cryptome.org/2014/02/gchq-disruption.pdf
>>
>>
>> 29 January 2014. Related: GCHQ Squeaky Dolphin Psychological Operations:
>>
>> <http://cryptome.org/2014/01/gchq-squeaky-dolphin.pdf>
>> http://cryptome.org/2014/01/gchq-squeaky-dolphin.pdf
>> (18MB)
>>
>> 4 March 2012. Precursor to this sabotage, OSS Sabotage of Organizations:
>>
>> <http://svn.cacert.org/CAcert/CAcert_Inc/Board/oss/oss_sabotage.html>
>> http://svn.cacert.org/CAcert/CAcert_Inc/Board/oss/oss_sabotage.html
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151011/eeffc4aa/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 08:13:50 +1100
>> From: Alfie John <alfiej at fastmail.fm>
>> To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>> Subject: Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying customers?
>> Message-ID:
>>         <1444598030.829859.407317641.4ED309A5 at webmail.messagingengine.com
>> >
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015, at 04:08 AM, Dr. J Feinstein wrote:
>> > Resend–HTML email scrubbed
>> >
>> > Calling bullshit. Mirimirs right, this makes no sense. And JYA says
>> > netsol won't let him delete the logs but Netsol says logs are disabled
>> > by default[
>> >
>> https://www.networksolutions.com/support/how-to-enable-download-the-web-logs/
>> ]
>> > and you have to turn them on.
>> >
>> > So how the fuckd this really happen?
>> >
>> > Mirimir <mirimir at riseup.net> Are you arguing that users could have
>> > found those logs?
>> >
>> > I almost can't imagine that. Logs are normally in /var/log/ somewhere,
>> > and I can't imagine making them searchable. And indeed, I can't
>> > imagine how Cryptome archives would have included anything from
>> > /var/log/, even after system restore from backups.
>> >
>> > <--SNIP-->
>> >
>> > > Should access logs be kept for that long? Absolutely not. From what
>> > > I> have read in the email exchange that was posted, the log files
>> > > were> included in a NetSol total restore. My guess is that
>> > > John/Cryptome did> not intentionally keep these files, and did not
>> > > realize these files were> included in the archive.
>> > But that's the thing. Logs should have been in /var/log/. And how
>> > would the "NetSol total restore" have changed that?
>>
>> Not necessarily...
>>
>> Logs in /var/log is where they should be by default, but if the box is
>> on a shared hosting account, then things are completely different. For
>> instance, Bluehost charges $3.95/month, which gets you a home directory
>> on a box shared with hundreds of other users. In your home directory,
>> you get something like (from memory, which was a long, long time ago):
>>
>>   ~/
>>   ~/public_www/
>>   ~/public_www/html/
>>   ~/public_www/access_log
>>   ~/public_www/error_log
>>
>> So as you can see, the user does have permissions to access logs, but
>> are kept in the user's _home_ directory. Now you can see why this could
>> have mistakenly been distributed:
>>
>>   tar zcf cryptome-backup.tar.gz ~/
>>
>> The backup would have also slurped in all the logs. There was no malice,
>> just an easy mistake that everyone here could have make given the same
>> circumstances.
>>
>> Alfie
>>
>> --
>>   Alfie John
>>   alfiej at fastmail.fm
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 6
>> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 17:18:33 -0400
>> From: Michael Best <themikebest at gmail.com>
>> To: cryptome <cryptome at freelists.org>
>> Cc: cpunks <cypherpunks at cpunks.org>
>> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>         customers?
>> Message-ID:
>>         <CANFTA0-jX-L8c-u+kusdY_D6YzDNwtRVXgv=
>> pFoOamNSgXwVTQ at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> I'm not sure what the links are meant to imply. That the log leak was a
>> disruption effort by the GCHQ that was planted when NetSol restored the
>> site?
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:03 PM, John Young <jya at pipeline.com> wrote:
>>
>> > https://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm
>> >
>> > 25 February 2014. Related: GCHQ Full-Spectrum Cyber Effects:
>> >
>> > http://cryptome.org/2014/02/gchq-cyber-effects.pdf
>> >
>> > 24 February 2014. Related: GCHQ Online Deception:
>> >
>> > http://cryptome.org/2014/02/gchq-online-deception.pdf
>> >
>> > GCHQ DISRUPTION Operational Playbook:
>> >
>> > http://cryptome.org/2014/02/gchq-disruption.pdf
>> >
>> > 29 January 2014. Related: GCHQ Squeaky Dolphin Psychological Operations:
>> >
>> > http://cryptome.org/2014/01/gchq-squeaky-dolphin.pdf (18MB)
>> >
>> > 4 March 2012. Precursor to this sabotage, OSS Sabotage of Organizations:
>> >
>> > http://svn.cacert.org/CAcert/CAcert_Inc/Board/oss/oss_sabotage.html
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151011/23af6a29/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 7
>> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:24:15 +0200
>> From: "Dr. J Feinstein" <drjfeinstein at mail.com>
>> To: alfiej at fastmail.fm
>> Cc: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>> Subject: Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying customers?
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> <trinity-b3ad17af-4e1b-4f86-9947-45853cfd1f4c-1444598654915 at 3capp-mailcom-lxa08
>> >
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>
>>
>> Maybe, but why those foldersmonths only? Itd be good to hear from JYA,
>> especially b/c Netsol contradicts him.
>>
>> > Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 9:13 PM
>> > From: "Alfie John" <alfiej at fastmail.fm>
>> > To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>> > Subject: Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying customers?
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015, at 04:08 AM, Dr. J Feinstein wrote:
>> > > Resend–HTML email scrubbed
>> > >
>> > > Calling bullshit. Mirimirs right, this makes no sense. And JYA says
>> > > netsol won't let him delete the logs but Netsol says logs are disabled
>> > > by default[
>> > >
>> https://www.networksolutions.com/support/how-to-enable-download-the-web-logs/
>> ]
>> > > and you have to turn them on.
>> > >
>> > > So how the fuckd this really happen?
>> > >
>> > > Mirimir <mirimir at riseup.net> Are you arguing that users could have
>> > > found those logs?
>> > >
>> > > I almost can't imagine that. Logs are normally in /var/log/ somewhere,
>> > > and I can't imagine making them searchable. And indeed, I can't
>> > > imagine how Cryptome archives would have included anything from
>> > > /var/log/, even after system restore from backups.
>> > >
>> > > <--SNIP-->
>> > >
>> > > > Should access logs be kept for that long? Absolutely not. From what
>> > > > I> have read in the email exchange that was posted, the log files
>> > > > were> included in a NetSol total restore. My guess is that
>> > > > John/Cryptome did> not intentionally keep these files, and did not
>> > > > realize these files were> included in the archive.
>> > > But that's the thing. Logs should have been in /var/log/. And how
>> > > would the "NetSol total restore" have changed that?
>> >
>> > Not necessarily...
>> >
>> > Logs in /var/log is where they should be by default, but if the box is
>> > on a shared hosting account, then things are completely different. For
>> > instance, Bluehost charges $3.95/month, which gets you a home directory
>> > on a box shared with hundreds of other users. In your home directory,
>> > you get something like (from memory, which was a long, long time ago):
>> >
>> >   ~/
>> >   ~/public_www/
>> >   ~/public_www/html/
>> >   ~/public_www/access_log
>> >   ~/public_www/error_log
>> >
>> > So as you can see, the user does have permissions to access logs, but
>> > are kept in the user's _home_ directory. Now you can see why this could
>> > have mistakenly been distributed:
>> >
>> >   tar zcf cryptome-backup.tar.gz ~/
>> >
>> > The backup would have also slurped in all the logs. There was no malice,
>> > just an easy mistake that everyone here could have make given the same
>> > circumstances.
>> >
>> > Alfie
>> >
>> > --
>> >   Alfie John
>> >   alfiej at fastmail.fm
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 8
>> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:33:33 +0200
>> From: "Dr. J Feinstein" <drjfeinstein at mail.com>
>> To: "Michael Best" <themikebest at gmail.com>
>> Cc: cpunks <cypherpunks at cpunks.org>, cryptome <cryptome at freelists.org>
>> Subject: Re: [cryptome] Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying
>>         customers?
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> <trinity-135ce961-ec2d-4bd9-8df8-772b864b2834-1444599213281 at 3capp-mailcom-lxa08
>> >
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151011/37caa80c/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 9
>> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 21:43:31 +0000
>> From: Travis Biehn <tbiehn at gmail.com>
>> To: "Dr. J Feinstein" <drjfeinstein at mail.com>, alfiej at fastmail.fm
>> Cc: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>> Subject: Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying customers?
>> Message-ID:
>>         <CAKtE3zexn9=fi1v_-7r0snYT+_+mG=ZZazfbkwoQaOFsYBat=
>> A at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>>
>> It's simple.
>> Someone made a mistake. Best was initially assumed full of shit by JYA, as
>> he's a neophyte - and is consistently 'off-message' for this list.
>>
>> Others, wishing to read more into it, other than face value of hubris, see
>> plans within plans.
>>
>> At the end of the day, Bests' disclosures amount to nothing of
>> consequence.
>> At best he overhyped them, being a neophyte. At worst he's JTRIGd the
>> list,
>> hilariously easily. The technical cognoscenti on the list stay quiet,
>> "code
>> compiling" as the good doctor says.
>>
>> In general, this oversight is valuable because it demonstrates one thing:
>> Even if you try to delete it.
>> If there's a signal it will leak. Purposefully or not.
>>
>> When the protocol you use doesn't provide metadata anonymity, don't expect
>> it because you won't get it. If you don't understand this - keep studying.
>>
>> Why guess at 'motivation'? Do we need to FUD yet another leaker site? Put
>> your money where your mouth is - improve it, donate, write your own, fix
>> the bug & plug the hole.
>>
>> Travis
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015, 5:28 PM Dr. J Feinstein <drjfeinstein at mail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Maybe, but why those foldersmonths only? Itd be good to hear from JYA,
>> > especially b/c Netsol contradicts him.
>> >
>> > > Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 9:13 PM
>> > > From: "Alfie John" <alfiej at fastmail.fm>
>> > > To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>> > > Subject: Re: Why cryptome sold web logs to their paying customers?
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015, at 04:08 AM, Dr. J Feinstein wrote:
>> > > > Resend–HTML email scrubbed
>> > > >
>> > > > Calling bullshit. Mirimirs right, this makes no sense. And JYA says
>> > > > netsol won't let him delete the logs but Netsol says logs are
>> disabled
>> > > > by default[
>> > > >
>> >
>> https://www.networksolutions.com/support/how-to-enable-download-the-web-logs/
>> > ]
>> > > > and you have to turn them on.
>> > > >
>> > > > So how the fuckd this really happen?
>> > > >
>> > > > Mirimir <mirimir at riseup.net> Are you arguing that users could have
>> > > > found those logs?
>> > > >
>> > > > I almost can't imagine that. Logs are normally in /var/log/
>> somewhere,
>> > > > and I can't imagine making them searchable. And indeed, I can't
>> > > > imagine how Cryptome archives would have included anything from
>> > > > /var/log/, even after system restore from backups.
>> > > >
>> > > > <--SNIP-->
>> > > >
>> > > > > Should access logs be kept for that long? Absolutely not. From
>> what
>> > > > > I> have read in the email exchange that was posted, the log files
>> > > > > were> included in a NetSol total restore. My guess is that
>> > > > > John/Cryptome did> not intentionally keep these files, and did not
>> > > > > realize these files were> included in the archive.
>> > > > But that's the thing. Logs should have been in /var/log/. And how
>> > > > would the "NetSol total restore" have changed that?
>> > >
>> > > Not necessarily...
>> > >
>> > > Logs in /var/log is where they should be by default, but if the box is
>> > > on a shared hosting account, then things are completely different. For
>> > > instance, Bluehost charges $3.95/month, which gets you a home
>> directory
>> > > on a box shared with hundreds of other users. In your home directory,
>> > > you get something like (from memory, which was a long, long time ago):
>> > >
>> > >   ~/
>> > >   ~/public_www/
>> > >   ~/public_www/html/
>> > >   ~/public_www/access_log
>> > >   ~/public_www/error_log
>> > >
>> > > So as you can see, the user does have permissions to access logs, but
>> > > are kept in the user's _home_ directory. Now you can see why this
>> could
>> > > have mistakenly been distributed:
>> > >
>> > >   tar zcf cryptome-backup.tar.gz ~/
>> > >
>> > > The backup would have also slurped in all the logs. There was no
>> malice,
>> > > just an easy mistake that everyone here could have make given the same
>> > > circumstances.
>> > >
>> > > Alfie
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > >   Alfie John
>> > >   alfiej at fastmail.fm
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151011/f8ddd42d/attachment.html
>> >
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cypherpunks mailing list
>> cypherpunks at cpunks.org
>> https://cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo/cypherpunks
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of cypherpunks Digest, Vol 28, Issue 47
>> *******************************************
>>
>
>


-- 
Twitter <https://twitter.com/tbiehn> | LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/travisbiehn> | GitHub <http://github.com/tbiehn>
| TravisBiehn.com <http://www.travisbiehn.com> | Google Plus
<https://plus.google.com/+TravisBiehn>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 32713 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20151011/eced6f82/attachment-0002.txt>


More information about the cypherpunks mailing list