From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Antonomasia Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 19:33:28 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com Subject: HIP97 photos & hate speech in list opinions Message-ID: <199801010104.BAA04808@notatla.demon.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cpunks (and Bcc list), I've had a kind offer from Judith to scan my HIP photos and display them on the web (www.sabotage.org). This should happen in a few days. The photos include Alex, Judith, DDT, Ulf, Ian Grigg, Lucky, Sameer, Joichi and others. Re: Hate speech and censorship, 22 Dec, Anonymous > On behalf of the non-racist cypherpunks, please accept an apology for > Paul Bradley's racist message: > > uneducated and foolish arabs such as Parekh should stick > > to what they do best: running kebab shops and/or selling cheap fake rolex > > watches to tourists. > This does not reflect the mainstream view on the list. .... I found Sameer perfectly pleasant. IMO the best view to take on mainstream views is that you can't usually tell. Silence could indicate killfiles rather than assent. -- ############################################################## # Antonomasia ant@notatla.demon.co.uk # # See http://www.notatla.demon.co.uk/ # ############################################################## From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Miller Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 13:26:17 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: Location Escrow anyone ? In-Reply-To: <199801010433.XAA16928@users.invweb.net> Message-ID: <34AB3639.296E74E9@avana.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain William H. Geiger III wrote: > >>ZURICH (December 28, 1997 4:12 p.m. EST http://www.nando.net) - Swiss >>police have secretly tracked the whereabouts of mobile phone users via a >>telephone company computer that records billions of movements going back >>more than half a year, a Sunday newspaper reported. > > Don't be fooled that this is a swiss only problem. It's being done here > in Amerika right now. You betcha. A couple of years ago, there was a _tremendous_ need for programmers to produce "cellular accounting/billing" software in Atlanta in preparation for the Olympics. However, apparently the Olympic Park bomber was not carrying a cellular at the time, so alas, another crime has gone unsolved... Gee, I wonder which carrier Ted Kaczynski will be doing wireless endorsements for? --David Miller middle rival devil rim lad Windows '95 -- a dirty, two-bit operating system. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Robert A. Costner" Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 15:17:10 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: IRC Internet chat with Electronic Frontiers Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980101021332.0369ef2c@rboc.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I sent this message to the cypherpunks list (cyberpass) about 12 hours ago, but have not seen it come up, so I'm sending it again. My apologies if you get two copies. (this copy does have more listed at the bottom in the schedule.) There will be a series of IRC internet chats with Electronic Frontiers. We wish to address two main problems. The Electronic Frontiers movement is misunderstood by a lot of people, and there is not enough communication between the independent EF organizations. The idea was sparked by the recent Cypherpunks Christmas Eve chat. Thanks for the idea. The members of the cypherpunks mail list are invited to our upcoming internet chats. Dates and info are below. The Electronic Frontiers movement is several independent organizations that share a common thread to their name. Each group speaks for themselves and are not associated with each other. The various EF organizations have no association with the group called EFF. We are grassroots organizations of concerned citizens of our geographic areas, volunteering our time and energy. EF organizations exist in several US states and in different countries around the world. EF organizations have been responsible for activities such as winning court cases like the Georgia Internet Anonymity and web linking lawsuit, and the anti-spoofing spam lawsuit in Texas (flowers.com). Of particular interest to Cypherpunks is the fact that EFGA hosts a variety of cypherpunk technologies, including a Cypherpunk Type-1 remailer, nymserver, and mixmaster remailer. We also have a PGP keyserver. Recently we created an FTP archive of privacy software. So far this has been front ends for remailers and PGP software that various software authors have sent us to host. All you need is an IRC client, and to log onto EFnet. If you have questions on how to do this, ask the list. I'm a newbie with IRC and can't help that much. The first chat is Thursday, tomorrow, New Years day at 7:00 pm New York time. ------------- There will be an IRC internet chat session for Electronic Frontiers. More info can be found at http://www.efga.org/about/meeting.html Get out your IRC client and visit us on EFnet IRC in the #ElectronicFrontiers channel. There will be a chat session on * Thursday, January 1, 1998 at 7:00pm EST hosted by Robert Costner of Electronic Frontiers Georgia. * Saturday, January 3, 1998 at 3:00pm EST hosted by Scott Brower of Electronic Frontiers Florida. * Wednesday, January 7, 1998 at 5:00 EST (2:00pm Pacific) hosted by Jon Lebkowsky of EF-Texas * To be announced hosted by Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) These will be our first chat sessions. After we see how this goes, we will try to setup something on a regular basis. -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh@efga.org http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 22:38:09 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Long-distance limits on Bells unconstitutional [CNN] Message-ID: <199801011456.IAA11379@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Federal judge says long-distance > restrictions on Bells unconstitutional > > December 31, 1997: 7:02 p.m. ET > > SBC Communications > More related sites... WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A federal judge Wednesday > threw out as unconstitutional provisions of a landmark federal law > that restrict the regional Baby Bells from entering the $80 billion > long-distance telephone market, SBC Communications Inc. said. > [INLINE] San Antonio-based SBC said U.S. District Judge Joe Kendall > sided with the carrier, which had charged that the Telecommunications > Act of 1996 was unconstitutional because it discriminated against SBC > and the other four Baby Bells. > [INLINE] The New Year's Eve ruling is expected to send shock waves > through the telecom industry and throw into further disarray the > Federal Communications Commission's efforts to break open the $100 > billion local phone market controlled by the Bells. [text deleted] ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Mix Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 03:32:22 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199801011858.KAA07272@sirius.infonex.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Okay, I'd like to set up a remailer - but I don't know where to start! Unfortunatly it's going to have to run on an NT 4.0 box, so the winsock remailer is out of the question, right? And I'm not in the US, so I can't use the juno stuff -- so what (if anything) *can* I use? Thanks for any help... From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 03:23:23 +0800 To: Julian Assange Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 2:52 AM -0800 1/1/98, Julian Assange wrote: >Anyone noticed this before? > >------- Start of forwarded message ------- >Date: 1 Jan 1998 09:54:51 -0000 >Message-ID: <19980101095451.25998.qmail@suburbia.net> >From: proff@suburbia.net >To: proff@suburbia.net >Subject:home.html > > > > Scoop the Grim Reaper! > > Who will live? > > Who will die? Yeah, a few people pointed this out when Bell's "Assassination Politics" stuff began hitting the CP list, circa fall of 1995. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 03:38:42 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain An interesting message (well, interesting to me and perhaps to some others). At 10:47 AM -0800 1/1/98, Ryan Lackey wrote: >Thus, in defending against a raid, Soviet-style weapons are probably better. >7.62x54R Dra----v rifles are probably a good model -- iirc (I've never >fired one), they're semi auto bullpups. [eeek, www.guns.ru is selling them >with bayonets! tactical close range sniping, aye!]. Or the SEAL sniper I've read some reviews of the Dragunov which are very unflattering. The scope on standard USSR-used rifles was terrible. I could doublecheck what Plaster says about them, but I haven't seen anyone advocating that Americans use them. Maybe they'll become the wave of the future... >weapon -- an accurized M14, which is basically an M1A. With a good scope >and better trigger, an M14/M1A can be 1 MOA, and it's a real battle rifle, >with the ability to engage multiple targets quickly due to the semi-auto >action. Actually, I figure that if I'm ever in a situation where I have to engage multiple targets quickly, I'm probably a goner. If nothing else, they'll roll an armored vehicle in (and more and more SWAT teams have them) and burn me out, Waco-style. ("We had to burn the children in order to save the children. Save them from what? Well, we had reports of something....") >Also, when you're operating without a spotter/security man, it's nice to >have the ability to quickly kill anyone in close. With an M1A, you just move >from your concealment, kill, and return, wasting a minimum of time. I guess >in a home you could just keep an AR-15 next to you for such close-in dealings, >though. Yeah, I think an AR-15 (or variant, of course) makes more sense for the average person than anything else (incl. shotgun) for home defense. Opinions vary on this, but this is my conclusion. >you are going to have to move around the house, at least. A PSG-1 ends >up being cheaper than 10 match-grade Remington 700s -- besides, the scope >is much more expensive than the gun anyway (perhaps I just like overly >expensive scopes) Well, I could justify buying _one_ Remington 700, for $600, plus another $400 or so for the Leupold scope (not bought yet). But I sure as hell couldn't justify buying a $10K PSG-1!!! >*ObCrypto!*: >The choice of cryptographic tools is somewhat like the choice of sniper >weaponry. ... Nice parallels, though I tend to argue for crypto in terms of speech and First Amendment grounds, and avoid the (obvious, but dangerous) comparisons of crypto to firearms. Dangerous because one immediately runs into the "But we regulate machine guns, so if crypto is like a machine gun, why shouldn't it be regulated?" And "We don't let citizens have nuclear weapons, so why let them have military-grade unbreakable ciphers?" The speech issues and prior restraint issues are much cleaner. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Robert Hettinga Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 02:32:33 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Peter Huber on the Orwellian Falacy Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain --- begin forwarded text X-Sender: oldbear@pop.tiac.net Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 15:09:58 -0500 To: Digital Commerce Society of Boston From: The Old Bear Subject: Peter Huber on the Orwellian Falacy Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: bounce-dcsb@ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: The Old Bear HIGH-TECH'S LIBERATING EFFECT As the Internet makes inroads into information-restrictive nations, such as China, efforts to limit access to only "desirable" ideas are doomed to failure, say experts. "The complaint one hears against the Internet isn't that there is too little speech," says Manhattan Institute analyst Peter Huber. "Instead, the argument is that there is too much hateful or pornographic speech. Stalin manipulated the past, altering photos and just wiping people and events out of the historical record. But today, documents and photos get downloaded and stored in files all over the world. You can make corrupt copies, false copies, but you can't erase real copies now." Huber, author of the book "Orwell's Revenge," applauds the move by industry to make encryption products widely available: "It means that we can now create a zone of privacy that the government can't penetrate. That's the exact opposite of what Orwell through would happen." source: Investor's Business Daily December 30, 1997 as summarized by Edupage For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "dcsb-request@ai.mit.edu" with one line of text: "help". --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 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' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 11:08:00 +0800 To: The Sheriff Subject: Re: [Anon newsgroup posting "censorship"] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 31 Dec 1997, The Sheriff wrote: > Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 13:19:58 -0400 > From: The Sheriff > To: cypherpunks@toad.com > Subject: Re: [Anon newsgroup posting "censorship"] > > [snip] > > >My cancelled Usenet article offered a reward for killing the spammer: [...] > It's not censorship, you idiot. The dude who clipped out your post > was trying to keep some fucking psycho from killing somebody else for > some imagined (or not, who knows?) $50k reward. > > It's common sense, in other words. Not realy, Post it to one unnmoderated newsgroup Canceling it would be rouge Post it to one moderated newsgroup Moderator may cancel it Post it to more then 20 newsgroups Anyone can cancel it as spam The post was canceled because the moderator can canel anything in there newsgroup. It is censorship, but by posting to a moderated newsgroup you are concenting to that censorship. - -- Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. ex-net.scum and proud You Say To People "Throw Off Your Chains" And They Make New Chains For Themselves? --Terry Pratchett. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNKry9qQK0ynCmdStAQGQyQQAniVlZhPkrx/sk5HvduXR0c1iUs9ZyVZZ ncXkjREeMJFAjnL4FEtACji0KdtQqFZ1meGYJ33EVDK2SUmYKNVa0RZebK53C6Gw YJot1jnkSMU5MHDqRX25kqqSBSmyX/IML0KZbh6D9NTV+iOF4qos5B016RdsG43f 1FW67ogq0qI= =nXjj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 03:05:30 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] (fwd) Message-ID: <199801011919.NAA11887@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] > From: Ryan Lackey > Date: 01 Jan 1998 13:47:02 -0500 > 2) In my (somewhat limited) experience, many field-improvised concealment > locations are great during firing, but when you move to cycle the action > on a bolt action rifle, you make the concealment shake or otherwise reveal > yourself. Against a force with sniper/antisniper weaponry, that will likely > All that being said, for field use and home defense, if I'm alone, I'd > take a barrett .50 browning for long-range USMC-style scout-sniping, or You obviously haven't seen the flash or the dust cloud from one of these beasties fired from ground level. Hiding at anything less than a mile is not something you're going to do very well. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ryan Lackey Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 02:58:42 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tim May continues the sniping discussion: >I haven't seen Jim's reaction to my point about bolt-action rifles still >being far and away the favored weapon for sniping. Neither an AR-15 variant >nor an HK variant are advised for long-range shots (though either will of >course be capable of such shots...it's just that one wants the absolute >best precsion, and cycling rate is largely immaterial). In a rich target environment where you're firing from concealment, I think it is better to have a semiauto 7.62mmN rifle such as an accurized HK91 or a national match M1A, assuming the enemy has snipers or long-range antisniper weaponry. Why? 1) It is likely to be a target rich environment. USMC sniper doctrine is mainly single target single kill attacks from outside 600 yards. Former Soviet and US Army snipers mainly engaged multiple targets inside that range for tactical support. Defending against a raid is primarily tactical support sniping, killing the vice president of a country other than the US is primarily USMC style scout/sniping. Thus, in defending against a raid, Soviet-style weapons are probably better. 7.62x54R Dra----v rifles are probably a good model -- iirc (I've never fired one), they're semi auto bullpups. [eeek, www.guns.ru is selling them with bayonets! tactical close range sniping, aye!]. Or the SEAL sniper weapon -- an accurized M14, which is basically an M1A. With a good scope and better trigger, an M14/M1A can be 1 MOA, and it's a real battle rifle, with the ability to engage multiple targets quickly due to the semi-auto action. Also, when you're operating without a spotter/security man, it's nice to have the ability to quickly kill anyone in close. With an M1A, you just move from your concealment, kill, and return, wasting a minimum of time. I guess in a home you could just keep an AR-15 next to you for such close-in dealings, though. 2) In my (somewhat limited) experience, many field-improvised concealment locations are great during firing, but when you move to cycle the action on a bolt action rifle, you make the concealment shake or otherwise reveal yourself. Against a force with sniper/antisniper weaponry, that will likely bring down a hail of fire, which is suboptimal at best. USMC snipers generally solve this by firing once and leaving, since it's confusing and hard to localize on a single gunshot, but in a target rich environment, you might not be able to move. And they may have you surrounded, so it's hard to move without being seen. 3) A semi-auto is generally more useful for non-sniping tasks. I can barely carry an M1A, spare ammo, supplies, etc. for a couple days without being annoyed at the weight -- I sure wouldn't want to add a SMG or assault carbine to that. I would not have a problem with using a battle rifle/sniper rifle against a force armed with assault carbines and SMGs, though. True, this may be less of an issue inside a house, since you could just leave all your supplies cached throughout. I still thing you need to remain concealed and hopefully in cover, and if they bring heavy weapons to bear, you are going to have to move around the house, at least. A PSG-1 ends up being cheaper than 10 match-grade Remington 700s -- besides, the scope is much more expensive than the gun anyway (perhaps I just like overly expensive scopes) All that being said, for field use and home defense, if I'm alone, I'd take a barrett .50 browning for long-range USMC-style scout-sniping, or antimateriel sniping, and either a PSG-1 if money is no object (it's not *that* expensive, if you actually use it), or the German Army sniping system (or my^H^Ha national match M1A or M14) if money is only somewhat an object, or a Dragunov if money is a limiting factor, for anti-sniping or support sniping. And I strongly feel anti-raid sniping is of the latter category. (True, your gun is the best 7.62 USMC-style rifle other than the PSG-1..) Even better than that would be the addition of a spotter/security person with an M16 :) And some nice *cover* for where you fire from, in the form of earth, concrete, sandbags, or Spectra. And if the sky is the limit, something to engage light armor, like a 20mm rifle or tactical air support :) *ObCrypto!*: The choice of cryptographic tools is somewhat like the choice of sniper weaponry. A OTP is remarkably like a bolt-action rifle of infinite accuracy. Say, a USAF prototype 20mm laser guided sniper rifle. Use it twice in the same place, and get slagged in automatic cannon fire. However, it is ideal for "one shot one kill" perfect secrecy. A steganographically-protected data stream is much like a silenced subsonic carbine. A remailer network is much like a remote electrically-fired weapon (someone at a pistol match tried this with a free pistol, won, and the technique was banned the next year :) PGP is the PSS -- pretty [good] sniping system, pretty good precision. Useful for a lot of things, and since it's one of the better tools, it gets used for a lot of things where another solution might be better. :) Of course, I'd be kind of biased to call a working Eternity implementation and/or working and distributed digital cash system the PSG-1. -- Ryan Lackey rdl@mit.edu http://mit.edu/rdl/ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: ichudov@Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 04:00:22 +0800 To: devnull@www.video-collage.com Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801011948.NAA17459@manifold.algebra.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Tim May wrote: > >Thus, in defending against a raid, Soviet-style weapons are probably better. > >7.62x54R Dra----v rifles are probably a good model -- iirc (I've never > >fired one), they're semi auto bullpups. [eeek, www.guns.ru is selling them > >with bayonets! tactical close range sniping, aye!]. Or the SEAL sniper > > I've read some reviews of the Dragunov which are very unflattering. The > scope on standard USSR-used rifles was terrible. I could doublecheck what > Plaster says about them, but I haven't seen anyone advocating that > Americans use them. Maybe they'll become the wave of the future... First of all, the standard Dragunov scopes use weird Russian batteries that are hard to find here. (the batteries are only used to light the crosshairs). Also, I have been told that Dragunovs are not as accurate as M1As (2MOA or so). What I do like about SVD is their mean looks. Maybe it is my Soviet taste. - Igor. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Robert A. Costner" Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 03:30:43 +0800 To: Jim Choate Subject: Re: IRC Internet chat with Electronic Frontiers (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199712312107.PAA09410@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980101141316.0362f05c@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 03:07 PM 12/31/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >Forwarded message: > >> Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 15:06:46 -0500 >> From: "Robert A. Costner" >> Subject: IRC Internet chat with Electronic Frontiers > >> * To be announced >> hosted by Jon Lebkowsky of EF-Texas > >Woah Nelly, this is the first I have heard of EF-Tx, got any contact info? There have always been two groups in Texas, one in Austin, and one in Houston, I think. Austin is of course the famous home of the Steve Jackson raids. Rumor has it that the two groups are merging into one to be called something similar to EF-Texas. If you want more info, you'll have to get it from Jon Lebkowsky, Gene Crick, or one of the others in Texas. I'm sure Jon will address this during his chat. Hopefully we'll have the text of the chat session, or at least the first hour, on a web page after the chat. Jon's chat session will be on Wednesday, January 7, 1998 at 7:00 EST (5:00pm Pacific) The session hosted by EF Australia should be Saturday, January 17, 1998 at 8:00pm EST (11:00am Sunday, Brisbane, AU), Hosted by Greg Taylor of Electronic Frontiers Australia. (maybe 7:00 EST - it is not set in stone) To be honest, I'm getting confused on the time zones. Today I noticed a mistake I made earlier when I added when I should have subtracted. Plus I haven't figured out Australia and GMT time yet, to do it without thinking. More info about times, and hopefully any corrections can be found at http://www.efga.org/about/meeting.html -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh@efga.org http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "William H. Geiger III" Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 04:56:36 +0800 To: Steve Schear Subject: Re: Mobile phones used as trackers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801012054.PAA25297@users.invweb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 12/31/97 at 06:53 PM, Steve Schear said: >and keep your cell phone turned off. It is my understanding that they can still track you with the cell phone turned off so long as there is power going to the box (most auto cell phones are hardwired into the cars electrical system). - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNKwA+o9Co1n+aLhhAQG15gP/eG3w/i4L2HjWlacroj7BWLWZYgjoOWdn yNxmvrOPQGSrrTBCO28dn3xOvJfz4z87G918h7pRZvxmhElNsHEbqCSK2CqsUCnZ ahfF/aiXMm59ToF1HMMRXgpCxORORC58GxOkIR5zUp7HKjpPc6KhEdARovBfYnJM LcxS2kcOJ+4= =aljX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 04:39:59 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: W.F. Friedman - A reputation revisited?... Message-ID: <199801012057.OAA12379@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Hi, Thought I would pass an interesting quote along regarding Friedman. I think it may have some interest considering the holding of Friedman by some cpunks... Combined Fleet Decoded: The secret history of American intelligence and the Japanese navy in WWII John Prados ISBN 0-679-43701-0 pp. 164 "This is not to say the solution occurred in a vacuum, however. It was OP-20-G that had solved Red, predecessor to the new diplomatic system, and Commander Safford recognized that his organization needed outside help on Purple. He went to his Army counterpart, The Signal Intelligence Service (SIS), which formed part of the Signal Corps: there, senior cryptanalyst William F. Friedman, was an expert on machine based encipherment systems. Under Friedman, chief of the team attacking the B Machine would be Frank B. Rowlett. Other SIS cryptanalysts, an electronics engineer, accounting machine experts, and Japanese linguist formed the rest of the group. Friedman, too often given credit as the man who "broke" Purple, made only sporadic contributions amid other duties. His main role came in selecting members of Rowlett's team, with an assist on diagnosis and analysis of the sytsem. Robert O. Ferner was Rowlett's second, with cryptanalysts Genevieve Grotjan, Albert W. Small, and Samuel S. Snyder plus crytographic specialists Glenn S. Landig, Kenneth D. Miller, and Cyrus C. Sturgis Jr. The top Japanese linguist was John B. Hurt, a Virginian like Rowlett himself." ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Kent Crispin Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 07:21:29 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Jim Bell... lives... on... in... Hollywood! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19980101150542.36875@songbird.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, Jan 01, 1998 at 09:52:20PM +1100, Julian Assange wrote: > > Anyone noticed this before? No. But there are two obvious differences between this and the Bell plan: 1) it's not anon; 2) you are explicitly barred from winning if you contribute in any way to the death. [...] > You will not receive credit for a death if you somehow contribute to > that person's demise. If there's any dispute over the exact date of a > celebrity's demise, information listed on the death certificate will > prevail. > > Dewey's Death Pool is open to residents of the 50 United States and > the District of Columbia who are 18 years or older. For complete > rules, see the Official Rules. So you have to provide proof of age to claim... [...] -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent@songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: rights@super.zippo.com Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 08:47:46 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Defamation of the goverment Message-ID: <199801020044.QAA06595@super.zippo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > >In the U. S. a public figure must show actual malice and reckless disregard >for truth to recover damages for defamation. >But how does this apply to the >goverment itself, the president, and to a foreign goverment? >Seditious speech >against the U. S. goverment is protected under Brandenburg v. Ohio >But what if >for instance a Singaporian or German citizen uses a remailer in California to >insult the head of state, the goverment or the rulingparty at home? >Would >willfully promotion of falsehood about a foreign goverment or a foreign >goverment institution be protected speech? >Could the Singaporian or German >head of state or any goverment institution within these countries recover >damages for defamation committed in the U.S. through a local SP? >As far I >understand it, there is two matters of relevance. >1) Sed¹tious advocacy under >the Brandenburg standard. >2) Defamation precedence in which the Supreme Court >ruled that a public figure has to demonstrate actual malice and reckless >disregard for truth. >The Supreme Court has never ruled that _all_ speech is >protected unless it is directed to incite or produce imminent lawless or >likely to incite or produce such action. >Does this mean that defamation >against the goverment or a foreign goverment could be subject for civil action >as long the statute applied would meet the Sullivan standard? > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Mikhael Frieden Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 06:10:42 +0800 To: Paul Bradley Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment Message-ID: <3.0.16.19980101165908.0c4f464c@pop.mindspring.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 08:18 PM 1/1/98 +0000, Paul Bradley wrote: >> It is about basic human decency, and giving a person a fighting chance. >No, acts of law which require employers not to discriminate against >niggers, wops, kikes or greezers, or any other ratial group infringe >basic rights of association, I personally have no racist prejudices, but >recognise the freedom of others to be as bigotted as they care to be. Does that include the krauts, micks, limeys, frogs as well as the canucks and pea soup eaters? The polacks, chinks and dagos? The Wogs too? Can't we all be ethnic slurs together? Which reminds me. We never did get a good one for the Russians. Any nominations? -=-=- Censorship is OK if it is of them. -- the F-C motto From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Mikhael Frieden Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 06:10:42 +0800 To: Paul Bradley Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment Message-ID: <3.0.16.19980101170044.0dff4600@pop.mindspring.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 08:13 PM 1/1/98 +0000, Paul Bradley wrote: > >> > Should the government be able to take action against me because I fire >> > someone for being jewish/black/homosexual??? >> >> Welcome to the 20th Century, moron. > >You clearly have no comprehension of the principles of the free market >and the rights of businesses and individual to hire and fire whoever the >fuck they like for any reason whatsoever. I am no racist, but I defend >your right to be as racist as you see fit. You are obviously an evil person if you do so against the self annointed, even though they self identify themselves as 30% racist. -=-=- Censorship is OK if it is of them. -- the F-C motto From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Antonomasia Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 03:48:05 +0800 To: usura@basement.replay.com Subject: Re: HIP97 photos Message-ID: <199801011921.TAA01743@notatla.demon.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Alex de Joode : > Hmm, I think she only got 3 photos .. End of one film. The rest are in the post now. -- ############################################################## # Antonomasia ant@notatla.demon.co.uk # # See http://www.notatla.demon.co.uk/ # ############################################################## From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Paul Bradley Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 05:18:10 +0800 To: Colin Rafferty Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > > Should the government be able to take action against me because I fire > > someone for being jewish/black/homosexual??? > > Welcome to the 20th Century, moron. You clearly have no comprehension of the principles of the free market and the rights of businesses and individual to hire and fire whoever the fuck they like for any reason whatsoever. I am no racist, but I defend your right to be as racist as you see fit. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Paul Bradley Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 05:16:49 +0800 To: Colin Rafferty Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > It is about basic human decency, and giving a person a fighting chance. No, acts of law which require employers not to discriminate against niggers, wops, kikes or greezers, or any other ratial group infringe basic rights of association, I personally have no racist prejudices, but recognise the freedom of others to be as bigotted as they care to be. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Paul Bradley Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 05:16:58 +0800 To: Colin Rafferty Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > You are not being coerced into anything. If you don't want to serve > food to Blacks, don't open a restaurant. It's your choice. I really hate having to go over and over basic points, but will do in the hope of bringing even a tiny glimmer of enlightenment to you: If you don`t want to serve food to blacks, open and restaurant and refuse to serve blacks in it, put a sign on the door saying "whites only, no niggers please", if blacks try to force you to serve them in your restaurant protect your rights by killing them. Simple as that. > By the way, you are also not allowed to dump toxic waste in your own > backyard. Are you being oppressed? Dumping toxic waste in my back yard will kill my neighbours. How does refusing to hire blacks or any other group harm anyone but myself (in terms of trade levels)? > > Colin, do you consider > > yourself oppressed when someone choses not to date you? What about > > a rejection by someone who takes out a public advertisement in the paper? > > Nope. Of course, this has nothing to do with anything. On the contrary it is an entirely analagous situation, someone is choosing not to associate with you, do you go crying to the govt. claiming you didn`t get a fair shake because sarah in accounts wouldn`t fuck you at the office christmas party? > With freedom comes responsibility. Decency is one of them. With freedom comes responsibility not to infringe someone elses rights, I infringe no-one elses rights by refusing to hire them... Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Paul Bradley Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 05:22:05 +0800 To: Colin Rafferty Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > > Where do you get the right to tell others how they can make a living? > > I don't have that right. However, the Supreme Court has said that the > Congress has that right. Then that must be right... This is starting to look like a troll. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: remailer@geocities.com Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 10:00:37 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Remailer Message-ID: <199801020146.RAA10880@geocities.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Check out , for a remailer that will run on any winsock compatible connection. I think there is a ftp site in europe. I can't remember if it runs on NT, so check out the site. At 10:58 AM 1/1/98 -0800, you wrote: >Okay, I'd like to set up a remailer - but I don't know where to start! Unfortunatly it's going to have to run on an NT 4.0 box, so the winsock remailer is out of the question, right? And I'm not in the US, so I can't use the juno stuff -- so what (if anything) *can* I use? > >Thanks for any help... > > > > > > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Miller Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 09:08:51 +0800 To: "Robert A. Costner" Subject: Re: IRC Internet chat with Electronic Frontiers (fwd) In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980101141316.0362f05c@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <34AC4B93.5ECBC8DD@avana.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Robert A. Costner wrote: > > To be honest, I'm getting confused on the time zones. Today I noticed a > mistake I made earlier when I added when I should have subtracted. Plus I > haven't figured out Australia and GMT time yet, to do it without thinking. > More info about times, and hopefully any corrections can be found at > > http://www.efga.org/about/meeting.html There is a Windows 3.1/95 program called "WorldClock" you might want to see at: http://www.mindspring.com/~otterson/worldclock/index.html I haven't tried it myself, so don't consider this an endorsement. --David Miller middle rival devil rim lad Windows '95 -- a dirty, two-bit operating system. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Julian Assange Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 19:08:37 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Jim Bell... lives... on... in... Hollywood! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Anyone noticed this before? ------- Start of forwarded message ------- Date: 1 Jan 1998 09:54:51 -0000 Message-ID: <19980101095451.25998.qmail@suburbia.net> From: proff@suburbia.net To: proff@suburbia.net Subject:home.html Scoop the Grim Reaper! Who will live? Who will die? And who will win the grand prize in Dewey's Death Pool -- an all-expense paid, two-day Hollywood Death Tour for two. Or one of four quarterly prizes -- a fabulous celebrity death library. It's fun, it's easy -- and all you have to do to win is correctly forecast more celebrity deaths for the calendar year 1998 than any other entrant. Here's how it works: Between now and December 31, 1997, fill out an entry form, listing your picks in descending likelihood of death. For instance, if you believe Celebrity X is a cinch to die within the year, list him or her in the No. 1 slot, followed by your second most likely choice in the No. 2 slot, etc. For tie-breaking reasons, a correct pick in the top slot is worth 10 points, a correct pick in the second is worth 9 points, and so forth. (Please list an alternative name in the event that one of your choices dies before the game begins. The alternative will be substituted in the empty slot and you will not receive credit for the original name.) At the end of the year, the contestant with the most correct picks wins. If there's a tie, the winner will be the person with the highest point total. In the event of a point-tie, the contestant with the youngest decedent will win. Judges' decisions are final. In addition, quarterly prizes (an assortment of guide books, maps, videos and other celebrity death memoribilia) will be awarded for the most correct picks within the four three-month intervals ending 11:59 EST on March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31, 1998. In the event of ties, tie-breaker rules described above apply. Standings will be updated on the site regularly. To qualify as a correct "hit," a death must be noted in one or more of the following publications: New York Times, Los Angeles Times, U.S.A. Today, Time, Newsweek or People. Paid obituaries do not count; the death notice MUST appear in the context of a news story, roundup item or editorial obituary. If someone's death is not mentioned in one of the above publications, you will not receive credit. You will not receive credit for a death if you somehow contribute to that person's demise. If there's any dispute over the exact date of a celebrity's demise, information listed on the death certificate will prevail. Dewey's Death Pool is open to residents of the 50 United States and the District of Columbia who are 18 years or older. For complete rules, see the Official Rules. [INLINE] home | entry | rules _________________________________________________________________ Back to Webb Page Confidential ------- End of forwarded message ------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Lucky Green Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 08:31:10 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Need secondary DNS Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I am looking for somebody outside North America to run a secondary DNS for cypherpunks.to. Please email me directly, not the list. Thanks, -- Lucky Green PGP v5 encrypted email preferred. "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Brian B. Riley" Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 13:36:30 +0800 To: "Jim Choate" Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] (fwd) Message-ID: <199801020526.AAA02793@mx01.together.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 1/1/98 2:19 PM, Jim Choate (ravage@ssz.com) passed this wisdom: >> Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] >> From: Ryan Lackey >> Date: 01 Jan 1998 13:47:02 -0500 > >> 2) In my (somewhat limited) experience, many field-improvised >> concealment locations are great during firing, but when you move >> to cycle the action on a bolt action rifle, you make the concealment >> shake or otherwise reveal yourself. Against a force with >> sniper/antisniper weaponry, that will likely > >> All that being said, for field use and home defense, if I'm alone, >> I'd take a barrett .50 browning for long-range USMC-style >> scout-sniping, or > >You obviously haven't seen the flash or the dust cloud from one of >these beasties fired from ground level. Hiding at anything less >than a mile is notsomething you're going to do very well. IIRC, the Barret gun with all its gear is also a multiperson load as well, so the 'alone' part isn't very valid either. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNKx6SD7r4fUXwraZAQEzGgf/Ymp7/s0+FlgpBQgNs81x8cqasRAjFrIf gvF0fG+XsLeoDaeohFf1uKUktkYE0zoO5G3IBBY9QJ69uPYDKlyFfQJldWYHPL56 2i9bfMuqnrj+sCOLJl54X/WaucO9WrUYNC16RulXblPohj8HBqGp9y73iybbfycb mQdbfhyTYeuM5X3vjcCOVzKHTl4hPqxijeJjL4OUtx5NeUDnZWlp9PRkVDY5CHLu dvr8LJvmbF9vzUSOLAjUeHD3j8rjzR8wRQ9ZeeDkH6leevjuI1NAH/J1xB5bWxgC zrzud/QFgs0rX38YZlLnpP4iekXcqWaq2j+SfptBD1BthK7nuqf9mg== =33z2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys "Saying windows 95 is equal to Macintosh is like finding a potato that looks like Jesus and believing you've seen the Second Coming." -- Guy Kawasaki (MacWorld, Nov '95) From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 19:00:33 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > Which reminds me. We never did get a good one for the Russians. Any >nominations? Klintonkov? As in Comrade Klintonkov? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: ichudov@Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 22:40:03 +0800 To: cypherpunks@www.video-collage.com Subject: Meganet's Unbreakable Virtual Matrix Encryption Takes the Market by Storm; Finally in 1998 Absolute Security... Message-ID: <199801021435.IAA27120@manifold.algebra.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text CNN Custom News: Repeat/Meganet's Unbreakable Virtual Matrix Encryption Takes the Market by Storm; Finally in 1998 Absolute Security... LA Times 02-JAN-98 LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 31, 1997--Finally Meganet's highly acclaimed unbreakable encryption, Virtual Matrix Encryption (VME) is for sale. Meganet, a San Fernando Valley software development company, is proud to announce the release of a full line of encryption products. VME 98 is available in six (6) levels of front-end applications in three (3) flavors: DOS, Win 16 (Windows 3.x), and Win 32 (Windows 95 & NT). The VME 98 Standard Edition, VME 98 Professional Edition, VME 98 Enterprise Edition, VME 98 Custom Client Edition, VME 98 Custom Server Edition, & VME 98 Batch Server Edition provide unprecedented security, options, and flexibility. The pricing ranges from $100.00 for a single retail license to over $1,000,000.00 for the most sophisticated VME 98 Batch Server Edition. In addition, three (3) SDK's (Software Developer Kits) are ready to assist software developers in easily integrating VME 98 into their existing and future products. The three (3) SDK's include an 8bit DOS Engine, 16bit Windows DLL (Win 3.x) and 32bit Windows DLL (Win 95 & NT). The possibilities are endless with the array of VME 98 products. Now any application including but not limited to Internet commerce, Government communications, banking transactions, corporate secrets and personal computer data can be guaranteed complete impenetrability. Yes, the VME 98 is the same product that was posted on the Internet with a $1 million reward for anyone that could break a VME encrypted file. Over fifty five thousand (55,000) tried with zero (0) success. Yes, the VME 98 is the same product that challenged Microsoft, IBM, AT&T, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, America Online, Netscape, etc. to break a VME encrypted file. All the great computer minds in this country have had an opportunity to dispel the bold claims of unbreakable encryption, yet none have. Meganet is pleased to offer the same standard of excellence with all of the VME 98 packages. Additional information about this exciting new technology can be found at www.meganet.com From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Attila T. Hun" Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 16:51:33 +0800 To: Bill Stewart Subject: Time to Pay the Piper Message-ID: <19980102.081442.attila@hun.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >From: Bill Stewart >To: "Attila T. Hun" , > cypherpunks >Subject: Re: Making them eat their words... (while they watch!) >Date: Sun, 21 Dec 1997 11:56:54 -0800 > > At 05:15 PM 12/21/1997 +0000, Attila T. Hun wrote: >> there is only one solution to organizations like M$ >> which are operated without ethics: treat them to the >> pleasures of not only the antitrust laws but the >> exquisite delights of RICO. > Nonsense, and I'm surprised to hear this from you. No, Bill. it's not nonsense... 1) when a true market monopoly exists, society _is_ entitled to intervene. I wrote my Harvard thesis on antitrust and the effect on society of a monopoly, regulated in the public interest as in AT&T v. the industrial monopolies. this may have been 35 years ago, but the principles are even more imperative now with the increasing concentration of real wealth both individually and corporately in the hands of a few. 2) why should you be surprised to hear this from me? sure, I would prefer anarchy per se, but have absolutely no faith that the vast majority would do anything except rape, pillage, and plunder. and, I think I have made my beliefs more than plain over the history trail of cypherpunks. anarchy is nothing more than an isolationist theory; as a political system it does not work --never has, never will. ergo, there is a need for some government in the interest of the people (sheeple, if you prefer). man has not proved his worth on this planet, and whether or not you believe in God is irrelevant. the last several generations have bequeathed a wilting, dying polluted earth to their children and grandchildren. therefore, I am neither your revolutionary anarchist nor your "lost in the clouds" libertarian idealist; I am just a pragmatist who wishes we could govern with an enlightened electorate in the manner of a New Hampshire town meeting; a pragmatist that I believe limited regulation is essential, but a foolish dreamer to hope for an enlightened electorate. > Treat them to the pleasures of the free market - > if you don't like them, start a Boycott M$ campaign, > and see if people stop buying their lousy software. no, Bill, there is no alternative in the mass market. A perfect example is Gate$ buying _both_ WebTV and their competitor to make sure he has _all_ the action. another is EnCarta. Gate$ gave it away until the other vendors dropped out of the market; now M$ charges for the encyclopedia. Gate$ is the perfect example of not only a pure monopoly with 90% of the OS market, but also a constructive monopoly who has leveraged the first position to force monopolies in other areas: 95% of word processing, 95% of spreadsheets, and approaching the total domination of the browser market. Secondly, Gate$ is spreading into the control of the means of distribution in cable, networks, etc. and likewise into media content. Gate$ current actions are those of a spoiled four year old child who sees nothing wrong with demanding it all. > The direct democracy of the free market is far more > appropriate than government here - it's $1/vote, > and if enough people vote against M$ they'll get the hint, > and it enough people vote _for_ M$, it's none of your > business. WRONG! when 90% of the voters are dependent on M$, M$ has bought the vote. to the average user, to vote against M$ is to vote against a free v. a not-free browser, etc. WRONG AGAIN: the OEM computer group has no choice either; software is available from virtually every software house for M$ --and only M$. therefore the OEM has no choice of operating system. without the software, any competing OS is useless. M$ has also intimidated and constrained the software houses. Corel is a good case in point with M$ threatening to withhold critical information on Windows 95 if Corel delivered their 32 bit product to OS/2 first. WRONG AGAIN: M$ has required OEMs to load Explorer as part of the "privilege" to be able to load the OS. That is restraint of trade. when they try to exercise total market control through their customers with their own marketing policies. WRONG AGAIN: M$ is forcing Explorer on totally non-related software vendors. Why should the accounting software vendor in MN be required to load Explorer to be able to distribute the OS --and, most additional M$ packages in networking, etc required Explorer for essential DLLs. this is "binding" in FTC unfair practices regulations. > It _is_ funny to see the Feds hiring a big corporate lawyer > to run their case; I guess they don't think Federal Prosecutors > are good enough. Surely if a low-level prosecutor can't hack it, > they should use their boss, and on up the hierarchical chain. > If Janet Reno can't do it either, they should replace her with > someone who can :-) GRIN? Bill, I'm surprised you would say this. Reno is not an anti-trust specialist. just how many of them are there in the country as a whole? not many? why? --not much anti-trust action; usually the FTC has been able to block mergers, etc. before they become a menace to society such as M$ has become. this is where the failure of the free market comes in: few companies manage to attain the total monopoly position; _none_ to date have done so with clean hands. frankly, Gate$' hands are dirtier than Cornelius Vanderbilt's hands were in his heyday; and Cornelius Vanderbilt made John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan look like angels. Gate$' literally has not only violated the anti-trust laws and the FTC rules on fair competition, but he has done so deliberately in what can easily be defined as a conspiracy to limit or prevent access to the market --and that can be construed as a RICO offense --and should be. Neither Gate$ nor Ballmer show the slightest interest in backing off what they consider their God given rights in a free market to rape, pillage, and burn; they feel that M$ is entitled to tell the American (or world) buyer what he wants to buy. monopoly eliminates freedom of choice. I do not usually have much use for Jesse Berst, whom I generally consider a senseless and shameless M$ schill, like the rest of Ziff-Davis; however, this is what Jesse had to say Monday: Jesse Berst, 22 Dec. "I'm a fan of its [Microsoft's] accomplishments and its great products. More than that, I'm a fan of personal computing. That's why I can say that it's better for us -- and better for Microsoft -- if the DOJ forces the company to play fair. Only intense competition can keep a company from the hardening of the attitudes that eventually damaged companies such as IBM, Digital, Wang and Data General." to engender that competition, M$ needs to be forced to divest either operating systems or products. despite any imagined gains of their increasing integration, the market can not fall to a monolithic line and then expect further advances with no-one nipping at M$' heels unfortunately, M$ idea of competition has not been to be just the market leader --it has fostered an attitude that it can be the only player. and like all monopolies, M$ has fallen into the Al Sloan mode ("What's good for General Motors is good for the country"). more Jesse Berst, 22 Dec. "That's why I can say with all sincerity, the more you like Microsoft, the more you admire its accomplishments, the more you appreciate its products, the more you should root for the DOJ to win its latest case. Anybody who thinks otherwise should be forced to attend every single match of the World Wide Wrestling Federation next year. That will give them an up-close-and-painful taste of what happens when you do away with competition. Jesse, the Microsoft schill, is now at least as strident as I have been since the late 80s when the uncontrolled direction of Gate$' marketing and operating system leverage over office products became more than evident. the DOJ should have broken M$ into separate companies in 1994. instead, the DOJ made a deal with a "Joe Stalin", who, true to Lenin's manifestos, would sign any treaty which bought him time to develop the prohibited weapons --then he broke it. M$ violated the consent decree before it was certified in court and. in reality, applied even more onerous terms to the hardware OEM vendors; we are reaping the results of Gate$ incredible arrogance today. Gate$ also broke the public trust by arrogantly usurping by whatever means more of the market --his actions today are untenable in a civilized market. any suggestions that if you do not like M$, you should not buy M$ products are hollow inanities --to the public, there is no alternative --economies of scale and market dominance have wiped out all but a few niche market vendors. the sheeple never revolt; they just follow the Judas goat to the abattoir happily enjoying the free software while Gate$ builds his tollGate$ (nice pun --guess I will add that to my lexicon). the sheeple will not be happy when they find themselves being nicked for every transaction, on or off Gate$' networks. --and if Gate$ actions over the past 3 years were not enough, his ridiculous, affrontive, and offensive response to the Judge's order is prima facie evidence of not only a monopoly, not only a constructive monopoly, but a tyrannical, maniacal monster who is still a spoiled four year old brat with absolutely no conscience or sense of social responsibility. the fact Steve Ballmer, et al, echo this dictatorial policy in violation of US law is prima facia evidence of an ongoing criminal enterprise which employs extortion --yes, literally extortion-- in the furtherance of its business plan --and this is a RICO offense for which Gate$ and his henchman certainly appear to have deservedly earned the right to 3 hots and a cot for the 20 years minimum on the lesser RICO charge, or mandatory life imprisonment on a conspiracy of greater than 6. Secondly, none of Gate$ lieutenants and captains can claim they acted under orders; it wont fly any more than it flew at Nuremberg. Esther Dyson (with Margie Wylie of CNET) But it is big government that's watching them, not ... Yes--and that's why we need to keep...I mean, God bless the Justice Department for fighting Microsoft; God bless Microsoft for creating good products, and the customers for keeping everybody in line. This is what I want: I don't want anybody to win. I want the game to keep going. I want little guys to keep on coming up and tweaking the noses of the big guys. I've always been a believer in antitrust. It's the concentration of power that bothers me, not whether it's "for profit" or "for government." And I've never claimed to be or not to be a Libertarian. People put labels on things and stop thinking. a good clear statement from Dyson on the public interest. do you think M$ should be permitted to behave in their autocratic and callous manner towards software developers who have no need for Explorer? Brian Glaeske, a programmer/analyst with Fargo, North Dakota-based Great Plains Software, complained to the US Justice Department last month that Microsoft effectively requires him and others to provide its browser in his accounting software, which has nothing to do with the World Wide Web or the Internet. "Microsoft should not be permitted to force third-party developers to redistribute Microsoft Internet Explorer in order to use [new] features," Glaeske wrote to Joel Klein, the Justice Department's top pursuer of antitrust allegations. is not Glaeske's position reasonable? the real point however, does not relate to the browser; the bottom line is that Glaeske, and most of the software developers, do not have an alternative to Microsoft as an operating system. Oh, sure, some clients will run Unix flavours and there are vendors for most high profile applications on unix and OS/2, but the vast majority (90%) of the clients take the easy way out and go Microsoft --M$ is what the employees have at home; M$ is what the "trained" employees have used before.... there are millions of arguments, after WinTel being cheaper, why they should not change --starting with "why should we be different?" a pure free market is anarchy; anarchy may be a wonderful idea for utopian people; the human race is far from being anything except a selfish, greedy collection of individuals who are constrained either by the threats of fire and brimstone from the church, or the laws of the land which punish transgressions of socially acceptable behaviour --fair or not. even Teddy Roosevelt wrote that anarchists should be hunted down and exterminated like vermin. William H. Gates III is just another robber baron who really believes the statement: "What's good for Microsoft is good for the country." Al Sloan never realized his monopoly with General Motors, although there have been periods where GM was over 50% of the market (when Chrysler was close to failing). Bill Gates has created an effective monopoly _world_ _wide_ which far surpasses any monopoly ever created by one individual or company; even John D. Rockefeller did not come close to Gate$' power. John D. was also rather benevolent. IBM never approached Gate$' level of monopoly. Gate$ has proven, and is proving while the very litigation is going on, that he is not a benevolent monopolist; there is only one way: Bill's way, and everyone will think like Bill, or they will be the vermin to be exterminated. and, that, my friends, is why there is such a thing as the public interest; and it should have been exercised on BadBillyG in 1994. my vote goes to prosecute Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer, at the very least, for violations of the Sherman Act, the Clayton Antitrust Act, and the Robinson-Patman amendments (FTC, etc.) to the full extent of the law, including criminal violations as warranted under those titles; and prosecute under the RICO statutes for an ongoing racketeering (extortion is racketeering) and criminal enterprise. frankly, I am disappointed that it has come to this, but Gate$ greed and lust for power has not only exceeded his common sense, it has transgressed the boundary of baseline social responsibility. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: No safety this side of the grave. Never was; never will be iQBVAwUBNKyor7R8UA6T6u61AQHtcAH/XVaZQWl+IicPv7adVvLy/Yy4xkBj7mUP lyU0ecw8oQPCxB2zhtPQcwvPtCMJVBc3y8UtSuAu/i8Kn4XzWeS+EA== =GIWP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Eric Murray Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 01:53:04 +0800 To: whgiii@invweb.net Subject: Re: Mobile phones used as trackers In-Reply-To: <199801012054.PAA25297@users.invweb.net> Message-ID: <199801021756.JAA13004@slack.lne.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain William H. Geiger III writes: > In , on 12/31/97 > at 06:53 PM, Steve Schear said: > > >and keep your cell phone turned off. > > It is my understanding that they can still track you with the cell phone > turned off so long as there is power going to the box (most auto cell > phones are hardwired into the cars electrical system). How? The little I know about cellular is that the handset only broadcasts to the cells when its on. Of course, 'on' and 'off' might mean different things on a hand-held with limited battery life, and a mobile that's connected to a large battery with a generator (car). But it doesn't make sense to have the even the mobile system constantly communicating with cells and getting hand-offs when the operator has switched it 'off' and isn't using it- it'd be taking up bandwidth for no reason at all. And we all know that cellular bandwidth is in short supply. -- Eric Murray Chief Security Scientist N*Able Technologies www.nabletech.com (email: ericm at lne.com or nabletech.com) PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Kay Ping Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 18:28:20 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Location Escrow anyone ? Message-ID: <19980102101945.10999.qmail@nym.alias.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>ZURICH (December 28, 1997 4:12 p.m. EST http://www.nando.net) - Swiss >>police have secretly tracked the whereabouts of mobile phone users via a >>telephone company computer that records billions of movements going back >>more than half a year, a Sunday newspaper reported. > >Don't be fooled that this is a swiss only problem. It's being done here in >Amerika right now. The FCC has issued a ruling that will require all cellular telephone carriers to provide location information on all 911 calls. By the year 2001, this location information is to provide 125 metres of accuracy 67% of the time. Helping emergency services locate 911 callers is a great excuse for installing a cellular location system. Even better than the excuses they gave for eavesdropping-ready digital switches and limits on encryption. - -------------- Kay Ping nop 'til you drop -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: cp850 iQEQAwUBNKyXURHPAso8Qp7tAQH+LgfRATtByYG8nB+gbqvrJ96SGdhRPhXUWnzl 7gHW9+nr6lNQxgbFnU1cpOKR76Y0MEj80ls9n9DojlQuIKJD1RHXc7GQA3k0IVZU yXYyy8Z89dvVUxprVjt0MylxY1+fP7pGLVcViz9jZ/5cgZSgUdRKQNAWpp9g/Ww4 8GYSXGYGrC8hCPoD+i/cjwC3FEQVD+GzSmXnadK8a2a+stiehN1bw/p61+vizxQZ C9YG1AS54Ttzh/jUjnHmRwNYtY4J0i9zUXxElbwj8PcOW9GewTPw+/6fiQ63c35Q 2pCi2q9dk1jFtgIXfrBusSkKS9wP0yYmtLG6lc52YtC6MNE= =+pHY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Mix Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 02:53:58 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: remailer Message-ID: <199801021822.KAA05621@sirius.infonex.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain In a message dated 20:44 01/01/98 EST, you wrote: > Check out , for a remailer that will > run on any winsock compatible connection. I think there is a ftp site in > europe. I can't remember if it runs on NT, so check out the site. Thanks for the help - I've tried the latest version with no luck. The docs state that it works under win95 now but there are still some issues with NT 4.0 Has anyone got this to work under NT? I really want to give something back to the remailer/cypherpunk community and this is the only way I can think of. If anyone has experience of the Winsock remailer and can help... From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 03:39:14 +0800 To: cypherpunks@www.video-collage.com Subject: Re: Meganet's Unbreakable Virtual Matrix Encryption Takes theMarket by Storm; Finally in 1998 Absolute Security... In-Reply-To: <199801021435.IAA27120@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 6:35 AM -0800 1/2/98, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >CNN Custom News: > Repeat/Meganet's Unbreakable Virtual Matrix Encryption Takes > the Market by Storm; Finally in 1998 Absolute Security... > > LA Times 02-JAN-98 LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 31, > 1997--Finally Meganet's highly acclaimed unbreakable encryption, > All the great > computer minds in this country have had an opportunity to > dispel the bold claims of unbreakable encryption, yet none have. All the great computer minds.... They laughed at Galileo, they laughed at Darwin, they laughed at Bozo the Clown. Jeesh. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: jim@mentat.com (Jim Gillogly) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 04:13:57 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Meganet's Unbreakable Virtual Matrix Encryption Takes the Market by Storm; Finally in 1998 Absolute Security... Message-ID: <9801022007.AA03484@mentat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain IChudov relays from CNN Custom News: > Repeat/Meganet's Unbreakable Virtual Matrix Encryption Takes > the Market by Storm; Finally in 1998 Absolute Security... That reminds me... in PR Newswire on 16 Dec 1997 it was reported that IBM had endorsed Meganet's VME, and recommended that NIST replace the DES standard with it (presumably in the AES bake-off). This was humorous enough that I thought it worth sharing with IBM -- I ingenously asked them whether it was true, and, if so, how they came to the conclusion that it was a useful product. They responded: I would like to apologize for the length of time it took to reply to your message. I had to make a few phonecalls and had to wait for someone to get back to me. I spoke with a Cryptography Specialist and she informed me that IBM has, in fact, not tested their product and therefore has not endorsed it. IBM has no further comment regarding the report. I hope this helps. Thank you for using askIBM. George Lavasidis (ASKIBM@vnet.ibm.com) IBM Internet Support Group 1-800-IBM-4YOU I, too, have no further comment. Jim Gillogly Hevensday, 11 Afteryule S.R. 1998, 20:11 12.19.4.14.11, 8 Chuen 9 Kankin, Third Lord of Night From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Paul Bradley Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 21:49:07 +0800 To: Mikhael Frieden Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment In-Reply-To: <3.0.16.19980101165908.0c4f464c@pop.mindspring.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > >No, acts of law which require employers not to discriminate against > >niggers, wops, kikes or greezers, or any other ratial group infringe > >basic rights of association, I personally have no racist prejudices, but > >recognise the freedom of others to be as bigotted as they care to be. > > Does that include the krauts, micks, limeys, frogs as well as the > canucks and pea soup eaters? The polacks, chinks and dagos? The Wogs too? Indeed it does. > Which reminds me. We never did get a good one for the Russians. Any > nominations? Reds is always a good one, and especially ignorant and offensive since the communist tyranny was replaced with a "democratic" one. Can`t think of any others offhand. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Pearson Shane Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 11:59:44 +0800 To: "'cypherpunks@toad.com> Subject: RE: Location Escrow anyone ? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Hello all, >> "Swisscom has stored data on the movements of more than a million mobile >> phone users. It can call up the location of all its mobile subscribers down >> to a few hundred meters and going back at least half a year," the paper >> reported. > >They probably say a few hundred meters so the people don't feel >their privacy is too ridiculously invaded / soften the blow. > >If this is a GSM network then I think they can probably pinpoint >your location down to 2 possible locations within a few meters >due to the digital timing involved with the very precise spread >spectrum radio. Or maybe your actual location within a meter or 2. > >I have heard of digital mobile phones that have a feature in their test/diag >mode that displays the distance to the current base station in meters, >and also displays info of a second base station that it would most likely >switch to when moving out of the current cell. >Even if the telco only had the distance info to your phone within a meter >from 2 of their base stations, they could calculate where you are if need >be to 2 possible locations within meters. >Surely though they would have the capability of recording distance info >from 3 base stations, pin pointing you exactly during a call or the exact >spot your phone requested a cell change. > >And during a call, if need be, they could probably plot your position at >around 10,000 samples per second. :) Though for them to be keeping >this much info on you, you are obviously being investigated. > >Isn't it ironic that people who use GSM for it's "security" can have this >much info of their whereabouts known to big brother/whoever? >Not to mention their actual conversation. > >Imagine Mr.Drug Dealer turns up to court and watches as the jury is >presented with a floorplan on screen and an animated pinpoint of his >phones position while a recording of his conversation is played in sync? > >The world just about, has no idea! >To say big brother is watching is a gross understatement. :) > >He's gunna find out who's naughty and nice. > >Bye for now. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Lance Cottrell Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 09:19:12 +0800 To: wayne clerke Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 1:32 AM +0000 12/31/97, wayne clerke wrote: >On Tuesday, December 30, 1997 7:56 AM, Mark Hedges >[SMTP:hedges@rigel.cyberpass.net] wrote: >> >> >> We found IRC users to be so involved in petty information wars -- >> ping floods, malicious prank hacking, and the like -- that we directed >> policy against use of IRC from the anonymous shell accounts at CyberPass. >> >> If IRC users weren't so easily lulled by the tempation to crash a server >> or run malicious bots or just plain irritate other people for fun, and >> if they would gang up and kick out people who did that, then perhaps we'd >> switch that back on. >> >> They were just too much overhead. Everyone else seems pretty nice, really, >> as far as the system goes. They're all self-interested in keeping the >> anonymous publishing and so on going, so the peace keeps itself. > > >What's the reason behind the policy direction against the use of personal web >proxies running in a (paid for) shell account? >Seems like less risk than you already accept anyway. Something I've missed? > System load is the issue in this case. If a proxy becomes publicly known the load it imposes on the system could quickly become gigantic. In addition we found that people were setting up proxies on any old port, sometimes causing all kinds of conflicts. Our accounts are priced assuming light personal usage. Running servers on our systems is negotiable. -Lance ---------------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell loki@infonex.com PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. http://www.infonex.com/~loki/ "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche ---------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 09:21:05 +0800 To: Eric Cordian Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 4:48 PM -0800 1/2/98, Eric Cordian wrote: >Newsgroups: alt.true-crime >Subject: Kennedy Death Spurs Legislative Initiative >Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 22:44:03 GMT >Message-ID: <68jrg6$eil@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com> > >BOSTON, Mass. (AP) - Sen. Ted Kennedy announced here today that he >will introduce a bill limiting access to skis and ski poles. The >"Winter Sports Safety Bill" is believed to be a reaction to the recent >death of the Senator's nephew Michael Kennedy in a skiing accident. ... And on a more serious note, one thing this affair shows is that once again, the Kennedy clan (KC) lives by different rules. Whether it's Edward Kennedy getting off in the Mary Jo Kopechne case, when any of us would have likely been charged with a) drunk driving, b) leaving the scene, c) lying in an investigation, or whether it's this very same Michael Kennedy getting off with his underage babysitter.... (Why was he not charged with statutory rape? Because the KC got to the babysitter and, it is widely reported, bought her off. So why was the _criminal_ charge of statutory rape not still applied? Because the babysitter wouldn't testify.) And so on, over and over again. Wanna bet that if I was on the hill in Aspen horsing around playing ski football and behaving like a drunken lout with a bunch of other people the ski patrol would whistle us down and tell us to knock it off? Justice has always been for sale in America. But with tens of thousands of new laws, the effects are just becoming more obvious. I say the death of Michael Kennedy, as with the death of Princess Di, was just an example of evolution in action. (An imperfect example, of course, as Di had already been bred.) Regrettably, this satire about the Safe Slopes and Children's Protection Act of 1998 is on the mark. Clueless bimbos like Swinestein, who's never passed up a chance to make another law, will be jockeying for regulation of the ski slopes...even as the Kennedy Clan remains exempt. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Eric Cordian Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 08:51:47 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation Message-ID: <199801030048.SAA02365@wire.insync.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Something amusing from alt.true-crime with definite crypto parallels to certain Swinestein and Freeh initiatives. It is rare to find material that rises to the Toto level of comedy on Usenet. ----- Newsgroups: alt.true-crime Subject: Kennedy Death Spurs Legislative Initiative Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 22:44:03 GMT Message-ID: <68jrg6$eil@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com> BOSTON, Mass. (AP) - Sen. Ted Kennedy announced here today that he will introduce a bill limiting access to skis and ski poles. The "Winter Sports Safety Bill" is believed to be a reaction to the recent death of the Senator's nephew Michael Kennedy in a skiing accident. "When skis were invented, they were made out of wood," Kennedy said. "Today's skis are simply to powerful and dangerous to be in the hands of people. There is no constitutional right to skiing. We feel that people will have to sacrifice some of their freedoms for the protection of society as a whole." One provision will license all dealers in skis. These licenses will involve fingerprinting, background checks, body cavity searches, and photographs of anybody wishing to be in the business of selling skis and ski poles. Another section of the bill bans any ski pole under 36" in length and any ski which is not at least 48" in length. The bill also addresses ski wax. Studies have shown that some waxes actually make the skis go faster, creating a greater danger of death to the skier. Skiers also use the faster skis to outrun the ski patrol, which is not an acceptable practice. A five day waiting period will be required for all ski and ski pole sales. People will be required to provide their social security number and floor plan of their homes before being permitted to purchase skis. "There are simply too many people getting excited about skiing. Easy access to skis is the major reason people get killed on those things. They should have to wait before they can pick up their skis. I am sure that this 'cooling off period' will save lives," Kennedy said. Another bill has been introduced that will ban 'ski carrying devices' on tops of cars that have a capacity of greater than ten skis. "There is simply no reason why anybody needs more than ten skis. You can't ski on more than two at the same time. People with more than ten skis are simply up to no good," said Kennedy. Statistics quoted by the Center for Disease Control show that skiing was second only to drowning as the leading cause of death for people close to the Kennedy family. OTHER RELATED STORIES: - Ted Kennedy Denies Driving Michael to Aspen. - Study Links Skiing to Suicides. - Clinton Calls for Restrictions on "Cop Killer" Ski Poles. - Washington DC to Buy Back Skis for $2 Each. - Dianne Feinstein Vows Defeat for the National Skiing Association. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 10:14:55 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Creative Justice?... [CNN] (fwd) Message-ID: <199801030233.UAA16300@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: >From ravage@ssz.com Fri Jan 2 20:33:21 1998 From: Jim Choate Message-Id: <199801030233.UAA16279@einstein.ssz.com> Subject: Creative Justice?... [CNN] To: users@ssz.com (SSZ User Mail List) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 20:33:15 -0600 (CST) Cc: friends@ssz.com (Ravage's Friends) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2327 Forwarded message: > DRUNKEN DRIVER ORDERED CLOSER TO LIQUOR STORE > > graphic January 2, 1998 > Web posted at: 8:39 p.m. EST (0139 GMT) > > CINCINNATI (Reuters) -- An Ohio judge has ordered a chronic drunken > driver to move within easy walking distance of a liquor store or > face jail. > > In a sentence meted out on New Year's Eve, Hillsboro Municipal Judge > James Hapner ordered Dennis Cayse to move within "easy walking > distance" -- defined as one-half mile or less -- of a liquor store > within 30 days or face a potential 1-1/2-year jail sentence for > drunken driving. > > It was Cayse's 18th conviction for drunken driving. He was also > sentenced to spend the first week of each of the next five years in > jail. > > The judge also directed that Cayse, who lost his license years ago > but continued to drink and drive, be handcuffed to the > passenger-side door or be seated with someone between him and the > driver anytime he travels. > > University of Cincinnati law professor Christo Lassiter said the > multiple sentence passed constitutional muster. > > "It appears to me that this sentence is neither unconstitutional nor > inappropriate," Lassiter told Reuters Friday. "It looks to me like > the judge felt that there was nothing he could do to keep the man > off the road except to make him move to where he could walk to buy > his booze." > > Hillsboro is a town of 6,000 just east of Cincinnati. > > "For as long as I have been associated with law enforcement, I have > never heard of such an unusual sentence. It's very squirrelly," said > Lt. Ronald Ward of the Highland County sheriff's office. > > "I have known Dennis Cayse a long time and I've never seen him sober > except when he was in jail," Ward said. "His lifetime record shows > that if he is not in jail, he's going to drink and drive." > > A spokeswoman for Mothers Against Drunk Driving denounced the > sentence, saying it was too lenient and sends the wrong public > message. > > Copyright 1998 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Alexandre Maret Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 05:35:59 +0800 To: "'cypherpunks@toad.com> Subject: Re: Location Escrow anyone ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <34AD5B24.520C3851@infomaniak.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Pearson Shane wrote: > > Hello all, > > >> "Swisscom has stored data on the movements of more than a million mobile > >> phone users. It can call up the location of all its mobile subscribers down > >> to a few hundred meters and going back at least half a year," the paper > >> reported. > > > >They probably say a few hundred meters so the people don't feel > >their privacy is too ridiculously invaded / soften the blow. > > > >If this is a GSM network then I think they can probably pinpoint > >your location down to 2 possible locations within a few meters > >due to the digital timing involved with the very precise spread > >spectrum radio. Or maybe your actual location within a meter or 2. it is a GSM network, however, I doubt that they try to know more than just the cell you're in... but you never know [snip] > >Imagine Mr.Drug Dealer turns up to court and watches as the jury is > >presented with a floorplan on screen and an animated pinpoint of his > >phones position while a recording of his conversation is played in sync? yes... except that everybody but Mr.Drug Dealer use these mobile phones (marketed under the name "Natel-D"). In switzerland, you can buy GSM phones that works with prepaid cards. No trace, no name. The location can still be pinpointed, but nobody know who's owning the phone. This is called "Natel Easy" (what a name). It cost much more, but depending on the business you're conducting, it's not a problem... To conclude: everybody is watched, except Mr.DD... > >The world just about, has no idea! > >To say big brother is watching is a gross understatement. :) this is the problem in switzerland. When I first heard about this story (and believe me, it's not the only one of that kind... it's not even the worse), I tried to ask people around me to see what they think about this, and I was amazed by their reaction. "There is no problem, I'm not doing anything wrong." The media are beginning to relate this kind of facts, but the people are still incredibly naive. One more thing we can say about this story: Switzerland's telecom market is now free (since 1.1.98), and this story may give some people (altough I'm not sure...) a reason to change their telco (when possible). Another fact of the 1997 year in switerland: the largest retailer in switzerland (Migros http://www.migros.ch) launched the M-Cumulus card. Each time you buy something by Migros, you can present this card and get a 1% rebate (wow...) and you may also get special rebate "tailored to your needs". But, to get this card, you have to sign an agreement that allows Migros to record what you buys. On the 20th november 1997, 1.6mio of citizen were in the database (about 1/4th of the swiss population). When requesting this card, you also provide the name and date of birth of each in the household (you're not forced to do so, but 97% of the M-Cumulus owners filled this information). (source: partially "Le Nouveau Quotidien", 20th nov 1997) The federal government was supposed to issue a warning. If a warning was issued, I may have been sleeping at that time... Swiss Federal Data Protection Commissioner: http://www.edsb.ch/ mostly empty... not a word about these 2 stories. you see how the swiss people are informed... alex From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Remo Pini Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 06:56:30 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Location Escrow anyone ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19980102234524.00977740@linux> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 22:24 02.01.98 +0100, you wrote: > >Pearson Shane wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> >> "Swisscom has stored data on the movements of more than a million mobile >> >> phone users. It can call up the location of all its mobile subscribers down >> >> to a few hundred meters and going back at least half a year," the paper >> >> reported. >> > >> >They probably say a few hundred meters so the people don't feel >> >their privacy is too ridiculously invaded / soften the blow. >> > >> >If this is a GSM network then I think they can probably pinpoint >> >your location down to 2 possible locations within a few meters >> >due to the digital timing involved with the very precise spread >> >spectrum radio. Or maybe your actual location within a meter or 2. > >it is a GSM network, however, I doubt that they try to know more than >just the cell you're in... but you never know They can't really (the cell relay equipment is not up to the task). >> >Imagine Mr.Drug Dealer turns up to court and watches as the jury is >> >presented with a floorplan on screen and an animated pinpoint of his >> >phones position while a recording of his conversation is played in sync? > >yes... except that everybody but Mr.Drug Dealer use these mobile >phones (marketed under the name "Natel-D"). In switzerland, you can >buy GSM phones that works with prepaid cards. No trace, no name. The >location can still be pinpointed, but nobody know who's owning the >phone. This is called "Natel Easy" (what a name). It cost much more, >but depending on the business you're conducting, it's not a problem... > >To conclude: everybody is watched, except Mr.DD... > >> >The world just about, has no idea! >> >To say big brother is watching is a gross understatement. :) > >this is the problem in switzerland. When I first heard about this >story (and believe me, it's not the only one of that kind... it's >not even the worse), I tried to ask people around me to see what >they think about this, and I was amazed by their reaction. "There >is no problem, I'm not doing anything wrong." The media are >beginning to relate this kind of facts, but the people are still >incredibly naive. You should have asked me instead :), I'm a bit more paranoid than most. (Yes, I most certainly don't have a Cumulus card and I have a Natel D-Easy for fun.) >One more thing we can say about this story: Switzerland's telecom >market is now free (since 1.1.98), and this story may give some >people (altough I'm not sure...) a reason to change their telco >(when possible). Until somewhen in 1999 you can only do international calls through alternate carriers (only Swisscom has access to the home so far, unless these cable operators really get serious, which they won't, because Swisscom owns more then 30% of their stock) and you have to prepend a 5 digit number to do a call until autumn (I don't think people without a pbx that can be programmed to automatically do that will switch carriers). >Another fact of the 1997 year in switerland: > >the largest retailer in switzerland (Migros http://www.migros.ch) >launched the M-Cumulus card. Each time you buy something by Migros, >you can present this card and get a 1% rebate (wow...) and you may >also get special rebate "tailored to your needs". But, to get this >card, you have to sign an agreement that allows Migros to record >what you buys. On the 20th november 1997, 1.6mio of citizen were >in the database (about 1/4th of the swiss population). When requesting >this card, you also provide the name and date of birth of each >in the household (you're not forced to do so, but 97% of the >M-Cumulus owners filled this information). > (source: partially "Le Nouveau Quotidien", 20th nov 1997) It is a bit worrying, but on the other hand, I don't consider my shopping list a very personal thing, after all, hardly anyone (except Monty Python) gets killed by a banana. >The federal government was supposed to issue a warning. If a warning >was issued, I may have been sleeping at that time... Well, I guess everybody was... >Swiss Federal Data Protection Commissioner: http://www.edsb.ch/ >mostly empty... not a word about these 2 stories. you see how the >swiss people are informed... Now this guy (Odilo Guntern) seems to have no clue about anything... Wanna get more paranoid? Some companies log all Internet traffic of their employees that passes through their proxy (which you have to use for anything to work) for some weeks (Weren't you the one chatting on #really-naughty-bits for more than 1 hour on Monday??). And of course, phonenumbers you call in your company are logged, too. See you, Remo ----------------------------------------------------- Fate favors the prepared mind. (from "Under Siege 3") ----------------------------------------------------- Remo Pini T: +41 1 350 28 88 Pini Computer Trading N: +41 79 216 15 51 http://www.rpini.com/ E: rp@rpini.com key: http://www.rpini.com/crypto/remopini.asc ----------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Patrick May Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 06:01:44 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Time to Pay the Piper In-Reply-To: <19980102.081442.attila@hun.org> Message-ID: <1669-Sat03Jan1998030310-0800-Patrick May MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Attila T. Hun writes: [ . . . ] > > At 05:15 PM 12/21/1997 +0000, Attila T. Hun wrote: > >> there is only one solution to organizations like M$ > >> which are operated without ethics: treat them to the > >> pleasures of not only the antitrust laws but the > >> exquisite delights of RICO. [ . . . ] > 1) when a true market monopoly exists, society _is_ > entitled to intervene. I wrote my Harvard thesis on > antitrust and the effect on society of a monopoly, Ah, that explains why a bad-ass with a vocabulary would spout such nonsense. That little liberal arts college up the river from my alma mater can corrupt even the finest minds. Rather than go down yet another libertarian v. statist debate rathole, I'll just quote one of the more notorious (former) list members by saying: "I have a solution for that." The federal government should immediately stop purchasing and using Microsoft products. No more monopoly, no court cases, no delay. Free market and technical solutions are always superior to legal remedies. Regards, Patrick May S P Engineering, Inc. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Charlie Comsec Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 13:09:08 +0800 To: remailer-politics@server1.efga.org Subject: Re: Remailer Logs (and Accountability) In-Reply-To: <199712221346.OAA03091@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: <19980103050003.766.qmail@nym.alias.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- usura@sabotage.org (Alex de Joode) wrote: > : I suspect that if you polled remailer operators you'd find that some > : keep logs and some don't. I don't know about the Replay remailer. Perhaps > : Alex DeJoode (the operator of the Replay remailer) would care to comment. Nor > : can logs necessarily positively identify you. If kept, they would record when > : your message came in and when the post to usenet went out, but *PROBABLY* > : would not establish a conclusive link between the two. Many remailers > : maintain a "reordering pool" where forwarded messages do not necessarily get > : sent out in the order they were received. > > I donnot keep sendmaillogs, I donnot keep remailerlogs and I let > usenet do my mail2newslogging ... (They can ofcourse always supena > /dev/null, and then they get everything ..) Good. No reason to tempt the Big Brother types (and wannabes). BTW, people outside the remailer operator and user community seem to assume that logs ARE kept. I'm curious to know how often individuals, organizations, and maybe even governments make requests for your logs. Oh ... also, if you don't mind, can you uuencode your /dev/null and send it to me? > The "reordering pool" is > always a minimum of 5 messages so people can opt for how long their > message wil be 'stashed' at replay. (use 'Latency: +00:00' for zero latecy). Is that default reordering pool size the same for Type I and Type II messages? Perhaps someone can double-check my math on this. Assuming equally-sized messages that are otherwise indistinguishable, and a reordering pool size of five, then the odds of matching up an encrypted incoming message with an encrypted outgoing message are one in five. Thus a message chained through n remailers (each having a reordering pool size of 5) would be diffused among 5^n possible messages to thwart potential traffic analysis. What I'm unclear on is how setting a Latency: flag affects the diffusion of the output. Is that lattency IN ADDITION to the pool size of five, or does Latency: +00:00 bypass the reordering process altogether? My main concern is the security of chained reply blocks which are more vulnerable to attack than normal anonymous messages. A single anonymous message can only be traced BACKWARDS after it's been received. An anonymous reply, OTOH, could, theoretically, be "walked" through each remailer in the chain until the identity of the recipient was discovered. While that process would require convincing each remailer operator in the chain to cooperate, it's a lot more feasible than tracing a message backwards to its source. (Yes, I know about posting to a public message pool, such as a.a.m, but NG posting seems to be rather unreliable lately.) - ---- Finger for PGP public key (Key ID=19BE8B0D) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNK2wqwbp0h8ZvosNAQFcpwf9GzP5jGSURrVZXu3omQXx9+de1aOHZ+Uk azgpHRZwStL86ztv1U5RcO7TRQ7gNgEd0+8V+z/wJei82f5zsQPCWVITjHBnUBKL sbGEFTtlkLfehXgF6oRk4xYzngxekYYFXm3UqZFKf/maQvMCRXbXSfTpb0CejpfQ 01PQGmXrShjdiYO8Uj+UoXzEEyAU383ssnJmsDBbnMvilM3aE5f0GXG/dx3QSvQi CfRzPFpcgfM4kojv8CxH5xfCvCWzKNgi8lnGuMjNwYApuGrYVtJSReq+OcAe9GeQ O2e+R9emHWiZHO16asfjnx6Eie7BylGrBRCLPWAAxPo16AtGjhJimw== =HRSR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: The Sheriff Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 19:46:32 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Location Escrow anyone ? In-Reply-To: <34AD5B24.520C3851@infomaniak.ch> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>it is a GSM network, however, I doubt that they try to know more than >>just the cell you're in... but you never know > >They can't really (the cell relay equipment is not up to the task). What about the new digital phones? Best wishes and fresh-roasted peanut taste, The Sheriff. -- ****** - --- As kinky as it sounds, finger me to see my PGP key and confirm the signature attached to this message. Either that, or head for pgp.ai.mit.edu on the WWW and search for my e-mail address. - --- Any and all SPAM will be met with immediate prosecutory efforts. Solicitations are NOT welcome here! - --- ----BEGIN INFLAMATORY BLOCK---- Version: 160 (IQ) Comments: Definitely one of their greatest misses. Reporter: "Do you know what Public Enemy is?" - --- Citizen: "Public enemy?" [long pause] "Probably somebody in office." -----END INFLAMATORY BLOCK----- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0 for non-commercial use Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNK4VhQBMw4+NR29ZAQHBPggAhJ2CnjBM0+5R6gHoWIOktua6OTjRQZK+ RUN6nRF3HezE1ZHrpIx6HO0fSCjyCCO0YUFu7VY66rTQ0FfwP3Czax1965xmKOpw QN7zvyvcBeiO4Pc2K9RhpwcskYlOFVUwwkoxFOEKEb9TL7urk4G3K8pTkx8ArW0+ x/rSQ3SKomzZKHJVOQq5IV8q+fFxGSSDElyKOnE0gSf//OuLpxHpUtMTIciMT6xd 8lGSFlFopONAOGixCFalbAJl1wE+LnYFuSRjCQVlNx18z0DsFWvtvDNBzZ353gfj 4Ma0w2XTQT8LEWoZfGceSHE+8gr+BVsWwLljf5Qmr7dpBxMCAOC4IQ== =2wNG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: John Young Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 21:00:22 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: The Codeleakers Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19980103125335.0073b628@pop.pipeline.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain http://www.mercury-rising.com/ Mercury Rising Art Jeffries (Bruce Willis), a disillusioned, outcast FBI agent, is the only one who can protect an orphaned nine-year-old autistic savant (Miko Hughes) when he becomes the target of assassins after inadvertently deciphering a top-secret government military code. Lt. Colonel Nicholas Kudrow (Alec Baldwin) is the National Security agent assigned to unveil the source of the code's leak. Preview 5fps - 4.9MB / 10fps - 8.1MB The film opens April 3, 1998. Website Coming Soon! From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Steve Schear Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 01:53:11 +0800 To: Kay Ping Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 1:35 PM +0000 1/3/98, Kay Ping wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>>ZURICH (December 28, 1997 4:12 p.m. EST http://www.nando.net) - Swiss >>>police have secretly tracked the whereabouts of mobile phone users via a >>>telephone company computer that records billions of movements going back >>>more than half a year, a Sunday newspaper reported. >> >>Don't be fooled that this is a swiss only problem. It's being done here in >>Amerika right now. > >The FCC has issued a ruling that will require all cellular telephone >carriers to provide location information on all 911 calls. By the year >2001, this location information is to provide 125 metres of accuracy 67% >of the time. The FCC may have ruled it, but its doubtful that the carriers can provide it. Doing better than than a cell sector will depend on many factors, including: specific technology (analog, GSM, CDMA, etc.), frequency and local propagation characteristics, especially multipath conditions. >From parallel discussions on the cryptography list: 800 MHz analog may be the most difficult. GSM perhaps can reach 500 meteres under ideal conditions (Andreas Bogk). IS-95/CDMA probably a bit better than GSM due to the very high data (chip) rate and spread spectrum's better multipath characteristics, although the system's multipath performance most improves communications not ranging (Phil Karn, Qualcomm). --Steve PGP mail preferred, see http://www.pgp.com and http://web.mit.edu/network/pgp.html RSA fingerprint: FE90 1A95 9DEA 8D61 812E CCA9 A44A FBA9 RSA key: http://keys.pgp.com:11371/pks/lookup?op=index&search=0x55C78B0D --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear | tel: (702) 658-2654 CEO | fax: (702) 658-2673 Lammar Laboratories | 7075 West Gowan Road | Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | Internet: schear@lvdi.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 00:21:57 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tim May writes: > And on a more serious note, one thing this affair shows is that once again, > the Kennedy clan (KC) lives by different rules. Whether it's Edward > Kennedy getting off in the Mary Jo Kopechne case, when any of us would have > likely been charged with a) drunk driving, b) leaving the scene, c) lying > in an investigation, or whether it's this very same Michael Kennedy getting > off with his underage babysitter.... Joe Kennedy was a common thug, no different from the Gambinos and the Genoveses. He made millions of dollars during the prohibition smuggling whiskey from Canada. He personally murdered numerous of fellow drug dealers and law enforcement officers (OK, he's not all bad :-) and dozens more were murdered on his orders. He then bought political offices for his kids, which is precisely what his colleagues - cocaine and heroin deales from Cali, medellin, etc cartels - get blamed for in Mexico and Colombia. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Brad Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 01:08:12 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Which side are you on, brother? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Watching the DOJ/MS fight is sort of like watching Iraq and Iran fight. Or Iraq and Kuwait. I have a hard time working up much enthusiasm for either side. What finally knocked me onto {gasp, choke} Gates' side, was the following: WSJ, p. A16, 12/23/97 Dole Backing Effort to Slow Microsoft Plan Washington - Former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole has been sending letters and calling companies seeking their support in an expanding campaign to curb Microsoft Corp.'s entrance into new Internet businesses. Mr. Dole is part of a nascent but growing lobbying effort that goes far beyond issues raised by the Justice Department's antitrust case against Microsoft. ... Mr. Dole is representing several companies, including Microsoft computer rivals Netscape Communications Corp., and Sun Microsystems Corp., and Sabre Group Holdings Inc., a Dallas-based airlines reservation system that faces competition from Microsoft. ... In a recent letter to one company that has been approached for support, Mr. Dole wrote: "In the coming months, we will need to educate the public, the administration, and Congress about the dangers of a laissez-faire attitude toward Microsoft. I am personally convinced that if nothing is done now, it will become increasingly difficult to have fair competition in the years ahead. That is why we will need companies like yours to help finance and support our efforts. Mr. Dole, who was travelling in Bosnia yesterday with President Clinton, couldn't be reached for comment. ... Whenever both heads of the DemoPublican hydra agree, they're circling the wagons to protect their "vital interests" against the barbarians. I'm rooting for the barbarians, no matter how stinky they are. Brad From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Rabid Wombat Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 16:45:35 +0800 To: Lucky Green Subject: Re: Gun Nutz In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Sun, 4 Jan 1998, Lucky Green wrote: > On 3 Jan 1998, Ryan Lackey wrote: > > It would be interesting to fit one's house with speakers/noise generators/ > > flash generators/smoke/etc. to make it look as if one has an automatic > > cannon or a small army, in response to a raid. It would make a perfect > > distraction during which to leave :) > > [The following is a theoretical discusion. Do not try this at home]. > > What you really want is the ability to slow down the mobility of the raid > force while making your exit. In a prolonged siege, the attacker will > always win. A good way of slowing down the attacker after an initial > armed response is to deploy chemicals. A combination of Tabun and Mustard > Gas works best, but don't deploy them at the same time. Use the Tabun > first for maximium impact. Follow up with the Mustard Gas a few minutes > later. Setting this off in an inhabited area is sure to make you a popular hero. You'd be better off investing in a tunnel. Maybe Seymour Cray could use a job about now ... ;) (I never bought that car accident cover - he and Elvis are probably hangin' out in Tonga) -r.w. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Kay Ping Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 21:45:21 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Location Escrow anyone ? Message-ID: <19980103133555.12753.qmail@nym.alias.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>ZURICH (December 28, 1997 4:12 p.m. EST http://www.nando.net) - Swiss >>police have secretly tracked the whereabouts of mobile phone users via a >>telephone company computer that records billions of movements going back >>more than half a year, a Sunday newspaper reported. > >Don't be fooled that this is a swiss only problem. It's being done here in >Amerika right now. The FCC has issued a ruling that will require all cellular telephone carriers to provide location information on all 911 calls. By the year 2001, this location information is to provide 125 metres of accuracy 67% of the time. Helping emergency services locate 911 callers is a great excuse for installing a cellular location system. Even better than the excuses they gave for eavesdropping-ready digital switches and limits on encryption. An accuracy of 125 meters seems quite impressive considering the facts that cellular channels are plagued by very long multipath dispersion and that a narrowband FM signal is much less than ideal for calculating delay. - -------------- Kay Ping nop 'til you drop -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: cp850 iQEQAwUBNK4a2hHPAso8Qp7tAQFI1wfRARzxzUTRWkuETjkWrz7Gh4StMEwhCZ6C Nzh2i2ymTq2/hMMdx7L8tuc2N5wISlBjzJtJGKnyQTHYJs6SMkvYLQa89H4v4MyH 9NJK6wSqx1OLEmgPwCoJWo8NUkH1jwPvhRfb+A/KE3raYazMd1fY+EgL/P3R216s j0F0RsPUFvMS3m+/j5rKFoatuG1Qc6b2p8QnQLxgxyePoEScEEcfxiCrGGH75YEF 5yiJMi11LraUnDyJtZ/9xVXAFAEjLM9IYyCapfleIEUNisu9Iu3R9V/FIBdEom3O uL7we6ETWSrYCFxdmrDq64q7wi1ygN/d1IvIFgNzSol/D9Y= =czyT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Alexandre Maret Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 21:49:44 +0800 To: Remo Pini Subject: Re: Location Escrow anyone ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <34AE4047.212669B2@infomaniak.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain The LPD (law on data protection) : http://193.5.216.40/ch/f/rs/235_1/index.html http://193.5.216.40/ch/f/rs/235_11/index.html (in french, italian, german only) The LPD states that you can get a copy of your database entry printed on paper, for a cost of max 300SFrs (about US$200), unless some special cases which have to be specified in the law. Since the debate is based on the fact that there is no legal text that allows swisscom to record these informations, there is no legal text that allow them not to communicate your informations on request. I'm not a jurist, but it may be an interesting path to follow. If they store the location of your phone every 3 secs, for 6 month, this means 5'241'600 locations. Printed on 70 lines/page paper, this means 74'880 A4 pages. Do you think they'd be happy to print and send you 74'880 pages for 300SFrs ? There is certain rules that allow them to postpone your request. However, they have to tell you before. Just wondering what would happen if 100'000 people asks for their last 6 month of positions... > >Swiss Federal Data Protection Commissioner: http://www.edsb.ch/ > >mostly empty... not a word about these 2 stories. you see how the > >swiss people are informed... > > Now this guy (Odilo Guntern) seems to have no clue about anything... Last month, I was thinking about launching a web site to inform swiss citizen about these issues. A kind of swiss EPIC. However, I can't do this alone. If anybody is interested by this idea, drop me a mail. > Wanna get more paranoid? Some companies log all Internet traffic of their > employees hmmm... no need to become more paranoid, enough is enough. > that passes through their proxy (which you have to use for anything to > work) for > some weeks (Weren't you the one chatting on #really-naughty-bits for more > than 1 > hour on Monday??). > And of course, phonenumbers you call in your company are logged, too. swisscom does it. They log all the internal/external mail of their employees... alex From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Lucky Green Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 22:14:07 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Remailer under NT [was:Re: your mail] In-Reply-To: <199801011858.KAA07272@sirius.infonex.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, 1 Jan 1998, Mix wrote: > Okay, I'd like to set up a remailer - but I don't know where to start! > Unfortunatly it's going to have to run on an NT 4.0 box, so the winsock > remailer is out of the question, right? And I'm not in the US, so I > can't use the juno stuff -- so what (if anything) *can* I use? AT&T offers a free UNIX (korn shell) emulator for NT. Check ftp://ftp.research.att.com/ -- Lucky Green PGP v5 encrypted email preferred. "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Remo Pini Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 23:09:43 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: eudora plugin Message-ID: <199801031502.QAA19999@linux.rpini.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain There would by chance be anyone around who would know where the Eudora Plugin Patch for PGP 5.5 (NT/95) can be downloaded (or aquired otherwise) outside USA? (http://www.pgp.com/products/eudora.cgi) Thanks, Remo ----------------------------------------------------- Fate favors the prepared mind. (from "Under Siege 3") ----------------------------------------------------- Remo Pini T: +41 1 350 28 88 Pini Computer Trading N: +41 79 216 15 51 http://www.rpini.com/ E: rp@rpini.com key: http://www.rpini.com/crypto/remopini.asc ----------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ryan Lackey Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 05:17:54 +0800 To: "Brian B. Riley" Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I've only seen bolt action .50s fired. They're not *too* heavy, and from the amount of muzzle flash, noise, etc. it gave, I'd be as comfortable using it at 1000-1500 yards as I would a .308 at 600-1000 yards. Given proper concealment and the absence of anyone looking directly at you when you fire, that is. Professional sniping is a 2 man operation anyway -- against a target that can shoot back, you really want to have a spotter. >From what I can gather, the US military seems to agree with this strategy -- .308s for traditional sniping, .50 for anti-materiel, extreme long range, and countersniping. Attacking an incoming force which has its own snipers is mostly a job for the .50. And if I were in the field on the offense, I'd be attacking small enough groups that a few .50 rounds would be sufficient to kill them all or at least immobilize them. Or high enough value targets to make a more likely kill worth the higher risk during E&E. True, they mainly use bolt-action .50s -- if the semi auto version is really that much heavier, I'd probably go for the bolt action gun in the field and the semi at my home. For Tim May's situation, in a house, they know fairly well that he's firing from the house. Pretty much any weapon will give enough signature for them to zero in on it and fire. If he's lucky, and they just have carbines and 7.62 snipers, he could fire from one room, move to another, fire, etc. Or have enough cover to keep himself from getting hit. But at some point, they'll just bring in a real countersniper asset, like an automatic cannon, and any muzzle flash will be responded to with several hundred AP/explosive shells. Within the house, the weight of a .50 isn't that bad -- and the extra 500-1000 yards and AP capability might make a difference against a raid. At the very least, it'll get his place firebombed rather than shot up :) Forcing them to keep outside the 1500-2000 yard high danger range from a .50 (or forcing them to stay behind serious cover) would give him a chance to duck out and fight another day, too :) A .50 is also a bit more effective against helicopters containing special forces "monitoring" personnel who are there (but of course not actually there) in violation of the law. It would be interesting to fit one's house with speakers/noise generators/ flash generators/smoke/etc. to make it look as if one has an automatic cannon or a small army, in response to a raid. It would make a perfect distraction during which to leave :) I'd much rather write code, make money, and leave the country (not necessarily in that order) than worry about defending myself from a government which has shown time and time again it is willing to ignore the law, though. [ObCrypto: * Eternity DDS is coming along. The current almost-ready-for-announcement version is using Postgres95 for a backend, sigh. Design for the first production-demo system is progressing as well. * The Cypherpunks Archive project I was working on is also progressing. Unfortunately, my archive is kind of weird -- it's in MIT discuss format, and converting it into mbox is nontrivial, given the size of the file. After adding more memory to the system on which I'm editing the file, I think I have an mbox file which is just missing one field. I'm planning to index them with hypermail, then glimpse. On the cd, I'll put the original mbox file, either as a single massive file or broken up, depending on what people want, as well as a precomputed index and perhaps the web site version as well. The next step is to put all of the cypherpunks archives into Eternity DDS -- Postgres95 seems to puke on large data objects sometimes, so I'll need to fix that. Once I get the cypherpunks archive done, I'll work on some other lists. And then hopefully some people will buy CD-Rs so I can buy another 25gb of HDD or so :) * Financial people are pretty cool. I just got back from talking to some about the Eternity Service concept, and they were really excited. I really didn't expect non-(electronic finance) finance people to be interested in it right away. They even got more excited when the magic word "cryptography" was mentioned. Perhaps finance will fix the software industry. -- Ryan Lackey rdl@mit.edu http://mit.edu/rdl/ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Brian B. Riley" Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 06:01:20 +0800 To: "Ryan Lackey" Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] (fwd) Message-ID: <199801032150.QAA29689@mx02.together.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 1/3/98 4:05 PM, Ryan Lackey (rdl@mit.edu) passed this wisdom: >I've only seen bolt action .50s fired. They're not *too* heavy, and >from the amount of muzzle flash, noise, etc. it gave, I'd be as >comfortableusing it at 1000-1500 yards as I would a .308 at >600-1000 yards. Given proper concealment and the absence of anyone >looking directly at you when you fire, that is. Professional >sniping is a 2 man operation anyway --against a target that can >shoot back, you really want to have a spotter. I finally remebered where I saw it. In Tom Clancy's non-fiction book "MARINE: A Guided Tour of a Marine Expeditionary Unit." On pages 75-77 (there is a good picture too) he details the history and developement as well as the uses of the "Barrett M82A1A .50-cal special-purpose sniper rifle." It is for all intents and purposes a Brownig M2 .50-cal machine gun barrel/receiver set o a newly designed spring recoil system to be fired from shoulder wit bipod. It is chambered for the NATO standard .50-cal/12.7mm ammunition. It was developed by Ronnie Barrett of Murfeesboro, Tennessee and further developement sponsored by the USG and was first deployed by the CIA with the Mujahadeen in Afgahnistan where they used it to make some Russian troops quite miserable from a long way off. The sucess of it in Afghanistan force the military to consider it. Nothing is said concerning other services but it has been adopted by the USMC Force Recon for use by a three man team. The gun is broken down into upper reciever, lower reciver, and scope and ammo. There may be .50-cal bolt actions out there that are one man carries, but the Barrett gun is a three man load. The gun is 57 inches long and weighs 32.5 pounds, unloaded with no scope. The primary mission of the gun is not man sniping, though I am sure it often has been and will be used in that role, but its main aim is to long range snipe and disable antennae, dishes, equipment, etc using the AP and API ammunition. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNK6ybj7r4fUXwraZAQGSNgf/X6+K6j5lzj1odfzDM0HUfTnNzcc/RgSD OHHelk3Elb0jLDIX76KJsVOghDQ228QA+dFa+dEH+3YyjquIclKp4UBrfqw42Rfd Fv/HVinE9qLKse4PVY3Mjeqt8jHCGO01RHNATnrArDA6C2lVJIeE1tIDVGDVVtI2 bndGRnOexSXrFSm+5ux1GejWUYzUbLiQIOmfNSJMpzi8WwfQ/I3OLyFm5I6y9DR1 IiQZRs4RoqJ6f4caiZWz62/L6iivwKsOX6LCHlZAjz/6Ld+/o6ZtC0cjn/yWtUqL +3n/ZVydK+jGQ+rHopM4Eg1NGL5aRt+ANkKRDeTXohNlwfkCvI4xGA== =zI8W -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys "You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go around repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in their struggle for independence." -- Charles M. Beard From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Alan Olsen Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 11:12:28 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: Microsoft In-Reply-To: <199801040125.CAA09309@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980103190024.038b0d80@clueserver.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 02:25 AM 1/4/98 +0100, Anonymous wrote: > >Windows is still fucking me up the ass! I'm bleeding to death here! Then get a copy of Linux and stop whining! Sheesh! --- | "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano@teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan@ctrl-alt-del.com| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "William H. Geiger III" Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 10:06:36 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: Microsoft In-Reply-To: <199801040125.CAA09309@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: <199801040209.VAA17936@users.invweb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199801040125.CAA09309@basement.replay.com>, on 01/04/98 at 02:25 AM, Anonymous said: >Windows is still fucking me up the ass! I'm bleeding to death here! Well when you bend over and squeal like a pig what do you expect?!? - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNK7taY9Co1n+aLhhAQHNiwQAxieliKHUE97aAZ+eZ0u64vtO4eZaaQyz vjdLpOksrSRuF9+m2PqOcwf4tjSHUHR5g6C90fjiGR8Cs2sFD6eWByCOGlR2r5t0 DAiZA7WryKf3V06mw6266F2VaeRIZ5HUrKaCXeGPtb2I8kGKwCuWqM6kGLnzt96S J1C+ddiKFsk= =Mllk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 09:34:11 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Meganet's Unbreakable Virtual Matrix Encryption Takes the Market by St Message-ID: <400641a667f1ebd324c0c58d8ef866f9@anon.efga.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > Yes, the VME 98 is the same product that challenged Microsoft, > IBM, AT&T, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, America Online, > Netscape, etc. to break a VME encrypted file. All the great > computer minds in this country have had an opportunity to > dispel the bold claims of unbreakable encryption, yet none have. Why should Microsoft, IBM, AT&T, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, America Online, Netscape, "all the great computer minds in this country," etc. give a flying fuck? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 19:12:29 +0800 To: Paul Bradley Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Thu, 1 Jan 1998, Paul Bradley wrote: [...] > > Welcome to the 20th Century, moron. > > You clearly have no comprehension of the principles of the free market > and the rights of businesses and individual to hire and fire whoever the > fuck they like for any reason whatsoever. My rights to swing my fists end at your noise. When ever you interact with other peaple your rights are tempered by there rights. Even Adam Smith recognised that its was gorverments dutie to redress the failing of the market. Also recall the free market model assumes that the word is full of totaly rational pepeale who have full knowige of the market. Any one who has been on this list knows that these peaple are somewhat uncommen. - -- Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep. ex-net.scum and proud You Say To People "Throw Off Your Chains" And They Make New Chains For Themselves? --Terry Pratchett. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNK4GM6QK0ynCmdStAQFE7AP/Xgnf8xsGsovspmlzG8xRLCBPKAcAco1d hwUg752OPyjDksq6ZlM4eQNckRAwXWtEVethqJFXk/Wgyl0//f9L5zjSv/f1siAg uYUpElxwajL23W6AZjMVqhBqIn1daeI7PIlJy1iBfE2151fPuPQ8Ox6XHVbDjqZC KR/CjYA0uCY= =3e/G -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Carsten Hartwig Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 04:04:41 +0800 To: Brad Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980103205938.007c1100@mail.rhein-main.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/enriched At 12:04 03.01.98 -0500, Brad wrote: > Dole Backing Effort to Slow Microsoft Plan Good call :-) It is a good plan indeed. Looking at the OS-market, one can speak of a monopoly of Microsoft. We know, what monopolies lead to. In terms of security, this is a frightening thought. We all have seen security breaches by the software, be it Windows itself or the Internet explorer. AND we know how long it takes Microsoft to adapt to new standards. I'm quite confident that the guys at MS still think, that a 56-bit DES key is impossible to break ;-) I think, this matter deserves further investigation. Carsten PGP Fingerprint: 70AB EA30 A3E0 655E A3FB 3B6B 76CE 4790 A8F9 DB7A Public Key available on: pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371 for carsten.hartwig@rhein-main.net carsten.hartwig@rhein-main.net carsten.hartwig@frankfurt.netsurf.de inferno.web@t-online.de werfrosch1@aol.com ICQ: 6167944 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Blanc Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 13:02:23 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Time to Pay the Piper Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980103210255.006ddcf8@cnw.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Attila T. Hun wrote: > 1) when a true market monopoly exists, society _is_ > entitled to intervene. [. . .] > 2) why should you be surprised to hear this from me? > sure, I would prefer anarchy per se, but have > absolutely no faith that the vast majority would do > anything except rape, pillage, and plunder. [. . . .] ....................................................................... Well, between the "raping, pillaging, plundering" society of people who can't do better than to follow in the path which Billg prepares for them, and the "entitled" right of these same pillaging, plundering, sheeple to intervene in a "true market monopoly" which they themselves participated in creating, if only by default (intervening so they don't become exhausted from all that decision making - Unix, or Perl? Unix, or Wintel? This is too hard!!), and the attitude of Governors of the People's Interest who live to protects us from pillaging, plundering monopolists, all the while doing a little undercover raping of their own, all I can say is, "it's a Wonderful Society". And who wouldn't want to be a member of such a society, and who wouldn't want to intervene on the behalf of its citizens, none of whom have, apparently, yet "proved their worth" on this planet? (I'm surprised there's still so many of them, considering all the "good" guys trying to help them, and considering that they've been receiving "help" for their condition from everywhere - left and right, up and down, here and there - for many, many, years, now.) wheN are PEE-ple GOing towake UP. The Truth is Out There. .. Blanc From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Andy Dustman Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 11:10:50 +0800 To: Charlie Comsec Subject: Re: [RePol] Re: Remailer Logs (and Accountability) In-Reply-To: <19980103050003.766.qmail@nym.alias.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 3 Jan 1998, Charlie Comsec wrote: > > The "reordering pool" is > > always a minimum of 5 messages so people can opt for how long their > > message wil be 'stashed' at replay. (use 'Latency: +00:00' for zero latecy). > > Is that default reordering pool size the same for Type I and Type II > messages? Type-II messages don't support latency yet (or not until fairly recently, I can't remember). Type-I remailers don't, by default, do any reordering, but reordering is not as useful for type-I messages (unless you remix). Cracker uses Mixmaster to reorder type-I messages. In addition to the pool size of 5, it also will remail a maximum of half the messages present, so in reality, the pool size floats up and down (but not lower than 5). > Perhaps someone can double-check my math on this. Assuming > equally-sized messages that are otherwise indistinguishable, and a > reordering pool size of five, then the odds of matching up an > encrypted incoming message with an encrypted outgoing message are > one in five. The odds are somewhat worse (for the attacker). In the case of the scenario above on cracker, the odds of any given message being cycled out of the pool (the pool is processed at six minute intervals) is generally 50% per cycle. Thus, there is a 75% chance that it has been sent by the end of the second cycle, and therefore a 25% (.5*.5) chance that it is still in the queue. The current RMS latency (from the remailer's own stats) is 19.5 minutes. You want to about double that to be sure that the message has really come out (and then, you still can't be sure), so that's about six cycles. If we are doing 5 per cycle, then the odds are 1 in 30. A very rough estimate. However, by my estimates, it's more like 12 messages per cycle (typically; it's variable for the reasons above), so that runs it up to 1 in 72 or so. (And of course, the remixing ensures that all messages are indistinquishable, whenever possible.) > What I'm unclear on is how setting a Latency: flag affects the > diffusion of the output. Is that lattency IN ADDITION to the pool > size of five, or does Latency: +00:00 bypass the reordering process > altogether? Latency occurs before reordering. Latency: +00:00 does nothing, BTW, and it's the default. Latency: +12:00r adds a 0-12 hour random delay before reordering. > My main concern is the security of chained reply blocks which are > more vulnerable to attack than normal anonymous messages. A single > anonymous message can only be traced BACKWARDS after it's been > received. Which is probably not so hard when you record all inter-remailer traffic, which is probably what happens somewhere. > An anonymous reply, OTOH, could, theoretically, be > "walked" through each remailer in the chain until the identity of > the recipient was discovered. While that process would require > convincing each remailer operator in the chain to cooperate, it's a > lot more feasible than tracing a message backwards to its source. > (Yes, I know about posting to a public message pool, such as a.a.m, > but NG posting seems to be rather unreliable lately.) Yep, that was part of the motivation for remixing: To keep eavesdroppers from intercepting partially-decrypted reply blocks. It also prevents traffic analysis based on the message section after the reply block. Reply blocks, of course, tend to get smaller after each hop, while the message getting delivered tends to get larger. Automatically encapsuling type-I messages in type-II format whenever the recipient supports it prevents this type of traffic analysis. Andy Dustman / Computational Center for Molecular Structure and Design For a great anti-spam procmail recipe, send me mail with subject "spam". Append "+spamsucks" to my username to ensure delivery. KeyID=0xC72F3F1D Encryption is too important to leave to the government. -- Bruce Schneier http://www.athens.net/~dustman mailto:andy@neptune.chem.uga.edu <}+++< -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQEPAwUBNK77/BOPBZTHLz8dAQHlRwfPY/0uPyFXIgQxGAFt+kbNT85lZ9/Bf9B6 XIoRHARSbE0np2JB7kB0PdjXIxgyFoxcn9kuTyspOgFgF80zQjFR7RYSQC8QKXDV 1dnod7X4ynrvjmHbGtfOYDfgZSKUboTrwIPuehfUw3IDnDliVjDnnDy76f4uZdLc +Jn4JGRGPqVBQ3EX2d0yxDsIXY88geeGa4xgzSMSEaXWW+AoNw19mNJRA0AehiLg DZRDHKbCKYRtqt9aOn1h3qi3VrOqUjkO8awBkSQw84ycEqVaBgczBW/nBtNIpHq5 42pHjHpCc1riYY/2vuOXXD3juou1Th4By7JaZLwt+GkbZA== =r/Dk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 05:32:32 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Dimitry "The Hair" Vulis Message-ID: <199801032116.WAA06540@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Poor Dimitry! He can dish it out, but not take it. Everyone should give Dimitry a call and tell him how much he is appreciated. Dr. Dimitry Vulis's home phone number: Vulis, Dimitri (DV1006) postmaster@DM.COM D&M Consulting Services Inc. 67-67 Burns Street Forest Hills, NY 11375 718-261-6839 (FAX) 212-725-0693 The 212 number is goes directly into his home 718 (Brooklyn) house, and is answered by a person. Talk with the devil himself! ---simvlad From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Alan Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 15:39:21 +0800 To: "Brian B. Riley" Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199801032150.QAA29689@mx02.together.net> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980103231222.036b7b90@ctrl-alt-del.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 04:50 PM 1/3/98 -0500, Brian B. Riley wrote: > There may be .50-cal bolt actions out there that are one man >carries, but the Barrett gun is a three man load. The gun is 57 inches >long and weighs 32.5 pounds, unloaded with no scope. The primary >mission of the gun is not man sniping, though I am sure it often has >been and will be used in that role, but its main aim is to long range >snipe and disable antennae, dishes, equipment, etc using the AP and >API ammunition. When I lived in Alaska I knew someone who built such a thing for hunting bears. I never got to fire it, but it was supposed to have a kick like a mule. (Even with the shock absorbing stock.) The hardest part is getting the 50 cal ammo. (He had his Federal firearms license and was in the National Guard, so it was not too difficult for him.) Getting AP and other special ammo would be doubly difficult. (Non-specialty ammo could be reloaded as long as you could get molds and primer caps.) I guess it depends on your military and/or black market connections. --- | "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano@teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan@ctrl-alt-del.com| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Joab Jackson Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 12:42:05 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Baltimore City Paper editorial on Jim Bell Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980103232529.007b81f0@mailhost.charm.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain A Bridge Too Far? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- No doubt about it, Jim Bell disliked the government. As far as this Vancouver, Wash., resident was concerned, there isn't any problem with Congress that $60 worth of bullets couldn't solve. And he let his opinion be known in newsgroups, mailing lists, and, perhaps most notoriously, through an essay he wrote and promoted on the Internet called "Assassination Politics". But did Bell-who, federal authorities discovered, had an arsenal of deadly chemicals and firearms and the home addresses of more than 100 government workers-have a plan to murder public employees? "What was interesting is that the whole case was based on whether he'd be harmful in the future. He hadn't actually hurt anyone, but he was talking about some scary stuff," John Branton, a reporter who covered the Bell case for the southern Washington newspaper The Columbian (The Jim Bell Story), told me by phone. On Dec. 12, Bell, 39, was sentenced to 11 months in prison and three years of supervised probation after pleading guilty to using false Social Security numbers and setting a stink bomb off at a local Internal Revenue Service office. But authorities acknowledge those charges weren't what his arrest was really about. "We chose not to wait until he followed through on what we believe were plans to assassinate government employees," Jeffrey Gordon, an IRS inspector, told the Portland, Ore., daily The Oregonian. Gordon likened Bell to convicted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh and Unabomber suspect Theodore Kaczynski. The federal government's court filing against Bell stated the belief that the defendant had a plan to "overthrow the U.S. government." Proof of his motivation, the government asserted, was found in Bell's Internet writings: "Bell has spelled out parts of his overall plan in his 'Assassination Politics' essay." Bell wasn't lacking for firepower. On April 1, 20 armed federal agents raided Bell's home, where he lived with his parents. According to U.S. News & World Report ("Terrorism's Next Wave") the feds found three semiautomatic assault rifles; a handgun; a copy of the book The Terrorist's Handbook; the home addresses of more than 100 government workers; and a garage full of potentially deadly chemicals. Authorities had long known that Bell was a spokesperson for a local libertarian militia and was involved in a so-called "common-law court" that planned "trials" of IRS employees. Given what the feds found at the house, in retrospect the raid seems prudent-as Leroy Loiselle of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency told U.S. News, "You don't need nitric acid to keep aphids off your flowers." It's easy to forget the troubling fact that the government's initial reason for raiding Bell's residence was "Assassination Politics," which they found in Bell's car when the IRS seized it back in February. (Bell owed some $30,000 in back taxes.) Will others who make public their wrath for government and owe some taxes to Uncle Sam be paid similar visits? What's perhaps more troubling still is the way the feds held up Bell's essay as evidence of his violent intent. Reading "Assassination Politics" makes clear that it is no more a workable blueprint for overthrowing the government than Frank Herbert's Dune is a realistic plan for urban renewal. For about two years prior to Bell's arrest, "Assassination Politics" floated around the Internet. Bell, for instance, sent this essay out on the cypherpunks mailing list, where scenarios for the future, based on new technology and libertarian principles, are frequently discussed. None of the cypherpunks took his "plan" seriously then. The core of "Assassination Politics" is a plan to establish an anonymous electronic market wherein people could "wager" money on when public individuals, be they world leaders or corrupt tax collectors, will die. A person (say, for instance, an assassin) who correctly "predicts" the day of a death could anonymously collect the "winnings." Far from being a direct call to arms, Bell's essay is largely hypothetical, at least until encryption, traceless digital cash, and mass homicidal hatred of world leaders becomes widespread. Ugly yes; realistic no. "I've told Jim Bell on any number of occasions that it would never work," Robert East, a friend of Bell's, tells me by e-mail. "If Jim had properly titled this as a fictional piece of literature he'd have been far more accurate." In April, when the Jim Bell story broke, both The Columbian and Time Warner's Netly News portrayed Bell as a victim whose free-speech rights were violated. But as evidence against Bell piled up, the sympathy muted considerably. U.S. News' recent cover story on domestic terrorism, "Terrorism's Next Wave," opened with the Bell case. Perhaps Bell was prosecuted for what he wrote rather than what he might do. (Both friends and family have repeatedly said Bell, though a big talker, isn't much of a doer. "Jim is a harmless academic [n]erd," East insists. "I've known him for years and he's harmless.") Perhaps the IRS was spooked by little more than idle speculation of its demise. But the evidence seems to have dealt the feds the better hand, and lends credence to the idea that, for all the protest of free-speech advocates, words are not always separable from actions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------- The Baltimore City Paper: http://www.citypaper.com City Paper's Cyberpunk column: http://www.citypaper.com/columns/framecyb.htm Archives: http://www.charm.net/~joabj/ joabj@charm.net 410.356.6274 -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 5.0 mQBtAzJFsfEAAAEDAOtSe/7TU8y0ZYBFXp8c6hxwzDIdbIsDtTsvKx2X v5S65Mdc3vCEFhMuwxceatO4T5IKgBFWJ2r7s9fFKtsAIS4vKCESi+wY7j 5rEZ6oYbaeWlj1yfwjAjg8SUxCjuji1QAFEbQeSm9hYiBKYWNrc29uIDxqb2 FiakBjaGFybS5uZXQ+ =ttEP -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Blanc Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 18:00:15 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: MS: "Setting the Record Straight" Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980104011838.006a2b20@cnw.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain For any of you who haven't already searched for & found this: http://www.microsoft.com/corpinfo/myths.htm .. Blanc From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@nsm.htp.org Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 10:15:50 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Microsoft Message-ID: <19980104020914.26009.qmail@nsm.htp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 02:25 98/01/04 +0100, Anonymous wrote: > Windows is still fucking me up the ass! I'm bleeding to death here! > > > For relief, see: http://www.enemy.org/ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 09:45:01 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Microsoft Message-ID: <199801040125.CAA09309@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Windows is still fucking me up the ass! I'm bleeding to death here! From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Lucky Green Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 10:26:56 +0800 To: Ryan Lackey Subject: Re: Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns] (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On 3 Jan 1998, Ryan Lackey wrote: > It would be interesting to fit one's house with speakers/noise generators/ > flash generators/smoke/etc. to make it look as if one has an automatic > cannon or a small army, in response to a raid. It would make a perfect > distraction during which to leave :) [The following is a theoretical discusion. Do not try this at home]. What you really want is the ability to slow down the mobility of the raid force while making your exit. In a prolonged siege, the attacker will always win. A good way of slowing down the attacker after an initial armed response is to deploy chemicals. A combination of Tabun and Mustard Gas works best, but don't deploy them at the same time. Use the Tabun first for maximium impact. Follow up with the Mustard Gas a few minutes later. The underground irrigation systems common on California properties are ideal means of gas deployment. You should be able to retrofit the system for under $500. Assuming you already have the gas. Of course you need to make sure to keep a chem suit at home. After you make your exit, you can clean out the next with a previously installed fuel/air explosive. -- Lucky Green PGP v5 encrypted email preferred. "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Kay Ping Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 16:48:42 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Location Escrow anyone ? Message-ID: <19980104083939.14929.qmail@nym.alias.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > The FCC may have ruled it, but its doubtful that the carriers can provide > it. Doing better than than a cell sector will depend on many factors, > including: specific technology (analog, GSM, CDMA, etc.), frequency and > local propagation characteristics, especially multipath conditions. The FCC ruling is a result of lobbying by a company that has actually built such a location device. The requirements are tailored to the capabilities of their device and they probably expect to automatically win the contracts. I don't remember their name but the devices need to be installed in about one out of 3 cellular base stations. I am only guessing now, but it's not unlikely that they have been assisted in their lobbying efforts by certain three-letter-acronym agencies. They knew that the goverment would look favorably on a device to track people and would eagerly buy their excuse of 911 caller location. - ----------------- Kay Ping nop 'til you drop finger kping@nym.alias.net for key DF 6D 91 18 A6 59 41 96 - 89 01 69 B7 9D0 4 AE 53 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: cp850 iQEQAwUBNK8o/BHPAso8Qp7tAQFGfgfRAQUYARi6dQYIWyehqBhXMhyvgfYkWN2X rDDkE/bCr4yfvuYA5e/H3kVhfEh9TXT2m4+F6NmWPmy5WM6s5yuDR3I5t/3EDH8T uHV/EfkhjiE0HiQgTLB19VGFRXoi9eLlnBaxBcZZK8dknJ/T7rFlthvpUeL3crVl yD0Swl7lYgeyuG2HLgOLc5v+ej1tDdI27KIjoBj/dCDSoN6gtzj/linCLbjY8NZZ akY3cQbk3QVrXfJamX+n6X3cwKkI20phrM5DBjh1pdhod6nLvRDPiEkT3prqRTx7 gjrJip/pzCKABUmkWSigXFgQARvkPW6ZqSCnoCSivzgYFxE= =UcO3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 02:07:01 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: My last comment (for now) on rifles Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:12 PM -0800 1/3/98, Alan wrote: >When I lived in Alaska I knew someone who built such a thing for hunting >bears. I never got to fire it, but it was supposed to have a kick like a >mule. (Even with the shock absorbing stock.) > >The hardest part is getting the 50 cal ammo. (He had his Federal firearms >license and was in the National Guard, so it was not too difficult for >him.) Getting AP and other special ammo would be doubly difficult. >(Non-specialty ammo could be reloaded as long as you could get molds and >primer caps.) > >I guess it depends on your military and/or black market connections. You must be thinking of some other (larger) caliber, as .50 BMG is readily available. At my local gun shop, $3 a round. (It may be cheaper elsewhere.) A gun shop over in Silicon Valley was selling a belt-fed, semi-automatic .50 BMG for about $7K, if I recall the ad correctly. They were selling shots with it for $5 a shot, and advertising it as "Diane Feinstein's Worst Nightmare." .50 caliber is the largest readily available caliber (Uncle has limited larger calibers only for His own use, not for the use of the Rabble.) And there are several .50 BMG rifles readily for sale, mostly ranging from $3000 to $6000. The Barrett is the most commonly talked about version. Personally, I can't see the point of a .50, even for hunting bear. (Not that I would _want_ to hunt bears, as I find bears preferable to most humans, by far.) A .300 Winchester Magnum, a .375 H&H, or a .338 Lapua Magnum should be more than enough, and a whole lot cheaper than a Barrett or somesuch. The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Robert Hettinga Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 04:35:45 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: BOOK: Forthcoming - J Gray, _Hayek on Liberty 3rd edition_ Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain --- begin forwarded text Date: Sat, 3 Jan 1998 13:34:30 EST Reply-To: Hayek Related Research Sender: Hayek Related Research From: Gregransom Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) Subject: BOOK: Forthcoming - J Gray, _Hayek on Liberty 3rd edition_ To: HAYEK-L@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU >> Hayek Web << Routledge -- Hayek's publisher in England and on the Continent of Europe, on the Web at: http://www.routledge.com/ >From the Routledge Web site: "_Hayek on Liberty Third Edition_ John Gray, Jesus College, University of Oxford Published by Routledge Pb ISBN/ISSN: 0-415-17315-9 >From the previous edition: ... "In Hayek on Liberty John Gray treats Hayek primarily as a philosopher. His book is analytical, not hagiographical, and almost certainly the best book on the subject.' - Samuel Brittan, Financial Times 'The most generally accessible book on Hayek so far.' - Anthony Quinton, Times Higher Education Supplement ... Hayek's achievements in social and political philosophy are increasingly receiving full recognition. _Hayek on Liberty 3rd Edition_ is a concise yet exhaustive and provoking study of this classic liberal philosopher which examines the structure and impact of his system of ideas and locates his position within Western philosophy. Not available since the 1980s this up-dated 3rd edition contains a postscript which assesses how far the historical developments of the last ten years can be deployed in a critique of Hayek's thought. This book will contribute to a much needed wider debate on the future of conservatism. 192 pages Dimensions: 5 1/2 x 8 1/2 inches; 216 x 138 mm Status: Coming Soon" Hayek on the Web is a regular feature of the Hayek-L list. --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 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' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Brian B. Riley" Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 23:54:43 +0800 To: "Al KC2PB" Subject: Fwd: Yup Message-ID: <199801041548.KAA21685@mx02.together.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ---------------- Date: 01/03 10:00 AM Received: 01/04 10:37 AM From: Bruce Alan Johnson, baj@sover.net To: Brian B. Riley, brianbr@together.net MISTAKEN IDENTITY: Police in Bangkok, Thailand, arrested an American tourist who climbed repair scaffolding to the top of Wat Arun (Temple of the Dawn) and refused to come down. After 10 hours, the man was subdued by police and turned over to the American Embassy. He identified himself as God, but officials determined he was Brandon Simcock, 27, an employee of Microsoft. (Bangkok Post) ..."Termination Notice. Reason for Termination: Impersonating CEO." ----------------- End Forwarded Message ----------------- Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys "Journeys are about discovery, about lives touching briefly and then parting, except on the Internet, where distant lives can intertwine, and where a journey of discovery never has to end." -- Jim Heid From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Bill Stewart Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 04:16:27 +0800 To: remailer-operators@anon.lcs.mit.edu Subject: PGP-out-only vs. hashcash aware remailers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980104120940.00722cdc@popd.ix.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 05:40 PM 12/30/1997 -0400, Privacy Admin wrote: >Since I've switched to type-I pgponly remailer I haven't had a problem >with spammers. I've been wondering if hashcash makes sense for remailers, >or [only] for mail2news gateways. > >I guess I am looking for any means of controlling spammers using remailers >and mail2news gateways. Hashcash won't help mail2news, except by discouraging dumb spammers, because news spam only needs a few messages. PGP-only input will cut down on most spammers, though you'll still get a few, especially if they're spamming mailing lists (which makes the encryption both worth the effort and useful for safety.) If you modify your remailer to only _output_ PGP-encrypted messages, you get hashcash-equivalence, and cut abuse substantially. The cost is limiting recipients to pgp users (plus known exceptions), but it's tough to spam people when you need to look up their PGP key and encrypt to it (at least you'll only get spams for high-tech stuff), and it's tougher for random abusers to abuse people since most targets don't have PGP keys, and a mailbox full of PGP junk is less annoying to most people than a mailbox full of human-readable hate mail. In particular, it's harder to send death threats to politicians if they don't have published PGP keys. Is this a feature that makes sense? PGP-out-only remailers aren't as useful for anonymous tip lines (unless the tip line has a PGP address.) They're not as useful for inviting new people into your conspiracy, though they're fine for conspiring with people whose keys you already know (and they can be unlisted keys only used for the conspiracy.) If the Bank of Caribbean Cash Importers is interested in taking anonymous clients who contact them through remailers, they've probably got a PGP key handy to send to anyway. They're not transparently useful for mail2news, but the remailer could make exceptions for known mail2news sites, or could ignore the problem, which is fine for posting to alt.anonymous.messages, though not for posting to alt.whistleblowers. How would you implement it? Obviously you'd need to allow some unencrypted lines at the beginning, at least if they have remailer syntax( ::, ##, mail headers, etc.). Do you cut all lines after the "-----END PGP"? My first impression was yes, but after reading the Freedom Remailer source, it looks like this might kill messages using encrypted reply blocks, so maybe not. Detecting the PGP itself can be crude ("----- BEGIN PGP ENCRYPTED"...) or can be a bit fancier (make sure the lines are all the right length and limited to the correct character set), or much fancier (de-armor and look for PGP blocks). Even the fancy approaches can be spoofed, since you can't go very deep into the headers without the right keys, so a couple lines of real PGP material could be included, leaving possibilities like :: Request-Remailing-To: Your Mama ## Subject: My Guitar Wants to Kill Your Mama -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Comment: PGP allows arbitrary comments, so Decrypt This! hQCMAynIuJ1VakpnAQP+MWng0I6TnDf/U83KCttjYZQSnPQjS59rw+M+iSmTGLIs btqW5hn1HXheSb8GNifAWz2rqgdH3GqjZ5rRBDF5tZfQfV5kNNYE1XpT/CMgAsDh 3IkaeOumDKXON+8acl5X7NToSjml+mkxkF7kE9u5oxCEXErDjS3k2wOtv0krNfSk HeyChelseaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaBWAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA MyGuitarWantsToKillYourMamaBWAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA MyGuitarWantsToKillYourMamaBWAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA MyGuitarWantsToKillYourMamaBWAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA -----END PGP MESSAGE----- and your little dog, too! But at least it's a start. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 07:51:47 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: rant on the morality of confidentiality Message-ID: <199801042341.PAA26750@netcom5.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I posted this to PM's mailing list, but he apparently zapped it without comment. so here it goes to a less authoritarian forum. context: posters to his list were remarking on the recent declassification of information in Britain that suggested they had discovered the key aspects of RSA before it was discovered in the open literature by Diffie & Hellman etc. ------- Forwarded Message To: cryptography@c2.net Subject: a rant on the morality of confidentiality scientists who agree to government secrecy to develop their inventions are agreeing to a lot more than mere secrecy. they are committing to a paradigm that is at odds with science itself, which only advances through the open literature. furthermore, they are giving away their power, so to speak, to governments that do not have the same motives they do. essentially they are working for a war machine, or a suppression machine. how can they be sure their inventions will not be used for dark purposes? imho, by not working within a system that poses that risk. that no such system seems to exist is irrelevant. a truly responsible scientist would help create one and wouldn't work without one. I think the scientists who worked on the atom bomb and today within the NSA are working under a key false assumption. "if we don't develop it, the enemy will, and he will use it against us". but perhaps if scientists around the world united against the government warmongers that have been manipulating them for many generations, particularly within the 20th century with grotesque results, perhaps a different story would emerge. yet even Einstein himself urged our government to "develop a weapon of mass destruction before the Joneses do". how smart is that? perhaps scientifically clever, but morally, socially, and spiritually vacuous. it is a feeble mind in my opinion who takes refuge in the saying that "technology is neutral". perhaps so, but not the humans who use and *develop* it, and the latter are particularly responsible for the former. how smart were those nuclear weapons scientists, anyway, such as Feynmann? imho they agreed to the terms of their own manipulation, and failed to question their basic motives and intents and of those who paid them. I believe those that work within the NSA and other secret agencies are betraying the principles of science under the guise of protecting humanity. I believe they have the power to change this system, but they have reneged on their responsibility as human beings. Wayner covers the simplistic issues in his piece for the NYT, but they key issues at stake are far deeper and have never even been recognized by some of the so-called greatest minds of our century. so I view with distaste, to say the lest, the scientists who later try to break the secrecy and come out in the open merely so that they can have credit for something that was classified they claim to deserve. they deserve credit only for supporting and participating in a vast and sinister system of scientific manipulation for dark and inhumanitarian purposes. Chomsky is one of the few scientists of our time who has the brilliance to recognize the ulterior side of the government we support. surprise! he is largely ignored or even blacklisted by his morally- and socially- handicapped colleages who believe it is not their place to question the status quo, but only to fit into it or advance through it. all those scientists who have ever complained about the lack of funding for your branch, or who have fought with each other over the scraps handed to you like dogs-- do you have any concept of how much tax money is put into military research? how much is funnelled into the NSA? this is money that is funded by the public for public welfare-- is it really being used for that? NSA and other secret agencies have become vast parasites feeding on public dollars that have no accountability, and largely because scientists, who should lead the pack, instead lack the intelligence to recognize it or the courage to challenge it. these are my thoughts as I read how the NSA's Inman pops up to say that the credit for RSA is the NSA's, or a British agency does the same. secrecy is directly contradictory to the principles upon which this country is founded. and imho it is becoming a large source of its ongoing demise. quite simply, the scientists are fiddling while Democracy burns. ------- End of Forwarded Message From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Secret Squirrel Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 02:53:27 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Microsoft Message-ID: <186eae90d0afdcd691326a13f1ad8b66@squirrel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >At 02:25 AM 1/4/98 +0100, Anonymous wrote: >> >>Windows is still fucking me up the ass! I'm bleeding to death here! > >Then get a copy of Linux and stop whining! > >Sheesh! Usually when somebody says something like that they're refering more to Microsoft indirectly borking them. For instance, people send around MS Turd documents. You have to buy MS Turd. Some Windows lamers send out HTML email. Many (most?) are clueless on USENET. Many (most?) don't like to type at all, and choke and die when they get into an environment where they have to. People walk into computer labs and are stuck with the pathetic environment that is Windows. And this doesn't even count the "Everyone is running Windows" and "Everything is da web" folks. It wouldn't be so bad if there was full source to everything and it didn't cost an arm and a leg, or if it didn't suck. But there isn't, it does, and that's putting it mildly. I can hear the cries of "You're anti-business!" and "You're just a UNIX weenie!" already. I just remember back when the average net user had somewhat of a clue. When the network went "to the masses" and people went out of their way to make it point and click the drooling lemmings were attracted to it. And of course where the drooling lemmings go the people who take advantage of the drooling lemmings follow, e.g. spammers. My attitude about this pretty much went down the toilet when I was called a "UNIX weenie" because I suggested that a Windows user deliver his own mail while the ISP's SMTP server was down. Then of course the Windows flamer decided to start denouncing the very notion of RFCs, then started rambling about POP3 and IMAP. And of course I implied "that we all run UNIX" because I used the word "daemon" -- yeah, apparently Windows is so bad that this user didn't even know it *could* run background processes. No, I wasn't the original writer, but I see where the original author was coming from...I think. Yes, I use Linux. Yes, I remember MAKE.MONEY.FAST but it was nothing like the spam we get today and was few and far between. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Lucky Green Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 23:32:35 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Smartcard readers Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Several people inquired about obtaining one of the universal smartcard readers the Cypherpunks Smartcard Developer Association built in the past. As our knowledge about commercial readers increased, we were able to add support for commercial readers from several manufacturers such as Gemplus, Schlumberger, and Philips. Therefore, there is no need to for another production run of our own reader. If you wonder which reader to buy, I like the Gemplus best. If you have a reader we don't already support, send me a sample and we'll add it. Our smartcard software is at https://www.cypherpunks.to/scard/ Have fun, -- Lucky Green PGP v5 encrypted email preferred. "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: root Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 07:31:38 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com Subject: index.html Message-ID: <199801042353.RAA20982@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Welcome to the Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer. This mailing list is sponsored by The Armadillo Group and other indipendant operators. The purpose of this mailing list is to explore the frontier of cryptography, civil liberty, economics, and related issues. This is a very high traffic mailing list. Several members of the mailing list are involved in various types of events through the year. Participation by members of the list does not construe any support or affilliation with the mailing list. Contact the author of all works obtained through the remailer network. They retain original rights. Please let others know about this mailing list, the more the merrier! To subscribe to the CDR you should contact the individual operators as conditions at each remailer site may be quite different. To subscribe through SSZ you should send a note to list@ssz.com or send an email to majordomo@ssz.com with 'subscribe cypherpunks email_address' in the body. If you have questions or problems contact list@ssz.com There may be local groups of members who have regular (or not) meetings in order to discuss the various issues and projects appropriate to their individual membership. These groups generaly announce their meetings via the CDR. Please feel free to make appropriate announcements of activity in your area. Austin Cypherpunks From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 10:36:34 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Why some people are making nerve gases and such to defendthemselves In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 6:19 PM -0800 1/3/98, Lucky Green wrote: >What you really want is the ability to slow down the mobility of the raid >force while making your exit. In a prolonged siege, the attacker will >always win. A good way of slowing down the attacker after an initial >armed response is to deploy chemicals. A combination of Tabun and Mustard >Gas works best, but don't deploy them at the same time. Use the Tabun >first for maximium impact. Follow up with the Mustard Gas a few minutes >later. The underground irrigation systems common on California properties >are ideal means of gas deployment. You should be able to retrofit the >system for under $500. Assuming you already have the gas. Of course you >need to make sure to keep a chem suit at home. In an age where it is accepted (and unpunished) behavior for the black-clad ninja warriors to shoot through pregnant women, to burn children to death in the name of publicity for the BATF, to raid the home of a woman who refused to answer questions of the State psychiatric police, to shoot to death a retired doctor who the raiders accidentally hit, and on and on, other measures are needed. (In none of these cases have the guilty parties been punished. If the State will not restrain itself, other measures will be needed.) This may well be why militias and survivalist groups are so actively developing chemical and biological agents. (I hear that even some of the dopers in the hills have gotten interested in Sarin release systems. Hoo boy!) Sad, but maybe one has to fight fire with fire. If a hundred SWAT stormtroopers surround a compound and prepare to burn it down, releasing the countermeasures may be needed. In fact, leaking (no pun intended) word that a home has CBW deadman switches may make the ninjas a bit less trigger-happy. --Tim May, whose house is _not_ booby-trapped with Sarin, or Tabun, or anything else, but who will defend to his death his right to talk as he wishes about such things. The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Mix Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 12:00:58 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: best body armor for cypherpunks [serious] Message-ID: <199801050344.TAA10130@sirius.infonex.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain What is, in your opinion, the best (price and performance-wise) body armor for cypherpunks? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 11:57:24 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com Subject: Re: .50 ammo In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980103231222.036b7b90@ctrl-alt-del.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 7:24 PM -0800 1/4/98, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >Alan wrote: >> At 04:50 PM 1/3/98 -0500, Brian B. Riley wrote: >> The hardest part is getting the 50 cal ammo. (He had his Federal firearms >> license and was in the National Guard, so it was not too difficult for >> him.) Getting AP and other special ammo would be doubly difficult. >> (Non-specialty ammo could be reloaded as long as you could get molds and >> primer caps.) >> >> I guess it depends on your military and/or black market connections. > >I have seen what appeared to be .50 ammo (probably not AP) in gun stores. Armor-piercing ammo, the common kind, is just steel-core ammo. This is readily available in most calibers, esp. military calibers. (A less common kind is "KTW" handgun ammo, which is under some recent restrictions. And even less common, and almost certainly unavailable to the proles, are "sabot" rounds, some with tungsten cores.) Importation of steel-core ammo is under various restrictions. Klinton recently blocked import of a lot of foreign 7.62x39 steel core ammo, on nebulous grounds that they represented a threat to the ruling elite and their police bodyguards. But it's still widely available. Check the gun shows. (There is little need for this, for even folks like us. We are not likely to want to disable fleeing vehicles, etc. And even conventional lead-core rifle rounds will cut through body armor easily, which is all I care about.) --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: ichudov@Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 11:34:51 +0800 To: alan@clueserver.org (Alan) Subject: .50 ammo In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980103231222.036b7b90@ctrl-alt-del.com> Message-ID: <199801050324.VAA21481@manifold.algebra.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Alan wrote: > At 04:50 PM 1/3/98 -0500, Brian B. Riley wrote: > The hardest part is getting the 50 cal ammo. (He had his Federal firearms > license and was in the National Guard, so it was not too difficult for > him.) Getting AP and other special ammo would be doubly difficult. > (Non-specialty ammo could be reloaded as long as you could get molds and > primer caps.) > > I guess it depends on your military and/or black market connections. I have seen what appeared to be .50 ammo (probably not AP) in gun stores. - Igor. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 14:54:50 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: <199801042341.PAA26750@netcom5.netcom.com> Message-ID: <9RcTie5w165w@bwalk.dm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain "Vladimir Z. Nuri" writes: > I posted this to PM's mailing list, but he apparently zapped it > without comment. I'm shocked. I thought the purpose of the perry-moderated list was to let him reject submissions AND send perrygrams, not just silenty drop them on the floor! During the Gilmore/C2net "moderation experiment", Sandy Sandfart not only silently deleted the submissions he didn't like (he lied when he claimed that everything he rejects is forwarded to the rejects list), he also had C2Net lawyers threatening several people whose articles were rejected, including myself and Timmy May. Perry can learn a lot from Sandy Sandfart. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Alan Olsen Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 15:13:25 +0800 To: ichudov@Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov) Subject: Re: .50 ammo In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980103231222.036b7b90@ctrl-alt-del.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980104222937.03ab0100@clueserver.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 09:24 PM 1/4/98 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >Alan wrote: >> At 04:50 PM 1/3/98 -0500, Brian B. Riley wrote: >> The hardest part is getting the 50 cal ammo. (He had his Federal firearms >> license and was in the National Guard, so it was not too difficult for >> him.) Getting AP and other special ammo would be doubly difficult. >> (Non-specialty ammo could be reloaded as long as you could get molds and >> primer caps.) >> >> I guess it depends on your military and/or black market connections. > >I have seen what appeared to be .50 ammo (probably not AP) in gun stores. I am surprised, but I am sure you are correct. It has been quite a while since I have spent time in gun shops. (My expenditures on ammo is limited to smaller calibers. I tend not to look at other things because I cannot afford what I want.) --- | "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano@teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan@ctrl-alt-del.com| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: ichudov@Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 12:40:51 +0800 To: cypherpunks@www.video-collage.com Subject: Re: .50 ammo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801050436.WAA21960@manifold.algebra.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Tim May wrote: > Armor-piercing ammo, the common kind, is just steel-core ammo. This is > readily available in most calibers, esp. military calibers. (A less common > kind is "KTW" handgun ammo, which is under some recent restrictions. And > even less common, and almost certainly unavailable to the proles, are > "sabot" rounds, some with tungsten cores.) By the way, I keep hearing about these sabot rounds but do not know what they actually are. Could someone please explain. Thank you. > (There is little need for this, for even folks like us. We are not likely > to want to disable fleeing vehicles, etc. And even conventional lead-core > rifle rounds will cut through body armor easily, which is all I care about.) Many people underestimate the power of most rifles. - Igor. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Nobuki Nakatuji" Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 15:18:48 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Is FEAL developed by NTT safe? Message-ID: <19980105070034.3946.qmail@hotmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Is FEAL developed by NTT safe? Where isn't safe if it is here because it isn't safe? ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 12:52:47 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: best body armor for cypherpunks [serious] (fwd) Message-ID: <199801050513.XAA22310@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 19:44:42 -0800 (PST) > From: Mix > Subject: best body armor for cypherpunks [serious] > What is, in your opinion, the best (price and performance-wise) > body armor for cypherpunks? Not being in the vicinity of the fan... (I couldn't resist) ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Alan Olsen Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 15:47:57 +0800 To: "Nobuki Nakatuji" Subject: Re: Is FEAL developed by NTT safe? In-Reply-To: <19980105070034.3946.qmail@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980104232746.00b28760@clueserver.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:00 PM 1/4/98 PST, Nobuki Nakatuji wrote: > >Is FEAL developed by NTT safe? Where isn't safe if it is here because it >isn't safe? >From what I have read, FEAL is the punching bag of the cryptographic community. It has been broken many times by many people at many different number of rounds. (It seems to be the one that many cryptanalists have cut their teeth on.) The history of FEAL does not inspire a whole lot of confidence, no matter who is selling it. --- | "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano@teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan@ctrl-alt-del.com| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Alan Olsen Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 15:33:09 +0800 To: ichudov@Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov) Subject: Re: .50 ammo In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980104232928.0366bdc0@clueserver.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 10:36 PM 1/4/98 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >By the way, I keep hearing about these sabot rounds but do not know >what they actually are. Could someone please explain. Thank you. They are a wooden round made by the dutch for firing into milling machines. --- | "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano@teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan@ctrl-alt-del.com| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 15:42:28 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Sabots In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 8:36 PM -0800 1/4/98, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >Tim May wrote: >> Armor-piercing ammo, the common kind, is just steel-core ammo. This is >> readily available in most calibers, esp. military calibers. (A less common >> kind is "KTW" handgun ammo, which is under some recent restrictions. And >> even less common, and almost certainly unavailable to the proles, are >> "sabot" rounds, some with tungsten cores.) > >By the way, I keep hearing about these sabot rounds but do not know >what they actually are. Could someone please explain. Thank you. Typically a dense projectile inside an outer projectile. (Sabot in French means "shoe," the origin of course of "saboteur.") The outer projectile can fall away, leaving the inner projectile to continue. The physics of this is explained in ballistics sources. This allows smaller projectiles to be launched out of larger bores. Thus, high density projectiles can be launched out of .50 BMG barrels. Or large tank barrels (as in the M-1 Abrams tank) can fire sabot projectiles. (For example, smaller projectiles made of depleted uranium, which punch through tank armor and then become liquid and incendiary on the inside of the tank, killing all occupants in milliseconds.) The term "sabot" is sometimes used interchangeably with "slug," espeically with respect to shotguns. It is also possible to use sabots to build a "two-stage" bullet, with a smaller round firing from inside a sabot. 6000 fps velocities have been reported. Or so I read. As always, using the Web is the way to get such answers quickly. A DejaNews search on "rec.guns sabot" will turn up many interesting threads. Especially the older data base. >> (There is little need for this, for even folks like us. We are not likely >> to want to disable fleeing vehicles, etc. And even conventional lead-core >> rifle rounds will cut through body armor easily, which is all I care about.) > >Many people underestimate the power of most rifles. Yep. Every rifle caliber other than .22 LR will penetrate ballistic vests. Even with a vest rated to stop a .44 Magnum round, from a handgun, the extra speed from a 16-inch carbine barrel is enough to defeat these vests. (I have a handy little carbine, the Winchester Trapper, in .44 Magnum. Not as much punch as an AR-15, but mighty handy.) More and more "home invaders" (*) are wearing Kevlar body armor, so bear this in mind. (* Home invaders are usually gangs of several thieves who enter a home in force, sometimes by kidnapping the owner and forcing him to let them in, sometimes just by breaking down the doors. They tend to terrorize the occupants, tie them up, rape the women, and then, increasingly, kill all the occupants so as to leave no witnesses. And for "kicks." Of course, liberals and gun grabbers would have us believe that it is not proper for homeowners to have guns to defend themselves, that it is for the police to respond to burglaries. People who think this way are delusional. And if they go beyond their delusions and attempt to disarm homeowners forcibly, they ought to be taken out and shot.) --Tim May --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 15:51:22 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Is FEAL developed by NTT safe? In-Reply-To: <19980105070034.3946.qmail@hotmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:00 PM -0800 1/4/98, Nobuki Nakatuji wrote: >Is FEAL developed by NTT safe? Where isn't safe if it is here because it >isn't safe? > FEAL am not safe if not safe here. (Try using a search engine or Schneier, Nobuki Nakatuji, to answer these stupid little Zen koans you keep hitting us with.) --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: lcs Mixmaster Remailer Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 12:03:34 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Microsoft Message-ID: <19980105040003.18797.qmail@nym.alias.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >At 02:25 98/01/04 +0100, Anonymous wrote: >> Windows is still fucking me up the ass! I'm bleeding to death here! >> >> >> > >For relief, see: http://www.enemy.org/ Uh, how does one read this in Lynx? The first page instructs you to choose your nearest location. The "Mirror Sites" page is an image map. Chosing this "image map" will pop up a series of selections like "(318,85)" and chosing one of these dies with a 404. There are four options below that: "Russia," "France," "Brasil," and "Japan." Chosing one of these brings you to a bunch of frames which aren't even named sanely. Frame "ob_li" has nothing in it. Frame "links" has nothing in it. Frame "un_li" has nothing in it. Frame "oben" has nothing in it. Is anyone beginning to see a pattern? Nearest I can tell, the people running enemy.org are just as clueless as the people programming at Microsoft. It's possible that they're even more clueless. If they want to attack Microsoft, they need to learn how to make a web page first. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Raph Levien Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 23:06:50 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: List of reliable remailers Message-ID: <199801051450.GAA13185@kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list@kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys@kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list@kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord ?"; $remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{"cracker"} = " cpunk mix remix pgp hash ksub esub latent cut ek reord post"; $remailer{'redneck'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"bureau42"} = " cpunk mix pgp ksub hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"neva"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub ?"; $remailer{"lcs"} = " mix"; $remailer{"medusa"} = " mix middle" $remailer{"McCain"} = " mix middle"; $remailer{"valdeez"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash ek"; $remailer{"arrid"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash ek"; $remailer{"hera"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash ek"; $remailer{"htuttle"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut post ek"; catalyst@netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth@ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura@replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer@crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix reno winsock) (weasel squirrel medusa) (cracker redneck) (nym lcs) (valdeez arrid hera) This remailer list is somewhat phooey. Go check out http://www.publius.net/rlist.html for a good one. Last update: Thu 23 Oct 97 15:48:06 PDT remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- hera goddesshera@juno.com ------------ 5:03:45 99.86% nym config@nym.alias.net +*#**#**### :34 95.82% redneck config@anon.efga.org #*##*+#**** 2:00 95.44% mix mixmaster@remail.obscura.com +++ ++++++* 19:18 95.27% squirrel mix@squirrel.owl.de -- ---+--- 2:34:19 95.16% cyber alias@alias.cyberpass.net *++***+ ++ 11:26 95.11% replay remailer@replay.com **** *** 10:06 94.93% arrid arrid@juno.com ----.------ 8:50:34 94.41% bureau42 remailer@bureau42.ml.org --------- 3:38:29 93.53% cracker remailer@anon.efga.org + +*+*+*+ 16:32 92.80% jam remailer@cypherpunks.ca + +*-++++ 24:14 92.79% winsock winsock@rigel.cyberpass.net -..-..---- 9:59:18 92.22% neva remailer@neva.org ------****+ 1:03:02 90.39% valdeez valdeez@juno.com 4:58:22 -36.97% reno middleman@cyberpass.net 1:01:28 -2.65% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Dan Ritter Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 21:00:00 +0800 To: Cassidy Lackey Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980105075118.0072eec0@pobox3.bbn.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 03:33 PM 1/3/98 -0600, you wrote: >Mobile Account Manager v1.1 now encrypts the data to the PalmPilot >database. For more information, check out our site at >http://www.mobilegeneration.com or you can download the trial version at >http://www.mobilegeneration.com/downloads/acctmgr.zip. Let me know if >there is anything else we can do! > >Cassidy Lackey >Mobile Generation Software >www.mobilegeneration.com > >Dan Ritter wrote: > >> What sort of encryption is used to protect private information in >> Mobile >> Account Manager? >From http://www.mobilegeneration.com : >After reviewing the costs and benefits associated with each of the published > encryption algorithms (DES, RC4, RC5, IDEA, etc...) we have decided to utilize a > proprietary Mobile Generation Software data encryption algorithm. Most This does not answer my original question, which is: what encryption method are you using? All it says is which encryption methods you are *not* using. > importantly, data encryption must ensure that no user can view the data in the > PalmPilot MAM database or the backup MAM database on the PC. We feel that it > is highly unlikely that anyone will attempt to 'break' the encryption and therefore the If I felt that it was highly unlikely, I'd hardly be asking, would I? Poor cryptography is worse than none - it encourages people to believe their data is safe when it is not. Good cryptography can stand up to having its algorithms made public. Can yours? > costs incurred by utilizing the published encryption algorithms would outweigh the > benefits. Therefore, we are confident that the MAM encryption algorithm provides > sufficient data security for the Mobile Account Manager database. Without providing more information, customers can not make that decision for themselves. > > Below are the costs associated with utilizing many of the published algorithms for > MAM: > > U.S. Laws governing encryption software may not allow for exportation of > MAM outside of the U.S. Then you should be active in political groups advocating change of those laws. In fact, if you really believe in encryption, you might want to offer this as a test case - even a reporter can see how silly it is not to be able to protect your ATM PIN. > Copyrights and royalties associated with many of the encryption algorithms > may increase the cost of MAM. Many strong encryption algorithms are free. > Complex encryption algorithms drastically increase the size of the application > and slow the response time of MAM. Many algorithms can be tuned for different levels of complexity. > If you feel uncomfortable placing your sensitive data in the PalmPilot, please let us > know and we will give you some other ideas to ensure that your data is secure. I am doing so. I am also copying this to the cypherpunks mailing list, as other people ought to be made aware of this issue. Nothing I have quoted seems to be nonpublic information. -dsr- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Eric Murray Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 00:33:44 +0800 To: ichudov@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: .50 ammo In-Reply-To: <199801050436.WAA21960@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <199801051627.IAA20090@slack.lne.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Igor Chudov @ home writes: > > Tim May wrote: > > Armor-piercing ammo, the common kind, is just steel-core ammo. This is > > readily available in most calibers, esp. military calibers. (A less common > > kind is "KTW" handgun ammo, which is under some recent restrictions. And > > even less common, and almost certainly unavailable to the proles, are > > "sabot" rounds, some with tungsten cores.) > > By the way, I keep hearing about these sabot rounds but do not know > what they actually are. Could someone please explain. Thank you. A Sabot is a casing which goes around a bullet, allowing say a .22 caliber bullet to travel properly down a .30 caliber barrel. They're usually made of plastic and designed to fall away from the bullet soon after it leaves the barrel. It's a hack to get high(er) velocity out of an existing gun, or to expand the range of available projectiles for a weapon. I used to see Sabot rounds that were .22 caliber bullets with a .30 caliber Sabot, in a .30-06 casing. I think Remington made them and they were available to the general public. They were marketed for 'varmint' hunting, as an alternative to buying a .25-06 or similar varmint rifle. > > (There is little need for this, for even folks like us. We are not likely > > to want to disable fleeing vehicles, etc. And even conventional lead-core > > rifle rounds will cut through body armor easily, which is all I care about.) > > Many people underestimate the power of most rifles. Yes, and many people want to be able to buy a quick technological fix to something (like shooting) which requires talent and/or practice to become good at. Just like buying a synthesizer doesn't instantly make one a musician, buying a wonder gun doesn't immediately make one a crack shot. Not that I'm accusing anyone in this discussion of having this tendency, just pointing out that the best gun in many situations is the one that you have run the most rounds through. -- Eric Murray Chief Security Scientist N*Able Technologies www.nabletech.com (email: ericm at lne.com or nabletech.com) PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 23:06:27 +0800 To: users@ssz.com (SSZ User Mail List) Subject: Japanese bank rifled by cyber-thieves [CNN] Message-ID: <199801051522.JAA23261@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Cyber-thieves target Sakura > > Data stolen from bank's computers leaked to Tokyo mailing-list vendor > > January 5, 1998: 8:10 a.m. ET > > Sakura seeks restructuring - Dec. 30, 1997 > > > [IMAGE] > > Sakura Bank > More related sites... TOKYO (Reuters) - Cyber-criminals rifled > confidential computer records of a major Japanese bank and stole > information on customers' names, telephone numbers, addresses and even > birthdays, the bank said Monday. > [INLINE] Sakura Bank Ltd. said data on up to 20,000 of its 15 million > individual customers could have been stolen and that it had confirmed > that files on at least 37 then were leaked to a mailing-list vendor in > Tokyo. [text deleted] ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jrbl Pookah Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 00:05:09 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Encrypted Telephony Products Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I've recently begun looking for internet telephony products that employ reasonably secure encryption on-the-fly. Now, I've found Nautilus, and PGPFone, but neither product appears to have been updated for quite a while now. I was just wondering if anybody could give me recommendations for more up-to-date products, and perhaps comparisons between those available. Thank you. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Burnes Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 01:11:41 +0800 To: Jrbl Pookah Subject: Re: Encrypted Telephony Products In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, Jrbl Pookah wrote: > > > I've recently begun looking for internet telephony products that > employ reasonably secure encryption on-the-fly. Now, I've found Nautilus, > and PGPFone, but neither product appears to have been updated for quite a > while now. I was just wondering if anybody could give me recommendations > for more up-to-date products, and perhaps comparisons between those > available. > > Thank you. > Try Speak Freely. Sincercely, J. Burnes From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Andy Dustman Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 00:15:12 +0800 To: Bill Stewart Subject: Re: PGP-out-only vs. hashcash aware remailers? In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980104120940.00722cdc@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Sun, 4 Jan 1998, Bill Stewart wrote: > If you modify your remailer to only _output_ PGP-encrypted messages, > you get hashcash-equivalence, and cut abuse substantially. > The cost is limiting recipients to pgp users (plus known exceptions), > but it's tough to spam people when you need to look up their PGP key > and encrypt to it (at least you'll only get spams for high-tech stuff), > and it's tougher for random abusers to abuse people since most targets > don't have PGP keys, and a mailbox full of PGP junk is less annoying > to most people than a mailbox full of human-readable hate mail. > In particular, it's harder to send death threats to politicians > if they don't have published PGP keys. > > Is this a feature that makes sense? It makes some sense. It's similar to what I proposed a few weeks ago with "casual" remailers. The smart middleman portion of coerce does something similar: If it looks like a PGP message (has the "BEGIN PGP MESSAGE" line), it doesn't chain through a random remailer but delivers directly. I'm not sure if anyone is actually using this, though (perhaps tea/mccain). What you seem to be proposing is sending non-encrypted messages to /dev/null. That may yet be an option if things get bad, but I don't think they are that bad yet. It does seem to achieve, in part, the goals of hashcash (although it generally takes longer to generate hashcash, depending on the collision length required). > How would you implement it? You are correct that there are easy ways to spoof PGP messages well enough to fool a simple parser. One way around this would be to pipe any apparent PGP messages (start and end easily detected) through PGP to de-armor only. A couple problems: PGP (2.6.x) doesn't seem to have an option to only de-armor; a sophisticated spoofer could make the armor verify correctly anyway by generating the correct CRC (trivial if you know what you're doing). So it seems sensible to only consider some simple safeguards and not worry about actually decoding the armor. Andy Dustman / Computational Center for Molecular Structure and Design For a great anti-spam procmail recipe, send me mail with subject "spam". Append "+spamsucks" to my username to ensure delivery. KeyID=0xC72F3F1D Encryption is too important to leave to the government. -- Bruce Schneier http://www.athens.net/~dustman mailto:andy@neptune.chem.uga.edu <}+++< From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jonathan Wienke Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 03:39:22 +0800 To: ichudov@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: Lock and Load (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199712230422.WAA22160@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980105111943.006ce590@popd.netcruiser> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At 10:37 PM 12/22/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >You can't lock and load an AK. I remember that very well even though it >has been a while. The bolt just would not go far enough back to pick up >the cartridge. The bolt carrier's charging handle would only go as far >as to allow for the weapon inspection. I own a Norinco MAK-90 (a semi-auto only AK variant) and it is designed so that a round cannot be chambered with the safety on. If the weapon is not cocked, the hammer hits the top of the sear (which is locked by the safety) and prevents the bolt from traveling more than 1 inch to the rear. If the weapon is cocked, the charging handle on the side of the bolt hits the front of the safety lever, which stops the rearward travel of the bolt at about 2.5 inches, which is not sufficient to chamber a round. The magazine can be inserted or removed regardless of the position of the safety or the bolt. On my Winchester 1300 Defender 12-gauge, (a pump gun with a 7-round magazine) the safety cannot be engaged until the weapon has been cocked, which requires the action to be cycled. This will chamber a round unless the magazine is empty. On my Norinco Model 320 carbine (a semi-auto only Uzi lookalike) if the weapon is not cocked, and the grip safety is not depressed, the bolt is locked in the forward position, which makes it rather difficult to chamber a round. However, the safe/fire selector (the sliding button on the left side of the grip) has no effect on the bolt. Neither safety has any effect on inserting or removing a magazine. ObOddGunTrivia: One of the oddities of the SKS is that a magazine cannot be inserted or removed unless the bolt is locked in the rearmost position. The sides of the bolt have grooves machined in them that the lips of the magazine occupy when the bolt is forward. This can make changing a half-full magazine kind of annoying. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Business Security 5.5 iQA/AwUBNLEyTMJF0kXqpw3MEQIp+QCg1btR4CI1QthIVV2AYTTi7ztS6r0AoNlB LkkRQf7554PRxVe/Q+IsPqLs =SAYC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Jonathan Wienke PGP Key Fingerprints: 7484 2FB7 7588 ACD1 3A8F 778A 7407 2928 3312 6597 8258 9A9E D9FA 4878 C245 D245 EAA7 0DCC "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." -- Samuel Adams "Stupidity is the one arena of of human achievement where most people fulfill their potential." -- Jonathan Wienke Never sign a contract that contains the phrase "first-born child." When the government fears the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny. RSA export-o-matic: print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 00:42:51 +0800 To: "'cypherpunks@toad.com> Subject: RE: best body armor for cypherpunks [serious] Message-ID: <6B5344C210C7D011835C0000F80127668B15C9@exna01.securitydynamics.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > ---------- > From: Mix[SMTP:mixmaster@remail.obscura.com] > Reply To: Mix > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 1998 10:44 PM > To: cypherpunks@toad.com > Subject: best body armor for cypherpunks [serious] > > What is, in your opinion, the best (price and performance-wise) > body armor for cypherpunks? > After a few years on this list, one develops such a thick skin that extra protection is superfluos Peter Trei ptrei@securitydynamics.com From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Information Security Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 00:53:42 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Internet Watch Foundation reports child nudity as illegal!! Message-ID: <199801051639.LAA26491@panix2.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > From jrg@blodwen.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 5 05:57:11 1998 > > Information Security writes: > > Can anyone not biased like Paul "British Twit of the Month" Allen > > confirm the two jpg's now visible at > > are in Demon's alt.binaries.pictures.nudism Usenet group? > > too late to check/ a right pain to check anyway bearing in mind how > much is probably available in that group. > > Give some message-ids and it's very easy to check if they are and grab > the headers of the messages from them (if you're really interested in > how they got here, etc.) My interest has blown over. PICSRules is a political response to government pressure. IWF immediately began watching for KiddiePorn and notifying IWF member organizations (and police) about such posts. Members are given the MD5 of the post to automatically delete it when next seen, in addition to the first deletion. The only thing "watch" organizations are good for is spotting "controversial" material. Demon/IWF's Clive Feather: : Some subscribers to IWF have asked to be notified of certain other : classes of material, since they *do* choose to censor and not carry : more than just material that is illegal to possess. Demon is not one : of these ISPs. So, IWF supports labeling/spotting of controversial material for the purposes of censorship, beyond what is illegal. Thus, the IWF is not going to get anywhere with PICSRules. No way in hell can they label all of the Net. Usenet content is produced at a furious rate: it cannot be rated until it has already expired off of most servers. Rate WWW? Most are business: who cares about advertising/support? Any page with a counter on it won't verify the MD5 taken when it was "rated"... PICSRules is a political prank on the politicians. Kind of like The Jetsons was an educational show about the future. What *is* happening are groups forming to censor material; funded by governments... # http://192.215.107.71/wire/news/june/0630ratings.html # # The Internet Watch Foundation, has already submitted a funding # request to the European Commission. # # "Whatever happens, we will carry on trying to get the funding # we need," Kerr said. "These things cost money, and we have not # got all the money we need", said David Kerr, chief executive # of the British-based Internet Watch Foundation This will probably keep expanding; Germany IWF to zap Nazi logos, Israel IWF to zap revisionist history, Muslim IWF to zap heresy, etc. ---guy The never-ending joke: Dimitry "I suck my male students" Vulis From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Robert Hettinga Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 06:19:58 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Anonymous Remailers Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain --- begin forwarded text Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 23:14:19 -0800 From: Chuq Von Rospach Subject: Re: Anonymous Remailers To: "ListMom-Talk Discussion List" Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Reply-To: "ListMom-Talk Discussion List" Sender: "ListMom-Talk Discussion List" X-URL: At 8:10 PM -0800 1/4/98, Eric Mings wrote: > I noticed on Apple's info about acceptable behavior on their lists, that > they ban postings which originate from anonymous remailers (of which they > include juno). I was wondering what experience people have had regarding > abusive posts from such systems, and how one easily identifies them if > you choose to ban postings originating from such systems. Thanks. That's me. I decided to stop accepting posts from anonymous remailers way back, when anon.penet.fi was still alive. Some of that is philosophy, some of that was problems. As far as problems, it's the normal stuff -- personal attacks, mailbombing through anonymous remailers, copyright/slander/libel issues, all the normal fun and games. Since you can't track users back, you have real problems policing them. And since anonymous remailers tend to allow multiple (heading towards infinite) remailing addresses, the practical issue of how to lock out an abusive user becomes severe. That's why Juno is bounced -- you can create accounts and then use them instantly, with no policing and no tracking. I had a problem a while back with an idiot who did, abusively. After about four rounds of trying to get him to go away, I did it the hard way, with a virtual neutron bomb. Juno's no help. In THAT case, I got email from them six weeks later apologizing for being so delayed in responding to my requests for help. they didn't offer to help, they just apologized for not telling me they wouldn't for so long. And that's been typical of my dealing with them. They don't police. They don't care. Their systems are set up so that basically, they *can't* police things. So I just don't even get into it. Since I can't police their users, I police their site. Effectively, they are an anonymous remailer. God knows enough folks use them as one. -- Chuq Von Rospach (chuq@apple.com) Apple IS&T Mail List Gnome Plaidworks Consulting (chuqui@plaidworks.com) ( +-+ The home for Hockey on the net) --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 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' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 03:15:07 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation In-Reply-To: <199801030048.SAA02365@wire.insync.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 17:17 -0800 1/2/98, Tim May wrote: >Wanna bet that if I was on the hill in Aspen horsing around playing ski >football and behaving like a drunken lout with a bunch of other people the >ski patrol would whistle us down and tell us to knock it off? We have a good story in this week's Time that talks about how the ski resort had repeatedly asked the Kennedys to knock it off. Including the night before the accident. Even on the "fateful" afternoon, the ski patrol had told the Kennedys -- the last on the slopes -- it was time to quit. "Nevertheless, 36 members of the Kennedy party prepared to play." -Declan From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Brian B. Riley" Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 05:55:52 +0800 To: "Alan Olsen" Subject: Netiquette: (was) Re: .50 ammo Message-ID: <199801052140.QAA24055@mx01.together.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 1/5/98 1:29 AM, Alan Olsen (alan@clueserver.org) passed this wisdom: >At 09:24 PM 1/4/98 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >>Alan wrote: >>> At 04:50 PM 1/3/98 -0500, Brian B. Riley wrote: >>> The hardest part is getting the 50 cal ammo. (He had his Federal >>> firearms license and was in the National Guard, so it was not too >>> difficult for him.) Getting AP and other special ammo would be >>> doubly difficult. (Non-specialty ammo could be reloaded as long as >>> you could get molds and primer caps.) >>> >>> I guess it depends on your military and/or black market >>> connections. >> >>I have seen what appeared to be .50 ammo (probably not AP) in gun >> stores. > >I am surprised, but I am sure you are correct. It has been quite a >whilesince I have spent time in gun shops. (My expenditures on ammo >is limited to smaller calibers. I tend not to look at other things >because I cannot afford what I >want.) small point here of netiquette. one should be careful when trimming down quotes out of context ... I did not make the above statement. This time it is of little matter as the statement wasn't very inflammatory nor was it very controversial (not that CP is *ever* inflammatory or controversial), but it may well have been. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNLFTOz7r4fUXwraZAQHDDQf/XBk9i+6+GA7UcZD/a1CY3F/102Kh5u/L Y0KfqoMGCqv23oeJbayxjbWtXKSDd5+wX8Owrmr0i4arsD7vsunECkiQeUf0oQ83 Nid/tffRD5smu6P7mrf4yRVWOKKMmY8/VLOpFi9mRrOGVAWpGildXDikIhDuFylW RHjRnSugM88RUqz1Z7rLuIirMpYm//UVT0YRM9EXUyH/ejmOgH5YB8vP5isPBa4T L2TjPKbirQU1BX5HdgrVB+WkOpHdfSvA6sFlMPdAG4VvRltXA1IXZv1ce1AlKgtW OTnzvFoVrnMieJ0cKxe/dXSbFpedb9BBmCcCo+GWuf/Z2M/NWMwSnA== =SO5L -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys "There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause comedy in the streets?" Dick Cavett From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 07:20:04 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Crypto-enemy senator gets cash from Johnny Chung Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sen. Kerry is not as extreme as Sen. Kerrey, but he still is an enemy of strong encryption. I wrote last year: >>>> The committee also approved amendments proposed by Kerry that would give jurisdiction over crypto exports to a nine-member "Encryption Export Advisory Board." The panel would "evaluate whether [a] market exists abroad" and make non-binding recommendations to the president. <<<< Here's what he's been up to recently... -Declan KERRY: DAMAGE CONTROL Boston Globe's Black reports, Boston atty Robert Crowe on 12/29 resigned as chair of Sen. John Kerry's (D) camp. finance cmte "in response to negative publicity that featured his ties" to Kerry. Crowe, "a longtime close personal friend and financial supporter" of Kerry's, "reportedly decided that he had had enough of critical newspaper stories, sources close to Kerry said." Kerry, responding to the resignation which he termed "understandable": "Bob Crowe has done an outstanding job for me, often at the expense of his own personal life." Crowe had "made headlines" recently in regard to his role as a lobbyist for Boston's Big Dig and his work for a firm hired by the Swiss Bankers Assn. Kerry's finance cmte will be "'streamlined'" and headed by Peter Maroney who was hired by the campaign last fall (12/30). CHUNG CONNECTION? A Los Angeles Times article by Rempel & Miller reported that Kerry received $10K in '97 from Dem contributor Johnny Chung following Chung's "high-level meeting" with SEC officials, arranged for him by Kerry's office soon after he paid a visit there. A Kerry spokesperson "confirmed that Kerry's office contacted the SEC" on Chung's behalf, "but she said it involved no more than helping arrange "'a tour.'" The DoJ is investigating the contribution which Chung is said to have made through several employees and others whom he reimbursed. Kerry spokesperson Tovah Ravitz "acknowledged" that Chung was approached for a donation "'numerous times because they were nearing the end of a tough campaign.'" Although Ravitz said Kerry's office arranged a tour for Chung, SEC officials "said the request on behalf of Chung involved a briefing session" (12/24). Boston Globe's Zitner follows up on the Times story, reporting that Chung's visit to the SEC "was something more than a casual tour but something less than special access to high government official, the SEC said." Kerry's Ravitz said Chung made the request for a stop at the SEC during an 8/96 visit, accompanied by other Asian businessmen, to Kerry's office. Chung and the others visited the SEC later the same day (12/25). On 12/26, USA Today reported that Ravitz said the Times was incorrect in its initial report (12/26). 01/05 12:35 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: ichudov@Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 08:47:41 +0800 To: JonWienk@ix.netcom.com (Jonathan Wienke) Subject: Re: Lock and Load (fwd) In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980105111943.006ce590@popd.netcruiser> Message-ID: <199801060038.SAA30088@manifold.algebra.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Jonathan Wienke wrote: > At 10:37 PM 12/22/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >You can't lock and load an AK. I remember that very well even though it > >has been a while. The bolt just would not go far enough back to pick up > >the cartridge. The bolt carrier's charging handle would only go as far > >as to allow for the weapon inspection. > > I own a Norinco MAK-90 (a semi-auto only AK variant) and it is designed so > that a round cannot be chambered with the safety on. If the weapon is not > cocked, the hammer hits the top of the sear (which is locked by the safety) > and prevents the bolt from traveling more than 1 inch to the rear. If the > weapon is cocked, the charging handle on the side of the bolt hits the > front of the safety lever, which stops the rearward travel of the bolt at > about 2.5 inches, which is not sufficient to chamber a round. The magazine > can be inserted or removed regardless of the position of the safety or the > bolt. All AKs are like that. And I maintain that it is the right design, from the safety standpoint. - Igor. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 08:42:54 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <53Zuie3w165w@bwalk.dm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Declan McCullagh writes: > We have a good story in this week's Time that talks about how the ski > resort had repeatedly asked the Kennedys to knock it off. Including the > night before the accident. Even on the "fateful" afternoon, the ski patrol > had told the Kennedys -- the last on the slopes -- it was time to quit. > "Nevertheless, 36 members of the Kennedy party prepared to play." "Evolution in action." Thank you, Michael Kennedy, for improving humanity's gene pool. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Bruce Schneier Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 10:53:42 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Comparing PGP to Symantec's Secret Stuff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801060247.UAA24711@mixer.visi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > Having worked for those multinationals and defense >contractors, I've seen them buy new products with serious weaknesses >in key generation, with year 2000 problems, with stream ciphers used >to protect stored data--keyed the same way each time. I've seen them >use code that sent cleartext where it should have been encrypting on >the wire. I second this. The pitiful state of "secure code" is shocking. (Actually, I just wrote an essay on the topic. Get a copy for yourself at: http://www.counterpane.com/pitfalls.html.) Bruce ************************************************************************** * Bruce Schneier For information on APPLIED CRYPTOGRAPHY * Counterpane Systems 2nd EDITION (15% discount and errata), * schneier@counterpane.com Counterpane Systems's consulting services, * http://www.counterpane.com/ or the Blowfish algorithm, see my website. ************************************************************************** From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Information Security Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 09:58:49 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation Message-ID: <199801060150.UAA21492@panix2.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > "Evolution in action." > Thank you, Michael Kennedy, for improving humanity's gene pool. Too bad _you_ reproduced. ---guy From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Bruce Schneier Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 11:04:29 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Comparing PGP to Symantec's Secret Stuff In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801060259.UAA26681@mixer.visi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 08:56 PM 12/16/97 -0800, Bill Frantz wrote: >At 3:01 AM -0800 12/16/97, Vin McLellan wrote: >> Norton Secret Stuff secures the data using the 32-bit Blowfish >>encryption algorithm -- which is why it's approved for unrestricted export >>outside the US by the U.S. government. > >This is the first I've heard of a Blowfish based produce being approved for >export. Since Blowfish has about 9 bits worth of protection against brute >force searches in its key schedule, this is about a 41 bit approval. Does >anyone know of an export permit for a version of Blowfish with a key longer >than 32 bits? Blowfish with a 32-bit key has been approved for export before. The argument is that the long key setup time makes 32-bit Blowfish as weak as 40-bit anything else. I don't particularly agree, but there you have it. Bruce ********************************************************************** Bruce Schneier, President, Counterpane Systems Phone: 612-823-1098 101 E Minnehaha Parkway, Minneapolis,MN 55419 Fax: 612-823-1590 http://www.counterpane.com From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Wei Dai Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 17:05:50 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: cypherpunks and guns Message-ID: <19980106005136.23824@eskimo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately. Unless someone comes up with a weapon that has some very unusual economic properties, individuals cannot hope to compete with governments in the domain of deadly force. If we have to resort to physical violence, we've already lost! Think about it: if we can defend ourselves with guns, why would we need crypto? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 18:12:19 +0800 To: Wei Dai Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 12:51 AM -0800 1/6/98, Wei Dai wrote: >I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately. >Unless someone comes up with a weapon that has some very unusual economic >properties, individuals cannot hope to compete with governments in the >domain of deadly force. If we have to resort to physical violence, we've >already lost! People on almost any unmoderated mailing list will talk about what interests them. Those who mainly want to talk about crypto are of course free to do so. (You have, Wei, done important work in this area. But you very, very seldom write articles on this list, at least not for the last couple of years--I count less than one article per month from you over the past half year. I urge you to write such articles if you dislike reading what others are writing.) I agree that two or three or four or five years ago I was much more likely to write about something more crypto-related. Well, much time has passed. Most things worth saying have been said, at least for me. I can't work up the energy to discuss "data havens" a fourth or fifth time. (And an article from me on data havens, or information markets, or crypto anarchy, will usually produce complaints from people who don't see what it has to do with getting the latest version of PGP! That's only a slight exaggeration.) There have also been very few major new participants. A few years ago we could count on one or two major new "talents" joining the list each year, generating articles and new ideas. For whatever reasons, this has nearly stopped. I would guess the reasons are related to a) no major publicity stories as in past years, b) the disintegration of the list a year ago in the wake of the "moderation" fiasco (which cut subscriptions by 3-5x), c) competition from several other crypto lists, "moderated" by their owners, d) exhaustion of the older participants in the battles, and e) those who are interested in our topics have mostly already found us (meaning, the rich hunting period is over). ; >Think about it: if we can defend ourselves with guns, why would we need >crypto? This has an obvious answer. Guns are a last resort. Crypto makes it less likely that Big Brother will know what the proles are talking about, less likely that participants in a plan will be targetted for investigation and raids. Wei, your question could be paraphrased this way: "If Pablo Escobar could defend himself with guns, why did he need crypto in his cellphone?" (The answer being that P. Escobar was detected by using a cellphone without security. The NSA then told the DEA and its allies where he was and they took him out on a rooftop.) Final comment: If I find the motivation, I may finish an essay I've been working on about how we, the Cypherpunks and the World, are *retrogressing* in crypto areas. Most of the exotic applications are no longer being discussed, and various mundane commercial products are the main focus. Yawn. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Loren J. Rittle" Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 18:14:10 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Mobile phones used as trackers In-Reply-To: <199801012054.PAA25297@users.invweb.net> Message-ID: <199801061007.EAA28104@supra.rsch.comm.mot.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain In article <199801012054.PAA25297@users.invweb.net>, "William H. Geiger III" writes: > It is my understanding that they can still track you with the cell phone > turned off so long as there is power going to the box (most auto cell > phones are hardwired into the cars electrical system). This is the funniest thing I have read in some time. Assuming you watch the show, I think you may have watched too many episodes of the X-Files (TM). When the subscriber unit (SU a.k.a. the cellular phone) is turned off, "they" can't track you. Now, it is possible that some cars have built-in SUs that automatically power-on whenever the car is started. In this case, the SU is clearly turned on and the user knows it. Analog cellular phone systems in the U.S. only force the SU to transmit when they need too. As someone else already mentioned, from the perspective of cellular system operators, bandwidth is in short supply. The cellular system operators wouldn't stand for a bunch of unneeded transmissions "just to track location". Based upon my own personal informal study [1] and some past knowledge of cellular-type systems [2], in general, I believe the following about analog cellular systems fielded in the U.S.: 1) "They" might be able to get a location reading at power-on time. The SU will check to see if it is being powered on within a different cell than it was last registered. If the cell is different, then the SU transmits a message on the cell's control channel to reregister. If the SU believes it is in the same cell, then it doesn't transmit anything at power-on time. If the SU transmits, it will be a very short burst. This would allow an attacker to see your location at power-on time. 2) When your SU is on, "they" can track your cell-to-cell movements. Cells are on the order of 1-10 miles in diameter. The more populated the area (actually, the more likely the system is to be used in an area), the smaller the cell size. "They" will only get a reading when you move between cells. The system uses a form of hysteresis so your SU doesn't flip back and forth between two cells while you are on the "edge" between cell. Actually, there are no real edges to the cells in an RF cellular system. There is a bit of overlap between cells and the cell boundaries actually move over time due to environmental factors. I.e. your SU might be stationary and yet decide to move to a different cell due to a stronger signal being seen from a different cell at a particular point in time. 3) "They" can track your fine-grain movement while you are engaged in a call or call setup. This is because an SU transmits the entire time these activities take place. Note that call setup can be for either incoming or outgoing calls. The above appear to be the only times an SU will transmit in a properly functioning analog cellular system. Now, if we change the rules to allow an active "spoof" attack or participation by the service provider, I speculate that specific attacks against one or a few people (well, actually against their SUs) could be waged to track their fine-grain movement: 4) Continuously inform the SU that an incoming call is waiting. The user would get an indication of this attack since the phone would "ring" to signal an incoming call. OTOH, perhaps, there is a way to inform the SU that an incoming call is waiting without allowing the phone to enter the final state where it begins to "ring". A detailed study of the air interface and SU implementations would be required to understand if the silent attack is possible. This attack could target one SU. Even if direct indications were not seen by the user, battery life would be shortened somewhat. 5) Continuously force the SU to "see" a different cell code, thus forcing it to continuously reregister. The user would get no direct indication during the attack. However, battery life would be shortened somewhat. There may be protection in the SU to ensure a minimum time period between reregistrations. However, this would just limit the fineness of the tracking. Again, detailed study would be required. This attack would appear to target multiple SUs in a given area. If you assume your attacker is capable of (4), (5) and similar tricks and you have something to hide, then I suppose turning your SU off and on is a wise course of action. However, the coarse-grain (pin-point location but only at widely dispersed points in time) tracking afforded by (1) and (2) seem like minimal threats. If you are concerned by (3), then please remind me why you are using the analog cellular phone system. Regards, Loren [1] My informal study was conducted with a Motorola Micro TAC Lite SU and an HP 2.9 GHz Spectrum Analyzer on 1/5/98 and 1/6/98. My analog cellular service provider is Ameritech in the Chicagoland area. [2] Disclaimer: I personally work on research related to the iDEN system (which is an advanced form of digital cellular with dispatch services and packet data) being rolled out nationwide in the U.S. by Nextel along with other local and international operators. Motorola recently shipped the millionth SU for iDEN. I am only speaking for myself. I have never worked on analog cellular systems nor read its specification. -- Loren J. Rittle (rittle@comm.mot.com) PGP KeyIDs: 1024/B98B3249 2048/ADCE34A5 Systems Technology Research (IL02/2240) FP1024:6810D8AB3029874DD7065BC52067EAFD Motorola, Inc. FP2048:FDC0292446937F2A240BC07D42763672 (847) 576-7794 Call for verification of fingerprints. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ryan Lackey Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 18:50:14 +0800 To: Wei Dai Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain (Wei Dai) writes: > I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately. > Unless someone comes up with a weapon that has some very unusual economic > properties, individuals cannot hope to compete with governments in the > domain of deadly force. If we have to resort to physical violence, we've > already lost! > > Think about it: if we can defend ourselves with guns, why would we need > crypto? I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could inflict a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military. With maybe $20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, you could make life very difficult for any luckless squad that happens your way. Multiply that by 100 million armed citizens and you see that armed civilian resistance *can* defeat an occupying army. Certainly in times of "peace" information/infrastructure warfare is much more cost effective for the guerilla -- but once they start sending armored patrols around armed with 600 surplus M-16 rifles and having [un]official rules of engagement which include sniper fire on the wives and children of citizens not convicted of any crime, burning tens of people alive for their religious beliefs, forcibly sodomizing suspects with wooden rods, and passing laws which cripple the 1st by making it a crime to read, it's perhaps worth looking at other methods of resistance. (wow, that approached Hettingan length while having little in common with his style :) Plus, I honestly believe certain people who lacked the foresight or desire to use anonymity have increased the chances of illegal unconstitutional government action against them. It'll be a lot harder to quietly kill someone and keep it out of the news if they're prepared to fight back to the extent that I gather Tim May and others are prepared. Even if being armed does nothing more than let the world know they have declared war against the constitution, it's worth it. Me, I still plan to get out before high powered riflery becomes anything other than a sport. The Seychelles are looking remarkably tempting... (I still say steel core ammo is the way to go, especially in 5.56 NATO and 7.62 Soviet. There exist plenty of vests which have rifle hardplate to stop those rounds -- even 7.62 NATO rounds. 7.62 NATO AP/API, though, is a bit tougher, buying you substantial time) Hacking on Eternity DDS, Ryan [Not actually a gun toting lunatic, nor does he play one on TV, but rather keeps them in a safe, and carries knives instead. Yay Massachusetts. I hope this does not spark a discussion of how to stop a government assault force armed with only a knife (hint: the answer is not "in parallel")] [*ObCrypto* (it's getting really hard to do this every time): AOLserver (a nice web server formerly from GNN/navisoft) punted their 128bit SSL module distribution *EVEN TO US CITIZENS* due to commerce department fuckedness. Anyone know where I could get a copy? It would really suck to have to patch the 40bit one into a 128bit version, since they do not distribute source. Sigh. But I've started to use it for insecure stuff because it's cheaper than Stronghold (read: free) and does some cool database stuff easier than apache. And (cool db stuff + free) is more important than (secure) or (secure and easily configured and supported) for this.] -- Ryan Lackey rdl@mit.edu http://mit.edu/rdl/ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: John Young Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 20:14:06 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Letter on Jim Bell Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19980106115810.0074e354@pop.pipeline.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain There's a recent letter on Jim Bell/AP/IRS harassment by long-time friend Bob East at: http://www.charm.net/~joabj/belet.htm Offered by Joab Jackson, who wrote the recent story posted here for the Baltimore City Paper. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Eric Murray Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 01:14:06 +0800 To: weidai@eskimo.com Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: <19980106005136.23824@eskimo.com> Message-ID: <199801061655.IAA23107@slack.lne.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Wei Dai writes: > > I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately. > Unless someone comes up with a weapon that has some very unusual economic > properties, individuals cannot hope to compete with governments in the > domain of deadly force. If we have to resort to physical violence, we've > already lost! > > Think about it: if we can defend ourselves with guns, why would we need > crypto? I agree- the fedz will always have better firepower than any of us. Tim's strategy of letting them know that he won't take a 'no-knock' raid sitting down might keep them honest. Or it might make them come in with 80 special agents and a heliocopter to drop napalm on his house. I'm not going to spend a lot of time setting up defenses against a massive police attack- the costs are too high (expensive weapons, time practicing on the range) and the hassle is great... who wants to live barricaded in their house, jumping at every noise? Better to do the things that we're good at- writing code, cracking codes, writing about crypto-liberation ideas. However, guns are good for a couple things- they're still useful against non-government thugs, and they're a hell of a lot of fun. -- Eric Murray Chief Security Scientist N*Able Technologies www.nabletech.com (email: ericm at lne.com or nabletech.com) PGP keyid:E03F65E5 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 02:01:00 +0800 To: Tim May Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980106095312.007b8eb0@otc.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 01:54 AM 1/6/98 -0800, Tim May wrote: >At 12:51 AM -0800 1/6/98, Wei Dai wrote: >>I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately. Wei, Tim's response, though correct, is too serious. The real reason, I am inferring as I was not the initiator, was humor. This list tolerates a fair amount of crap, including spam and random ad-hominems. This is a result of the openness required to permit anonymous posts as has been explained in the last month or so. I have considered this 1. an occasional demonstration of crypto issues, esp. anonymity and authentication 2. just typical net.abuse. (There is also some oddness going on apparently between Vulis and others on this list, which Vulis didn't deny was spoofed when I asked. I don't know why, as V. seems to be libertarian, if homophobic.) There are also various humorous threads and banter that occurs. The gun-troll was part of that. Of course, it was a respectable question and answered well, although TM's answer tended towards the expensive, but Intel has done well. Both the question itself on this list, and the dryness of the answers, were amusing. The body-armor question is humorous also, esp. following the gun side-thread. Of course, your milage may vary. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 02:24:08 +0800 To: Ryan Lackey Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980106100807.007ab610@otc.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 05:28 AM 1/6/98 -0500, Ryan Lackey wrote: > >I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could inflict >a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military. With maybe >$20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, you could make >life very difficult for any luckless squad that happens your way. Multiply >that by 100 million armed citizens and you see that armed civilian >resistance *can* defeat an occupying army. A distributed decentralized terrorist group can trash almost any country's infrastructure as well. The gov't knows this, but if it were to start happening (or their intelligence indicated it might) guards would be sent to the power stations, transformers, water works, radio relays, NAPs, refineries, etc. These guards would be physical, guarding physical resources against physical threats. They would be able to resist smaller threats. As you say, if outnumbered, they're eventually hosed. The recent gov't interest in 'cyber' threats against infrastructure reflects the fact that the government doesn't dominate the digital domain, and can't protect it with troops, and needs it to run civilization and its armies. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "William H. Geiger III" Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 00:25:39 +0800 To: Andy Dustman Subject: Re: PGP-out-only vs. hashcash aware remailers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801061630.LAA15383@users.invweb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 01/05/98 at 11:14 AM, Andy Dustman said: >A couple problems: PGP (2.6.x) doesn't seem to have an option to only >de-armor PGP -da [filename] - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNLJZ9o9Co1n+aLhhAQHtGAP+LCyT+AGEcQoatO6vGAzj1qAInO9eSb9a Lhil7PdLxJFJO7FrkkpEkUSq+thIpKU5H+Kfo/qwq+fkeIKlgh8EAlog4bLTaTg8 yW2ZAOn1qVY5xZHppvIn946WE0/IxFCXee5EfzrnhchvpzVn4JXtYkWNf0wqP8it vPOsqKr3XQ4= =Vx+s -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Miller Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 00:10:03 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: Mobile phones used as trackers In-Reply-To: <199801012054.PAA25297@users.invweb.net> Message-ID: <34B27F22.7C07@avana.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Loren J. Rittle wrote: > If you assume your attacker is capable of (4), (5) and similar tricks > and you have something to hide, then I suppose turning your SU off and > on is a wise course of action. Another attack that was recently described to me by someone in the industry is to setup a three-way conversation, which basically is a cellular phone tap. The conversation could be split within the cell network to a silent party more interested in your communications than your location. --David Miller From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 03:19:49 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: ACM conference on computer-related policy (DC, 5/98) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 11:10:49 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh To: fight-censorship-announce@vorlon.mit.edu Subject: ACM conference on computer-related policy (DC, 5/98) [The best policy for the Net is probably no policy, or at most a hands-off one. We don't have national "policies" for how we should regulate, for example, newspapers or bookstores, and we don't need such policies for the Net. On universal service, we already have Internet connections that are cheaper than cable TV; on copyright, the safest course is to let federal courts decide; on crypto, most agree that the current "policy" is misguided at best. --Declan] *************** ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING (ACM) ANNUAL CONFERENCE * * * POLICY98 * * * "Shaping Policy in the Information Age" Washington, DC, Renaissance Hotel May 10-12, 1998 Preliminary Notice For Conference and Registration information see: http://www.acm.org/usacm/events/policy98/ The ACM Annual Conference will focus on public policy issues affecting future applications of computing. Our goal is to forge stronger links between computing professionals and policy makers. Attendees will interact with prominent leaders from academia, industry, Congress, and Executive agencies, and participate in debates on policy issues including Universal Access, Electronic Commerce, Intellectual Property, and Education Online. The conference will promote more regular engagement of computing professionals in democratic processes related to productive use of computing and information processing innovations. A blend of technical skills and policy insights are essential to cope with the inherent opportunities and dangers of any transformational technology. Continuing collaborations between computing professionals and policy makers will benefit citizens, consumers, entrepreneurs, researchers, and students. You can make a difference! May 10: Ethical and social impacts papers and panels May 11-12: Public policy panels and featured speakers All Policy98 attendees are invited to the Annual ACM Awards Banquet on Sunday evening May 10th, and a conference reception on Monday evening May 11th. +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ PANEL TOPICS AND COORDINATORS =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Universal Service: Ollie Smoot What can be done to promote widespread access to the benefits of the Internet? What is the role of government and the role of the private sector in wiring schools, libraries, and medical facilities? Electronic Commerce: Jim Horning How much public policy does EComm need? What problems would inadequate, excessive, or misguided policies cause? Can compromises in areas like fair trade practices, fraud prevention, security, privacy, law enforcement, and taxation advance the interests of all stakeholders? Intellectual Property in Cyberspace: Pam Samuelson What will be the impact of the WIPO agreements on copyright in cyberspace? How should intellectual property be protected and what safeguards are necessary to protect libraries and academic institutions? Education Online: Charles N. Brownstein The Internet offers unparalleled opportunities for learning and teaching. What public policy and technical challenges must be met to realize these prospects? +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRS =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Ben Shneiderman, USACM (U.S. Public Policy Committee) C. Dianne Martin, SIGCAS (ACM Special Interest Group on Computers & Society) +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ PROGRAM COMMITTEE CHAIRS =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ Marc Rotenberg, Public Policy Keith Miller, Ethics and Social Impacts +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ REGISTRATION INFORMATION =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ For more information, contact: policy98@acm.org or to register electronically, see: http://www.acm.org/usacm/events/policy98/reginfo.html Early registrants and ACM members receive discounts. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "William H. Geiger III" Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 01:45:57 +0800 To: rittle@comm.mot.com Subject: Re: Mobile phones used as trackers In-Reply-To: <199801061007.EAA28104@supra.rsch.comm.mot.com> Message-ID: <199801061749.MAA16034@users.invweb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199801061007.EAA28104@supra.rsch.comm.mot.com>, on 01/06/98 at 05:07 AM, "Loren J. Rittle" said: >In article <199801012054.PAA25297@users.invweb.net>, >"William H. Geiger III" writes: >> It is my understanding that they can still track you with the cell phone >> turned off so long as there is power going to the box (most auto cell >> phones are hardwired into the cars electrical system). >This is the funniest thing I have read in some time. Assuming you watch >the show, I think you may have watched too many episodes of the X-Files >(TM). The point I was trying to make, and you seemed to have missed, is that just because you turn off the switch and the lights are not flashing and blinking does not mean that power is not going to some of the circuits. Take the following into account: 1) Location Tracking via Cell Phone is currently available using equipment in place. 2) FCC mandates for Location tracking under the cover of 911 service 3) In field testing being done in several cities. 4) Lojack systems in place in several cities. 5) Systems in development for continuous traffic monitoring in the major cities for automated traffic management to address the problems of "rush hour" traffic. 6) GPS systems being built into productions vehicles at the factory. It seems only natural to merge these into one piece of equipment using one communication infrastructure. I think that if you take a closer look at where various technologies and regulations are going to see that this is less "X-File" like than you may think. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNLJsa49Co1n+aLhhAQENDwQAg93KFwtcSlKX2MB/W/zaQ1DoPtPoo1/+ 69qd8v9fTz35IOr8hKLiwwSf1jxqJNOMasU1jyjQtmPqZLVJFS6vQdgbj+9mcRaQ VKL48HrmiGasEFYXlsVP7qBSPxYP63qxz3gs0zKlKVLrZ6dO+0dt+WXdc1lYCcaJ a9BM9B3w/Pw= =dULr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: jim@mentat.com (Jim Gillogly) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 04:15:19 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption Message-ID: <9801062004.AA18375@mentat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Eric Cordian says: > Could someone poke through Lotus Notes with a debugger and see exactly how > this "giving 24 bits to the government" is implemented? Lotus produced a "backgrounder" called "Differential Workfactor Cryptography" when they first promulgated the 64/40 stuff. It says (in part): We do that by encrypting 24 of the 64 bits under a public RSA key provided by the U.S. government and binding the encrypted partial key to the encrypted data. I haven't seen the USG RSA key -- if it's 512 bits, that would be a humorous next factoring target. Jim Gillogly 15 Afteryule S.R. 1998, 20:02 12.19.4.14.15, 12 Men 13 Kankin, Seventh Lord of Night From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ray Arachelian Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 01:04:53 +0800 To: Salvatore DeNaro Subject: Re: 800 pound GorillaSoft In-Reply-To: <00456D9D.1576@usccmail.lehman.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Tue, 6 Jan 1998, Salvatore DeNaro passed me this url: http://www.motherjones.com/mother_jones/JF98/burstein.html "But instead of waiting for a ruling on the case, the BSA abruptly dropped the suit in the fall of 1997. The BSA receives funding from most of the top software companies but appears to be most heavily funded by Microsoft. And, according to Antel's information technology manager, Ricardo Tascenho, the company settled the matter by signing a "special agreement" with Microsoft to replace all of its software with Microsoft products...." Happy happy joy joy. Microsoft saves a pirate by assimilating it. Resistance is futile. You will sell NT. :( =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder@sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... ======================= http://www.sundernet.com ========================== From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "William H. Geiger III" Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 02:16:27 +0800 To: Ray Arachelian Subject: Re: fwd: The Swedes discover Lotus Notes has key escrow! (Win Treese) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801061821.NAA16341@users.invweb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 01/06/98 at 12:11 PM, Ray Arachelian said: >Lotus, a subsidiary of the American computer giant IBM, has negotiated a >special solution to the problem. Lotus gets to export strong >cryptography with the requirement that vital parts of the secret keys are >deposited with the U.S. government. ``The difference between the >American Notes version and the export version lies in degrees of >encryption. We deliver 64 bit keys to all customers, but 24 bits of >those in the version that we deliver outside of the United States are >deposited with the American government. That's how it works today,'' >says Eileen Rudden, vice president at Lotus. I have 2 problems with this outside of the fact they are doing it: 1) 64 bits is too weak. 2) why should we trust them that it is only the export versions they are giving the 24bit to the government on?? Yet *another* reason not to use Lotus Bloats. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNLJ0AY9Co1n+aLhhAQH/ugP/c98Sq7gCiXV8P045MyJZbcGmJGmD1IeX SgQAhCrThv8bmou+stgJfoYClaDQ1ozbyGyCuJXgCgp/AHhUjEuDLGxIgAzRTuHX V3vNSvNhW3FHMVSG1+UGylchaZzwhyo036frJrc3zxGXPGY142Y1BEW+4Zeoa1NN YPw0QYYnxnY= =k6PK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ray Arachelian Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 01:12:53 +0800 To: cypherpunks MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain (From the SpyKing Security Mailing list) 2)From: Mike G Subject: Lotus Privacy Problems This was taken from the Computer Privacy Digest 1/4/98 V12#00 Very interesting. The Swedes discover Lotus Notes has key escrow! (Win Treese) The article describes the reaction when various people in the Swedish government learned that the Lotus Notes system they were using includes key escrow. They were apparently unaware of this until Notes was in use by thousands of people in government and industry. Besides being an interesting reaction to key escrow systems, this incident reminds us that one should understand the real security of a system.... Secret Swedish E-Mail Can Be Read by the U.S.A. Fredrik Laurin, Calle Froste, *Svenska Dagbladet*, 18 Nov 1997 One of the world's most widely used e-mail programs, the American Lotus Notes, is not so secure as most of its 400,000 to 500,000 Swedish users believe. To be sure, it includes advanced cryptography in its e-mail function, but the codes that protect the encryption have been surrendered to American authorities. With them, the U.S. government can decode encrypted information. Among Swedish users are 349 parliament members, 15,000 tax agency employees, as well as employees in large businesses and the defense department. ``I didn't know that our Notes keys were deposited (with the U.S.). It was interesting to learn this,'' says Data Security Chief Jan Karlsson at the [Swedish] our Notes keys were deposited (with the U.S.). It was interesting to learn this,'' says Data Security Chief Jan Karlsson at the [Swedish] defense department. Gunnar Grenfors, Parliament director and daily e-mail user, says, ``I didn't know about this--here we handle sensitive information concerning Sweden's interests, and we should not leave the keys to this information to the U.S. government or anyone else. This must be a basic requirement.'' Sending information over the Internet is like sending a postcard--it's that simple to read these communications. When e-mail is encrypted, it becomes unintelligible for anyone who captures it during transport. Only those who have the right codes or raw computer power to break the encryption can read it. For crime prevention and national security reasons, the United States has tough regulations concerning the level of crytography that may be exported. Both large companies and intelligence agencies can already--in a fractions of a second--break the simpler cryptographic protections. For the world-leading American computer industry, cryptographic export controls are therefore an ever greater obstacle. This slows down utilization of the Internet by businesses because companies outside the U.S.A. do not dare to send important information over the Internet. On the other hand, the encryption that may be used freely within the U.S.A. is substantially more secure. Lotus, a subsidiary of the American computer giant IBM, has negotiated a special solution to the problem. Lotus gets to export strong cryptography with the requirement that vital parts of the secret keys are deposited with the U.S. government. ``The difference between the American Notes version and the export version lies in degrees of encryption. We deliver 64 bit keys to all customers, but 24 bits of those in the version that we deliver outside of the United States are deposited with the American government. That's how it works today,'' says Eileen Rudden, vice president at Lotus. Those 24 bits are critical for security in the system. 40-bit encryption is broken by a fast computer in several seconds, while 64 bits is much more time-consuming to break if one does not have the 24 bits [table omitted]. Lotus cannot answer as to which authorities have received the keys and what rules apply for giving them out. The company has confidence that the American authorities responsible for this have full control over the keys and can ensure that they will not be misused. On the other hand, this (assurance) does not matter to Swedish companies. On the contrary, there is a growing understanding that it would be an unacceptable security risk to place the corporation's own ``master key'' in the hands of foreign authorities. Secret information can leak or be spread through, for example, court decisions in other countries. These concerns are demonstrated clearly in a survey by the SAF Trade and Industry security delegation. Some 60 companies answered the survey. They absolutely do not want keys deposited in the U.S.A. It is business secrets they are protecting. These corporations fear that anyone can get a hold of this information, states Claes Blomqvist at SAF. Swedish businesses are also afraid of leaks within the American authorities. The security chief at SKF, Lars Lungren, states: ``If one has a lawful purpose for having control over encryption, it isn't a problem. But the precept is flawed: They ought to monitor (internally), but the Americans now act as if there are no crooks working within their authorities.'' In some countries, intelligence agencies clearly have taken a position on their country's trade and industry. Such is the case in France. One example, which French authorities chose to publicize, was in 1995 when five CIA agents were deported after having spied on a French telecommunications company. Win Treese [The Lotus Notes crypto scheme is one that I have familiarly been calling ``64 40 or fight!'' (in a reference to a slogan for an early U.S. election campaign border-dispute issue many years ago. PGN] From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Pearson Shane Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 09:46:32 +0800 To: "'Steve Schear'" Subject: RE: Location Escrow anyone ? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Hi All, > >> 800 MHz analog may be the most difficult. GSM perhaps can reach 500 meteres >>under ideal conditions >> (Andreas Bogk). IS-95/CDMA probably a bit better than GSM due to the very >>high data (chip) rate and >> spread spectrum's better multipath characteristics, although the system's >>multipath performance most >> improves communications not ranging (Phil Karn, Qualcomm). > > >GSM doesn't use spread spectrum? > >Either way, I'd imagine that the accurate time domain division used with GSM >would provide >the Telco's with something a lot better than 500 meters. > >Some cells where I live aren't much further apart than 500 meters. :) > >Bye for now. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Andy Dustman Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 01:43:05 +0800 To: "William H. Geiger III" Subject: Re: PGP-out-only vs. hashcash aware remailers? In-Reply-To: <199801061630.LAA15383@users.invweb.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 6 Jan 1998, William H. Geiger III wrote: > In , on > 01/05/98 > at 11:14 AM, Andy Dustman said: > > >A couple problems: PGP (2.6.x) doesn't seem to have an option to only > >de-armor > > PGP -da [filename] Well that would help a lot, then. Find the begin and end headers for the PGP message, pipe it into pgp -da, throw away the output, check the exit code, which should be set if the armor was invalid (or perhaps look at stderr). Like I said, though, you could still make the armor valid by correctly calculating the CRC, or even make PGP generate the armor with the insult/flames/whatever in the output (just a matter of shifting some bits around before armoring, could be done in perl). But this is certainly not worth worrying about. Andy Dustman / Computational Center for Molecular Structure and Design For a great anti-spam procmail recipe, send me mail with subject "spam". Append "+spamsucks" to my username to ensure delivery. KeyID=0xC72F3F1D Encryption is too important to leave to the government. -- Bruce Schneier http://www.athens.net/~dustman mailto:andy@neptune.chem.uga.edu <}+++< -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQEPAwUBNLJsUBOPBZTHLz8dAQFd8wfQhU4uMzLL8zHUXtHSeBLdHYPe66h6ZNw7 aMHntK3fz+6ZkpiTLb/iqGZKNm6pSueXz3CxbIytbTS+IwFpgRpZX/w2gz1Jw2hh tRiB9pCIXSlnV5E9K5fsREZRGlRyj82J6n2yjrTOQWLlW+piAopbBz20ShyELBaA HbygYVmbtqH0Q5aHXO6xVfz6odP0UQB3RblpVZr/Zl99tbbL9mZ5g8CMgcOf57Jq kORo+q4FTo8DhC7KfOs4oqIcsj+yKsX7qwANMd9RTl+6YXsqcV6A/jf2g3v1Q3wQ 1Oggz1gWNXn3+d2RSuIrCFEoUpLHIfMk4pMv8tH/Ikuaag== =869+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 04:46:31 +0800 To: Adam Back Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:08 AM -0800 1/6/98, Adam Back wrote: >it looks more like Jim was suggesting that free market forces would >tend to prevent deaths of lesser known people. Think about it -- it >would be dead easy to get a contract on Barney due to the number of >people who know and hate him -- but on an average neighbor, who is >completely obscure, you'd easily have to fund the entire bet yourself. The weakness of Bell's scheme was always that it only worked (so to speak) with well-known people. While there are some who want well-known people dead, most murders-for-hire happen for personal or financial reasons. Given untraceable payment systems, and buttressed with untraceable escrow systems, a much more efficient approach is simply to hire the killers untraceably. And the fluff about "picking the death date" is a side issue, one which merely makes the whole thing more cumbersome. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 04:50:48 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Ray Ozzie and the Lotus Notes "40 + 24" GAK Hack In-Reply-To: <199801061930.NAA09848@wire.insync.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:30 AM -0800 1/6/98, Eric Cordian wrote: >Could someone poke through Lotus Notes with a debugger and see exactly how >this "giving 24 bits to the government" is implemented? > >Most commercial software simply introduces redundancy in order to limit >the keyspace to 40 bits, regardless of the advertised length of the key. >This claim that they deliver 64 bits of key to the customer seems a bit >bogus. > >Of course, they could have done something clever, like generating a >completely random 64 bit key, and then encrypting 24 bits of it with a >giant government-owned RSA public key, and including this additional >information with each message. However, it seems unlikely that they would >employ such strong encryption for message recovery, while offering only 64 >bits for message encryption. > >Is Lotus Notes encryption documented anywhere? Are the differences >between the export and domestic versions disclosed to overseas customers? Ray Ozzie, founder of Iris, the company which developed Notes and sold it to Lotus, discussed his "40 + 24" hack a couple of years ago. It was met with much derision in the community. (He sent me a nice letter explaining his motivations for the 40 + 24 hack, but I was of course unconvinced. BTW, my recollection was that they were trying to get the industry to adopt this as a way of satisfying _domestic_ calls for GAK, not just for export to those dumb Swedes :-}). --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 05:02:22 +0800 To: Declan McCullagh Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:11 AM -0800 1/6/98, Declan McCullagh wrote: >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 11:10:49 -0800 (PST) >From: Declan McCullagh >To: fight-censorship-announce@vorlon.mit.edu >Subject: ACM conference on computer-related policy (DC, 5/98) > >[The best policy for the Net is probably no policy, or at most a hands-off >one. We don't have national "policies" for how we should regulate, for >example, newspapers or bookstores, and we don't need such policies for the >Net. On universal service, we already have Internet connections that are >cheaper than cable TV; on copyright, the safest course is to let federal >courts decide; on crypto, most agree that the current "policy" is >misguided at best. --Declan] > >*************** > > ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING (ACM) ANNUAL CONFERENCE > > * * * POLICY98 * * * > "Shaping Policy in the Information Age" > > Washington, DC, Renaissance Hotel > May 10-12, 1998 .. Jeez, don't these Beltway Bandits _ever_ get tired of holding these bullshit little conferences? It seems every month or so there's one of these b.s. things. Must be a way to justify their existence. "Shaping Policy in the Information Age." Give me a break. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 05:14:50 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Rep. Sonny Bono (R-California) dies at 62 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ************ http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/afternoon/0,1012,1670,00.html The Netly News / Afternoon Line January 6, 1998 When Sonny Turns to Blue Rep. Sonny Bono, a Congressman better known for his songwriting than his lawmaking, died yesterday in a skiing accident. He was 62. Bono built his show-biz career on being the butt of Cher's jokes and found that he played a similar role in Washington, a town where self-deprecation is reviled, not admired. Washingtonian magazine once dubbed him the dumbest member of Congress, and commentators criticized his informal approach to lawmaking on the buttoned-down House Judiciary committee, on which the California Republican tackled Internet legislation. Early last year he staunchly opposed the FBI's demands for increased government snooping power but then backed down. He told me in September that at first he had not been "aware" of the details surrounding the encryption debate and there are others "we have to be concerned about." Bono also sponsored H.R. 1621 and H.R. 2589, two copyright extension bills currently being considered by Congress. --Declan McCullagh/Washington From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 02:10:16 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Gadget Warfare, from the Netly News Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ********* http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1669,00.html The Netly News (http://netlynews.com/) January 6, 1998 Gadget Warfare by Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com) For a country with no real military rivals, the U.S. still manages to find an amazing number of enemies. Terrorists top the list of anti-American villains, according to a Pentagon report released last month. The 100-page document, called "Responses to Transnational Threats," describes how the military should respond to the threat of saboteurs and bombers aiming for violence, not victory. The solution, according to the Pentagon, is to develop a set of gadgets that would make even James Bond jealous: * STICKY ELECTRONICS Think SpiderMan's spidertracers, only smaller. "Sticky electronics" adhere to a suspected terrorist's clothing, hair, luggage or vehicle and report his location. These almost microscopic gizmos tune in to satellite signals and transmit their exact latitude and longitude. "To conserve battery (and mission life) they would respond only when" activated by a radio signal, the Pentagon says. And if you're the suspicious type, sprinkle some in your spouse's underwear. * DATA MINING If you worried about the FBI's jones for access to your data, wait 'til you find out what the military hopes to do. The Pentagon wants authority to sift through private-sector databases in hopes of tracking down, say, the World Trade Center bombers before they strike. The plan is to incorporate "real-time data on international border crossings, real-time cargo manifests, global financial transactions and the global network carrying international airline ticket manifests." As new private-sector databases are developed, "the baseline system would be augmented so that the correlation and fusion process becomes more automated." But the benefits of invading everyone's privacy are dubious: It's hard to imagine the alleged Unabomber, for instance, showing up in computer files. [...] From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jonathan Wienke Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 05:35:36 +0800 To: Wei Dai Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980106131052.00745004@popd.netcruiser> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At 12:51 AM 1/6/98 -0800, Wei Dai wrote: >I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately. >Unless someone comes up with a weapon that has some very unusual economic >properties, individuals cannot hope to compete with governments in the >domain of deadly force. If we have to resort to physical violence, we've >already lost! > >Think about it: if we can defend ourselves with guns, why would we need >crypto? InfoWar has always been a critical component of MeatWar. Knowing who your enemy is and where he is at makes it much easier to do something about him. Intelligence (in the military sense) and the tools to deny it to your enemy (strong crypto) are of equal importance to weapons. If you know that a homicidal Postal Service employee is standing outside your front door and is preparing to blast it off its hinges and then kill you, this intelligence will do nothing but raise your blood pressure if you have no weapons with which to deal with the situation. (Calling 911 isn't going to help you much.) If you own several "assault weapons", but are asleep in the living room when the door comes crashing down, the lack of intel will greatly reduce the effectiveness of said weapons. I have an equation for this: Effectiveness = Intelligence * Force * Will. I define force as the theoretical ability to inflict damage on an opponent, whether via bad PR, propaganda, lethal or nonlethal weapons, or any other means. Force has 2 components: Materiel and Skill. Thus, Force = Materiel * Skill. (Example: If I own a riot shotgun and appropriate ammunition, and have taken it to the range and familiarized myself with its use, I have the theoretical ability to shoot the aforementioned Homicidal Postal Employee, but mere ownership of the weapon and skill in its use does not guarantee that outcome.) Will is simply the will to fight if necessary. Although government will always have a higher Force factor than an individual or "the cypherpunks" or a militia, it can be possible to achieve a higher Effectiveness score via higher Intelligence and/or Will factors. This is how we lost the war in Vietnam. We had a much higher Force level than the VC, comparable Intelligence levels, but a much lower Will ratio (at least at the upper decision-making levels). Because of this, our Force assets were bound under all sorts of bizarre restrictions which hampered their usefulness, and we ultimately left in defeat. By disseminating a mechanism for increasing the Cypherpunks Force level (the Assassination Politics essay) and annoying some IRS agents with a stinkbomb, Jim Bell increased the government's Will to capture and incarcerate him. This is the problem with with terrorism in general (the OKC bombing is a prime example). If either Intelligence (the domain of crypto) or Force (the domain of weapons) is zero, Effectiveness (the real-world ability to inflict damage or defend yourself from damage) is also zero. Ignoring either can be costly. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Business Security 5.5 iQA/AwUBNLKd2sJF0kXqpw3MEQJMDACfbGNLIqwE57SxitK5ZDDc/JuWn1YAniO0 MxsO+BZXi+DWL9URMyOj+dzr =s/B9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Jonathan Wienke PGP Key Fingerprints: 7484 2FB7 7588 ACD1 3A8F 778A 7407 2928 3312 6597 8258 9A9E D9FA 4878 C245 D245 EAA7 0DCC "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." -- Samuel Adams "Stupidity is the one arena of of human achievement where most people fulfill their potential." -- Jonathan Wienke Never sign a contract that contains the phrase "first-born child." When the government fears the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny. RSA export-o-matic: print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 02:31:45 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Jim Bell article excerpt (Was: Letter on Jim Bell) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I wrote this last summer: [...] Then Assassination Politics sent the IRS into a tizzy. Jeffrey Gordon, an inspector in the IRS' Internal Security Division, widened the investigation immediately. He detailed in an 10-page affidavit how he traced Bell's use of allegedly fraudulent Social Security Numbers, how he learned that Bell had been arrested in 1989 for "manufacturing a controlled substance," how he found out that Bell possessed the home addresses of a handful of IRS agents. Gordon's conclusion? Bell planned "to overthrow the government." The IRS investigator said in his affidavit that Bell's "essay details an illegal scheme by Bell which involves plans to assassinate IRS and other government officials... I believe that Bell has begun taking steps to carry out his Assassination Politics plan." But for all Gordon's bluster in court documents, he had no proof that Bell broke the law. He didn't even have enough evidence to arrest the prolific essayist -- at least not yet. After the April 1 raid, Gordon and a team of IRS agents worked to assemble a case against Bell. They pored through the hard drives of the three computers they seized. They scrutinized documents from Bell's house. They interrogated his friends. They listened to tape recordings of the "Multnomah County Common Law Court." They scoured the Net for mentions of Assassination Politics. Six weeks later they felt their case was complete. --- IRS agents arrested Bell on May 16 and charged him with obstructing government employees and using false Social Security numbers. Now, this is hardly attempting "to overthrow the government." But government agents insist Bell is far more dangerous than the charges suggest. (The judge seemed to agree: at the time of this writing, Bell is being held without bail.) The latest IRS documents filed with the court label Bell a terrorist. They claim he talked about sabotaging the computers in Portland, Oregon's 911 center, contaminating a local water supply with a botulism toxin, extracting a poison called Ricin from castor beans, and manufacturing Sarin nerve gas. He allegedly bought and tested some of the chemicals. "Bell has taken overt steps to implement his overall plan by devising, obtaining, and testing the materials needed to carry out attacks against the United States, including chemicals, nerve agents, destructive carbon fibers, firearms, and explosives," the complaint says. But what really got the IRS in a stink was what happened a month after they seized Bell's car. The complaint says: "On March 16, 1997, a Sunday, an IRS employee noted a strong odor in the Federal building. On March 17, 1997, several IRS employees had to be placed on leave due to the odor, and another employee reported other ill effects. The odor was traced to a mat and carpeting... just outside the IRS office entrance." The chemical proved to be "mercaptan," with which Bell's friends say he doused an adversary's law office in the early 1980s. Yet if Bell was a crypto-terrorist, he was a singularly idle one. This is a problem with the IRS' accusations: if true, they prove too much. If Bell was bent on toppling the government, and his exploits date back from the early 1980s, why are they such laughably juvenile and ineffectual ones? Stink-bombing offices isn't a Federal felony, nor should it be. "I would've thought this would be 'malicious mischief,' at most," Tim May, one of the founders of the cypherpunks, writes. "People who've done far, far, far worse are left unprosecuted in every major jurisdiction in this country. The meat thrown to the media -- the usual AP stuff, mixed in with 'radical libertarian' descriptions -- is just to make the case more media-interesting... It sure looks like they're trying to throw a bunch of charges against the wall and hope that some of them stick -- or scare Bell into pleading to a lesser charge." Since his arrest, the denizens of the cypherpunks list, where Bell introduced and refined his ideas, have become generally sympathetic. Gone is the snarling derision, the attacks on his ideas as too extreme. Now a sense of solidarity has emerged. One 'punk wrote: "I have decided that I cannot in good conscience allow Jim Bell's persecution for exercising his basic human right to free speech to pass by without taking personal action to support him." --- When I talked to Bell a few days before his arrest, he spoke calmly and with little rancor about the pending investigation. I couldn't tell how he felt after being raided and interrogated by his arch-enemy, the IRS. But imagine continuously railing on the Net against jackbooted thugs, then having real ones bash down your front door. Bell was most interested in talking up Assassination Politics and predicting how it would eventually blossom. He had just published an op-ed in a local newspaper saying "the whole corrupt system" could be stopped. "Whatever my idea is, it's not silly. There are a lot of adjectives you can use, but not silly," he told me. "I feel that the mere fact of having such a debate will cause people to realize that they no longer have to tolerate the governments they previously had to tolerate. At that point I think politicians will slink away like they did in eastern Europe in 1989. They'll have lost the war." He told me why he became convinced that the government needed to be lopped off at the knees. Bell's epiphany came after he ordered a chemical from a supply firm and was arrested when he failed to follow EPA regulations. "That radicalized me," he said. "That pissed me off. I figured I'd get back at them by taking down their entire system. That's how I'd do it."' Moral issues aside, one of the problems plaguing Bell's scheme is that it's not limited to eliminating "government thugs who violate your rights," as he likes to describe it. If it existed, anyone with some spare change could wipe out a nosy neighbor or even an irritating grocery store clerk. After I pointed this out to Bell on the phone, he fired email back a few days later saying, "Assuming a functioning Assassination Politics system, nothing stops you from contributing to my death." He suggested that maybe assassins would develop scruples: "You'd be able to purchase deaths of unworthy people, but it might be only at a dramatically higher price. Doable but not particularly economical." [...] -Declan From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Eric Cordian Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 03:35:58 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption Message-ID: <199801061930.NAA09848@wire.insync.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Could someone poke through Lotus Notes with a debugger and see exactly how this "giving 24 bits to the government" is implemented? Most commercial software simply introduces redundancy in order to limit the keyspace to 40 bits, regardless of the advertised length of the key. This claim that they deliver 64 bits of key to the customer seems a bit bogus. Of course, they could have done something clever, like generating a completely random 64 bit key, and then encrypting 24 bits of it with a giant government-owned RSA public key, and including this additional information with each message. However, it seems unlikely that they would employ such strong encryption for message recovery, while offering only 64 bits for message encryption. Is Lotus Notes encryption documented anywhere? Are the differences between the export and domestic versions disclosed to overseas customers? -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Eric Cordian Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 03:53:41 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: <199801061930.NAA09848@wire.insync.net> Message-ID: <199801061949.NAA09879@wire.insync.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain To follow up my prior message... I managed to find a document entitled "Security in Lotus Notes and the Internet" on the Web. It describes the weakening procedure as follows. "No matter which version of Notes you are using, encryption uses the full 64-bit key size. However, the International edition takes 24 bits of the key and encrypts it using an RSA public key for which the US National Security Agency holds the matching private key. This encrypted portion of the key is then sent with each message as an additional field, the workfactor reduction field. The net result of this is that an illegitimate hacker has to tackle 64-bit encryption, which is at or beyond the practical limit for current decryption technology and hardware. The US government, on the other hand, only has to break a 40-bit key space, which is much easier (2 to the power of 24 times easier, to be precise)." Would anyone care to extract the modulus and exponent for the NSA's Lotus Notes helper key and post it to this newsgroup? -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 06:02:41 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: YAIPC (Yet Another Internet Policy Conference, 2/98) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 14:30:57 -0500 From: Ben Isaacson To: "'declan@well.com'" Subject: Would you consider forwarding this as well? --> WashingtonWeb Internet Policy Forum More info at http://www.washingtonweb.org and http://www.interactivehq.org Interactive Industry Leaders and Top Policy Makers to Meet at WashingtonWeb Internet Policy Forum Washington, DC -- With the mounting interest of Washington in the Internet, key policy makers and Internet industry executives will come together for a strategic discussion about the impact of politics on the Internet. Sponsored by the Association for Interactive Media, the WashingtonWeb Internet Policy Forum, February 9 and 10, 1998, is the premier top-level meeting between the Washington policy community and the leaders of the new media industry. "Internet executives and government officials come from very different backgrounds. There needs to be an on- going dialogue between the users and regulators of this powerful medium in order to ensure that businesses may continue to grow and serve the public. The WashingtonWeb Internet Policy Forum is designed to facilitate this discussion," said Andy Sernovitz, President of the Association for Interactive Media. Currently, over 300 Members of Congress have co- sponsored bills regulating interactive businesses. Federal regulatory agencies including the FCC, FTC, NTIA, Treasury, Federal Reserve, White House Office of Technology Assessment, and the Patent and Trademark Office, are considering new legislation and regulation. Commerce on the Net will be forever shaped by the dozens of bills, regulations, and policy directives that are already on the table. Participants will have the opportunity to interact with the very legislators and regulators who will make these decisions. A partial list of topics to be discussed at WashingtonWeb include: Pending Legislation and Regulation: The Industry Response; Potential Expansion of FTC and FCC Jurisdictions; Taxing the Internet; Beltway Wonks vs. Web Gurus; Consumer Concerns and Industry Self-Regulation. Speakers (to date) include: Representative Rick Boucher; Adam Theirer, Heritage Foundation; Adam Clayton Powell III, The Freedom Forum; Pete DuPont, IntellectualCapital.com.; Robin Raskin, Editor & Publisher, Family PC Magazine; Kenneth Dotson, CBS Sportsline; and Gordon Ross, NetNanny. Sponsors include: Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, Policy.com, CNN/Time All Politics, Net Nanny, IntellectualCapital.com, and Exodus Communications. The WashingtonWeb Internet Policy Forum will be held February 9 and 10, 1998, at the Willard intercontinental Hotel in Washington, DC. CONTACT: Andy Dotson Association for Interactive Media 202-408-0008 andy@interactivehq.org http://www.washingtonweb.org ___________________________________________________ This message was sent to you because your company is a member of the Association for Interactive Media. Visit our web site: http://www.interactivehq.org AIM never releases email addresses to third parties. To SUBSCRIBE or CHANGE YOUR ADDRESS, email a note to yasha@interactivehq.org To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to: unsubscribe-members@lists.interactivehq.org [staff@interactivehq.org] ___END____________________________________________ List server provided by Lyris -- http://www.lyris.com From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 06:13:21 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain This is for a story for Time on the "new" U.S .Postal Service. I vaguely recall the USPS trying to set digital signature standards and/or serve as a CA. I'd like to mention this. Can't remember the details, though. Does anyone have 'em (or a pointer to them) handy? -Declan From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Information Security Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 03:19:53 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns Message-ID: <199801061912.OAA08946@panix2.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Ryan Lackey # AOLserver (a nice web server formerly from GNN/navisoft) punted their # 128bit SSL module distribution *EVEN TO US CITIZENS* due to commerce # department fuckedness. Anyone know where I could get a copy? It would # really suck to have to patch the 40bit one into a 128bit version, since # they do not distribute source. I don't know if this is the "module" form of the answer you want: http://www.replay.com/ Download Netscape Communicator 4.04 with 128 bits SSL today on: ftp.replay.com Replay Associates distributes this software so you can safely conduct your E-commerce ---- Tim May wrote: > Final comment: If I find the motivation, I may finish an essay I've been > working on about how we, the Cypherpunks and the World, are *retrogressing* > in crypto areas. Most of the exotic applications are no longer being > discussed, and various mundane commercial products are the main focus. > Yawn. How about moving this list to encrypt its transmissions in the recipient's public keys, just to begin encrypting Net traffic? Obviously not to hide what is being said, but simply to start moving communications into the encrypted realm. That way, we'll build up the software tools for handling this, and try to get other lists to do the same. Maybe encourage all pro-crypto people to use it for all email to as many other people they talk with as possible. (Adopt two others...) Heh: a white-list to allow only encrypted messages through. Encourage Senators to set up public keys. In general, try to get the general flow of traffic encrypted, even if PGP is "mundane" these days. Solving the human factors problem of getting its use wide-spread is _not_ a mundane problem. Encryption ain't gonna be that useful if only a few in-the-know use it. ---guy From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ian Sparkes Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 23:11:52 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19980106144257.006f0fec@q9f47.dmst02.telekom.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At 05:28 06.01.98 -0500, Ryan Lackey wrote: > (Wei Dai) writes: > >> I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately. >> Unless someone comes up with a weapon that has some very unusual economic >> properties, individuals cannot hope to compete with governments in the >> domain of deadly force. If we have to resort to physical violence, we've >> already lost! >> >> Think about it: if we can defend ourselves with guns, why would we need >> crypto? > >I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could inflict >a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military. With maybe >$20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, you could make >life very difficult for any luckless squad that happens your way. Multiply >that by 100 million armed citizens and you see that armed civilian >resistance *can* defeat an occupying army. > I'm not sure I am convinced by this argument. The "enemy within" seems to be the main focus of the discussions in the CP list. When the 'luckless squad that happens your way' is manned by your countrymen at the command of their (and your) government, what then? As far as I can see, the result would be a *very* bloody civil war. The outcome may indeed be less obvious than in a 'conventional' (i.e. unarmed populace) civil war, but the cost much higher. This is from the standpoint of a 'sissy' European. I admit I am poorly equipped to comment on the American Zeitgeist. However, my experience of civil war victims (refugees from the E-bloc) suggests that we should be concentrating on social revolution before we tool up for military. There is more to be won, with a potentially much lower cost. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNLImc4n3W0ooQnZKEQL4VwCffzMNK1MfQ/1zMv+E/3dfoioc8e8AoL0d uZMzgq6LPu9nVe90kcA49cbG =yL/D -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 07:07:41 +0800 To: Jonathan Wienke Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980106145505.007b45a0@otc.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 01:10 PM 1/6/98 -0800, Jonathan Wienke wrote: >InfoWar has always been a critical component of MeatWar. Knowing who your >enemy is and where he is at makes it much easier to do something about him. Yep. Also, infoWar also includes psychops: propoganda and disinformation. During WWII, the largest RF transmitter in the world at the time (a GE 500Kwtt) was used to dishearten troops, incite civilians, mislead commanders, etc. Effectively. Sometimes it jammed known broadcasts; sometimes the PSYCHOPS stations identified themselves correctly, more often they claimed to be something they weren't. When everyone can publish c/overtly, it is harder to control the media; the trade off is that consumers have to think to filter. Not a bad deal. Orwell was an optimist. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Blanc Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 08:33:24 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Digital Societies, Guns, and AP Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980106163317.0068dc1c@cnw.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/enriched The conversations on guns, Wei Dai's statement "if we can defend ourselves with guns, why would we need crypto?", and this idea on Digital Societies, brings up a consideration: in the new digital age of anonymity, independent psyops ("psychological operations"; never heard of "psychops"), potential AP arrangements, etc., when governments are made obsolete sometime Real Soon, and people have to depend more and more upon their own resources, how will individuals defend themselves from _immediate_ physical aggression, if not by having their own personal stock pile of weapons and ammo, since they can't call upon the Centralized Gun & Ammo Depot? I remember an article in a book by Ayn Rand, on "Competing Governments", where she said that having services provided by more than one such defense service would create many problems, and provided arguments against the feasability of such arrangements. I know there have been references on the list in the past about some civilization along time ago which existed in Iceland which dealt with this, but I haven't got around to reading about it (can someone provide a book reference?). .. Blanc From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ian Sparkes Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 00:15:58 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19980106170810.006f0ff8@q9f47.dmst02.telekom.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 05:28 06.01.98 -0500, Ryan Lackey wrote: > (Wei Dai) writes: > >> I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately. >> Unless someone comes up with a weapon that has some very unusual economic >> properties, individuals cannot hope to compete with governments in the >> domain of deadly force. If we have to resort to physical violence, we've >> already lost! >> >> Think about it: if we can defend ourselves with guns, why would we need >> crypto? > >I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could inflict >a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military. With maybe >$20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, you could make >life very difficult for any luckless squad that happens your way. Multiply >that by 100 million armed citizens and you see that armed civilian >resistance *can* defeat an occupying army. > I'm not sure I am convinced by this argument. The "enemy within" seems to be the main focus of the discussions in the CP list. When the 'luckless squad that happens your way' is manned by your countrymen at the command of their (and your) government, what then? Will you still attempt to defeat the 'occupying army'? As far as I can see, the result would be a *very* bloody civil war. The outcome may indeed be less obvious than in a 'conventional' (i.e. unarmed populace) civil war, but the cost much higher. Bear in mind that this is from the standpoint of a 'sissy' European. I admit I am poorly equipped to comment on the American Zeitgeist. However, my experience of civil war victims (extensive contact with refugees from the E-bloc) suggests to me that we should be concentrating on social revolution before we tool up for a military one. There is more to be won, with a potentially much lower cost. By all means buy the hardware, that is after all your right. Just spare the hero talk. *Everyone* thinks they'll be one of the survivors in a war, just as 95% of the population believe they have an above average IQ. My understanding of the word 'revolution' in this context means realigning the opinions of the governments and peoples around the globe to allow freedoms such as those supported by Cypherpunks to be freely available. An example of this is to work against the misinformation spread by 'them' which leads the average Joe (dumb or not) to think that 'Encrypted Data = Child Porn/Drug Barons planning something big/More child porn'. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Mark Hedges Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 09:51:40 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: employment opportunity Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain A tech support position's opened at Infonex and the Anonymizer in the San Diego, California area. The job requires demonstrable unix, typing and English communication skills. C/C++, Perl, Java/Javascript, system administration and networking experience are secondary qualifications. Duties include routine technical support and occasional clerical tasks, and could include opportunity for future advancement based on skills. Wage based on skillset. Entry-level position. If interested, fax resume to 619-667-7966 or e-mail to job@infonex.com. Mark Hedges Anonymizer, Inc. Infonex Internet, Inc. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Nobuki Nakatuji" Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 10:20:02 +0800 To: daw@cs.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: Is FEAL developed by NTT safe? Message-ID: <19980107020417.23803.qmail@hotmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > >In article <19980105070034.3946.qmail@hotmail.com> you write: >> Is FEAL developed by NTT safe? Where isn't safe if it is here because it >> isn't safe? > >FEAL is dead; I wouldn't ever use it in any new product. >Use triple-DES instead. > What kind of method was FEAL decoded in? ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: jalonz@openworld.com Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 07:21:12 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: The Digital Society Group Message-ID: <85256584.007B1AC7.00@openworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Hi all, Openworld, Inc. is a company which sets up free enterprise zones around the world. The "free zones" are akin to Hong Kong and Singapore and are self-governing, independent entities as recognized by the parent country. Free zones usually have the ability to issue citizenship, business licenses and incorporation status to entities as well as have their own police force and arbitration structure. A lot of them are not nearly big enough to need that kind of independence, but there are a few. Free zones rarely have bureacracy, taxes, etc. because the idea is to create an environment for the rapid creation and deployment of new businesses. Land is leased for 50-100 years with a parent entity buy-back at the end of the term. Can anyone say corporate state? Basically, free zones are corporations (or groups of) leasing land from a country in order to make it valuable enough to sell back at a large profit in 100 years. Notice that the emphasis is on very long-term results. The free zone only makes money if the residents are happy, educated and making money. Environmental issues are addressed immediately. There is no bureacracy to hold things back. I'll be the first to agree that a corporate state is very easy to abuse (soon the world could end up being a Microsoft corporate state ). But you have to start somewhere. Most of these zones are created in third world countries and poorly developed areas. Free zones are exempt from telecommunications monopolies so the bandwidth and connection fees are at regular US wholesale market rates. When you consider that the economy is moving to be information and bandwidth dependent, and the main thing holding a new country back is the cost of a satellite feed, a free zone has enormous impact on the growth of an area. It is a bit mind-boggling to realize what the marriage of a free economic zone and the Internet can accomplish. Openworld, Inc. is developing drop-in modules for health, education, business and governance functions for free zones as well as Internet connectivity and infrastructures. A division of Openworld, Inc., The Digital Society Group, has been formed to apply technology to the infrastructure of the free zones and essentially mirror them in cyberspace . Without getting into too much detail, The Digital Society Group is constructing a pure-technology infrastructure to provide for the operation, governance and existence of a complete digital society within a free enterprise zone. My priorities are: 1. encryption for all 2. anonymity for all 3. digital currency for all 4. the ability for the creation of ad-hoc micro-communities by citizens more or less on-the-fly 5. the ability for any entity - hardware, software, etc. to be a citizen and be entitled to certain rights such as property ownership, incorporation,etc. (the legislation is being written right now) 6. do it very, very cheaply and give it to the end-user (the world) for free. Check out: http://www.openworld.com/digitalsociety Sorry about the sparse web pages and the crappy graphics, but there is no money for a graphics designer. Locations are planned for Africa, Southeast Asia, Russia, etc. We are already coding... :) Jalon --------------------------------------------------------------- Jalon Q. Zimmerman, Director The Digital Society Group A division of Openworld, Inc. http://www.openworld.com/digitalsociety jalonz@openworld.com --------------------------------------------------------------- The government is not your mommy. --------------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Bill Stewart Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 13:22:52 +0800 To: Alexandre Maret Subject: Re: Location Escrow anyone ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980106184201.00832180@popd.ix.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tracking your position in real time is one thing - recording the tracks is quite another. The system does need to know, in real time, the cell for each phone that's currently talking, and needs to know quickly where any phone that's being called is (could be implemented either by constantly tracking every phone, or by sending out requests when the call is made, probably starting with the usual suspect locations and then branching out farther, or using some kind of roaming notification.) But does it need to know where you've been? It wouldn't be surprising if the telco recorded location (at least cell site) at the beginning of each call, to resolve billing disputes with customers, and of course they record minutes of use and roaming information for users who make calls outside their home territory. They probably also record calls per cell site and handoff information, but probably not by user. For police purposes, if you want to find somebody right now, and the cellphone system can only give you precise locations right now, just call them - "Hey, Suspect! We know where you are, and it's costing you money for us to call you and tell you! Have a nice day!" - and the system knows even if they don't answer. At 02:42 PM 01/03/1998 +0100, Alexandre Maret wrote: >If they store the location of your phone every 3 secs, for 6 month, >this means 5'241'600 locations. Printed on 70 lines/page paper, >this means 74'880 A4 pages. Do you think they'd be happy to print >and send you 74'880 pages for 300SFrs ? They could probably deliver it on industry-standard 9-track tape :-) 5 bytes is enough to locate you within 62m anywhere on Earth - 16 bits gets you 1km of lat or long on a 40000km planet), though 4 bytes is probably enough to identify a cell plus some precision bits since the whole planet doesn't have cell sites. So it's really only 20-25MB of data per user to track that much data, and it compresses extremely well (e.g. 1 byte/sample is plenty for phones that are moving, and run-length coding radically reduces the location of the phones that aren't moving, which probably covers 23 hours a day for most people.) Call it 250KB/day, max? I'd be surprised if they really kept that much, and the economics are bad, but they could do it, and they'll be much happier to mail you a floppy of compressed data for your 300 francs, or print it in very tiny print... Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Adam Back Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 03:27:33 +0800 To: declan@well.com Subject: Re: Jim Bell article excerpt (Was: Letter on Jim Bell) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801061908.TAA00400@server.eternity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Declan McCullagh writes: Declan reposting something he wrote last year: > After I pointed this out to Bell on the phone [someone might > assassinate annoying neighbors], he fired email back a few days > later saying, "Assuming a functioning Assassination Politics system, > nothing stops you from contributing to my death." He suggested that > maybe assassins would develop scruples: "You'd be able to purchase > deaths of unworthy people, but it might be only at a dramatically > higher price. Doable but not particularly economical." You interpret Jim as implying "maybe assassins would develop scruples"; this doesn't look like the meaning of what you quote Jim as saying: "You'd be able to purchase deaths of unworthy people, but it might be only at a dramatically higher price." it looks more like Jim was suggesting that free market forces would tend to prevent deaths of lesser known people. Think about it -- it would be dead easy to get a contract on Barney due to the number of people who know and hate him -- but on an average neighbor, who is completely obscure, you'd easily have to fund the entire bet yourself. Adam From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: ichudov@Algebra.COM (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 11:16:01 +0800 To: cypherpunks@www.video-collage.com Subject: Police Report Stirs Up Militia Groups Message-ID: <199801070309.VAA08399@manifold.algebra.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Police Report Stirs Up Militia Groups (MARTINSVILLE) -- A confidential state police report... which looked at the dangers of right-wing militia groups in Indiana... is causing a stir among elected officials and militia members in Morgan County. While the report discounts any immediate threat of terrorist attacks from Indiana militias, it does suggest that militia members are getting involved in local politics and may have too much influence in some areas. Morgan County commissioners think they're the ones referred to in the report... and they say they're offended at the implication they're controlled by any special interest group. reuters From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Bill Frantz Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 16:50:54 +0800 To: Eric Cordian Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:49 AM -0800 1/6/98, Eric Cordian wrote: >I managed to find a document entitled "Security in Lotus Notes and the >Internet" on the Web. > >It describes the weakening procedure as follows. > > "No matter which version of Notes you are using, encryption uses the > full 64-bit key size. However, the International edition takes 24 bits > of the key and encrypts it using an RSA public key for which the US > National Security Agency holds the matching private key. This > encrypted portion of the key is then sent with each message as an > additional field, the workfactor reduction field. The net result of > this is that an illegitimate hacker has to tackle 64-bit encryption, > which is at or beyond the practical limit for current decryption > technology and hardware. The US government, on the other hand, only > has to break a 40-bit key space, which is much easier (2 to the power > of 24 times easier, to be precise)." It seems to me that if you step on the correct part of the message, you zap the encrypted 24 bits, and cut NSA out of the loop. Of course the receiver could notice and refuse to decrypt, which would require some software hacking to defeat, but that is certainly doable. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | One party wants to control | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | what you do in the bedroom,| 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz@netcom.com | the other in the boardroom.| Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Adam Back Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 05:37:07 +0800 To: jim@mentat.com Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: <9801062004.AA18375@mentat.com> Message-ID: <199801062128.VAA00264@server.eternity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Jim Gillogly writes: > Eric Cordian says: > > Could someone poke through Lotus Notes with a debugger and see exactly how > > this "giving 24 bits to the government" is implemented? > > Lotus produced a "backgrounder" called "Differential Workfactor Cryptography" > when they first promulgated the 64/40 stuff. It says (in part): > > We do that by encrypting 24 of the 64 bits under a public RSA key > provided by the U.S. government and binding the encrypted partial > key to the encrypted data. > > I haven't seen the USG RSA key -- if it's 512 bits, that would be a humorous > next factoring target. It would be humorous to even have the modulus and exponent -- if someone can obtain them, I'll package it up as a working PGP key, and give it user id of Spook GAK key , and submit to the keyservers. Then we have solved the key escrow implementation problems for the US government -- anyone who wants to send them a message can simply add DIRNSA to the list of recipeints. I don't have a copy of Notes, otherwise I thought this a most fun exploit to attempt. The above "solution" to key escrow infra-structure calls from Freeh etc., should be credited to Carl Ellison; probably others have proposed it also. Carl offered to sign some cheif spooks key, if he would generate one for the purpose, cheif spook declined the offer. I observed a few times before that now that Lotus have organised with the NSA to produce such a key, we can do the job of implementing the voluntary key escrow infrastructure for them. (It is voluntary right?) Adam -- Now officially an EAR violation... Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 14:07:19 +0800 To: "Nobuki Nakatuji" Subject: Re: Is FEAL developed by NTT safe? In-Reply-To: <19980107020417.23803.qmail@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980106215602.0098b670@clueserver.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 06:04 PM 1/6/98 PST, Nobuki Nakatuji wrote: > >> >>In article <19980105070034.3946.qmail@hotmail.com> you write: >>> Is FEAL developed by NTT safe? Where isn't safe if it is here because >it >>> isn't safe? >> >>FEAL is dead; I wouldn't ever use it in any new product. >>Use triple-DES instead. >> >What kind of method was FEAL decoded in? All of them. If you take a look at _Applied Cryptography (2nd Edition)_, you will find a number of different methods that have been used against FEAL. It seems that whenever someone comes up with a new method of cryptanalysis, they use it on FEAL first. (Or at least it seems that way...) There are much better solutions. Unpatented ones as well... --- | "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano@teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan@ctrl-alt-del.com| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: abc.307@iname.com Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 12:51:53 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: 70% Profit your 1st Day. Message-ID: <199801062135.e-mail@_tommy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Hello, YOU KEEP THE HIGHEST RETAIL PROFITS EVER!! ***************************************************** Consumer Direct Inc. has increased YOUR RETAIL PROFITS to 70% * Very LOW investment * Start earning the 70% profits your 1st day * YOU KEEP ALL THE PROFITS * High Impact Nutritionals by Durk Pearson & Sandy Shaw * Euro-Wash Laundry Ball eliminates Toxic Detergents * Magnetic Therapy Technology for immediate Pain Relief Just 2 Easy Steps: USA/CANADA 1-888-877-7092 (Special Holiday Call) INTERNATIONAL 1-512-703-8033 CALL US 1-800-600-0343 x1422 Best Regards, Rhonda & Pete --------------------------------------------------------------------- To Be Removed mailto:RemoveMe@leipro23.com?subject=REMOVE From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: John Young Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 12:21:49 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Sentencing for Electronic Copyright Infringement Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19980107033511.00750ac4@pop.pipeline.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain The United States Sentencing Commission published in the Federal Register today an RFC on changes in sentencing guidelines. Here's an excerpt on electronic copyright infringement: . . . Legislative Amendments Electronic Copyright Infringement 9. Issue for Comment The No Electronic Theft Act, Public Law 105-147, was recently enacted to provide a statutory basis to prosecute and punish persons who, without authorization and without realizing financial gain or commercial advantage, electronically access copyrighted materials or encourage others to do so. The Act includes a directive to the Commission to (A) ensure that the applicable guideline range for a crime committed against intellectual property (including offenses set forth at section 506(a) of title 17, United States Code, and sections 2319, 2319A, and 2320 of title 18, United States Code) is sufficiently stringent to deter such a crime; and (B) ensure that the guidelines provide for consideration of the retail value and quantity of the items with respect to which the crime against intellectual property was committed. Each of the statutes mentioned in the congressional directive currently are referenced to Sec. 2B5.3 (Criminal Infringement of Copyright or Trademark). That guideline provides for incrementally greater punishment when the retail value of the infringing items exceeded $2,000. However, when copyrighted materials are infringed upon by electronic means, there is no ``infringing item'', as would be the case with counterfeited goods. Therefore, the Commission must determine how to value the infringed upon items in order to implement the congressional directive to take into account the retail value and quantity of the items with respect to which the offense was committed. The Commission invites comment on how Sec. 2B5.3 (Criminal Infringement of Copyright or Trademark) should be amended to best effectuate the congressional directives. An approach suggested by the Department of Justice is set forth below. The Commission invites comment on this and alternative proposals. Department of Justice Proposed Amendments to Sec. 2B5.3: The text of Sec. 2B5.3 is amended to read as follows: ``(a) Base offense level: [6] (b) Specific Offense Characteristic (1) If the loss to the copyright or trademark exceeded $2,000, increase by the corresponding number of levels from the table in Sec. 2F1.1 (Fraud and Deceit).''. The Commentary to Sec. 2B5.3 captioned ``Application Note'' is amended in Note 1 by striking: `` `Infringing items' means the items that violate the copyright or trademark laws (not the legitimate items that are infringed upon).'', and inserting: ``A court may calculate the `loss to the copyright or trademark owner' in any reasonable manner. In determining `loss to the copyright or trademark owner,' the court may consider lost profits, the value of the infringed upon items, the value of the infringing items, the injury to the copyright or trademark owner's reputation, and other associated harms.''. The Commentary to Sec. 2B5.3 captioned ``Application Note'' is amended by striking ``Note'' and inserting ``Notes''; and by adding at the end the following new note: ``2. In some cases, the calculable loss to the victim understates the true harm caused by the offense. For example, a defendant may post copyrighted material to an electronic bulletin board or similar online facility, making it easy for others to illegally obtain and further distribute the material. In such an instance, it may not be possible to determine or even estimate how many copies were downloaded, or how much damage the defendant's conduct ultimately caused. In such cases, an upward departure may be warranted. See Chapter Five, Part K (Departures).''. The Commentary to Sec. 2B5.3 captioned ``Background'' is amended in the first paragraph by striking ``value of the infringing items'' and inserting ``loss to the copyright or trademark owner''; and by striking ``loss or''. [End excerpt] For the full RFC: http://jya.com/ussc010698.txt (254K) From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Kurt Buff Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 16:27:40 +0800 To: "'Trei, Peter'" Subject: RE: best body armor for cypherpunks [serious] Message-ID: <01BD1B01.0AF53040.kurtbuff@halcyon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Nice shot! :) However, Second Chance is probably the leader of that particular pack. - -----Original Message----- From: Trei, Peter [SMTP:ptrei@securitydynamics.com] Sent: Monday, January 05, 1998 8:32 AM To: 'cypherpunks@toad.com' Subject: RE: best body armor for cypherpunks [serious] > ---------- > From: Mix[SMTP:mixmaster@remail.obscura.com] > Reply To: Mix > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 1998 10:44 PM > To: cypherpunks@toad.com > Subject: best body armor for cypherpunks [serious] > > What is, in your opinion, the best (price and performance-wise) > body armor for cypherpunks? > After a few years on this list, one develops such a thick skin that extra protection is superfluos Peter Trei ptrei@securitydynamics.c -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNLMsmw3xegzLXcRmEQKJ4gCg9Fr8/XXJFUsB9UaPaZ4zymdc5GoAn3YS u46oyeNLel8/+nYbBs7Xb49R =EqQY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Kurt Buff Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 16:23:39 +0800 To: "'Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM'" Subject: RE: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation Message-ID: <01BD1B01.0CBA5FE0.kurtbuff@halcyon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 It balances, or more accurately, they don't. A second politician died today on the ski slope - Sonny Bono. - -----Original Message----- From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM [SMTP:dlv@bwalk.dm.com] Sent: Monday, January 05, 1998 4:19 PM To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation Declan McCullagh writes: > We have a good story in this week's Time that talks about how the ski > resort had repeatedly asked the Kennedys to knock it off. Including the > night before the accident. Even on the "fateful" afternoon, the ski patrol > had told the Kennedys -- the last on the slopes -- it was time to quit. > "Nevertheless, 36 members of the Kennedy party prepared to play." "Evolution in action." Thank you, Michael Kennedy, for improving humanity's gene pool. - --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNLMtJw3xegzLXcRmEQKeCwCgsElXKkUb2dzM+N0d2nn8I7fresoAn2yF fsizimZ5xfume+xLbPvpQCWL =ZhY3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 13:18:24 +0800 To: users@ssz.com (SSZ User Mail List) Subject: Hi-tech anti-terrorism... [CNN] Message-ID: <199801070542.XAA29574@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > GADGET WARFARE: HIGH-TECH ANTI-TERRORISM > > January 6, 1998 > Web posted at: 9:34 p.m. EST (0234 GMT) > > From Netly News Writer Declan McCullagh > > For a country with no real military rivals, the U.S. still manages > to find an amazing number of enemies. Terrorists top the list of > anti-American villains, according to a Pentagon report released last > month. > > The 100-page document, called "Responses to Transnational Threats," > describes how the military should respond to the threat of saboteurs > and bombers aiming for violence, not victory. The solution, > according to the Pentagon, is to develop a set of gadgets that would > make even James Bond jealous. > > Micro-robots > > A spy camera scuttling through the underbrush? Yes, disguised as "an > insect, a small pebble, or a stick." The report calls for the > development of "micro-robots" that walk or fly and can beam video, > audio and infrared signals back to their operators: "These sensors [deleted text] > Sticky electronics > > Think SpiderMan's spidertracers, only smaller. "Sticky electronics" > adhere to a suspected terrorist's clothing, hair, luggage or vehicle > and report his location. These almost microscopic gizmos tune in to > satellite signals and transmit their exact latitude and longitude. [deleted text] > Bio-sniffers > > Go lie down, Fido. Soon drug-sniffing dogs may be replaced by even > more sensitive, digital noses. If suspects have been handling nukes, > biological weapons or high explosives, the military hopes to be able > to sniff substance traces from items like passports. "As future [text deleted] > technology is improved, antigens might then be detected at national > entry portals as trace contamination on emigration documents or > passports, by urine analysis or by other means." Look for companies > to use this as a more sensitive (if not more reliable) type of drug > testing. > > The Internet > > The Net shouldn't be viewed as "a vulnerability." That view "loses > sight of many potential benefits," the Pentagon explains. To the > spooks, the Net "is an underexploited information-acquisition > resource" that "allows for remote and anonymous participation in > online 'chat' forums that might provide insight into dissident group > activities." (Look out, alt.fan.militia!) The military also wants to > create a "secure, transnational threat information infrastructure" > -- at a cost of a mere $300 million. > > Data mining > > If you worried about the FBI's jones for access to your data, wait > 'til you find out what the military hopes to do. The Pentagon wants > authority to sift through private-sector databases in hopes of > tracking down, say, the World Trade Center bombers before they > strike. The plan is to incorporate "real-time data on international > border crossings, real-time cargo manifests, global financial [deleted text] > Smart software > > Once you've got the databases, how do you use 'em? The military says > the answer is "groupware" and "intelligent software agents" that > "can be focused to search for a confluence of events in multiple > databases or for goals over time." Consumer marketers will finally > be able to determine the commonalities between the Hajj, Promise > Keeper gatherings and Burning Man. > > So would military budgets. In a world where even the Pentagon admits > that the U.S. is the only remaining superpower, the defense > community argues that terrorism threats justify their budgets. > "Nothing will be more challenging to the protection of our citizens, > soldiers and our way of life than the threats of weapons of mass > destruction and terrorism," General John Shalikashvili, chairman of [text deleted] ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 16:33:19 +0800 To: John Young Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 7:35 PM -0800 1/6/98, John Young wrote: >The United States Sentencing Commission published in the >Federal Register today an RFC on changes in sentencing >guidelines. Here's an excerpt on electronic copyright >infringement: .... > (1) If the loss to the copyright or trademark exceeded $2,000, >increase by the corresponding number of levels from the table in >Sec. 2F1.1 (Fraud and Deceit).''. .... The upshot of all this "spreadsheet sentencing" is that nearly all of us have some number of infringing materials, illegal copies, or unauthorized downloads on our systems. Or we have more than the allowable number of backup copies of our important programs. Or even of our unimportant programs. When the ninja narc raiders cart our computers off for analysis, I'm sure they can find enough violations to send us away for as many years as they wish. Even though I'm not a "warez" trader, or even a software pirate, and even though I have perhaps foolishly bought many thousands of dollars worth of now-discontinued and now-unused products ("shelfware"), I am quite sure the Authorities could find dozens and dozens of violations of these new laws. Welcome to Amerika. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Kent Crispin Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 16:20:04 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19980107001651.29456@songbird.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, Jan 07, 1998 at 01:25:45AM -0600, snow wrote: > > I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could inflict > > a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military. With maybe > > $20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, you could make > > If you were smart, you could do it for a lot less. That presumes the enemy is dumb. An amusing fantasy. -- Kent Crispin, PAB Chair "No reason to get excited", kent@songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Lucky Green Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 08:06:18 +0800 To: Adam Back Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: <199801062128.VAA00264@server.eternity.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Tue, 6 Jan 1998, Adam Back wrote: > It would be humorous to even have the modulus and exponent -- if > someone can obtain them, I'll package it up as a working PGP key, and > give it user id of Spook GAK key , and submit to the > keyservers. Then we have solved the key escrow implementation > problems for the US government -- anyone who wants to send them a > message can simply add DIRNSA to the list of recipeints. This would be truly hilarious. Anybody out there with a copy of Notes and a debugger? :-) -- Lucky Green PGP v5 encrypted email preferred. "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "snow" Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 14:22:39 +0800 To: weidai@eskimo.com (Wei Dai) Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: <19980106005136.23824@eskimo.com> Message-ID: <199801070718.BAA01750@smoke.suba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately. > Unless someone comes up with a weapon that has some very unusual economic > properties, individuals cannot hope to compete with governments in the > domain of deadly force. If we have to resort to physical violence, we've Tell that to Lincoln, Duke F., Kennedy, &etc. No, we couldn't win thru the overwhelming use of force, but force properly applied could at some point prove useful. > already lost! There are some of us who feel that if we "lose", it would be better to go down fighting than to live in the kind of world where we can't protect our privacy with crypto. > Think about it: if we can defend ourselves with guns, why would we need > crypto? Different realms. Crypto deals with transient/ephemeral(sp?) things like bits & words & numbers. Arms work in a more physical world of Rapists, Theives, & Dictators. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "snow" Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 14:21:25 +0800 To: tcmay@got.net (Tim May) Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801070720.BAA01765@smoke.suba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > Final comment: If I find the motivation, I may finish an essay I've been > working on about how we, the Cypherpunks and the World, are *retrogressing* > in crypto areas. Most of the exotic applications are no longer being > discussed, and various mundane commercial products are the main focus. Yawn. You mean things like Onion Routers, Crowds & the like? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "snow" Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 14:26:41 +0800 To: rdl@mit.edu (Ryan Lackey) Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801070725.BAA01787@smoke.suba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could inflict > a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military. With maybe > $20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, you could make If you were smart, you could do it for a lot less. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "snow" Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 14:39:34 +0800 To: isparkes@q9f47.dmst02.telekom.de (Ian Sparkes) Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980106144257.006f0fec@q9f47.dmst02.telekom.de> Message-ID: <199801070729.BAA01812@smoke.suba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > >that by 100 million armed citizens and you see that armed civilian > >resistance *can* defeat an occupying army. > The "enemy within" seems to be the main focus of the discussions in > the CP list. When the 'luckless squad that happens your way' is > manned by your countrymen at the command of their (and your) > government, what then? You answered your own question. Fight smarter, not harder. Kill the brains and the body would follow. > This is from the standpoint of a 'sissy' European. I admit I am > poorly equipped to comment on the American Zeitgeist. However, my > experience of civil war victims (refugees from the E-bloc) suggests > that we should be concentrating on social revolution before we tool > up for military. There is more to be won, with a potentially much > lower cost. Any kind of social revolution will be co-opted, destroyed, or rendered useless by the people at the top. What it needed is a continuance of the technical revolution. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "snow" Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 14:44:17 +0800 To: guy@panix.com (Information Security) Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: <199801061912.OAA08946@panix2.panix.com> Message-ID: <199801070740.BAA01846@smoke.suba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > # 128bit SSL module distribution *EVEN TO US CITIZENS* due to commerce > # department fuckedness. Anyone know where I could get a copy? It would > # really suck to have to patch the 40bit one into a 128bit version, since > # they do not distribute source. > I don't know if this is the "module" form of the answer you want: > http://www.replay.com/ Nope, he wants the AOL SERVER, not browser > Tim May wrote: >> Final comment: If I find the motivation, I may finish an essay I've been >> working on about how we, the Cypherpunks and the World, are *retrogressing* >> in crypto areas. Most of the exotic applications are no longer being >> discussed, and various mundane commercial products are the main focus. > > Yawn. > How about moving this list to encrypt its transmissions in > the recipient's public keys, just to begin encrypting Net traffic? At this point, there would be WAY too much overhead on the 3 or so servers that make up the cypherpunks mailing list. PGP encrypting every message sent thru would take up a lot of CPU time. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Adam Shostack Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 15:52:05 +0800 To: aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: <199801062128.VAA00264@server.eternity.org> Message-ID: <199801070745.CAA29531@homeport.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Adam Back wrote: | The above "solution" to key escrow infra-structure calls from Freeh | etc., should be credited to Carl Ellison; probably others have | proposed it also. Carl offered to sign some cheif spooks key, if he | would generate one for the purpose, cheif spook declined the offer. That was Phil Karn to NSA legal counsel at the Computers Freedom and Privacy conference in Burlingame, 1994 or 1995. I don't recall hearing it before that. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 22:12:54 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Sentencing for Electronic Copyright Infringement In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tim May writes: > When the ninja narc raiders cart our computers off for analysis, I'm sure > they can find enough violations to send us away for as many years as they > wish. And if Timmy knew a bit more about cryptography than he could learn by browsing through Bruce Schneier's book, the ninja narc raiders wouldm't be able to find shit on any of his media. :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Eric Cordian Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 23:22:28 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801071516.JAA10807@wire.insync.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Bill Frantz writes: > It seems to me that if you step on the correct part of the message, you > zap the encrypted 24 bits, and cut NSA out of the loop. Of course the > receiver could notice and refuse to decrypt, which would require some > software hacking to defeat, but that is certainly doable. Yes - I doubt if Lotus Notes has the ability to distinguish between messages containing ASCII for "FUD" in the workfactor reduction field and those containing 24 genuine bits of the key in question. It's probably a one-instruction patch to disable Big Brother. As I recall, the LEAF field in Clipper suffered from a similar ability to be disabled at the user's pleasure. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Pearson Shane Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 15:33:56 +0800 To: "'Bill Stewart'" Subject: RE: Location Escrow anyone ? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Hey guys, I wasn't suggesting that they do record exactly where everyone is at the highest resolution possible. Just suggesting that should they want to investigate an individual, they could do it with pretty high detail. Though I'm sure they'd record when and where you switch your phone on, switch off / loose signal, switch cells and make and receive calls and messages. That wouldn't be all that much data. Bye for now. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Paul Bradley Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 23:18:41 +0800 To: platypus@acmeonline.net Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > > You clearly have no comprehension of the principles of the free market > > and the rights of businesses and individual to hire and fire whoever the > > fuck they like for any reason whatsoever. > > My rights to swing my fists end at your noise. When ever you interact > with other peaple your rights are tempered by there rights. Even Adam > Smith recognised that its was gorverments dutie to redress the failing of > the market. Why there is even discussion on this point on a list whose membership is composed mainly of market anarchists is beyond me, the NAP and rights of association should clearly define the answer to this question, no agression is involved in the act of firing or declining to hire people based on their colour/nationality or any other factor whatsoever. > Also recall the free market model assumes that the word is full of totaly > rational pepeale who have full knowige of the market. Any one who has > been on this list knows that these peaple are somewhat uncommen. I don`t see the model that way at all, I don`t claim that my idea of a free market works well in practice, I believe it would but I have no proof, however, the model is ethically right in that it allows businesses and individuals to behave as they please as long as it harms no other person, sure, firing you may harm you by decreasing your income but this is not an agressive act, it is a passive one: I have declined to offer you, or keep you, in employment. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Rabid Wombat Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 11:49:29 +0800 To: "Brian B. Riley" Subject: More gun nutz In-Reply-To: <199801080258.VAA23445@mx02.together.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, 7 Jan 1998, Brian B. Riley wrote: > retired ... look just recently at what happened to the Russians troops > sent to Chechnya ... all these brand spanking new, highly trained > proud young 19 and 20 year old troops went romping off to fight 'a > bunch of old men' in the Chechyn Republic ... there was one little > problem ... a big hunk of those old men had spent two to seven years > in that same Russian Army fighting the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan ... > and that 'bunch of old men' kicked their young asses! That's just the new Russian capitalism. Their military had to create some real equipment losses to cover all the missing inventory they're selling on the black market. -r.w. p.s. - How can I get the DMV to give me "historic" tags for my slightly used T-64? What's the best armored fighting vehicle for a cypherpunk? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Miller Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 00:13:07 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: Sentencing for Electronic Copyright Infringement In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <34B3D211.4148@avana.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tim May wrote: > Even though I'm not a "warez" trader, or even a software pirate, and even > though I have perhaps foolishly bought many thousands of dollars worth of > now-discontinued and now-unused products ("shelfware"), I am quite sure the > Authorities could find dozens and dozens of violations of these new laws. On the other hand, it's no longer in vogue to haul people off for video piracy anymore. Perhaps we should all stego our monitors & computers into looking like TV's & VCR's until this blows over. :-) --David Miller From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Steve Schear Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:42:11 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Debit-card program cancelled because of fraud [FWD] Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 28 Dec 1997 09:22:45 -0500 From: Steve Bellovin Subject: Debit-card program cancelled because of fraud According to the AP, Burns National Bank (Durango, CO) is cancelling its debit-card program because of fraud. The article is maddeningly incomplete about technical details. Apparently, the "hackers" (to quote the article) counterfeited plastic cards and "took account number sequences off software that resides on the Internet before encoding them in the magnetic strip on the back of the card." When the fraud was detected, some customers had new cards issued, with some unspecified extra security feature. It didn't work; within a month, the accounts were penetrated again. Three other banks have been victimized by a similar scheme. All four use the same debit card vendor; Burns blames the vendor for inadequate security, in some unspecified form. They're looking for a new supplier; until then, the entire program is being suspended. Losses to date -- which are apparently being absorbed by the banks -- total $300,000. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 03:47:53 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:08 AM -0800 1/7/98, Declan McCullagh wrote: >[This is the conference Tim was criticizing yesterday. --Declan] > Just to be more accurate, I was criticising the _sheer frequency_ of such conferences, with this one just being one of many. And not even the latest such example, as yet another Washington conference on the Internet was announced later yesterday. I just can't understand who attends these things, besides the Usual Suspects. Maybe we could convince them to all have their confabs on the same day, the same day Abu Nidal explodes his nuke in Crystal City? (Or invite the Algerians in for a Hackers Conference? Get medeival on their asses.) --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 03:55:24 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain In truth, I mistyped. Tim not only was talking about the frequency (and I gather, the danger) of the conferences, he was responding to the ACM one, not the WW one. Now, who attends these things? 1. Journalists 2. Government bureaucrats happy to have a day off from work, who want to position themselves as "Net-savvy" 3. Lobbyists who bill it to clients 4. Think tank people who hope someone reads their papers The Naderite "Appraising Microsoft" conference seemed to be populated mainly by journalists, at some points. These conferences can be dangerous. If the best thing for the Net is for DC to leave it alone, that principle leaves no space for Washington lobbyists who bill by the hour (and through the nose) for their expertise: pressuring various portions of the government. This is why lobbyists, including so-called "Net-lobbyists" are not what the Net, and freedom, need. -Declan On Wed, 7 Jan 1998, Tim May wrote: > At 11:08 AM -0800 1/7/98, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >[This is the conference Tim was criticizing yesterday. --Declan] > > > > Just to be more accurate, I was criticising the _sheer frequency_ of such > conferences, with this one just being one of many. And not even the latest > such example, as yet another Washington conference on the Internet was > announced later yesterday. > > I just can't understand who attends these things, besides the Usual Suspects. > > Maybe we could convince them to all have their confabs on the same day, the > same day Abu Nidal explodes his nuke in Crystal City? > > (Or invite the Algerians in for a Hackers Conference? Get medeival on their > asses.) > > --Tim May > > The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography > ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- > Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, > ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero > W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, > Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. > "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." > > > > > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:10:47 +0800 To: Declan McCullagh Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:50 AM -0800 1/7/98, Declan McCullagh wrote: >In truth, I mistyped. Tim not only was talking about the frequency (and I >gather, the danger) of the conferences, he was responding to the ACM one, >not the WW one. Yeah, I didn't even recall which one I was commenting on. Just too many of these damned boondoggles. The only conference recently which as sounded interesting was the one on "anonymity" down near LA recently...I might have gone, but I don't recall hearing about it, or being invited. Until it was over, of course. (I guess it was filled up with journalists, judging from the various articles which have come out of it. Mostly cheesy articles, Declan's excepted.) >Now, who attends these things? > >1. Journalists >2. Government bureaucrats happy to have a day off from work, who want to >position themselves as "Net-savvy" >3. Lobbyists who bill it to clients >4. Think tank people who hope someone reads their papers Yep. Boondoggles. But as John G. and Declan and others have noted, these things can do real damage. By skimming the surface, they are really just platforms for position advocacy. Whether "conferences" on "ratings," or "Net.porn," or "anonymity," or whatever, they end up being fora for certain policy wonks to make their cases. And lazy staffers can then regurgitate the positions as proposed legislation. (Thus satisfying their quotas, and proving they are working hard.) >The Naderite "Appraising Microsoft" conference seemed to be populated >mainly by journalists, at some points. Too many fucking journalists. Too many fucking staffers. Too many fucking bureaucrats, lackeys, satraps, and empire builders. The whole city, America's imperial city, is corruption on earth. The Ayotollah had that one right. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:38:47 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, 7 Jan 1998, Tim May wrote: > The only conference recently which as sounded interesting was the one on > "anonymity" down near LA recently...I might have gone, but I don't recall > hearing about it, or being invited. Until it was over, of course. > > (I guess it was filled up with journalists, judging from the various > articles which have come out of it. Mostly cheesy articles, Declan's > excepted.) I think I was the only full-time journalist invited to participate. There were maybe four or so jlists covering it. From the web site: Attendance at this conference will be by invitation only. About 35 individuals will represent a variety of backgrounds and perspectives including the computing industry (such as Internet service providers, network administrators, and providers of "anonymizing" services) the legal community, professional societies, academic institutions, law enforcement agencies, and other agencies of government. > But as John G. and Declan and others have noted, these things can do real > damage. By skimming the surface, they are really just platforms for > position advocacy. Whether "conferences" on "ratings," or "Net.porn," or > "anonymity," or whatever, they end up being fora for certain policy wonks > to make their cases. And lazy staffers can then regurgitate the positions > as proposed legislation. (Thus satisfying their quotas, and proving they > are working hard.) Lobbyists need to show they're doing something to justify the money they grab from corporations (many of which could be doing something better with this cash, like R&D). Hence they host conferences and attend others. There are very, very few groups out there that say Washington should take a "hands off" approach to the Internet. Oh, sure, high tech firms (including Microsoft) will use it as a good PR line but wait 'til they get a chance to pass a criminal copyright bill. Even the librarians and scientists, generally good on issues like content and copyright, spend much of their time trying to grab more federal dollars. Like the new federal phone tax the librarians and teachers pushed for: something like $10-20/year per phone line. Then of course there's the religious right and the law enforcement lobbyists, all of which have their own pet projects and legislation. There are few groups who are consistently opposed to the government mucking around with the Internet. Cato Institute, Competitive Enterprise Institute, and maybe American Enterprise Institute and Citizens for Sound Economy and the Federalist Society. Very, very few. -Declan From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "William H. Geiger III" Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 02:50:27 +0800 To: Kent Crispin Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: <19980107001651.29456@songbird.com> Message-ID: <199801071844.NAA28170@users.invweb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <19980107001651.29456@songbird.com>, on 01/07/98 at 03:16 AM, Kent Crispin said: >On Wed, Jan 07, 1998 at 01:25:45AM -0600, snow wrote: >> > I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could inflict >> > a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military. With maybe >> > $20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, you could make >> >> If you were smart, you could do it for a lot less. >That presumes the enemy is dumb. An amusing fantasy. The fact that they collect a paycheck from the government is prima facie evidence of diminished mental capacity. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNLPK2o9Co1n+aLhhAQFGnQP/XjQolE3fElFXPrPWSe7p3lM7QY/kEMYr AF3CXUr1ov0IFRfqItryMSM8eGa65V69X1FS1AagXgzz5IpZ89E4wbiPMC5Rh8aP oifllXC+G7+bgcBZyzzRKQ9ZXlMckHnSpPCyFq1xE35Uj6gbu790oVd92yzvf5sy pjALZQjE7MI= =cG0G -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:38:05 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain YAICIW January 5, 1998: Information and registration details are now available on the Thursday, January 22, 1998 meeting in Washington, D.C.: "Internet Domain Name System - gTLD-MoU Information Session - An Opportunity to Meet Members of the Policy Oversight Committee (POC) and Council of Registrars (CORE) to Discuss Policy, Legal and Technical Aspects of the new Top Level Domains". See http://www.gtld-mou.org/docs/meetings.html#jan22 for information and registration form. January 5, 1998: CORE will have a Plenary Meeting on January 21, 23, 24, 1998 in Washington, D.C. See http://www.gtld-mou.org/docs/meetings.html#jan21 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 05:11:17 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain YAICIW Look for more taxes to pay for rural phone connections Connecting All Americans for the 21st Century: Telecommunications Links in Low Income & Rural Communities February 24-27, 1998 Washington, D.C. A Policy Conference & A Practitioners Workshop sponsored by United States Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) & The Public Utility Law Project (PULP) A Non Profit Public Interest Law Firm Representing Low Income and Rural Consumers From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "William H. Geiger III" Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 02:44:53 +0800 To: Bill Frantz Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801071847.NAA28200@users.invweb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 01/07/98 at 12:10 AM, Bill Frantz said: >At 11:49 AM -0800 1/6/98, Eric Cordian wrote: >>I managed to find a document entitled "Security in Lotus Notes and the >>Internet" on the Web. >> >>It describes the weakening procedure as follows. >> >> "No matter which version of Notes you are using, encryption uses the >> full 64-bit key size. However, the International edition takes 24 bits >> of the key and encrypts it using an RSA public key for which the US >> National Security Agency holds the matching private key. This >> encrypted portion of the key is then sent with each message as an >> additional field, the workfactor reduction field. The net result of >> this is that an illegitimate hacker has to tackle 64-bit encryption, >> which is at or beyond the practical limit for current decryption >> technology and hardware. The US government, on the other hand, only >> has to break a 40-bit key space, which is much easier (2 to the power >> of 24 times easier, to be precise)." >It seems to me that if you step on the correct part of the message, you >zap the encrypted 24 bits, and cut NSA out of the loop. Of course the >receiver could notice and refuse to decrypt, which would require some >software hacking to defeat, but that is certainly doable. Wouldn't it be much better just to not use the crap?!? Why should we give our money to a company that has shown that they will sell us out at the first chance of making a buck doing so?? - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNLPLlY9Co1n+aLhhAQHt5gP+NtHd38qR7JcqpL1hCxdk4Tz1N239kIIm 7V6vmiM76oinIDXmsgJoZN9NgLdI8kd7otJt1nLOlEkbGpZ9lAn69pdeB0BzAM2Q OOXhPsy6AzB3y/wdMY2wXpgmTAIT5CpW/014NqtBLIgoL2g2pXseTe416OixxBDv m9aJKKvHgb0= =Us1n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:43:59 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain YAICIW (well actually a press conference) January 7 1:30 p.m. POLITICS ONLINE - PoliticsOnLine publisher Phil Noble holds a news conference to release a report on how the Internet was used in politics last year and prospects for usage this year. Location: National Press Club. Contact: Willie Blacklow, 301-652-3623. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:46:09 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain YAICIW (disclaimer: I am speaking at this one) Cyberjournalism98 The best and brightest in cyberjournalism will explore the future of internet based news and reporting at the Cyberjournalism98 symposium on Jan. 8-10, 1998 in Washington, D.C. and jointly sponsored by the National Press Club and the Freedom Forum. For information on exhibiting atCyberjournalism98 contact Yvonne Miller at MediaMasters@rocketmail.com For information about attending the conference call Euraine Brooks at 703.284.2809 or email ebrooks@freedomforum.org From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 05:10:59 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Lessig on antitrust and government regulation Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Lessig is the special master appointed by the judge in the Microsoft consent decree case. He once wrote: >Whether a regulation is >rational turns on the facts, and what counts as "the facts" turns on the >theory that animates inquiry into the facts. Wow. How do we know what theory is the right one, and when we should change it? -Declan From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 05:13:31 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain YAISIW Washington, D.C. - January 6, 1998 - Ira Magaziner, President Clinton's domestic policy development advisor, will outline the U.S. Government position on electronic commerce and reform of the Domain Name System at the Internet Executive Summits in London (on January 19, 1998, by video conference link) and Washington (on February 4, 1998). Magaziner has spearheaded the Clinton Administration's efforts on electronic commerce and has taken a leading role in the U.S. Government's work on privatization of the Domain Name System. Sally Tate, joint managing director of Prince plc, which is facilitating the Summits, said that "Governments around the world want the private sector to take the lead to reform and manage the Internet. The Internet Executive Summits will enable business leaders to have direct participation in formulating the private sector initiative to ensure that the solution will fully reflect its requirements." A U.S. Inter-Agency Taskforce, set up in April 1997, it is expected to issue policy recommendations based on responses to a request for comments issued in July 1997 and thousands of pages of emailed recommendations received each week. Magaziner's team has also had consultations with hundreds of major Internet and telecommunications companies in Washington D.C. in December 1997. The open door global Internet Executive Summits in London (January 19-20, 1998) and Washington (February 3-4, 1998) will help to set the agenda for transition of the current Internet Domain Name and governance systems. All delegates will be eligible to participate in the reform committees / initiatives formed at the Summits. Representatives from all Internet stakeholder groups are expected to attend the Summits including: commercial organizations worldwide, national governments and intergovernmental organizations, law firms / corporate legal departments, Internet consumer groups (including the research and education community), technology companies and Internet service providers (ISP's). From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: bill payne Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:51:13 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Bruce Schneier, Sandia, FBI and the REAL WORLD Message-ID: <34B3DFB4.6396@nmol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Wednesday 1/7/98 12:57 PM Bruce Schneier wrote and a burglar willing to try all 10,000 is guaranteed to break into your house. This is posted at jya.com. Sandia employees Jack Hudson and Jack Menako, both in my division when Sandia transferred me to break electronic locks for the FBI/ERF [Engineering Research Facility, Quantico, VA], were TRYING to defeat combination locks on file cabinets. Menako built a frame to connect a stepper-motor to the combination dial. The stepper motor was wried to a PC. Hudson wrote the software to try all possible combinations. What happened, IN FACT, was that the combination lock wore-out before the combination which opened the lock was reached. Combinations locks are NOT ENGINEERED for such heavy use. The file safe had to be destroyed to open it! So Schneier's statement may be incorrect. No guarantee. Guys, this is the REAL WORLD. bill Title: Security Pitfalls in Cryptography Security Pitfalls in Cryptography by Bruce Schneier Cryptography Consultant Counterpane Systems e-mail: schneier@counterpane.com Magazine articles like to describe cryptography products in terms of algorithms and key length. Algorithms make good sound bites: they can be explained in a few words and they're easy to compare with one another. "128-bit keys mean good security." "Triple-DES means good security." "40-bit keys mean weak security." "2048-bit RSA is better than 1024-bit RSA." But reality isn't that simple. Longer keys don't always mean more security. Compare the cryptographic algorithm to the lock on your front door. Most door locks have four metal pins, each of which can be in one of ten positions. A key sets the pins in a particular configuration. If the key aligns them all correctly, then the lock opens. So there are only 10,000 possible keys, and a burglar willing to try all 10,000 is guaranteed to break into your house. But an improved lock with ten pins, making 10 billion possible keys, probably won't make your house more secure. Burglars don't try every possible key (a brute-force attack); most aren't even clever enough to pick the lock (a cryptographic attack against the algorithm). They smash windows, kick in doors, disguise themselves as policemen, or rob keyholders at gunpoint. One ring of art thieves in California defeated home security systems by taking a chainsaw to the house walls. Better locks don't help against these attacks. Strong cryptography is very powerful when it is done right, but it is not a panacea. Focusing on the cryptographic algorithms while ignoring other aspects of security is like defending your house not by building a fence around it, but by putting an immense stake into the ground and hoping that the adversary runs right into it. Smart attackers will just go around the algorithms. Counterpane Systems has spent years designing, analyzing, and breaking cryptographic systems. While we do research on published algorithms and protocols, most of our work examines actual products. We've designed and analyzed systems that protect privacy, ensure confidentiality, provide fairness, and facilitate commerce. We've worked with software, stand-alone hardware, and everything in between. We've broken our share of algorithms, but we can almost always find attacks that bypass the algorithms altogether. We don't have to try every possible key, or even find flaws in the algorithms. We exploit errors in design, errors in implementation, and errors in installation. Sometimes we invent a new trick to break a system, but most of the time we exploit the same old mistakes that designers make over and over again. Attacks Against Cryptographic Designs A cryptographic system can only be as strong as the encryption algorithms, digital signature algorithms, one-way hash functions, and message authentication codes it relies on. Break any of them, and you've broken the system. And just as it's possible to build a weak structure using strong materials, it's possible to build a weak cryptographic system using strong algorithms and protocols. We often find systems that "void the warranty" of their cryptography by not using it properly: failing to check the size of values, reusing random parameters that should never be reused, and so on. Encryption algorithms don't necessarily provide data integrity. Key exchange protocols don't necessarily ensure that both parties receive the same key. In a recent research project, we found that some--not all--systems using related cryptographic keys could be broken, even though each individual key was secure. Security is a lot more than plugging in an algorithm and expecting the system to work. Even good engineers, well-known companies, and lots of effort are no guarantee of robust implementation; our work on the U.S. digital cellular encryption algorithm illustrated that. Random-number generators are another place where cryptographic systems often break. Good random-number generators are hard to design, because their security often depends on the particulars of the hardware and software. Many products we examine use bad ones. The cryptography may be strong, but if the random-number generator produces weak keys, the system is much easier to break. Other products use secure random-number generators, but they don't use enough randomness to make the cryptography secure. Recently Counterpane Systems has published new classes of attacks against random-number generators, based on our work with commercial designs. One of the most surprising things we've found is that specific random-number generators may be secure for one purpose but insecure for another; generalizing security analyses is dangerous. In another research result, we looked at interactions between individually secure cryptographic protocols. Given a secure protocol, we show how to build another secure protocol that will break the first if both are used with the same keys on the same device. Attacks Against Implementations Many systems fail because of mistakes in implementation. Some systems don't ensure that plaintext is destroyed after it's encrypted. Other systems use temporary files to protect against data loss during a system crash, or virtual memory to increase the available memory; these features can accidentally leave plaintext lying around on the hard drive. In extreme cases, the operating system can leave the keys on the hard drive. One product we've seen used a special window for password input. The password remained in the window's memory even after it was closed. It didn't matter how good that product's cryptography was; it was broken by the user interface. Other systems fall to more subtle problems. Sometimes the same data is encrypted with two different keys, one strong and one weak. Other systems use master keys and then one-time session keys. We've broken systems using partial information about the different keys. We've also seen systems that use inadequate protection mechanisms for the master keys, mistakenly relying on the security of the session keys. It's vital to secure all possible ways to learn a key, not just the most obvious ones. Electronic commerce systems often make implementation trade-offs to enhance usability. We've found subtle vulnerabilities here, when designers don't think through the security implications of their trade-offs. Doing account reconciliation only once per day might be easier, but what kind of damage can an attacker do in a few hours? Can audit mechanisms be flooded to hide the identity of an attacker? Some systems record compromised keys on "hotlists"; attacks against these hotlists can be very fruitful. Other systems can be broken through replay attacks: reusing old messages, or parts of old messages, to fool various parties. Systems that allow old keys to be recovered in an emergency provide another area to attack. Good cryptographic systems are designed so that the keys exist for as short a period of time as possible; key recovery often negates any security benefit by forcing keys to exist long after they are useful. Furthermore, key recovery databases become sources of vulnerability in themselves, and have to be designed and implemented securely. In one product we evaluated, flaws in the key recovery database allowed criminals to commit fraud and then frame legitimate users. Attacks Against Passwords Many systems break because they rely on user-generated passwords. Left to themselves, people don't choose strong passwords. If they're forced to use strong passwords, they can't remember them. If the password becomes a key, it's usually much easier--and faster--to guess the password than it is to brute-force the key; we've seen elaborate security systems fail in this way. Some user interfaces make the problem even worse: limiting the passwords to eight characters, converting everything to lower case, etc. Even passphrases can be weak: searching through 40-character phrases is often much easier than searching through 64-bit random keys. We've also seen key-recovery systems that circumvent strong session keys by using weak passwords for key-recovery. Attacks Against Hardware Some systems, particularly commerce systems, rely on tamper-resistant hardware for security: smart cards, electronic wallets, dongles, etc. These systems may assume public terminals never fall into the wrong hands, or that those "wrong hands" lack the expertise and equipment to attack the hardware. While hardware security is an important component in many secure systems, we distrust systems whose security rests solely on assumptions about tamper resistance. We've rarely seen tamper resistance techniques that work, and tools for defeating tamper resistance are getting better all the time. When we design systems that use tamper resistance, we always build in complementary security mechanisms just in case the tamper resistance fails. The "timing attack" made a big press splash in 1995: RSA private keys could be recovered by measuring the relative times cryptographic operations took. The attack has been successfully implemented against smart cards and other security tokens, and against electronic commerce servers across the Internet. Counterpane Systems and others have generalized these methods to include attacks on a system by measuring power consumption, radiation emissions, and other "side channels," and have implemented them against a variety of public-key and symmetric algorithms in "secure" tokens. We've yet to find a smart card that we can't pull the secret keys out of by looking at side channels. Related research has looked at fault analysis: deliberately introducing faults into cryptographic processors in order to determine the secret keys. The effects of this attack can be devastating. Attacks Against Trust Models Many of our more interesting attacks are against the underlying trust model of the system: who or what in the system is trusted, in what way, and to what extent. Simple systems, like hard-drive encryption programs or telephone privacy products, have simple trust models. Complex systems, like electronic commerce systems or multi-user e-mail security programs, have complex (and subtle) trust models. An e-mail program might use uncrackable cryptography for the messages, but unless the keys are certified by a trusted source (and unless that certification can be verified), the system is still vulnerable. Some commerce systems can be broken by a merchant and a customer colluding, or by two different customers colluding. Other systems make implicit assumptions about security infrastructures, but don't bother to check that those assumptions are actually true. If the trust model isn't documented, then an engineer can unknowingly change it in product development, and compromise security. Many software systems make poor trust assumptions about the computers they run on; they assume the desktop is secure. These programs can often be broken by Trojan horse software that sniffs passwords, reads plaintext, or otherwise circumvents security measures. Systems working across computer networks have to worry about security flaws resulting from the network protocols. Computers that are attached to the Internet can also be vulnerable. Again, the cryptography may be irrelevant if it can be circumvented through network insecurity. And no software is secure against reverse-engineering. Often, a system will be designed with one trust model in mind, and implemented with another. Decisions made in the design process might be completely ignored when it comes time to sell it to customers. A system that is secure when the operators are trusted and the computers are completely under the control of the company using the system may not be secure when the operators are temps hired at just over minimum wage and the computers are untrusted. Good trust models work even if some of the trust assumptions turn out to be wrong. Attacks on the Users Even when a system is secure if used properly, its users can subvert its security by accident--especially if the system isn't designed very well. The classic example of this is the user who gives his password to his co-workers so they can fix some problem when he's out of the office. Users may not report missing smart cards for a few days, in case they are just misplaced. They may not carefully check the name on a digital certificate. They may reuse their secure passwords on other, insecure systems. They may not change their software's default weak security settings. Good system design can't fix all these social problems, but it can help avoid many of them. Attacks Against Failure Recovery Strong systems are designed to keep small security breaks from becoming big ones. Recovering the key to one file should not allow the attacker to read every file on the hard drive. A hacker who reverse-engineers a smart card should only learn the secrets in that smart card, not information that will help him break other smart cards in the system. In a multi-user system, knowing one person's secrets shouldn't compromise everyone else's. Many systems have a "default to insecure mode." If the security feature doesn't work, most people just turn it off and finish their business. If the on-line credit card verification system is down, merchants will default to the less-secure paper system. Similarly, it is sometimes possible to mount a "version rollback attack" against a system after it has been revised to fix a security problem: the need for backwards compatibility allows an attacker to force the protocol into an older, insecure, version. Other systems have no ability to recover from disaster. If the security breaks, there's no way to fix it. For electronic commerce systems, which could have millions of users, this can be particularly damaging. Such systems should plan to respond to attacks, and to upgrade security without having to shut the system down. The phrase "and then the company is screwed" is never something you want to put in your business plan. Good system design considers what will happen when an attack occurs, and works out ways to contain the damage and recover from the attack. Attacks Against the Cryptography Sometimes, products even get the cryptography wrong. Some rely on proprietary encryption algorithms. Invariably, these are very weak. Counterpane Systems has had considerable success breaking published encryption algorithms; our track record against proprietary ones is even better. Keeping the algorithm secret isn't much of an impediment to analysis, anyway--it only takes a couple of days to reverse-engineer the cryptographic algorithm from executable code. One system we analyzed, the S/MIME 2 electronic-mail standard, took a relatively strong design and implemented it with a weak cryptographic algorithm. The system for DVD encryption took a weak algorithm and made it weaker. We've seen many other cryptographic mistakes: implementations that repeat "unique" random values, digital signature algorithms that don't properly verify parameters, hash functions altered to defeat the very properties they're being used for. We've seen cryptographic protocols used in ways that were not intended by the protocols' designers, and protocols "optimized" in seemingly trivial ways that completely break their security. Attack Prevention vs. Attack Detection Most cryptographic systems rely on prevention as their sole means of defense: the cryptography keeps people from cheating, lying, abusing, or whatever. Defense should never be that narrow. A strong system also tries to detect abuse and to contain the effects of any attack. One of our fundamental design principles is that sooner or later, every system will be successfully attacked, probably in a completely unexpected way and with unexpected consequences. It is important to be able to detect such an attack, and then to contain the attack to ensure it does minimal damage. More importantly, once the attack is detected, the system needs to recover: generate and promulgate a new key pair, update the protocol and invalidate the old one, remove an untrusted node from the system, etc. Unfortunately, many systems don't collect enough data to provide an audit trail, or fail to protect the data against modification. Counterpane Systems has done considerable work in securing audit logs in electronic commerce systems, mostly in response to system designs that could fail completely in the event of a successful attack. These systems have to do more than detect an attack: they must also be able to produce evidence that can convince a judge and jury of guilt. Building Secure Cryptographic Systems Security designers occupy what Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz calls "the position of the interior." A good security product must defend against every possible attack, even attacks that haven't been invented yet. Attackers, on the other hand, only need to find one security flaw in order to defeat the system. And they can cheat. They can collude, conspire, and wait for technology to give them additional tools. They can attack the system in ways the system designer never thought of. Building a secure cryptographic system is easy to do badly, and very difficult to do well. Unfortunately, most people can't tell the difference. In other areas of computer science, functionality serves to differentiate the good from the bad: a good compression algorithm will work better than a bad one; a bad compression program will look worse in feature-comparison charts. Cryptography is different. Just because an encryption program works doesn't mean it is secure. What happens with most products is that someone reads Applied Cryptography, chooses an algorithm and protocol, tests it to make sure it works, and thinks he's done. He's not. Functionality does not equal quality, and no amount of beta testing will ever reveal a security flaw. Too many products are merely "buzzword compliant"; they use secure cryptography, but they are not secure. Home page - Counterpane - Applied Cryptography - E-Mail Security - Crypto Links Bruce Schneier Bio - Blowfish - Publications - Contact Counterpane Bruce Schneier Copyright 1998 Counterpane Systems. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 03:14:49 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: More on Association for Interactive Media conference Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain [This is the conference Tim was criticizing yesterday. --Declan] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 10:49:01 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh To: politech@vorlon.mit.edu Subject: FC: More on Association for Interactive Media conference Netly articles on AIM: http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1155,00.html http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,1464,00.html -Declan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 10:24:20 -0800 From: John Gilmore To: declan@well.com, gnu@toad.com Subject: Re: FC: Association for Interactive Media conference (DC, 2/98) [for forwarding if you like] Note that AIM, the sponsors of the "WashingtonWeb" conference, are the folks who appear to be paid stooges for Network Solutions in trying to keep their ten million dollar per month monopoly on domain names. AIM's coverage of that issue has been completely false and completely biased ("The Internet is likely to break apart on October 15, 1997"; "you may lose all rights to use your trademark in your Internet address forever". See www.interactivehq.org/oic/). They've been deliberately making false statements to stir up sentiment against the evolution of domain names away from the Network Solutions monopoly. I wouldn't promote or attend their conference. There's something going on there that I don't understand -- but I do recognize slime when I see it. John Gilmore -------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology To subscribe: send a message to majordomo@vorlon.mit.edu with this text: subscribe politech More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Miller Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 03:29:04 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: FCC squeezes the ham TV band Message-ID: <34B40059.28DE@avana.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Wednesday January 7 10:22 AM EST FCC Reallocates Lightly Used Television Spectrum WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Federal Communications Commission said Tuesday it had reallocated lightly used television frequencies for use by public safety services. Portions of the spectrum between 746 and 806 megahertz that had carried channels 60 to 69 will be given over to police and fire departments and other emergency services. The remainder of the spectrum will be auctioned off for commercial use. The reallocation was required by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. The FCC had previously announced it would reallocate the lightly used spectrum in an April, 1997 plan for the transition to digital television. FCC chairman William Kennard said on Tuesday the commission would allow some users of the high channels to continue operations, however. "While recovery of unused spectrum is an integral part of the FCC plan for transition from analog to digital television, I am sensitive to the effects of spectrum recovery on Low Power TV and TV translators," Kennard said in a statement. Such broadcasters may continue operations through the transition to digital television "as long as they do not cause harmful interference to primary services," he said. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright (c) 1997 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:03:53 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Polycratic government?... Message-ID: <199801072025.OAA32052@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Hi, Is anyone aware of research or writings regarding polycratic political systems? Thanks. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Miller Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 03:54:59 +0800 To: declan@well.com Subject: Re: More on Association for Interactive Media conference In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <34B406D5.2A9D@avana.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Declan McCullagh wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: John Gilmore > > Note that AIM, the sponsors of the "WashingtonWeb" conference, are the > folks who appear to be paid stooges for Network Solutions in trying to > keep their ten million dollar per month monopoly on domain names. > AIM's coverage of that issue has been completely false and completely > biased ("The Internet is likely to break apart on October 15, 1997"; > "you may lose all rights to use your trademark in your Internet > address forever". See www.interactivehq.org/oic/). >From the January 5, 1998 issue of Internet Week, page 14: "Network Solutions, Inc., which registers domain names under an agreement with the National Science Foundation, will have the [DNS] agreement extended six months beyond its March 1998 conclusion to ensure the stability of the system." --David Miller From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:41:30 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington (fwd) Message-ID: <199801072105.PAA32344@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 12:30:42 -0800 (PST) > From: Declan McCullagh > Subject: Re: Too many "Internet Conferences" in Washington > Attendance at this conference will be by invitation only. About 35 > individuals will represent a > variety of backgrounds and perspectives including the computing industry > (such as Internet service > providers, network administrators, and providers of "anonymizing" > services) the legal community, > professional societies, academic institutions, law enforcement agencies, > and other agencies of > government. This is the real fault with the conference mentality... How can anyone reasonably expect 35 people, invitation only or not, to have a clue about any aspect of the industry let alone some sort of birds eye view? I would wager that if we took the top 35 ISP's in the US they couldn't come up with a cohesive expression of viewpoint that would have a lifetime measured in anything more than a few weeks. Pure hubris. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 05:25:12 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Governments want to change Net architecture, from Comm Daily Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 07:44:57 -0800 (PST) >From: Declan McCullagh >To: politech@vorlon.mit.edu >Subject: FC: Governments want to change Net architecture, from Comm Daily >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Sender: owner-politech@vorlon.mit.edu >Reply-To: declan@well.com >X-Loop: politech@vorlon.mit.edu >X-URL: Politech is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/ > >[Apologies to Art for not forwarding this earlier. --Declan] > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 10:28:49 -0500 >From: Art Brodsky >To: declan@smtp.well.com >Subject: comm daily story > >Declan, > Here's the story from Comm Daily, Dec. 17 > >'Optimistic and Damned Silly' > > INTERNET CHANGE FOCUS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT > > Law enforcement officials of U.S. and 7 other industrialized >countries want to make fundamental changes in Internet technology >in order to aid in their ability to track and catch criminals, >Justice Dept. sources said. > > Program to consider changes in Internet architectures comes as >part of agreement announced last week by Attorney Gen. Janet Reno >and Justice ministers from around world after meeting in Washington >(CD Dec 11 p10). However, one leading Internet authority, MCI >Senior Vp Vinton Cerf, said international group's plan wouldn't >work. > > Justice ministers are considering approach similar to that of >Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) program in >U.S., which would make traffic from advanced telecom networks more >accessible to law enforcement entities. Representatives of Canada, >France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and U.K., as well as U.S., >agreed as part of "statement of principles" issued in communique >following 2-day session that: "To the extent practicable, >information and telecommunications systems should be designed to >help prevent and detect network abuse, and should also facilitate >the tracing of criminals and the collection of evidence." Several >items on "action plan" issued in support of those principles refer >to working with new technologies to collect critical evidence, >developing standards for authenticating electronic data for use in >investigations and encouraging standards-making bodies to provide >public and private sectors "with standards for reliable and secure >telecommunications and data processing technologies." > > DoJ officials said Dept. may want to talk later with telephone >industry on trap and trace issues, but it's premature to involve >them now in follow-up to international summit. Instead, they said, >they are looking at broader picture of telecom networks that >haven't worked as closely with law enforcement as they could, and >have begun thinking about Internet protocols. Internet operates >globally with common protocols, currently Internet Protocol version >4. Internet engineers are working on next iteration, version IPv6 >(Internet Protocol version 6 -- 5 was experimental attempt that was >dropped). Justice official said that one problem now is that it's >easy to send and receive e-mail with false address, called >"spoofing." > > It would be helpful to law enforcement if information sent >over Internet were tagged, and packets would transmit information >reliably as to where they came from, including user and service >provider, officials said. Loose analogy would be to compare e-mail >messages to tagging of explosives, so law enforcement can track >explosive material to its source. DoJ said new protocols could be >designed to make it easier to authenticate messages and to make >system more reliable. Law enforcement wants to work with industry >to accomplish goal, saying it would help "keep people who are >abusing information technologies from continuing to do it." > > There will be substantial obstacles to law enforcement >concept, however. Not least of them is that IPv6 will include >sophisticated encryption capabilities as part of protocols. Such >security isn't built in to Internet now, one of reasons why >electronic commerce has yet to take off, said Mark McFadden, >communications dir. for Commercial Internet eXchange Assn. (CIX). >That feature will make it harder for law enforcement to gain access >to information, he said. > > Cerf, co-inventor of Internet protocols, said in interview >that law enforcement's concept of tagging e-mail messages wouldn't >work: "To imagine that we would instantly create the >infrastructure for that throughout the entire Internet strikes me >as optimistic and damned silly, at least in the short term. Anyone >who anticipates using tools to guarantee that everything will be >traceable is not going to have a successful outcome." Technically, >such project could be accomplished, Cerf said, but having >administrative infrastructure to administer it is quite different >issue. > > It's possible to have digital signature for every packet of >data, but it would take "an enormous amount of processing, and it's >not clear we have any network computers and routers that could do >that and maintain the traffic flow that's required," Cerf said. It >also would require that each sender affix digital signature to each >piece of mail, idea that Cerf said couldn't be enforced: "Frankly, >the idea of trying to guarantee traceability of that kind is far >from implementable." He said he didn't want to be misunderstood >that his objections were "an argument in favor of criminality." >But Cerf said he worries that "someone relies on what they think is >a technical solution without recognizing all of the administrative >mechanics that need to be put in place." > > Law enforcement has some time to work with Internet community. >McFadden said IPv6 isn't scheduled to be implemented at consumer >level for at least 5 years, possibly as much as 10. There was some >urgency when it appeared that reservoir of Internet addresses would >dry up, but with progress being made to protect addresses as scarce >resource there's less pressure for new set of protocols, he said. > > >posted with permission Warren Publishing > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology >To subscribe: send a message to majordomo@vorlon.mit.edu with this text: >subscribe politech >More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/ >-------------------------------------------------------------------------- > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 09:33:41 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: a good example of bad crypto hype Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980107171614.007c4eb0@206.40.207.40> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain at http://www.meganet.com/explain.htm you can test your critical thinking skills... ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 08:11:05 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Ruby Ridge FBI sniper to stand trial [CNN] Message-ID: <199801080032.SAA00252@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > FBI SNIPER TO STAND TRIAL IN RUBY RIDGE CASE > > FBI seal January 7, 1998 > Web posted at: 6:32 p.m. EST (2332 GMT) > > BONNERS FERRY, Idaho (AP) -- A judge Wednesday ordered an FBI > sharpshooter to stand trial on a state manslaughter charge for the > death of white separatist Randy Weaver's wife in the 1992 siege at > Ruby Ridge. > > The U.S. Justice Department decided in 1994 against prosecuting Lon > Horiuchi and upheld the decision last year after a long review. But > in August, Boundary County Prosecutor Denise Woodbury filed a charge > of involuntary manslaughter. > > Magistrate Judge Quentin Harden decided there was probable cause to > bring Horiuchi to trial on the state charge. Harden scheduled a > February 13 arraignment before state Judge James Michaud. > > A federal judge is to hear arguments Monday from Horiuchi's lawyers > in Boise that the case should be transferred to federal court. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Information Security Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 08:23:11 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Sentencing for Electronic Copyright Infringement Message-ID: <199801080008.TAA03811@panix2.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > Subject: Re: Sentencing for Electronic Copyright Infringement > From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Date: Wed, 07 Jan 98 08:09:32 EST > > Tim May writes: > > When the ninja narc raiders cart our computers off for analysis, I'm sure > > they can find enough violations to send us away for as many years as they > > wish. > > And if Timmy knew a bit more about cryptography than he could learn by browsing > through Bruce Schneier's book, the ninja narc raiders wouldm't be able to find > shit on any of his media. :-) Hey, Vulis, how does it feel to know all your phone lines are being monitored by the FBI? For (among other things): soliciting funds for terrorist groups incl Hamas to kill a couple, and threatening government employees... ---guy Lon T. Horiuchi was indicted for murder today. The DOJ refused to prosecute him: the state will. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: jalonz@openworld.com Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 08:34:25 +0800 To: blancw@cnw.com> Subject: Re: The Digital Society Group Message-ID: <85256585.00837DB3.00@openworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >>Without getting into too much detail, The Digital Society Group is >>constructing a pure-technology infrastructure to provide for the operation, >>governance and existence of a complete digital society within a free >>enterprise zone. >The web site doesn't explain what methods you are using to establish these >zones. Do you have a mailing list set up for discussion? The plan >sounds interesting and ideologically supportable, but I'm skeptical. Blanc, I'm trying to get more docs online ASAP to explain things. The physical free zones are very popular in the interational business world, but I as a computer type had never heard of them other than Hong Kong, etc. When a country wants to set up a free zone, they come to Openworld and its partner companies who do everything from clearing land, construction, setting up businesses, schools, hospitals, etc. One of the soon to be required components of a free zone installation is a digital infrastructure to link all of the things together. We're talking smart cards for physical structure security and personal ID, email, web hosting, net access, all kinds of stuff. Since we are building a "country" from scratch, rather than have to automate paper workflows and do document management, the governance processes are designed to be digital from the start. Thus, to provide incorporation services to its citizens, a free zone allows them to sign up via web browser, and the daily maintenance, processing and management of the corporate records is also done almost exclusively via web browser and email. Its fast, cheap, and requires far less labor than a paper-based system. Another feature is that rather than maintaining the records for the customer, the customer can log in via web browser and update their own corporate record. (similar to Internic) This reduces labor even further and reduces the cost of incorporation to around $100 per year making instant offshore incorporation accessible to the general global public for the first time. That kind of solution applied across an entire governance and communications infrastructure make for some radical things to become possible. Another concept being implemented is that each new free zone (being fully wired) can easily replicate records and data with other free zones (they will actually be required to for certain things) and thus a citizen in one free zone can access banking, etc. services (even physical access) in another. So, we see the emergence of a phsically distributed, digitally cohesive network of "corporate states". This lends to applications like data protection and hiding via distributed storage or data sharing via common dataspaces and replication. The technical methods to perform all of this work are a bit touchy. At the risk of starting endless flame wars, I was looking at Lotus Bloats for its replication and hierarchical security structure as well as easy forms to web publishing and workflow management. That got shot down at the thought of actually administrating the mess and also the costs are fairly significant. The final nail in the coffin was the encryption key escrow fiasco with the Swiss. I was also looking at NT due to the nice database-to-web interface and the fact that IIS 4 isn't too bad. But again software license costs are large and who knows if Microsoft is doing, or will do, a key escrow deal for future products? Who knows what they are doing now with NT on the OS level? You can't run around making structures which allow people around the world to move money and communicate anonymously, incorporate and have software agents be owners of property and bank accounts without someone getting very pissed off. Thus, a good solution seems to be Linux in that its cheap, Unix is good for multi-process routing, and the toolkits and components created by the Digital Society can be easily moved into the public domin in some form or another. Also, the export mess can be gotten around in one way or another. Any comments? Any better alternatives than Linux? The coding being done now is either cross-platform or prototype which will be scrapped as soon as the kinks are worked out and the real fun can begin. The Digital Society is purposefully working cheap and small to enable the tools and communities to be deployed at as close as possible to no cost for the end-user - that is the priority. Most things are being coded from scratch to ensure security and keep the costs low. Labor is cheap - when its your own. :) Jalon --------------------------------------------------------------- Jalon Q. Zimmerman, Director The Digital Society Group A division of Openworld, Inc. http://www.openworld.com/ jalonz@openworld.com --------------------------------------------------------------- The government is not your mommy. --------------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Bill Frantz Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:03:03 +0800 To: "William H. Geiger III" Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 10:36 AM -0800 1/7/98, William H. Geiger III wrote: > at 12:10 AM, Bill Frantz said: > >>At 11:49 AM -0800 1/6/98, Eric Cordian wrote: >>>I managed to find a document entitled "Security in Lotus Notes and the >>>Internet" on the Web. >>> >>>It describes the weakening procedure as follows. >>> >>> "No matter which version of Notes you are using, encryption uses the >>> full 64-bit key size. However, the International edition takes 24 bits >>> of the key and encrypts it using an RSA public key for which the US >>> National Security Agency holds the matching private key. This >>> encrypted portion of the key is then sent with each message as an >>> additional field, the workfactor reduction field. The net result of >>> this is that an illegitimate hacker has to tackle 64-bit encryption, >>> which is at or beyond the practical limit for current decryption >>> technology and hardware. The US government, on the other hand, only >>> has to break a 40-bit key space, which is much easier (2 to the power >>> of 24 times easier, to be precise)." > >>It seems to me that if you step on the correct part of the message, you >>zap the encrypted 24 bits, and cut NSA out of the loop. Of course the >>receiver could notice and refuse to decrypt, which would require some >>software hacking to defeat, but that is certainly doable. > >Wouldn't it be much better just to not use the crap?!? > >Why should we give our money to a company that has shown that they will >sell us out at the first chance of making a buck doing so?? I don't plan on using it, but the Swedes have a bit of an installed base problem. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | One party wants to control | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | what you do in the bedroom,| 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz@netcom.com | the other in the boardroom.| Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 03:11:02 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Fiat's Batch RSA Message-ID: <199801071855.TAA07264@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Batch RSA invented by Amos Fiat Described in Crypto 89 and J Cryptology 1997. RSA works as follows. The key owner chooses two secret primes p and q, and forms their product n = p*q. He then chooses a public exponent e relatively prime to p-1 and q-1. His public key is (n, e). To encrypt a message m into cyphertext c, m is raised to the power e, mod n: c = m^e mod n. To decrypt the message, the key holder calculates d as the multiplicative inverse of e mod (p-1)(q-1): d = 1/e mod (p-1)(q-1). He recovers m from m = c^d mod n. For simplicity, below we will write this as m = c^(1/e) mod n, where it is understood that the 1/e is done mod (p-1)(q-1). An RSA signature s on a message m is calculated as for a decryption: s = m^(1/e) mod n. The signature is verified by m ?=? s^e mod n. The time consuming part of an RSA decryption or signature is this exponentiation step. e can be chosen to be small, so encryption and verification is fast, but 1/e will generally be about the same size as n, so many multiplications must be done to raise a number to that power. Amos Fiat describes a method whereby multiple messages can be decrypted or signed using only one full-sized exponentiation. The "catch" is that the messages must all use different exponents with the same n. Here is a concrete example. You want to decrypt or sign two messages, M1 and M2, raising M1 to the 1/3 power and M2 to the 1/5 power. Perform the following steps: M12 = M1^5 * M2^3 I12 = M12 ^ (1/15) This is the only full-sized exponentiation needed. This gives: I12 = M1^(1/3) * M2^(1/5). This is the product of the two values that we want. Fiat uses a trick to disentangle the two values. He raises I12 to the 6th power. The number 6 is chosen so that it is a multiple of one of the two exponents, 3, and is 1 more than a multiple of the other exponent, 5: I12^6 = M1^2 * M2 * M2^(1/5) Therefore: M2^(1/5) = I12^6 / (M1^2 * M2) which is one of the values we need. Since I12 is the product of the two values we want, we can recover the other value just by dividing this into I12: M1^(1/3) = I12 / M2^(1/5) Here is another example. Suppose we want M3^(1/7) and M4^(1/11). (Note that we are using prime numbers for the exponents; the reason will be explained below.) We calculate: M34 = M3^11 * M4^7 I34 = M34 ^ (1/77) This gives us: I34 = M3^(1/7) * M4^(1/11) Again this is the product of the two values we want. As before we will raise this to a power which is 1 more than a multiple of one of the two exponents (7 and 11) and is a multiple of the other one. The smallest such power is 22. I34^22 = M3^3 * M3^(1/7) * M4^2 So we can divide to get M3^(1/7): M3^(1/7) = I34^22 / (M3^3 * M4^2) And we can divide to get the other value needed: M4^(1/11) = I34 / M3^(1/7) This illustrates how to derive two RSA roots using only one full sized exponentiation. A few small exponentiations are also needed, as well as two divisions, but these are much faster than doing the full exponentiation (raising to the 1/15 or 1/77 powers above). Fiat's idea can then be applied recursively. Note that in the examples above we had to take two full-sized exponentiation, M12 to the 1/15 power and M34 to the 1/77 power. We can combine both of these exponentiations into one just as was done above: M14 = M12^77 * M34^15 I14 = M14 ^ (1/1155) Now: I14 = M12^(1/15) * M34^(1/77) the product of the two values we want. We need an exponent which is 1 more than a multiple of 15 while being a multiple of 77, giving 615, or vice versa, giving 540. Choosing the latter since it is smaller we have: I14^540 = M12^36 * M34^7 * M34^(1/77) so: M34^(1/77) = I14^540 / (M12^36 * M34^7) and dividing gives the other factor: M12^(1/15) = I14 / M34^(1/77) These values can then be fed into the expressions above to recover M1^(1/3) and the other three values, all with only one full-sized exponentiation for the four messages. In general, finding the exponent for Ixx can be handled by the Chinese Remainder Theorem. However it requires that the two values be relatively prime. That is why the exponents used in Batch RSA must all be relatively prime, so that there is a solution to the value of the exponent for Ixx. As the number of values in the batch increases, the "small" exponents needed to recover the values increase as well. We saw above that the exponents went from 6 and 22 for the size-two batches to 540 for the size-four batch. This means that you reach a point of diminishing returns where increasing the batch size no longer provides much benefit. Fiat suggests a batch size of n/(log^2 n) messages, where n is the length of the full-sized exponentiation (e.g. 1000 for a 1000 bit modulus). This would correspond to about a 10 message batch for a 1024 bit key. Fiat describes a few situations where it may be appropriate to use different exponents for multiple RSA operations. In the case of a server issuing multiple RSA signatures it could define its public key to be (n, e1, e2, e3,...) and specify that the signature was valid for any exponent in the list. Then it could batch up signatures and use a different exponent for each one. Another case is "pure RSA" encryption, where the message itself is broken into blocks and each one is RSA encrypted. In that case the blocks could use successive exponents from the list, and the receiver could decrypt a batch of blocks using one large exponentiation. There is another case of interest to us, related to the task of searching through messages from a message pool, possibly steganographically hidden. That will be described in another message. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@nsm.htp.org Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 04:30:16 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: lists Message-ID: <19980107200049.20317.qmail@nsm.htp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Can someone tell me if the toad cypherpunk list gets *all* the cypherpuink traffic? As I understand it there are three possible subscription points -- does one subscription cover all? Thanks in advance... From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Eric Cordian Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 10:34:09 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: a good example of bad crypto hype In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980107171614.007c4eb0@206.40.207.40> Message-ID: <199801080230.UAA11585@wire.insync.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain David Honig wrote: > at http://www.meganet.com/explain.htm > you can test your critical thinking skills... Clearly everyone in this company is on crack. :) -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Information Security Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 10:11:51 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: The Digital Society Group Message-ID: <199801080202.VAA11825@panix2.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > From: jalonz@openworld.com > To: cypherpunks@toad.com > Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 18:07:24 -0500 > Subject: The Digital Society Group > > Hi all, Hi, stranger. > Openworld, Inc. is a company which sets up free enterprise zones around the > world. The "free zones" are akin to Hong Kong and Singapore and are > self-governing, independent entities as recognized by the parent country. [snip] > A division of Openworld, Inc., The Digital Society Group, has been formed > to apply technology to the infrastructure of the free zones and essentially > mirror them in cyberspace . > > Without getting into too much detail, The Digital Society Group is > constructing a pure-technology infrastructure to provide for the operation, > governance and existence of a complete digital society within a free > enterprise zone. [snip] > Locations are planned for Africa, Southeast Asia, Russia, etc. > > We are already coding... > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Jalon Q. Zimmerman, Director > The Digital Society Group > A division of Openworld, Inc. Firing up the DejaNews traffic analysis tool... Jalon Q. Zimmerman: sneaker@powergrid.electriciti.com jalonz@compuvar.com jalon@ix.netcom.com jalonz@datacore.compuvar.com jalonz@morava.com jalon@hermesnet.net # Subject: I need a challenge!! # From: "Jalon Q. Zimmerman" # Date: 1995/06/19 # Newsgroups: misc.jobs.resumes # # I'm bored with the usual run-of-the-mill jobs and am looking for a # challenge. I want to solve problems, find solutions, and create # things with computers. # # My background is in programming/computer security and I have a # strong creative talent. # # My dream is to work in the R&D environment where I can be given # a problem/idea and turned loose. Good boy. Good boy. Stop slobbering on the carpet... % Subject: ENTERTAINMENT: The CyberGuy Project % From: jalonz@compuvar.com (Jalon Q. Zimmerman) % Date: 1995/10/23 % Newsgroups: comp.infosystems.www.announce % % Follow the crazed wanderings of a technomad. Announcing the CyberGuy % Project. The first fully functioning guy, with a real job, and a real % life, living with a laptop, a duffel bag full of stuff and the wide, % wide world as his home... % % [defunct] Word: "Technomad". Like it. # I am moving. 1995/09/27 Moving from San Diego to... # Subject: Columbus, Ohio - webheads netnerds arthackers wanted! # From: jalon@ix.netcom.com (Jalon Q. Zimmerman) # Date: 1996/04/08 # Newsgroups: oh.general,alt.cyberpunk,alt.rave,alt.2600 # # I'm looking for webheads, netnerds and arthackers in the Columbus area # to form an unstructured group and get a hangout going somewhere in a # Columbus coffee-house or something like that. # # The idea is to throw a bunch of people and some resources together and # see what happens. # # I have just moved to Columbus from San Diego where this type of thing # is a necessity for modern cyberpeople. Since I can't find anything # here, I thought I'd get it going myself. # # If you are interested, mail me and we'll make it happen. Columbus "4DeadIn" Ohio. % Subject: Looking for investor wishing to start an internet provision company in Columbus % From: "Jalon Q. Zimmerman" % Date: 1996/01/16 % Newsgroups: cmh.general % % I am looking for an investor wishing to start an Internet presence or % service provision company in the Columbus, Ohio area. I have just % relocated from San Diego, Ca. and am interested in contributing the % "technical" element to a start-up venture. % % Please contact Jalon Zimmerman at: 614-873-4250 % % Serious inquiries only. Mooer. # From: "Jalon Q. Zimmerman" # Date: 1996/10/20 # Newsgroups: alt.mud.moo # # Hello, # # We are looking to sponsor a moo or some variation thereof as well as a # rather serious Mxx-related website for the sheer coolness of it. Headhunter: Date Scr Subject Newsgroup Author 1. 96/07/19 020 Corporate salespeople wanted sdnet.jobs Jalon Q. Zimmerman 2. 96/07/19 020 Interns wanted - marketing/P sdnet.jobs Jalon Q. Zimmerman 3. 96/07/19 020 Corporate sales - Internet r sdnet.wanted Jalon Q. Zimmerman 4. 96/07/19 020 Corporate salespeople wanted sdnet.jobs.offered Jalon Q. Zimmerman 5. 96/07/19 020 Re: Corporate salespeople wa sdnet.jobs Jalon Q. Zimmerman 6. 96/07/19 020 Re: Corporate salespeople wa sdnet.jobs Jalon Q. Zimmerman 7. 96/07/19 020 Interns wanted - marketing/P sdnet.jobs.offered Jalon Q. Zimmerman ...moved to DC/Maryland... # Subject: Exciting Internet jobs in growing DC & MD business: Programming, # Graphics Design, Web Page Design, Customer Service, and More! # Full-Time and Contractual positions saught. # From: Cool Internet Jobs # Date: 1997/03/13 # Newsgroups: dc.jobs,md.jobs,balt.jobs,misc.jobs.offered,us.jobs.offered, # biz.jobs.offered,prg.jobs,comp.jobs.contract,misc.jobs.contract # # On May 1, 1997, Hermes Internet Service, Inc. will be opening a second # office in Landover, Md., which is located at the intersection of US 50 # and the DC Beltway and walking distance to the New Carrollton Metro # (Orange Line). # # We will continue to use our current location as well, near 7th Street # and Maine Ave., SW, DC, near the waterfront. # # We have openings for four additional people, the first immediately, the # other three on May 1: Resume (snipped): # Subject: html/CGI/db online inet apps - VB/MS Access - Linux/Postgres95 # From: "Jalon Q. Zimmerman" # Date: 1995/06/25 # Newsgroups: misc.jobs.resumes # # DIGICOM # # Developing an HTML interface to telephone conferencing hardware for Logicon, a # defense contractor. Group telephone conferencing can be managed from any HTML # browser via a LAN or the internet. The system incorporates user accounting, # document sharing within a conference, graphical icons and elements including # photographs of the group participants, secure html interfacing, support for voice # encrypted lines. Each server handles 32 simultaneous queries and 32 phone lines. # The application is written in Visual Basic using Winsock 1.0 sockets, MS Access # database tables, HTML 3.0, and MS Visual C++ DLLs. # # # CREDIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES # # Designed and implemented an automated credit information retrieval and analysis # solution. The system automated the office workflow, paper trail, billing, and # communications. The final solution utilized an in-house client-server scheme for # communications, a Paradox for Windows database platform, and an automated credit # retrieval and analysis application in C++. Communications servers were run on OS/2, # database platforms on Windows, and high-speed credit analysis under DOS. This was # the second generation of the system developed at Credit Depot earlier. # # SAN DIEGO COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT # # Designed a statistical analysis solution to track the usage of learning resources on # campus. Authored several encryption and security applications. # # SAN DIEGO DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. # # Computer Security - Provide computer security assistance in criminal # investigations. Tasks include data decryption, recovering erased data, # password retrieval, data line monitoring, and protected system entry. Isn't that last item special? ---guy And a possible reason for heading the other way. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 11:04:05 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <99d5b130b3c4dbe1a86b35eb0bd8f255@anon.efga.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain CRACKING DOWN ON MICROSOFT The Justice Department has a long history of mistaking innovators for monopolists BY LAWRENCE J. SISKIND THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE has painted its assault on Microsoft Corp. as a campaign against tying. Microsoft, the government says, should not be allowed to force manufacturers who load Windows95 onto their computers to include the Internet Explorer Web browser. Close inspection, however, reveals that the DOJ is not guarding against tying -- it is guarding against change. And while the Justice Department has won the first round against the software giant, the question of whether that change is good or ill should be left to the market to decide, not the government. When the DOJ charged Microsoft with violating their 1995 consent decree, it cited Sec. IV(E)(I), which bars Microsoft from conditioning the licensing of any one product on the licensing of another. Microsoft's Windows95 operating system includes the Internet Explorer -- IE -- Web browser. Microsoft openly forbids PC manufacturers licensed to load Windows95 from removing the browser. To Joel Klein, head of the DOJ's Antitrust Division, this is unlawful tying, plain and simple. "We think the evidence will show unmistakably that these are two separate products," he said. "Everybody knows you have an operating system and you have a browser." Everybody also knows that whenever a lawyer begins a statement with the phrase "everybody knows," the consequent proposition will be questionable at best. Mr. Klein's statement was not flat-out wrong. But it was flat-out nearsighted. The only thing "everybody knows" about operating systems is that they are constantly changing. Mr. Klein's statement was not flat-out wrong. But it was flat-out nearsighted. The only thing 'everybody knows' about operating systems is that they are constantly changing. An operating system program controls the operation of the computer, determining which programs run and when. It also coordinates the interaction between the computer's memory and its attached devices. When the world's first PC, the Altair 8800, appeared in 1975, its operating system didn't have much to operate. The product was a do-it-yourself kit, without display screen or printer. Operating systems became more complex as personal computers became more versatile. FAR-FLUNG PERIPHERALS Contemporary operating systems are as far removed from the early operating systems as Cape Kennedy is from Kitty Hawk. They have evolved to manage a growing array of peripherals: keyboard, monitor, disk drives, printer, fax, modem and more. They have also embraced new features and capabilities: data compression, disk defragmentation, multimedia extensions and data transmission technology. All of these features, by the way, once existed as separate programs. Yet no one views their inclusion in modern operating systems as any kind of tying. Which brings us to the Windows95 operating system. When Microsoft began to develop Windows95, then code-named "Chicago," it decided to build Internet technology into it. The early elements of this technology included a Web browser and were code-named "O'Hare." The very first commercially available versions of Windows95 included Internet Explorer as a component. Since then, IE has been repeatedly upgraded, with each successive version more tightly intertwined with the rest of the operating system. The most recent version, IE 4.0, is ubiquitous, and allows the user to explore World Wide Web sites from anywhere on the computer. One can connect to the Web without even opening the browser, and one can view Web sites (called "channels") without connecting to the Internet. What is true about Windows95 also holds true for rival products. Brit Hume recently observed in the Weekly Standard: "The distinction between browsers and operating systems has blurred to the point where it's not clear where one ends and the other begins." Every major contemporary operating system now contains Internet technology. Designing an operating system to access the Internet represents a quantitative, rather than a qualitative, change. The intermeshing of operating systems with Internet capabilities is eminently logical. These systems have always been designed to access information. In the early days, that meant accessing hard drives and floppy-disk drives. With the advent of the CD-ROM, they were designed to access data from that source. As businesses brought PCs into the office, computers became linked together into networks; operating systems were designed to access information from local area networks. The Internet, for all its unimaginably vast dimensions, is just another repository of information to a computer. Designing an operating system to access the Internet represents a quantitative, rather than a qualitative, change. MICROSOFT SLACKING Ironically, this is not a change sponsored or spearheaded by Microsoft. If anything, Bill Gates has been a laggard in this area. His rivals are far ahead and he is playing catch-up. The great proponents of Internet-driven computers have emerged from Silicon Valley, not from Redmond, Wash. Larry Ellison, CEO of Oracle Corp., has long championed the idea of the "network computer." Consider computers as underwater divers. Equipping each diver with his own tanks is wasteful and inefficient. It imposes severe limits on how long and how far the diver can explore. Instead, let every diver be connected to a surface mothership. The connection frees the diver from the limitations and burdens of carrying his own tanks. Similarly, loading millions of PCs with their own copies of software programs is a waste of resources. Instead, let every computer be networked and draw its software needs from the vast store of the Internet. The result, Ellison says, would be high-quality personal computers retailing at about $500. In line with this thinking, Sun Microsystems has developed Java, a language that allows programmers to create Internet-based applications capable of running on any computer, regardless of operating system. Sun's CEO, Scott McNealy, notes that 400,000 programmers (including 2,500 at IBM) are currently writing programs in Java language. The libertarian journalist and futurist George Gilder believes Java will revolutionize personal computing and render proprietary systems like Windows obsolete. If the future of personal computing is indeed linked to the Internet, then weaving Internet technology into Windows95 (and even more intimately and pervasively into Windows98) is not a grab for power. It is a clutch for survival. Which brings us back to the DOJ's decision to prosecute Microsoft for tying. Some have suspected a political bias, noting that in 1992 and 1996 Silicon Valley entrepreneurs were among Clinton's best friends in the business community. Microsoft, on the other hand, has always remained aloof from politics. 'INSTITUTIONAL MYOPIA' But I believe the attack on Microsoft stems from institutional myopia rather than political bias. The DOJ's Antitrust Division may understand the law and may be sincerely dedicated to enforcing it fairly. But it has no way of knowing where the economy is headed or how fast it is heading in that direction. Instead, the division views the economy as static. An operating system will always be an operating system. A browser will always be a browser. Just like timber, coal or oil: Products do not change. Because of this institutional myopia, the DOJ has a history of marching down wrong roads. In 1969, it prosecuted IBM. Fifteen years passed before the department finally understood what every high school techno-geek already knew: The computer industry was dynamic, and Big Blue was not dominant. If the Internet is the future of personal computing, then weaving Internet technology into Windows is not a grab for power. It is a clutch for survival. The hapless campaign against IBM probably did no harm. Other Antitrust Division missteps have. In the 1960s and '70s, long after most Americans had abandoned the neighborhood Mom-and-Pop store for the national chain, the DOJ was prosecuting Topco Associates, a cooperative association of small grocery chains. The DOJ wanted to protect the association's small regional members. It failed to notice the dynamic changes already apparent to the average shopper. The days of the Mom-and-Pop grocer were over. And while the DOJ was successfully squashing Topco, its much more powerful rivals -- The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. Inc. (A&P), Safeway Inc., the Kroger Co. -- were assuming dominance over the grocery business. The same myopia underlies the decision to prosecute Microsoft. Enslaved by its institutional myopia, the DOJ simply cannot understand that operating systems change. Thus, it sees tying when in fact there is transmutation. Internet-oriented operating systems may be the wave of the future. Or they may be a detour to nowhere. Not everyone likes or needs the endless waits, the superfluous graphics and the flood of irrelevant and unwanted information that always seem to accompany excursions onto the Internet. Nothing is certain in high tech; business empires rise and fall with stunning rapidity. Confronting this sometimes creative, sometimes destructive turmoil, a wise government would recognize its limitations and restrict its role. Whether Windows95 should include Internet Explorer is a question best left to the millions of jurors who make up the marketplace. AUTHOR LAWRENCE J. SISKIND is a San Francisco attorney who specializes in intellectual property law. Mr. Siskind owns stock in Microsoft Corp. He hopes that his pro-Microsoft opinions, once published, will influence the price of his stock favorably. The expectation of financial gain has colored, if not dictated, the opinions expressed in his article. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 11:02:54 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <2257f75e9d4378c573ebe49c9a1d7acc@anon.efga.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Creative Insecurity The complicated truth behind the rise of Microsoft By Virginia I. Postrel Back in 1983, Forbes ran an article called "If they're so smart, why aren't they rich?" It was about how inventors rarely reap big financial rewards from their creations, and it started like this: "Here are some names you are not likely ever to see in The Forbes Four Hundred [list of the richest Americans]: Franklin Lim. Gary Kildall. Bill Gates...." Oops. The world's richest man wasn't always so. During the last round of high-tech excitement--the personal-computer boom of the early 1980s (which was followed by a traumatic shakeout)--Gates looked like a smart programming geek whose business savvy was dwarfed by the marketing whizzes at Apple: "Their Apple Corp.," wrote the anonymous Forbes author, "has been among the most successful at packaging a product that sells and then selling it at an attractive price." Therein lies a tale. As the Justice Department and a half-dozen state attorneys general push forward antitrust actions against Microsoft, it's worth considering how the company got where it is and what that suggests about the strengths and limitations of markets. There are two main fables told about Microsoft: It has become the dominant, standard-setting software company, and made Gates a multibillionaire, because a) it makes wonderful products and expresses all that is good about a capitalist system or b) it cheats. Both fables turn up especially strongly in statements by people who lack deep knowledge of the industry, and each serves the interests of an industry faction. The truth, however, is more complicated. Considered without regard to price, ubiquity, or compatibility with inexpensive hardware, many Microsoft products are mediocre at best. I am happily writing this article using an obsolete Macintosh operating system and WordPerfect, both of which I find superior to even the latest versions of Windows and Word. Great products did not make Microsoft number one. Good-enough products did. That uncomfortable truth offends moralists on both sides of the Microsoft debate. The company's fans (and its spin doctors) want to tell a simple tale about virtue triumphant--with virtue defined, Atlas Shrugged-style, not only as astute business decision making and fierce competition but also as engineering excellence. Its critics use the same definition. If the products are less than great, they suggest, the only way to explain the company's success is through some sort of sleaze. Or, alternatively, through the innate flaws of the market. So what really happened? How did Microsoft end up ruling PC operating systems and, through them, software in general? At the risk of simplifying a complex story (if only by reducing it to two players), the bottom line is this: Apple acted--and continues to act--like a smug, self-righteous monopolist. Microsoft acted--and continues to act--like a scrambling, sometimes vicious competitor. That pattern shows up most clearly in pricing strategies. Microsoft's approach, throughout its history, has been to charge low prices and sell an enormous amount of software. True to form, the company is currently in trouble with the Justice Department for charging too little--nothing--for its Internet Explorer, by including it in Windows. (The technical legal dispute is over whether Explorer is a "feature" of Windows, as Microsoft maintains, or a separate product that is an illegal "tie-in" and thus violates a consent decree Microsoft signed in 1995.) The low-price strategy makes sense on two levels: First, it approximates marginal-cost pricing, since software, once written, costs very little for each additional copy. Anything above that incremental cost, however small, is profit. Second, and more significantly in this case, lower prices mean more customers. And the more people who use a particular kind of software, the more desirable it is for others to use it too. Although translators help, switching formats is messy and inconvenient. This "network externality" is particularly important for operating systems and Internet browser formats, since software developers and Web site designers have to pick a standard for which to optimize their products. As Gates toldWall Street Journal reporter Jim Carlton in an interview for Carlton's new book Apple: The Inside Story of Intrigue, Egomania, and Business Blunders, "Momentum creates momentum. If you have volume, then people write apps. If people write apps, you have momentum." But if you think you already have a monopoly, you don't worry about momentum. While Apple executives theoretically knew they had competition, they acted as though they didn't. Back in 1983 Apple may have been "selling [its computers] at an attractive price." But the coming of the IBM clones made Apple's prices look downright hideous. In the face of ever-stronger competition, the company insisted on pricing the Macintosh to maintain at least 50 percent profit margins; its "50-50-50 rule" told managers to keep margins up to maintain the stock price. Customers who paid their own personal money for Macs might be able to justify the high price simply because the computers were fun and easy to use. But business managers who paid Apple prices for any but the most specialized applications, notably graphics-intensive work, were either fiscally irresponsible or just plain dumb. Apple's pricing strategy handed the vast business market to computers running Microsoft operating systems, first DOS, then Windows. Microsoft, of course, doesn't sell computers. It's in the software business. You can get its operating system (and run its applications) on all sorts of different machines, whose manufacturers compete intensely. That competition drives down consumer costs, even as machine features get better all the time. Apple didn't want that sort of competition. It not only kept its own prices high but refused to license its software to any other computer maker. That meant even fewer people used its operating system, which further dampened its momentum. Apple, in fact, acted like the ultimate "tie-in" monopolist. You not only couldn't buy parts of its software separately; you couldn't buy them at all without forking over thousands for an Apple-made machine. And Apple has never been particularly good at manufacturing. After the company tepidly began licensing a couple of years ago, Mac clone makers did what Apple had feared: They cut into its revenue. But they also expanded the market, and they made the fastest computers ever to carry the Mac operating system. They gave Apple money for its software, even as they bore the costs of manufacturing and distributing their machines. And they gave consumers more choice, more alternatives to Windows. If I were an antitrust regulator looking for conspiracies, I'd be wondering just how coincidental it was that Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple just about the time Steve Jobs announced that the company was ending the clone program. Such explanations aren't necessary, however. Apple screwed Mac lovers all by itself. Far from the marketing whizzes of 1983 conventional wisdom, its executives were enamored with the cult of the machine, too hung up on the beauty of their product to understand that consumers actually cared about many other things: price, plenty of software, and compatibility with other systems. Quality is not one-dimensional. Apple's arrogance left computer users with less choice than they might have had--or, perhaps, with more. After all, if Apple had slashed prices early on and taken the business market seriously from the start, it could well have ended up in a Microsoft-like position, but without having to share its market with clones. Microsoft would then have been mostly an applications company, selling Excel and Word to Mac users, and we'd be hearing about the evil, anticompetitive actions of Steve Jobs. That seems unlikely, however, and the reason is revealing. Apple's all-in-one-box strategy was inherently brittle. It offered too many margins of error and too few margins of adjustment. The same company wrote the software and made the machines. So if the computers caught on fire, as they sometimes did, or the manufacturing plants couldn't keep up with Christmas demand, there was no alternative outlet for the Mac operating system. Software sales dropped too. No competitive sales force could go after business users while Jobs and company were chasing public schools. All new ideas had to come from within the same closed system. (For a discussion of related issues, see my Forbes ASAP article "Resilience vs. Anticipation". While Apple is based in Silicon Valley, its self-sufficiency strategy more closely resembles those of the minicomputer companies based around Boston.) Microsoft's partner-dependent system proved far more resilient as the industry changed. The company didn't have to do everything itself, and it could reap the benefits of innovations by others, whether in manufacturing, assembly, distribution, or applications software. Instead of the best minds of a single company, it enlisted the best minds of hundreds. And while Microsoft depended on its partners to build the market, in time they came to depend on Microsoft. The irony is that by making alliances and competing furiously--by not acting like a monopolist--Microsoft wound up reaping the benefits of a near-monopoly on its operating system. It is emphatically not true that "when you buy a computer, you already are without any choice as to the operating system," as Microsoft critic Audrie Krause said on Crossfire. Both REASON's production department and I personally will be buying new Macs in the next few months. Translation software makes it relatively easy to go from one operating system to another. Nowadays, it's possible to function reasonably well with an operating system that controls only 5 percent of the new-computer market. The great fear of Microsoft's critics is that the company will wind up controlling everything, foisting mediocre-to-poor products on an unwilling public at ever-higher prices. It's impossible to disprove that hypothetical scenario. But history, and Microsoft's own intense paranoia, cast doubt on it. Just when its quasi-monopoly looks secure, something new--Netscape's Web browsers, Sun Microsystems' Java programming language--pops up and makes Microsoft scramble to maintain its position. So far its resilience has served it well, but the critics' scary scenario relies on more than successful scrambling. It requires absolute security, no future challengers. And that looks unlikely. Consider the smoking gun memo cited by Assistant Attorney General Joel Klein at the press conference announcing the Justice Department suit. An internal Microsoft document, it told marketing managers to "Worry about the browser share as much as Bill Gates does, because we will lose the Internet platform battle if we do not have a significant user-installed base. The industry would simply ignore our standards. At your level, that is at the manager level, if you let customers deploy Netscape Navigator, you lose the leadership on the desktop." I will leave it to the attorneys to divine what it means not to "let customers deploy Netscape Navigator," but one thing is clear: This is not a company that thinks like a monopoly. It is always running scared. There's always the possibility that something new could come along and destroy its franchise. Microsoft didn't get where it is by creating perfect products. It benefited as much from its competitors' mistakes as from its own considerable acumen. And it isn't shy about leaning on suppliers and intermediate customers, such as computer makers, to get its way. In the eyes of its critics, its success is therefore proof that something is amiss in the marketplace. But the market doesn't promise perfection, only a trial-and-error process of discovery and improvement. The fallible human beings who create products make mistakes. They let their egos and preconceptions blind them to what people really want. Or they just don't know enough, or adjust fast enough, to produce the right goods at the right time. That some of Microsoft's strongest current competitors--Sun and Oracle--are gripped by an anti-PC ideology, when customers love the independence and flexibility of personal computers, does not bode well for them. What is striking about the story of Microsoft is how adaptable the company has been. Gates's original vision of "a computer on every desk and in every home, running Microsoft software" didn't specify what sort of software or who would make the computers. It was an open-ended, flexible idea that built a resilient company. What Microsoft has delivered is pretty much what most people want: a way to use computers easily, for many different purposes. Its software isn't always elegant, but that's the criterion of programming elites, not everyday users. And though Microsoft is clearly the big kid on the block, it has enabled, and encouraged, lots of other software developers. Microsoft accounts for a mere 4 percent of industry revenue. As Eamonn Sullivan of PC Week notes, "A lot of companies are making a lot of money on the ubiquity of Windows, providing users with a lot of choice where they want it--on their desktops. That isn't the expected result of a monopoly." From 1969 to 1982, the Justice Department carried on a similar trust-busting crusade against IBM, which had behaved in many ways just like Microsoft. (An earlier antitrust action against IBM had been settled by a consent decree in 1956.) Millions of dollars were transferred from the taxpayers and stockholders to lawyers and expert witnesses. Enormous amounts of brain power were dissipated. Having to monitor every action for possible legal ramifications further constipated IBM's already-centralized culture. The suit was a complete waste. Whatever quasi-monopoly IBM had was broken not by government enforcers but by obscure innovators, working on computer visions neither IBM nor the Justice Department's legions of lawyers had imagined. Big Blue is still big, though it's smaller than it once was. But nobody thinks it could control the world. The world, it seems, is beyond that sort of control. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Brian B. Riley" Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 11:03:53 +0800 To: "CypherPunks List" Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns Message-ID: <199801080258.VAA23445@mx02.together.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 1/7/98 3:16 AM, Kent Crispin (kent@songbird.com) passed this wisdom: >On Wed, Jan 07, 1998 at 01:25:45AM -0600, snow wrote: >>I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could >>inflict a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military. >>With maybe $20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, >>you could make >> >> If you were smart, you could do it for a lot less. > >That presumes the enemy is dumb. An amusing fantasy. ... not so .... the US Military has very few really experienced combat soldiers left and most of those are in places where their experience isn't available to the grunt on the line. Most RVN vets are retired ... look just recently at what happened to the Russians troops sent to Chechnya ... all these brand spanking new, highly trained proud young 19 and 20 year old troops went romping off to fight 'a bunch of old men' in the Chechyn Republic ... there was one little problem ... a big hunk of those old men had spent two to seven years in that same Russian Army fighting the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan ... and that 'bunch of old men' kicked their young asses! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNLRAvD7r4fUXwraZAQHv5wf/S8j1et/Rf0LQu8eH4koWLjmSduaxggsY VMGcY7z2OfLdSrtVAGIcLpfPPdrOk0utmH317xwKIL9SIQIqGYvm7pCdYSv0A4Vx KD49W3pQjhvrhTHZldd8EFrd7Z2thfR1EJL9Vowsnyr4QHt5FvXrBs6k5531iNtN TURAhCzVgpKuMruwwaKMVc+P72mYJl7OM2I2j6ZdEkZOPNxoCVS/0xO8UTlWpLUO 9Suxvi+rJSa4k/HKRsGUrRO/LaFK7abTs/AwLioJlyd5ukXjdPuyY2wza8h1GvC2 fowHb8WGYdcwc45FBhpz3bEiS/PU5t2xHQ9p+/mEkLDknfBSNk01zw== =hiEs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys "In effect, to follow, not to force the public inclination; to give a direction, a form, a technical dress, and a specific sanction, to the general sense of the community, is the true end of legislature." -- Edmund Burke From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Bill Frantz Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:22:10 +0800 To: Declan McCullagh Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 12:48 PM -0800 1/7/98, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Lessig is the special master appointed by the judge in the Microsoft >consent decree case. He once wrote: > >>Whether a regulation is >>rational turns on the facts, and what counts as "the facts" turns on the >>theory that animates inquiry into the facts. > >Wow. > >How do we know what theory is the right one, and when we should change it? Theories are normally only changed when (1) it is obvious they no longer reflect observed reality, and (2) they can't be patched anymore. :-) The Ptolemaic theory of the universe is the classic example. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | One party wants to control | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | what you do in the bedroom,| 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz@netcom.com | the other in the boardroom.| Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Alan Olsen Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:44:01 +0800 To: Eric Cordian Subject: Re: a good example of bad crypto hype In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980107171614.007c4eb0@206.40.207.40> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980107221217.03fd76b0@clueserver.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 08:30 PM 1/7/98 -0600, Eric Cordian wrote: > >David Honig wrote: > >> at http://www.meganet.com/explain.htm >> you can test your critical thinking skills... > >Clearly everyone in this company is on crack. :) And they also seem to be members of the Society for Creative Anacronyms. --- | "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano@teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan@ctrl-alt-del.com| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Tina (SingPing) Lai" Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 15:09:24 +0800 To: rambam@torah.org Subject: [hey yall DO NOT delete this is the weirdest game....~!]] Message-ID: <34B475DA.2E280EBF@mystop.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain To: Airheadlin@aol.com, SWeeTpny98@aol.com, Tlai@mystop.com Subject: Fwd: hey yall DO NOT delete this is the weirdest game....~!] From: Alyse4112 Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 21:06:34 EST Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) To: Alyse4112@aol.com, OhUSoSilly@aol.com, Ninavc@aol.com,swimgirl12@hotmail.com Subject: Fwd:hey yall DO NOT delete this is the weirdest game....~!] From: RayRay124 Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 03:01:18 EST Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) In a message dated 98-01-05 22:49:10 EST, DimplesF56 writes: << >> To: RayRay124@aol.com, VHSmile@aol.com, nail@home.com, Sak14@aol.com,AZNPL8YBOY@aol.com, ARISTO20@aol.com, JILTED76@aol.com Subject: Fwd: [Fwd: Fwd: hey yall DO NOT delete this is the weirdest game....~!] From: DimplesF56 Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 22:49:10 EST Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) To: Helen Huang , Jenny Young , Jonathan Woo , Margery Lee , Musette Chan , Steven Hu , Thyda Chhor Subject: [Fwd: Fwd: hey yall DO NOT delete this is the weirdest game....~!] From: Kwan Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 09:09:45 -0800 To: Helen Huang , Jenny Young , Jonathan Woo , Margery Lee , Musette Chan , Steven Hu , Thyda Chhor Subject: [Fwd: Fwd: hey yall DO NOT delete this is the weirdest game....~!] From: Kwan Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 09:09:45 -0800 -------------------- Received: from imo18.mx.aol.com (imo18.mx.aol.com [198.81.19.175]) by dry.jps.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA16198 for ; Wed, 31 Dec 1997 19:15:10 -0800 (PST) From: Bar111bie Message-ID: <2e2dd6f8.34ab0a14@aol.com> Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 22:14:26 EST To: kwan887@jps.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Fwd: hey yall DO NOT delete this is the weirdest game....~! Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part0_883624466_boundary" Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) X-Mailer: Inet_Mail_Out (IMOv11) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --part0_883624466_boundary Content-ID: <0_883624466@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII --part0_883624466_boundary Content-ID: <0_883624466@inet_out.mail.aol.com.2> Content-type: message/rfc822 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline From: Babytimd13 Return-path: To: Bar111bie@aol.com Subject: Fwd: hey yall DO NOT delete this is the weirdest game....~! Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 03:42:58 EST Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_883624466_boundary" --part1_883624466_boundary Content-ID: <0_883624466@inet_out.mail.aol.com.3> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII --part1_883624466_boundary Content-ID: <0_883624466@inet_out.mail.aol.com.4> Content-type: message/rfc822 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline From: Babytimd13 Return-path: To: Rndy2@aol.com Subject: hey yall DO NOT delete this is the weirdest game....~! Date: Mon, 29 Dec 1997 03:56:13 EST Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 97-12-28 19:03:18 EST, you write: << Begin... > = > First, write 1-11in a column. > Then in the first and second spaces, fill any two numbers you like. > Write two males names in the 3rd and 7th spaces. > Write anyone's name (like friends or family...) in the 4th, 5th, and >6th spaces. > Write four song titles in 8,9,10 and 11. > = > Finally, make a wish... > = > = > And here is the key for that game... > = > = > > > > > > > >You must tell (the number in space 2) people about this game in (the = >number in space 1) days in order to make your wish come true. > = > The name in 3 is the one you love. > The person in 7 is the one you like but can't work out. > You care most about the person you put in 4. > Fifth is the one you knows you very well. > The name in 6 is your lucky star. > The song in 8 is the song that matches with the person in 3. > The title in 9 is the song for 7. > The tenth space is the song telling you about your mind. > And 11 is the song telling what you feel for sex....... > = >> --part1_883624466_boundary-- --part0_883624466_boundary-- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Sergey Goldgaber Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 11:57:04 +0800 To: Kent Crispin Subject: Re: Jim Bell... lives... on... in... Hollywood! In-Reply-To: <19980101150542.36875@songbird.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, 1 Jan 1998, Kent Crispin wrote: > On Thu, Jan 01, 1998 at 09:52:20PM +1100, Julian Assange wrote: > > > > Anyone noticed this before? > > No. But there are two obvious differences between this and the Bell > plan: 1) it's not anon; 2) you are explicitly barred from winning if > you contribute in any way to the death. 1 - Anonymity is technically feasable. 2 - This requirement is a legal necessity. Otherwise, the organization may be seen as advocating murder. Obviously, if the "Death Pool" was fully anonymous, there would be no way to tell if the winner had contributed in any way to the death. Thus, I think we may be well on our way to Assasination Politics. - Sergey Goldgaber From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Mark Rogaski Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 12:30:41 +0800 To: honig@otc.net Subject: Re: a good example of bad crypto hype In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980107171614.007c4eb0@206.40.207.40> Message-ID: <199801080419.XAA13414@deathstar.jabberwock.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 An entity claiming to be David Honig wrote: : : at http://www.meganet.com/explain.htm : you can test your critical thinking skills... : - From the first paragraph, which offers this indisputable nugget: "At no point in time does the ORIGINAL DATA ever gets encrypted or transferred in any form or shape." I haven't laughed so hard in a long time. And the grammar adds an even better tinge to the spiel. - -- [] Mark Rogaski "That which does not kill me [] wendigo@pobox.com only makes me stranger." [] [] finger wendigo@deathstar.jabberwock.org for PGP key [] anti spambot: postmaster@localhost abuse@localhost uce@ftc.gov -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNLRT5piFNf283WlHEQJs7gCg2dNjMxE8A/IDL7Tv8wKzPd2/LBMAn3ZZ IDnY6wp9N0ncZZAwd/wv9TAQ =hYW8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Adam Back Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 08:38:27 +0800 To: billp@nmol.com Subject: brute forcing combination locks (Re: Bruce Schneier, Sandia, FBI and the REAL WORLD) In-Reply-To: <34B3DFB4.6396@nmol.com> Message-ID: <199801072324.XAA00540@server.eternity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Bill Payne writes: > Bruce Schneier wrote > > and a burglar willing to try all 10,000 is guaranteed to break > into your house. > > Sandia employees Jack Hudson and Jack Menako, both in my division > when Sandia transferred me to break electronic locks for the FBI/ERF > [Engineering Research Facility, Quantico, VA], were TRYING to > defeat combination locks on file cabinets. > > Menako built a frame to connect a stepper-motor to the combination > dial. > > The stepper motor was wried to a PC. > > Hudson wrote the software to try all possible combinations. > > What happened, IN FACT, was that the combination lock wore-out > before the combination which opened the lock was reached. > > Combinations locks are NOT ENGINEERED for such heavy use. Interesting. When I was at [x] they had (and still do I think, hence obscuring name!) 0-9 digit key pad combination locks. I noticed by just casually using various permutations each time I used the locks that there was something anomalous about the way the key pads worked. If the code was 6789 you could get in by typing 56789, or by typing 456789 etc. Clearly this gives you almost a 4 x reduction in the search space. So I hacked up some code to compute the minimal universal door entry sequence number. Joy of joys the "universal code" as it was dubbed fitted easily on 1/2 a sheet of A4 paper at 66 lines by 80 characters per line, and we figured (myself and entertained colleagues) with semi-covert experimentation that with a bit of practice you could break a lock in around 10 mins manually or something like that. It looked quite esthetically pleasing also. The sequence looked something like this: 01234567890124568902346780... which would try combinations in this sequence: 0123 1234 2345 3456 4567 5678 6789 7890 8901 9012 0124 1245 2456 4568 5689 6890 8902 9023 0234 2346 3467 4678 6780 ... I was not able to do it quite the theoretical minimal number of permutations of 2503, but it was only 3 or 4 extra digits I think. I am not sure if you could do better than this, but it was a computational trade off, my algorithm was recursive, and back tracked as it was; I just chopped it off and demanded best solution after 1 hours CPU or whatever. I might have the universal code and source code around somewhere, can't lay my hands on it right now. We dubbed this sheet of paper the "universal door code", and considered pinning it beside the lock :-) These locks looked pretty cheap, and didn't suffer the mechanical failure problem you describe, we probably gave them enough stress testing in our semi-covert experiments. Also it occurs to me that a duty cycle of 10k operations isn't that high. I am left wondering if perhaps you were pushing the units too hard -- would you have been able to break the lock before mechanical failure if you had slowed the rotation rate of your mechanical dial turner? Also, perhaps your mechanical setup was too rough, putting abnormal strain through clunky motion or something? Also, in fact these 0-9 digit 4 digit locks at [x] I think had other problems also, under certain circumstances you were able to type a spurious digit between the digits of the 4 digit code (eg code is 1234, typing 15234 would let you in!) If we had been able to find a rule governing this behaviour, an even shorter universal code would have been obtainable. However it seemed erratic, and interest waned around this point somewhere. They also had a few hex versions with 0-9A-F and 4 digits, which I also calculated a universal code for. They seemed not vulnerable to the spurious digit flaw described in the above paragraph of the 0-9 units. Adam -- Now officially an EAR violation... Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 15:53:38 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: best body armor for cypherpunks [serious] (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199801050513.XAA22310@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980107234753.00845350@popd.ix.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >> What is, in your opinion, the best (price and performance-wise) >> body armor for cypherpunks? Anonymity, of course ..... Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Bill Stewart Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 16:16:14 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980108000200.0084fab0@popd.ix.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 07:19 PM 1/5/98 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >"Evolution in action." >Thank you, Michael Kennedy, for improving humanity's gene pool. It's only evolution in action if it gets them before they've reproduced... Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Adam Back Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 08:37:42 +0800 To: frantz@netcom.com Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801080006.AAA00669@server.eternity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Bill Frantz writes: > > [lotus notes 24+40 GAK design] > > It seems to me that if you step on the correct part of the message, you zap > the encrypted 24 bits, and cut NSA out of the loop. Of course the receiver > could notice and refuse to decrypt, which would require some software > hacking to defeat, but that is certainly doable. Well if that were all they were doing you could just fill it with random numbers, or encrypt the wrong 24 bits of random data with the NSA's public key, etc. and the receiving software couldn't tell without access to DIRNSA's private GAKking key. However, I figure that they could do this... encrypt to the recipient and include in the GAK packet the RSA padding used to encrypt the 24 bits. The recipient gets the 24 bits anyway because he can decrypt the main recipient field; with the padding he can re-create the RSA encrypted GAK packet. Not that we want to help the GAKkers or anything :-) Still as you say even that would likely be a single byte patch or whatever to skip the test. Also as William notes, don't use the crap -- it's only 64 bits anyway even for non-export version, and their reputed motives in smoothing a path to domestic GAK, and even in buying into the KRAP program might be enough to move some to boycott them even if there crypto key sizes were reasonable, which they are not. Adam -- Now officially an EAR violation... Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:38:21 +0800 To: kent@songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: <19980107001651.29456@songbird.com> Message-ID: <199801080635.AAA01419@smoke.suba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > On Wed, Jan 07, 1998 at 01:25:45AM -0600, snow wrote: > > > I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could inflict > > > a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military. With maybe > > > $20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, you could make > > If you were smart, you could do it for a lot less. > That presumes the enemy is dumb. An amusing fantasy. No, just that one could bootstrap your fight for a lot less. As long as cops have guns and piano wire is unrestricted, ruthless people will always have access to guns. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Robert A. Costner" Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:01:03 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Remailers & N.E.T. In-Reply-To: <2257f75e9d4378c573ebe49c9a1d7acc@anon.efga.org> Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980108004628.03b6bbe8@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Perhaps the use of a remailer for this message below is an attempt to escape the criminal provisions of the No Electronic Theft Act. >From: Anonymous >Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above. > It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software. > Please report problems or inappropriate use to the > remailer administrator at . >To: cypherpunks@toad.com >Sender: owner-cypherpunks@cyberpass.net >Reply-To: Anonymous >X-Loop: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net > > Creative Insecurity > The complicated truth behind the rise of Microsoft > > By Virginia I. Postrel > > Back in 1983, Forbes ran an article called "If they're so From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Greg Broiles Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 17:52:31 +0800 To: declan@well.com Subject: Re: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19980108014945.006c9910@pop.sirius.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >This is for a story for Time on the "new" U.S .Postal Service. I vaguely >recall the USPS trying to set digital signature standards and/or serve as >a CA. I'd like to mention this. > >Can't remember the details, though. Does anyone have 'em (or a pointer to >them) handy? See for information about the USPS' plan to act as a CA. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles@netbox.com | Export jobs, not crypto. http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | http://www.parrhesia.com From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: jalonz@openworld.com Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 15:48:36 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <85256586.0029E630.00@openworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ># SAN DIEGO DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. ># ># Computer Security - Provide computer security assistance in criminal ># investigations. Tasks include data decryption, recovering erased data, ># password retrieval, data line monitoring, and protected system entry. > >Isn't that last item special? > >---guy > > And a possible reason for heading the other way. guy, tough noogies deal with it... Notice the words "criminal investigations"? God forbid talent could actually be used for a good cause. The incidents in question were actually quite serious (Chinese mafia money laundering via phony real estate deals) and not at all like the porno bbs confiscation crap you'd be thinking of. Besides the DA office reference (I can completely understand about that one), which was consulting work, what's your point in laying someone's life out on a page? Who cares? Yeah, its a lot of stuff, I just happen to work for start-up companies and thus I jump around a lot - given that most of them never make it due to one problem or another. :) jqz From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Robert A. Costner" Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 17:23:10 +0800 To: Declan McCullagh Subject: Re: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980108035645.037abe0c@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 02:07 PM 1/6/98 -0800, Declan McCullagh wrote: >This is for a story for Time on the "new" U.S .Postal Service. I vaguely >recall the USPS trying to set digital signature standards and/or serve as >a CA. I'd like to mention this. > >Can't remember the details, though. Does anyone have 'em (or a pointer to >them) handy? A few months back I asked a USPS rep about this, and was told that the idea had been scrapped. I do not know that this was correct. The USPS was going to do timestamping as well as act as a CA as I recall. The timestamping is a action that "postmarks" the digitally signed message. Many attorneys feel this is a very good thing, though I have had a hard time justifying the need for this to some technically inclined people. Try "digital postmark" in yahoo. http://www.aegisstar.com/uspsepm.html http://xent.ics.uci.edu/FoRK-archive/fall96/0328.html An interesting feature of the digital postmark is that the USPS was making the claim that if you receive an email that the USPS send to you that was not meant for you, then you have committed a federal crime when you read it. Additional timestamping services are available perhaps from Pitney Bowes, Arthur Anderson, and http://www.itconsult.co.uk/stamper.htm. My memory on this fails me. -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh@efga.org http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Mix Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 20:25:32 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199801081204.EAA28274@sirius.infonex.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tim C. May's reheated, refurbished, and regurgitated cud is completely inappropriate for the mailing lists into which it is cross-ruminated. | | | O | Tim C. May (--|--) | / \ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Gillogly Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 21:25:52 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <34B4CFF0.858FF03C@acm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > scientists who agree to government secrecy to develop > their inventions are agreeing to a lot more than > mere secrecy. they are committing to a paradigm that > is at odds with science itself, which only advances through > the open literature. Why limit your annoyance to government scientists? Scientists in private industry are in the same position, developing (e.g.) algorithms and analytical methods protected by trade secrets. Society recognizes this tendency and tries to advance science anyway by offering patent protection. You don't make money by giving away your intellectual capital. Seems to me that schools and independently wealthy scientists/foundations are the only ones who don't merit your censure on this count. -- Jim Gillogly Trewesday, 17 Afteryule S.R. 1998, 13:04 12.19.4.14.17, 1 Caban 15 Kankin, Ninth Lord of Night From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: jamesd@echeque.com (James A. Donald) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 13:57:59 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Announcing Crypto Kong, Release Candidate Two. Message-ID: <199801080543.VAA21873@proxy3.ba.best.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -- Announcing Crypto Kong, Release Candidate Two. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/Kong please test. Crypto Kong, like PGP, provides digital signatures and communications encryption. The important difference between it and other products that provide digital signatures and encryption is that it is not certificate based. Instead it is signature based. This eliminates the steep initial learning and management curves of existing products. The user does not need use and manage specialized certificates except for specialized purposes Perhaps more importantly, it also eliminates the threat we saw in England, the threat of the government giving itself a monopoly in certificate distribution, potentially creating the Number-Of-The-Beast system, where you need a government certificate to log on to dirty picture sites, to buy, to sell, to put up web pages. The big complexity and user hostility in existing products is creating and managing certificates. For those who need contracts and certificates, (and with Kong one almost never needs certificates) Kong handles them in an easy and natural way. See the discussion in the web site in the chapters: Linking digital IDs with paper documents or physical presence and Certificates and contracts This aspect of Kong seems to have been insufficiently tested in the beta tests. The key feature of the proposed product is that any digitally signed document can be stored in the database, and itself performs the functions of a certificate, just as a normal handwritten signature does. The user usually does not need to check a document against a certificate to see if it was signed by the "real" John Doe. Instead he normally checks one document against other documents stored in the database that have the same signature. And similarly when he encrypts a document, he does not need to use a certificate to encrypt a message to the one *real* John Doe, he merely encrypts a message to the *same* John Doe who signed the letter he is replying to. At present people have to deal with certificate management problems regardless of whether they really need certificates. For example the most common usage of PGP is to check that two signatures that purport to be by the same person are in fact by the same person. Unfortunately you cannot check one signature against another directly using PGP or any of the other existing products. Instead you have to check both signatures against a public key certificate, even if the authentication information in that certificate is irrelevant to your purpose, which it usually is, which means that you have to download the certificate from somewhere, and the person signing it had to upload it somewhere. As PGP always checks a document against the certificate, rather than against any other document the user happens to feel is relevant to the question, the person signing the document needs to get his certificate properly signed by some widely trusted third party, which is too much trouble or too complicated for many people. The signatures and contracts in Crypto Kong are optionally tolerant of email munging The web pages contain a new web page "Business Vision" which discusses the widespread failure to adopt cryptography, the widespread reluctance to pay for cryptography, and the illiquidity of various products for transferring money on the net, and proposes a path to a solution. Clearly, PGP has had rather poor penetration for business uses, and by and large, people only need to encrypt or sign stuff when there is money at stake. I believe that this product will be more acceptable for the typical businessman than PGP is, because it is easier to use, and existing business practices translate more readily to the identity model it supports than does the PGP identity model. The web page also contains full source code. Crypto Kong is written in large part as ActiveX component, and the use interface and database management code is written in visual basic. The use of ActiveX should make it easy to quickly code products and web page that perform tasks involving encryption. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG AXOOTHyx0TpTLdyQsBnt7WmaVIo1l4WDGabHKK0Y 4Bxm/YWIEOTOK6zRVH57lP7PENFT5OFN+IR39Fcx8 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "David E. Smith" Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:54:14 +0800 To: Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer Subject: The hax0rz are at it again... check out www.unicef.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Although I can't agree with their methods, I really love their motives. In case they fix it sometime soon, go to: http://bureau42.base.org/mirrors/ and click the "unicef" link. dave From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 02:25:19 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: MS Server Gated Crypto: strong encryption w/ exportable browsers if the server is US-OK Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980108090210.007a6820@206.40.207.40> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain The jist of http://eu.microsoft.com/industry/finserv/m_finserv/m_fordev_g.htm is, MS has US permission to export a DLL containing 128-bit SSL *worldwide* since the encryption is enabled IFF there's a Verisign "SGC certificate" on the *server*. This apparently will work with Netscape servers in addition to IIS. This facilitates gov't-trusted banks doing business with clients with generic MS browsers. And it facilitates MS's growth in the web world. Thoughts: Since US law (*) doesn't recognize digital IDs or the authority of Verisign, this implies the government has enforced some arbitrary judgement calls biassed towards this system, no? Additionally, the US would be seeming to trust the implementation in MS's new DLL which checks for and verifies signatures. All in all, some clever/cunning positioning by MS. This is set up for banks, and the certificates are strong. But they seem like the weak point --could a generic certificate be circulated amongst the Undesirables so they could enable this feature in IE browsers with the new DLL? (*) I understand that the government of Utah now recognizes some form of digital signatures. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 02:38:30 +0800 To: Sergey Goldgaber Subject: Re: Jim Bell... lives... on... in... Hollywood! In-Reply-To: <19980101150542.36875@songbird.com> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980108092108.007c3b30@206.40.207.40> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 10:48 PM 1/7/98 -0800, Sergey Goldgaber wrote: >On Thu, 1 Jan 1998, Kent Crispin wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 01, 1998 at 09:52:20PM +1100, Julian Assange wrote: >> > >> > Anyone noticed this before? >> >> No. But there are two obvious differences between this and the Bell >> plan: 1) it's not anon; 2) you are explicitly barred from winning if >> you contribute in any way to the death. > >1 - Anonymity is technically feasable. > >2 - This requirement is a legal necessity. Otherwise, the organization > may be seen as advocating murder. > >Obviously, if the "Death Pool" was fully anonymous, there would be >no way to tell if the winner had contributed in any way to the death. > >Thus, I think we may be well on our way to Assasination Politics. > > - Sergey Goldgaber I agree, but "contribute to death" needs to be operationalized. Here's a proposal: If a homicide suspect is arrested within N months, they will be isolated from the net and the owner of the winning ID will have to perform a challenge-response. Since the suspect couldn't have replied, they are different; if a pair collaborated, well, when a hit man is caught, his payoff matrix will usually make him turn in the client. The N-months might be a weakness since there is no expiration time on homicide. But in cases where cause of death is known and it can be proved that the incarcerated is not the winner, it looks good. E.g., a bet that "more than two BATF agents will be blown up in 97" would be safely payable now that those fellows with the short haircuts have been convicted. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 02:34:45 +0800 To: Bill Stewart Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980108092357.007c64e0@206.40.207.40> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 12:02 AM 1/8/98 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >At 07:19 PM 1/5/98 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >>"Evolution in action." >>Thank you, Michael Kennedy, for improving humanity's gene pool. > >It's only evolution in action if it gets them before they've reproduced... > No, if it gets them before they could have reproduced more, that's good too. Also, if their absence hurts their existing spawn, that's selection as well. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 02:44:25 +0800 To: Jim Gillogly Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980108093331.007c6100@206.40.207.40> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 05:09 AM 1/8/98 -0800, Jim Gillogly wrote: >Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >> scientists who agree to government secrecy to develop >> their inventions are agreeing to a lot more than >> mere secrecy. they are committing to a paradigm that >> is at odds with science itself, which only advances through >> the open literature. > >Why limit your annoyance to government scientists? Scientists >in private industry are in the same position, developing (e.g.) >algorithms and analytical methods protected by trade secrets. >Society recognizes this tendency and tries to advance science >anyway by offering patent protection. You don't make money by >giving away your intellectual capital. Seems to me that schools >and independently wealthy scientists/foundations are the only >ones who don't merit your censure on this count. >-- Nuri was obviously going through the angst of realizing responsibility as a creative technologist. You are adding antibusiness sentiments to this. The fact is, you choose who/what you work on. And face it, many government scientists think they're wearing white hats. As do those in industry and academia, as well as the independant investigator. The British scientist reporting on his discovery of PK was not *bitter* that others found it too. He was explaining the secretive context of its development in one closed shop. He undoubtably thinks his work was Good. It is only some readers who are thinking that the Brit is trying to usurp something. He's not. I thought the Brit's explanation was helpful for understanding PK beyond the confusing complexity of the RSA-implementation of it. It does not detract from the efforts (or patents) of anyone, that PK has been discovered multiple times. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Gillogly Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 03:05:23 +0800 To: David Honig Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <34B5111C.7129@acm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain David Honig wrote: > At 05:09 AM 1/8/98 -0800, Jim Gillogly wrote: > >Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > >> scientists who agree to government secrecy to develop > >> their inventions are agreeing to a lot more than > >> mere secrecy. they are committing to a paradigm that > >> is at odds with science itself, which only advances through > >> the open literature. > > > >Why limit your annoyance to government scientists? Scientists > >in private industry are in the same position, developing (e.g.) > > Nuri was obviously going through the angst of realizing responsibility > as a creative technologist. > > You are adding antibusiness sentiments to this. > > The fact is, you choose who/what you work on. I'm not adding antibusiness sentiments -- I'm questioning why the Vladster limited his angst to government. I did, in fact, choose to work in private industry, and I'm not opposed to inventors reaping the rewards of their brain power -- and that goes for the inventors of public keys and RSA, who I feel earned their rewards. -- Jim Gillogly Trewesday, 17 Afteryule S.R. 1998, 17:43 12.19.4.14.17, 1 Caban 15 Kankin, Ninth Lord of Night From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 03:01:54 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Journalism and the Internet conference at Freedom Forum Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 09:53:34 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh To: politech@vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Journalism and the Internet conference at Freedom Forum [I'm on the "Online journalism, governments and the First Amendment" panel tomorrow. I expect rating systems will come up. --Declan] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 10:48:22 -0500 From: Adam Powell Subject: Journalism/Internet conf webcast Tomorrow's "Journalism and the Internet" conference will be webcast in its entirety, so those who cannot join us in person will be able to join sessions on line. Webcast listeners will also be able to submit questions and comments via e-mail for panelists during the webcast. Below is the schedule (all times EST): "Journalism and the Internet" conference Rooftop Conference Center The Freedom Forum 1101 Wilson Boulevard Arlington, Virginia 22209 8:30 a.m. -- Welcome and introduction Charles Overby, The Freedom Forum; Richard Sammon, National Press Club 9 a.m. -- Keynote address Speaker: Steve Case, America Online Moderator: Adam Powell 9:45 a.m. -- "Where are we/How did we get here?" Panelists: Llewellyn King, King Publishing; Sam Meddis, USA TODAY; Stephen Miller, The New York Times; Marc Weiss, Web Development Fund Moderator: Don Brown, QRadio 11 a.m. -- "Standards and ethics online" Panelists: Rajiv Chandrasekaran, The Washington Post; Steven Levy, Newsweek; John Markoff, The New York Times; Jai Singh, CNET Moderator: Lee Thornton, University of Maryland 12:30 p.m. -- Luncheon program -- "Sports journalism online: Special case or leading edge?" Welcome: Peter Prichard, The Freedom Forum Speaker: John Rawlings, The Sporting News Moderator: Gene Policinski, The Freedom Forum 2:15 p.m. -- "Online journalism, governments and the First Amendment" Panelists: Donna Demac, Georgetown University; Mike Godwin, Electronic Frontier Foundation; Declan McCullagh, Netly News/Time magazine; Lynn Povich, MSNBC Moderator: Paul McMasters, The Freedom Forum 4 p.m. -- "Politics '98 online" Panelists: Farai Chideya, ABC News; Kathleen deLaski, America Online; Mike Riley, CNN/Time's AllPolitics; Omar Wasow, MSNBC Moderator: Robert Merry, Congressional Quarterly Newseum Broadcast Studio The Newseum 1101 Wilson Boulevard Arlington, Virginia 22209 1 p.m. -- "Journalism and the Internet" public program Journalist of the Day: John Markoff, The New York Times *** We will also have live webcasts of the Saturday programs: Newseum Broadcast Studio The Newseum 1101 Wilson Boulevard Arlington, Virginia 22209 1 p.m. -- "Journalism and the Internet" public program Journalist of the Day: Jai Singh, CNET 2:30 p.m. -- "Journalism and the Internet" public program Technology demonstration: John Pavlik, Center for New Media, Columbia University Discussion: Benjamin Davis, MSNBC Steve Geimann, Society of Professional Journalists Lisa Napoli, New York Times *** Adam Clayton Powell, III Vice President, Technology and Programs, The Freedom Forum 703-284-3553 fax 703-284-2879 apowell@freedomforum.org apowell@alum.mit.edu http://www.freedomforum.org/technology/welcome.asp From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ian Sparkes Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 17:07:52 +0800 To: Adam Back Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19980108100339.00722fc8@q9f47.dmst02.telekom.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >So I hacked up some code to compute the minimal universal door entry >sequence number... > >The sequence looked something like this: > >01234567890124568902346780... We have the same system at my [x], and I have played with the same idea coming up with similar results (my value was somewhat lower - but this was fag packet maths and therefore subject to error). In my fantasies I have also connected this sequence to an array of solenoids which punch in the number while you wait. The locks seem to be able to handle a throughput of around 2 digits per second, meaning the average search time of 10 minutes. Bear in mind that there are 8 of these locks - with the appropriate hardware you could guarantee to be in in less than three mins. The reason that this has remained in my fantasies is that any key changes are predictable - the company is the (until last Wednesday) state owned telephone company =) and the keyspace consists of the area codes for the surrounding regions. And this lock is the only thing that stands between the outside world and 25 Servers and 300 workstations. Makes you think... From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 17:23:02 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801080918.KAA28931@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, Robert Hettinga wrote: > > > I noticed on Apple's info about acceptable behavior on their lists, that > > I decided to stop accepting posts from anonymous remailers way back, > when anon.penet.fi was still alive. Some of that is philosophy, some of > that was problems. > > As far as problems, it's the normal stuff -- personal attacks, > mailbombing through anonymous remailers, copyright/slander/libel > issues, all the normal fun and games. Since you can't track users back, > you have real problems policing them. And since anonymous remailers > tend to allow multiple (heading towards infinite) remailing addresses, > the practical issue of how to lock out an abusive user becomes severe. Mailbombing could be a criminal offence. But libel is a civil and not a criminaloffence. Under The Communications Decency Act S.230(a) no service provider is liable for content authored by others. Even if someone use a remailer to slander and libel further action requires private civil action. There is absolute no reason for being concerned about defamation from the operator point of view. The Fourth Circuit Court upheld the service provider impunity defence in a recent case brought against American Online Inc. (Zeran v. American Online Inc.). However,if a moderator vulunterable approves a libelous message the case could be different. BTW, am I correct that criminal libel in no longer considered constitutional? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 03:39:58 +0800 To: Jim Gillogly Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 5:09 AM -0800 1/8/98, Jim Gillogly wrote: >Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >> scientists who agree to government secrecy to develop >> their inventions are agreeing to a lot more than >> mere secrecy. they are committing to a paradigm that >> is at odds with science itself, which only advances through >> the open literature. > >Why limit your annoyance to government scientists? Scientists >in private industry are in the same position, developing (e.g.) >algorithms and analytical methods protected by trade secrets. >Society recognizes this tendency and tries to advance science >anyway by offering patent protection. You don't make money by >giving away your intellectual capital. Seems to me that schools >and independently wealthy scientists/foundations are the only >ones who don't merit your censure on this count. Scientists even in schools and foundations are often secretive, too. The notion that "science" is about blabbing one's latest discoveries or theories is overly simplistic. Many scholars and scientists choose not to publicize their work for years, or decades, or, even, never. Consider Andrew Wiles, Princeton math professor, and the prover of Fermat's Last Theorem. He labored in secrecy for many years, only going public when he felt his results were complete. (As it turned out, they were not, and he needed another year or two to fill in some gaps.) Corporate scientists now outnumber academic or foundation scientists, and they are quite understandably under various restrictions to keep results secret, at least for a while. Science does not "only advance through the open literature." There are many other checks and balances which accomplish the same effect. I could give dozens of examples of where the open literature either did not exist or was not used...and science still advanced. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Miller Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 23:53:29 +0800 To: "Robert A. Costner" Subject: Re: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980108035645.037abe0c@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <34B51EC8.2489@avana.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Robert A. Costner wrote: > A few months back I asked a USPS rep about this, and was told that the idea > had been scrapped. I do not know that this was correct. The USPS was > going to do timestamping as well as act as a CA as I recall. The > timestamping is a action that "postmarks" the digitally signed message. > Many attorneys feel this is a very good thing, though I have had a hard > time justifying the need for this to some technically inclined people. I have it on good authority that either the plan has been scrapped or that it has simply gone nowhere (same result). > An interesting feature of the digital postmark is that the USPS was making > the claim that if you receive an email that the USPS send to you that was > not meant for you, then you have committed a federal crime when you read it. I'm not so sure about this, Robert. I've heard the rumor that it is a crime, but I have also heard that if something is delivered to your box, it is yours and you are not required to send it back unopened if it is not addressed to you. I tend to believe the latter, as it is the side of the story shared by USPS employees. It certainly is a federal crime, however, for the indended recipient to get into your mailbox to get a message which was incorrectly delivered to you, however! --David Miller From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Brian Franks <> Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 04:15:48 +0800 To: Subject: Search Engines Message-ID: <199801081853.KAA26269@toad.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I saw your listing on the internet. Get your web site(s) submitted to over 250 of the worlds best search engines for only $39.95! (Yahoo, Lycos, AOL, Excite, Hotbot, Linkstar, Webcrawler, and hundreds others). A professional will view your site and put together a list of the best key words and submit your site: mailing you the computer print out of ALL the search engines your site(s) were submitted to. (you should have in 5-10 days) To put your web site in the fast lane and receive more traffic, mail your check for only $39.95 to NetWorld at the below address. To start your submission today, fax a copy of the check you are mailing to (760) 639-3551 and be SURE to include BOTH the web site address and email address for each site you are having submitted. This is a one time fee. Mail Checks to NetWorld PO Box 326 Oceanside, CA. 92049 Sincerely, Brian Franks NetWorld http://www.max2001isp.com/networld/submit.htm (800) 484-2621 X5568 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Bill Stewart Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 04:43:29 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: FWD: AES Update - Known Answer Tests, Monte Carlo Tests, syntax, and formats Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980108111305.0088ba60@popd.ix.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >X-Sender: foti@csmes.ncsl.nist.gov >Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 16:41:40 -0500 >To: smid@csmes.ncsl.nist.gov >From: Jim Foti >Subject: AES Update - Known Answer Tests, Monte Carlo Tests, syntax, > and formats > >Folks, > >A Happy New Year to you all! 1998 should be quite exciting and hectic for >all of us involved in the AES development effort. > >Here is the latest news regarding AES. I have just posted Known Answer >Test and Monte Carlo Test documentation on our AES home page. The actual >link is: . > >Information on the API should be made available within several weeks - we >are actively and diligently working on that. When that information is >posted, I will send you a notification message similar to this one. > >In addition, we will soon have a survey for you which will be used to >expedite the exportability of AES analysis packages (which will be made >available when we announce the "complete and proper" submissions later this >summer). More information to follow soon. > >As with past messages, this is being sent to all persons who have expressed >an interest in the AES development effort (one way or another) within the >last year. > >Kindest regards, >Jim > > > >******************************************************************* >Jim Foti > >Security Technology Group >Computer Security Division >National Institute of Standard and Technology (NIST) > >TEL: (301) 975-5237 >FAX: (301) 948-1233 > >******************************************************************* > > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 02:37:38 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto (fwd) Message-ID: <199801081753.LAA03063@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 10:45:28 -0800 > From: David Miller > Subject: Re: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto > I'm not so sure about this, Robert. I've heard the rumor that it is a crime, > but I have also heard that if something is delivered to your box, it is yours > and you are not required to send it back unopened if it is not addressed to > you. I tend to believe the latter, as it is the side of the story shared by > USPS employees. The way it works is if a company send you (ie addressed to you or your physical address) and *then* attempts to recoup costs for the product or item delivered *and* you did not request the item *then* it is yours. It must be either addressed to you or the occupant of that delivery address, it is important to note that the test in all this is whether you requested something from the company. If the item is specificaly addressed to a 3rd party it is a crime to open it. I haven't looked into what the requirements for re-delivery are, as far as I am aware you could either return it to the post office for dead-letter filing or dump it in the trash. > It certainly is a federal crime, however, for the indended recipient to get > into your mailbox to get a message which was incorrectly delivered to you, > however! Technicaly, it is a crime for *you* to put stuff in your mailbox. When the home pick-up was eliminated a few years ago (supposedly because of the drug and bomb threat) the mailbox on your house or in your apartment was turned into an *exclusive* delivery point for the USPS. When you or I ask somebody to drop it in the box because we are not home we are technicaly committing a crime. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "S. M. Halloran" Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 18:21:47 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Anonymous Remailers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801081014.MAA06679@ankara.duzen.com.tr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On 8 Jan 98, Anonymous was found to have commented thusly: > On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, Robert Hettinga wrote: > > > > I noticed on Apple's info about acceptable behavior on their lists, that > > > > I decided to stop accepting posts from anonymous remailers way back, > > when anon.penet.fi was still alive. Some of that is philosophy, some of > > that was problems. > > > > As far as problems, it's the normal stuff -- personal attacks, > > mailbombing through anonymous remailers, copyright/slander/libel > > issues, all the normal fun and games. Since you can't track users back, > > you have real problems policing them. And since anonymous remailers > > tend to allow multiple (heading towards infinite) remailing addresses, > > the practical issue of how to lock out an abusive user becomes severe. > Mailbombing could be a criminal offence. > But libel is a civil and not a criminaloffence. > Under The Communications Decency Act S.230(a) no service provider is > liable for content authored by others. > Even if someone use a remailer to slander and libel further action > requires private civil action. > There is absolute no reason for being concerned about defamation from the > operator point of view. > The Fourth Circuit Court upheld the service provider impunity defence in > a recent case > brought against American Online Inc. (Zeran v. American Online Inc.). > However,if a moderator vulunterable approves a libelous message the case > could be different. > BTW, am I correct that criminal libel in no longer considered constitutional? Depends on whose constitution you are reading. In the country where I reside, the politicians use libel laws to avoid accountability to the voting public and to get at journalists with both civil and, I am pretty sure, criminal penalties. Journalism is a job with rather unusual occupational hazards in this particular country, in fact, with the largest number of murders of journalists taking place here, often by the police or some 'civil authority', who are rather brazen about it and characterize any journalist not in the pocket as a sympathizer of a cause for which the public is willing to do a lynching. (The military, which operates its own 'state security' court system here, just throws them in the lockup until they find a way to escape.) Sam Donaldson would have been history long ago here. Mitch Halloran Research (Bio)chemist Duzen Laboratories Group Ankara TURKEY mitch@duzen.com.tr other job title: Sequoia's (dob 12-20-95) daddy From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 05:44:43 +0800 To: David Miller Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 3:26 PM -0800 1/8/98, David Miller wrote: >Tim May wrote: > >> Consider Andrew Wiles, Princeton math professor, and the prover of Fermat's >> Last Theorem. He labored in secrecy for many years, only going public when >> he felt his results were complete. (As it turned out, they were not, and he >> needed another year or two to fill in some gaps.) > >You may have seen the same TV show I saw on him. I really enjoyed it. No, I didn't get my information from television. I presume you mean the "Nova" show some months back. >Is there any evidence that he got (ahem) outside funding for his project? >In the back of my paranoid mind, I wondered that since he was dealing with >elliptic curves and modular arithmetic if... I mean, how did he pay his >mortgage? The show implied that he was not doing any real teaching most >of that time, and if no one at the school knew of his work, then where was >the money coming from? Why don't you use the Web and report what you find? I'm not inclined to go out and do this research to answer your questions. (I just found 800 hits on his name, including biographical material.) If, by the way, you are surmising that he may've received NSA funding, this seems dubious. Just because "elliptic functions" are involved.... In any case, his salary was paid by Princeton for most or all of those years. As he had no equipment to buy, no students to support...his costs were low. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 05:50:42 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: Remailers & N.E.T. In-Reply-To: <2257f75e9d4378c573ebe49c9a1d7acc@anon.efga.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain [A reminder: people continue to use the "cypherpunks@toad.com" address. Please start using one of the real addresses!] At 9:46 PM -0800 1/7/98, Robert A. Costner wrote: >Perhaps the use of a remailer for this message below is an attempt to >escape the criminal provisions of the No Electronic Theft Act. > >>From: Anonymous Yep, expect a lot more of this. As the Copyright Police descend on more "violators" of the NETA, more folks will realize the remailers are their best protection. (Though the SPA and others may then go after the remailers. Ironically, the CDA exempted remailers--though not by name--from liability for messages.) --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Cindy Cohn Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 05:26:58 +0800 To: Simon Spero Subject: Re: How about a Bay Area Cypherpunks meeting 1/17/98? Message-ID: <199801082007.MAA29096@gw.quake.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:03 PM 12/20/97 -0500, Simon Spero wrote: >On Sat, 20 Dec 1997, Bill Stewart wrote: > >The 17th also happens to be just after a W3C meeting in Palo Alto. I was >planning to spend the day hanging at the mall with Chelsea, but this could >be fun too... I'm sorry, I won't be available on January 17th. Cindy ************************ Cindy A. Cohn McGlashan & Sarrail, P. C. 177 Bovet Road, 6th Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 (650) 341-2585 (tel) (650)341-1395 (fax) Cindy@McGlashan.com http://www.McGlashan.com From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 06:09:18 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Jalon'sWorld and Evil Money Laundering In-Reply-To: <85256586.0029E630.00@openworld.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:37 PM -0800 1/7/98, jalonz@openworld.com wrote: >Notice the words "criminal investigations"? God forbid talent could >actually be used for a good cause. The incidents in question were actually >quite serious (Chinese mafia money laundering via phony real estate deals) >and not at all like the porno bbs confiscation crap you'd be thinking of. And what is morally wrong with "money laundering"? Seems to me a person's money is his to do with it as he pleases...it's only governments that call some actions "money laundering." Just as they call some speech "information laundering." And do you think your "Digital Society" notion (which we've seen many times before, usually involving floating, offshore entities) will somehow not attract or involve "Chinese mafia money launderers"? Do you plan to implement key escrow so you can monitor what your residents are doing with each other? Do you plan to become a floating police state so as to stop this evil "money laundering"? I don't think you've quite grasped the significance of strong crypto and cyberspace. (For starters, an intentional community in cyberspace, situated in no particular country, and backed by strong crypto, digital escrow systems (real escrow, of course), reputation systems, etc. is a far better place to do business of certain sorts than is "Jalon'sWorld.") I suspect that Guy is right, that your "Digital Society" shtick is just the latest in your long series of "new businesses" started in many places in the country. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Graham-John Bullers Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 06:09:25 +0800 To: Mix Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <199801081204.EAA28274@sirius.infonex.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Mix wrote: I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him. > Tim C. May's reheated, refurbished, and regurgitated cud is > completely inappropriate for the mailing lists into which it is > cross-ruminated. > > | | > | O | Tim C. May > (--|--) > | > / \ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Graham-John Bullers Moderator of alt.2600.moderated ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ email : : ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Trei, Peter" Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 04:13:12 +0800 To: "'David Honig'" Subject: RE: MS Server Gated Crypto: strong encryption w/ exportable browsers if the server is US-OK Message-ID: <6B5344C210C7D011835C0000F80127668B15D0@exna01.securitydynamics.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Netscape got this deal quite some time ago, so it's hardly a special priviliege for MS. It lets certain (trusted by the US government) servers to use strong encryption with US products outside of the US. Peter Trei Disclaimer: I am not speaking for my employer. > ---------- > From: David Honig[SMTP:honig@otc.net] > Reply To: David Honig > Sent: Thursday, January 08, 1998 12:02 PM > To: cypherpunks@toad.com > Subject: MS Server Gated Crypto: strong encryption w/ exportable > browsers if the server is US-OK > > > The jist of > http://eu.microsoft.com/industry/finserv/m_finserv/m_fordev_g.htm > is, MS has US permission to export a DLL containing 128-bit SSL > *worldwide* > since > the encryption is enabled IFF there's a Verisign "SGC certificate" on > the > *server*. > This apparently will work with Netscape servers in addition to IIS. [...] > ------------------------------------------------------------ > David Honig Orbit Technology > honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu > > "How do you know you are not being deceived?" > ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, > Directorate of Intelligence, CIA > > > > > > > > > > > > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Marshall Clow Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 07:00:54 +0800 To: "Robert A. Costner" Subject: Re: Remailers & N.E.T. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 1:25 PM -0800 1/8/98, Robert A. Costner wrote: >At 12:47 PM 1/8/98 -0800, Tim May wrote: >>(Though the SPA and others may then go after the remailers. Ironically, the >>CDA exempted remailers--though not by name--from liability for messages.) > >Unfortunately you are semi wrong here. The CDA specifically does not cover >Intellectual property matters, and the SPA has consistently insisted that >the ISPs are liable for what their users do with copyrighted materials. > I had a professor in college who called this kind of argument "Proof by repeated assertion". That is what the SPA (a private organization) is doing. -- Marshall Marshall Clow Adobe Systems Warning: Objects in calendar are closer than they appear. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Information Security Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 05:04:02 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Vulis again Message-ID: <199801081949.OAA25833@panix2.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > Tim C. May's reheated, refurbished, and regurgitated cud is > completely inappropriate for the mailing lists into which it is > cross-ruminated. > > | | > | O | Tim C. May > (--|--) > | > / \ Talk about reheated, refurbished, and regurgitated... Vulis must be getting old. ---guy So, die, already. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Adam Back Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 06:32:29 +0800 To: pooh@efga.org Subject: time-stamp server uses (Re: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto) In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980108035645.037abe0c@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <199801081450.OAA00500@server.eternity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Robert Costner writes: > [...] The timestamping is a action that "postmarks" the digitally > signed message. Many attorneys feel this is a very good thing, > though I have had a hard time justifying the need for this to some > technically inclined people. One use for time-stamping is to allow digital signatures to out-live the validity period of a given public private key pair. If the time-stamped signature shows that the document was signed during the life-time of the signing key pair this provides additional assurance that the signature is still valid despite the fact that the key is now marked as expired, or was say later compromised and revoked. Lots of other uses for time-stamping services also; I thought of a use for them in the eternity service in preventing race conditions. Adam -- Now officially an EAR violation... Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 05:16:03 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: The Digital Society Group Message-ID: <199801081954.OAA26406@panix2.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > From jalonz@openworld.com Thu Jan 8 02:19:34 1998 > Received: from openworld.com (www.openworld.com [205.157.133.52]) > by mail1.panix.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/PanixM1.3) with SMTP id CAA24973 > for ; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 02:19:34 -0500 (EST) > From: jalonz@openworld.com > Received: by openworld.com(Lotus SMTP MTA SMTP v4.6 (462.2 9-3-1997)) id 85256586.00285987 ; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 02:20:43 -0500 > X-Lotus-FromDomain: OPENWORLD.COM > To: Information Security , cyberpunks@toad.net Cyberpunks? You really know how to score points! > Message-ID: <85256586.00280ED7.00@openworld.com> > Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 02:22:05 -0500 > Subject: Re: The Digital Society Group > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Status: R > > > ># SAN DIEGO DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. > ># > ># Computer Security - Provide computer security assistance in criminal > ># investigations. Tasks include data decryption, recovering erased > data, > ># password retrieval, data line monitoring, and protected system entry. > > > >Isn't that last item special? > > > >---guy > > > > And a possible reason for heading the other way. > > guy, > > tough noogies > > deal with it... > > Notice the words "criminal investigations"? God forbid talent could > actually be used for a good cause. The incidents in question were actually > quite serious (Chinese mafia money laundering via phony real estate deals) > and not at all like the porno bbs confiscation crap you'd be thinking of. > > :) > jqz Just curious what your reaction would be to that ambiguous statement. Having done DA support, I expect you are quite serious about heading the other way to give users security and anonymity. How do you justify both, since the "bad guys" would benefit? ---- It's the other stuff: that you flit around (people posting "Where are you Jalon Q. Zimmerman?"), that The Digital Society doesn't have its own domain, but is hosted by some other company called "OpenWorld", which has AOL contact addresses... Who is Mark Frazier, who owns OpenWorld, how long has it been in business, what is your relationship to them, what is your job description? Is OpenWorld another startup that is going to go ? The OpenWorld pages read like any other company BS, and you've given yourself the lofty title "Director". Yeah, and we have Sir Timothy May, Dr. Dim Vulvis, etc. You're about 26, and full of hot air. ---guy You mean well. ;-) From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Paul Bradley Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 00:20:25 +0800 To: Adam Back Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: <199801062128.VAA00264@server.eternity.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > > I haven't seen the USG RSA key -- if it's 512 bits, that would be a humorous > > next factoring target. Talking of factoring I wonder if anyone on the list has seen the article in this months new scientist regarding a new link found between energy levels in hydrogen atoms and generation of large primes, I don`t remember the details (I only scanned the article as even the elementary explanation of the physics involved was beyond me), The thrust of the article was that work was in progress on a variant of this that could factor large numbers significantly faster than current methods. Anyone with more background in this sort of thing care to comment? Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Paul Bradley Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 01:18:36 +0800 To: Wei Dai Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: <19980106005136.23824@eskimo.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > I don't understand why there is so much talk about guns here lately. > Unless someone comes up with a weapon that has some very unusual economic > properties, individuals cannot hope to compete with governments in the > domain of deadly force. If we have to resort to physical violence, we've > already lost! Ready availablity of defensive weaponry to citizens does create very unusual circumstances in that a motivated population can defeat the government by pure force of numbers, the fact is, the population is not motivated and most of the sheeple swallow the state BS, and just in case, most governments restrict citizens access to weapons and ignore the citizens right to defend themselves against attack (not that this will stop those of us who are motivated). Paul Bradley, who may or may not be prepared to defend himself. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Miller Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 05:30:27 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <34B560A2.2F2C@avana.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tim May wrote: > Consider Andrew Wiles, Princeton math professor, and the prover of Fermat's > Last Theorem. He labored in secrecy for many years, only going public when > he felt his results were complete. (As it turned out, they were not, and he > needed another year or two to fill in some gaps.) You may have seen the same TV show I saw on him. I really enjoyed it. Is there any evidence that he got (ahem) outside funding for his project? In the back of my paranoid mind, I wondered that since he was dealing with elliptic curves and modular arithmetic if... I mean, how did he pay his mortgage? The show implied that he was not doing any real teaching most of that time, and if no one at the school knew of his work, then where was the money coming from? --David Miller From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Robert A. Costner" Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 05:36:12 +0800 To: David Miller Subject: Re: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980108035645.037abe0c@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980108152654.03ba8028@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 10:45 AM 1/8/98 -0800, David Miller wrote: >> An interesting feature of the digital postmark is that the USPS was making >> the claim that if you receive an email that the USPS send to you that was >> not meant for you, then you have committed a federal crime when you read it. > >I'm not so sure about this, Robert. I've heard the rumor that it is a crime, >but I have also heard that if something is delivered to your box, it is yours >and you are not required to send it back unopened if it is not addressed to >you. I tend to believe the latter, as it is the side of the story shared by >USPS employees. I wasn't commenting on the legality, but on the fact that the USPS web page was making the claim that it was a crime. Apparently whoever wrote the legal disclaimer felt that email could be misdelivered in the same fashion in which postal mail could be misdelivered and was making this claim. I found the claim to be nutty and made me think they didn't know what they were doing. -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh@efga.org http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: kozmo killah Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 09:22:15 +0800 To: SpdrMan@aotto.com Subject: Re: System Message-ID: <19980108235246.12395.rocketmail@send1b.yahoomail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain which system did you want? ---"Adrian J. Otto" wrote: > > Cosmos, > > Ok, I want to buy. Tell me more details. > > Adrian > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 09:02:39 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: "Trade a Tape, Go to Jail?" from Wired News Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 18:46:37 -0500 From: Steve Silberman To: declan@well.com Subject: Re: FC: How long you'll be in jail for copyright violations Declan: An interesting corrollary to the Netly story - I wrote an article for Wired News today that might be of interest to anyone who trades tapes on the Net, especially those who post their "lists" to the Web and accept cash for trades - even when there is no profit involved. "Trade a Tape, Go to Jail?" http://www.wired.com/news/news/culture/story/9532.html Steve ********************************** Steve Silberman Senior Culture Writer WIRED News http://www.wired.com/ *********************************** From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 06:43:05 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Austin Cypherpunks - Physical Meeting - Sat. Jan. 17, 1998 Message-ID: <199801082209.QAA04856@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Hi, The Austin Cypherpunks will be holding a physical meeting on Saturday, January 17th, 1998. It will be from 6-7pm at Flipnotics on Barton Springs Rd. The meeting is open to all. If you would like directions please send a note to austin-cpunks@ssz.com. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "William H. Geiger III" Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 07:32:13 +0800 To: Information Security Subject: Re: The Digital Society Group In-Reply-To: <199801081954.OAA26406@panix2.panix.com> Message-ID: <199801082237.RAA09999@users.invweb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199801081954.OAA26406@panix2.panix.com>, on 01/08/98 at 02:54 PM, Information Security said: >Having done DA support, I expect you are quite serious >about heading the other way to give users security >and anonymity. How do you justify both, since the >"bad guys" would benefit? Well just because the DA says someone is a BadGuy(TM) does not make it so. I for one would feel safer with the majority of BadGuys(TM) as neighbors than I would with Lawyers and DA's. :) - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNLVSzo9Co1n+aLhhAQHhlgP/ajGh6pYuVrvzWIhPXKNv02HZAigRHgk2 z0sXTMZt+K0LDOx6gC6RGtiYtjOcQeoFvnGiw10PSu/6R7L5FXE/EmTI8Mpatx8b vW5Ql89HBwZFOd3UwCQ/g4uFQTotUocXMyCLZszhkHAvPywDMU3nHDaJXXQgOIx8 z1gSN9T6G3g= =+3Pc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Robert A. Costner" Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 06:29:13 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: Remailers & N.E.T. In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980108004628.03b6bbe8@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980108162541.0371f1f0@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 12:47 PM 1/8/98 -0800, Tim May wrote: >(Though the SPA and others may then go after the remailers. Ironically, the >CDA exempted remailers--though not by name--from liability for messages.) Unfortunately you are semi wrong here. The CDA specifically does not cover Intellectual property matters, and the SPA has consistently insisted that the ISPs are liable for what their users do with copyrighted materials. -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh@efga.org http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 09:43:24 +0800 To: Jim Gillogly Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: <34B4CFF0.858FF03C@acm.org> Message-ID: <199801090031.QAA01391@netcom11.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >> scientists who agree to government secrecy to develop >> their inventions are agreeing to a lot more than >> mere secrecy. they are committing to a paradigm that >> is at odds with science itself, which only advances through >> the open literature. > >Why limit your annoyance to government scientists? Scientists >in private industry are in the same position, developing (e.g.) >algorithms and analytical methods protected by trade secrets. >Society recognizes this tendency and tries to advance science >anyway by offering patent protection. a patent is not at all the same as a secrecy order issued by the NSA, and shame on you for suggesting so. we both know you are far more intelligent than this, and this is a feeble argument. how can you possibly compare the two cases? in one case, there is no knowledge whatsoever allowed to leak from a government agency. in the other case, the patent is published in a government forum for searching by anyone. there is no SECRECY in a patent, it in fact is a PUBLIC DECLARATION OF OWNERSHIP supported by a DISCLOSURE system. the NSA and all secret agencies are fundamentally ANTI DISCLOSURE and use their supposed claims of NATIONAL SECURITY to EVADE ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE PUBLIC and even the namby-pamby, gutless, souless BUREACRATS in congress. Jim G., how many scientists are now working on government WEAPONRY programs? how much money of taxes is being funneled to them? and you compare them with private sector scientists who are scrounging to make ends meet in this twisted con game we call the modern economy? Chomsky is right, its WELFARE FOR BUSINESS via vast subsidies to the so-called "defense" industry. its nothing but WAR TOYS FOR WAR MONGERS. You don't make money by >giving away your intellectual capital. Seems to me that schools >and independently wealthy scientists/foundations are the only >ones who don't merit your censure on this count. what does this have to do with the NSA or weapons development, to which I was referring to in my essay? neither has anything to do with making money, and quite frankly I'm ashamed that someone as intelligent as you would suggest there is any similarity. you're using one of the most feeble arguments in the world. two wrongs do not make a right. "those darn scientists in private industry are into secrecy too. secrecy is a basic part of life on planet earth". perhaps so, but secrecy in GOVERNMENT is ANTITHETICAL to freedom, and there is a direct proportion of the INCREASE IN SECRECY to the INCREASE IN TYRANNY. sorry to RANT but your post makes my blood boil. feel free to have your deluded fantasies in private, but if you post, I'll rant. gosh, JimmyG, have you read about how area 51 was charged with a lawsuit for burning toxic wastes by the widow of a dead employee? would you like me to post it for you? do you hold this up as an example of government accountability? or is it in fact government that no longer serves the people? a government that in fact is in total contempt of its citizens? food for thought, eh? I suppose it would make anyone with a conscience tend to THINK-- presuming they really have one. its a rare quality in these times, don't you think, JimmyG? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:00:02 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801090042.QAA02172@netcom11.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain every respondent to my post has missed the key points. I will post soon the list an article demonstrating my anger at the betrayal of sound government by a sinister state that has hijacked it. >Scientists even in schools and foundations are often secretive, too. > >The notion that "science" is about blabbing one's latest discoveries or >theories is overly simplistic. Many scholars and scientists choose not to >publicize their work for years, or decades, or, even, never. if so, they are not SCIENTISTS. a key aspect of SCIENCE is publishing results. science cannot advance without it. name me one scientist who did not publish an important result, or is considered a good scientists for doing so! >Consider Andrew Wiles, Princeton math professor, and the prover of Fermat's >Last Theorem. He labored in secrecy for many years, only going public when >he felt his results were complete. (As it turned out, they were not, and he >needed another year or two to fill in some gaps.) but he PUBLISHED his results, he gave a LECTURE on his findings. I am not saying that secrecy and science are mutually exclusive in this way. secrecy is a useful tool, I am not in general against secrecy. but secrecy can be ABUSED, and our government is ABUSING it. have you been following that Clinton was just fined $286,00 for lying to a judge? what do you think it was about? the government LIED that health hearings were being attended only by federal employees, and were thus exempt from mandatory public hearings. a law requires that if private individuals attend, the hearing must be OPEN and not SECRET!! for good reason!! our government is hijacked through SECRECY. in fact the hearing could be public even with federal employees only, and the law should have gone further but only stopped where it did!! >Corporate scientists now outnumber academic or foundation scientists, and >they are quite understandably under various restrictions to keep results >secret, at least for a while. "at least for a while" is the key phrase. "forever" would be false. again, secrecy is a tool. >Science does not "only advance through the open literature." There are many >other checks and balances which accomplish the same effect. name one. I could give >dozens of examples of where the open literature either did not exist or was >not used...and science still advanced. but science eventually published the results. the lack of publishing held back science collectively. science had to rediscover something that had already been discovered. it is misleading to suggest that science "advanced" as you do here. those findings that are withheld from the scientific literature do not advance science as a collective human endeavor. how can you argue with something so obvious? all this is uninteresting to me-- I was making a moral point in an essay that is obviously unintelligable to most people here. its my big mistake in this world, to pretent that morality plays a role. as EH once said, normative philosophies are a waste of time. what room does the world have for someone who thinks only in terms of how things should be? things ARE, PERIOD. good lord, no wonder Ayn Rand is so uninfluential. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "William H. Geiger III" Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 08:01:56 +0800 To: Adam Back Subject: Re: time-stamp server uses (Re: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto) In-Reply-To: <199801081450.OAA00500@server.eternity.org> Message-ID: <199801082306.SAA10265@users.invweb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199801081450.OAA00500@server.eternity.org>, on 01/08/98 at 02:50 PM, Adam Back said: >Robert Costner writes: >> [...] The timestamping is a action that "postmarks" the digitally >> signed message. Many attorneys feel this is a very good thing, >> though I have had a hard time justifying the need for this to some >> technically inclined people. >One use for time-stamping is to allow digital signatures to out-live the >validity period of a given public private key pair. If the time-stamped >signature shows that the document was signed during the life-time of the >signing key pair this provides additional assurance that the signature is >still valid despite the fact that the key is now marked as expired, or >was say later compromised and revoked. No it does not. The date that a Key becomes comprimised and the date that the owner of a Key knowns it is comprimised are two very different things and somthing that time-stamping can not solve. You also have at issue of what does one do with long term signatures if the undelying technology is broken. Say you sign a 30yr morgage electronically and 15yrs latter the algorithms that were used and now broken. Not to mention what does one do when the time-stamping key is comprimised. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNLVZgY9Co1n+aLhhAQF5HAQAvGRMd3YWhcQiZyaYrK7EJ46JC53E92h9 IR6QuO3rew6wdwUNavg6TPRgpF8L9kXAKaH35IFePBvfsSKzoCMxsSpdcoo4RuMx ZMqa81jWaJmKBNjAhyD1qSwsgiQnXaAEcAV7mIa3AboUm8bfA1JbfwiA/SE7i/g2 uF08Pnh90Yw= =KT64 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Robert Hettinga Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 07:09:37 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: HAYEKWEB: Hackney on Law & Econ History & Hayek Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain --- begin forwarded text Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:56:33 EST Reply-To: Hayek Related Research Sender: Hayek Related Research From: Gregransom Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) Subject: HAYEKWEB: Hackney on Law & Econ History & Hayek To: HAYEK-L@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU >> Hayek on the Web << -- Law & Economics "Law and Neoclassical Economics: Science, Politics, and the Reconfiguration of American Tort Law Theory" by James R. Hackney, Jr. on the Web at: http://www.press.uillinois.edu/journals/lhrforums.html >From "Law and Neoclassical Economics: Science, Politics, and the Reconfiguration of American Tort Law Theory" by James R. Hackney, Jr.: " .. C. The Antistatist Imperative: F. A. Hayek and the Road to Law and Neoclassical Economics The technique of analysis coming out of early twentieth-century Vienna was not linked to any particular ideological position. In fact, Janik and Toulmin illustrate that the fundamental position could be characterized as "apolitical." However, F. A. Hayek independently provided a distinct ideological position shaped by the Viennese experience41 that had a profound impact on ideological debates in post-World War II America and, by extension, on economic analysis. Hayek's migration to England influenced the LSE debates that are crucial to understanding the strands of economic thought that framed Coase's work in particular, and law and neoclassical economics in general. In addition, Hayek directly shaped the law and neoclassical economics project at the University of Chicago.42 Hayek stated his ideological position in The Road to Serfdom.43 He asserted that Serfdom "is a political book" and that "all I shall have to say is derived from certain ultimate values."44 Written while Hayek held a professorship at the LSE, Serfdom was conceived as a direct response to a socialist ethos that permeated the European continent and endangered the liberal underpinnings of English politics. The goal of the book was to sound a "warning to the socialist intelligentsia of England"45 that their program would lead to the very totalitarianism so many had fought against. Despite its focus on the English intellectual scene, the book had an enormous impact in the United States.46 In fact, it produced a more extreme reaction, both positive and negative, in the United States than in England. No doubt part of the consternation on the American left was due to the boldness and scope of Serfdom.47 While the argument that "hot socialism" would poison a society might not have unsettled leftists, Hayek made similar claims regarding the welfare state.48 The problem articulated in Serfdom was that some of the core beliefs of hot socialism had become so embedded in the conceptual framework of intellectual thought that they threatened to undermine liberal society under the guise of the welfar state or egalitarian rhetoric. This would come, for example, in the form of knee-jerk calls for state/bureaucratic intervention in the economy when "judicious use of financial inducements might evoke spontaneous efforts."49 The polemical force of Serfdom stemmed from its evocation of the dangers of totalitarianism, particularly the Nazi Germany variety, manifest in social approaches to the ills that befall society. Hayek boldly and flatly asserted that "[i]t is necessary now to state the unpalatable truth that it is Germany whose fate we are in some danger of repeating."50 The core of the antistatist stance as articulated in Serfdom grew out of the belief in the uniqueness of individual activity and thought ("ethical individualism"). It was unacceptable, in fact impossible, for anyone other than the individual to make decisions for the individual without imposing an alien set of values. At that point, seemingly benign policy prescriptions dissolved into naked, unjustifiable coercion. Thus, "individuals should be allowed, within defined limits, to follow their own values and preferences rather than somebody else's."51 In the antigovernment sentiment and proincentive policies articulated in Serfdom, we see the ideological seeds that helped influence, but were not determinative of, the American law and neoclassical economics movement. The ways in which the antistatist ideal set forth in Serfdom would be reflected in social institutions are clear in Hayek's discussion of the legal system and are fundamental in linking his intellectual project to the law and neoclassical economics movement. Hayek's views on the legal system were shaped by his core belief that "competition" is the central means of "co-ordinating human effort" and the "conviction that, where effective competition can be created, it is a better way of guiding individual efforts than any other."52 Thus, in the effort to protect the individual, it is free market competition, not government intervention, that is presumed to be for the good. So, what of the law "[I]n order that competition should work beneficially, a carefully thought-out legal framework is required. ." In particular, some legal structure may be needed in order to accurately reflect the price of goods and services, which is the vital information for individuals.53 In sum, the law serves to facilitate competition, which is the system most conducive to individual freedom. It does so by setting the boundaries of competition. The law should "recognize the principle of private property and freedom of contract." In this regard, it acts as a neutral arbiter facilitating individual preferences and defining the "right to property as applied to different things." The rights associated with property, notwithstanding antistatist ideals, were not absolute, but contingent upon the particular situation. Efficiency was the criterion: the "systematic study of the forms of legal institutions which will make the competitive system work efficiently." Regarding legal rules specifically, Serfdom articulated a system in which "[t]he only question . . . is whether in the particular instance the advantages gained are greater than the social costs which they impose."54 Hayek's emphasis on legal rules, particularly as they affected social costs,55 is the link connecting him to the law and neoclassical economics movement. Hayek gave a detailed analysis of social costs and the limits of government intervention as a tool for minimizing such costs. However, to the extent that legal rules limiting property rights represent an activist role for government, Hayek stated that, though the scope of this permissible intervention on individual autonomy was not defined, "these tasks provide, indeed, a wide and unquestioned field for state activity."56 I argue below that the possibility of "state activity" within neoclassical economics provides the ground for progressive political appropriation of neoclassical economics. This discussion of postwar antistatism, as represented by Serfdom, and its logical progression to concrete neoclassical analyses of legal institutions, specifically property rights, begins to substantiate the first major claim of this essay: law and neoclassical economics is, at its core, about politics. It also shows how the conservative politics associated with neoclassical economics could be taken seriously if the dangers of progressivism articulated in Serfdom, including progressive ideals espoused by pragmatic instrumentalists, were heeded.57 Now we turn to the connections between neoclassical economics and the science of the analytic turn in order to begin establishing the other claim of this paper: law and neoclassical economics is, at its core, also about science. At the end, we find that there is a synthesis of the politics and science of law and neoclassical economics .. " >From "Law and Neoclassical Economics: Science, Politics, and the Reconfiguration of American Tort Law Theory" by James R. Hackney, Jr. Law and History Review. Vol. 15, No. 2, Fall 1997 >From "'Law and Neoclassical Economics': A Response to Commentaries 163-172" by James R. Hackney, Jr.: " .. I never identify Hayek as a "neoclassical economist" but I think it is (1) fair to say that Hayek, and Austrian economics generally, have had considerable influence on neoclassical theory;16 and, more importantly for my thesis, (2) Hayek has had a profound influence on the strand of law and neoclassical economics coming out of the University of Chicago.17 (footnote 17. Coase's recognition of his intellectual debt to F. A. Hayek and the institutional role Hayek played in establishing law and neoclassical economics studies at the University of Chicago is illustrative of this point. Hackney, "Law and Neoclassical Economics," 284, n. 42, 306, n. 141.) .. " >From "'Law and Neoclassical Economics': A Response to Commentaries 163-172" by James R. Hackney, Jr. _Law and History Review_ Vol. 16, No. 1, Spring 1998. Hayek on the Web is a regular feature of the Hayek-L list. --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 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' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 08:28:42 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: Remailers & N.E.T. In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980108004628.03b6bbe8@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I would be very afraid of relying on the CDA's immunizing provisions as my sole defense against prosecution, conviction, and jail time, were I a remailer operator. -Declan At 12:47 -0800 1/8/98, Tim May wrote: >(Though the SPA and others may then go after the remailers. Ironically, the >CDA exempted remailers--though not by name--from liability for messages.) From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: jalonz@openworld.com Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 09:05:24 +0800 To: Tim May MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >>Notice the words "criminal investigations"? God forbid talent could >>actually be used for a good cause. The incidents in question were actually >>quite serious (Chinese mafia money laundering via phony real estate deals) >>and not at all like the porno bbs confiscation crap you'd be thinking of. >And what is morally wrong with "money laundering"? Seems to me a person's >money is his to do with it as he pleases...it's only governments that call >some actions "money laundering." Just as they call some speech "information >laundering." I personally dont see money laundering as a "bad" thing, but fraud definitely is. What you do with your money is your business as long as you dont hurt someone else. This was not the case. (IMHO) >And do you think your "Digital Society" notion (which we've seen many times >before, usually involving floating, offshore entities) will somehow not >attract or involve "Chinese mafia money launderers"? I'm sure it will. >Do you plan to implement key escrow so you can monitor what your residents >are doing with each other? Do you plan to become a floating police state so >as to stop this evil "money laundering"? Hell no, I personally do not think it would not be practical, moral or cost-effective to use key-escrow methods. Key escrow empowers governments, not individuals - at the cost of the individuals right to privacy. >I don't think you've quite grasped the significance of strong crypto and >cyberspace. has anyone? >(For starters, an intentional community in cyberspace, situated in no >particular country, and backed by strong crypto, digital escrow systems >(real escrow, of course), reputation systems, etc. is a far better place to >do business of certain sorts than is "Jalon'sWorld.") Then why doesn't someone do it? Like I said we have to start somewhere. >I suspect that Guy is right, that your "Digital Society" shtick is just the >latest in your long series of "new businesses" started in many places in >the country. Well it definitely is the latest and it definitely is one of many, so your suspicions are correct. BTW, The Digital Society Group has been selected to deploy the entire Digital Society Package within the new Agulhas Bay Free Zone in the People's Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe. I'd advise a look at the new content on the Digital Society website. :) Jalon --------------------------------------------------------------- Jalon Q. Zimmerman, Director The Digital Society Group A division of Openworld, Inc. http://www.openworld.com/ jalonz@openworld.com --------------------------------------------------------------- The government is not your mommy. --------------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:18:51 +0800 To: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980108190521.007b87d0@otc.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 04:42 PM 1/8/98 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >good lord, no wonder >Ayn Rand is so uninfluential. > Methinks you are either tweaking us or are ourselves some 20 years ago.. Assuming the latter. Howdy. Calm down. Everyone eventually considers the Faustian bargains one finds in one's environment, and realizes the bargains that others have made. And one chooses. The universe owes you nothing. Your goals and alliances are yours to choose. Everyone picks what they are comfortable with, and it ain't your business what they decide. No one is obligated to agree with you. And everyone is obligated to let you alone, unless you violate their right to be left alone. But you know this. If there are people w/ evil (and there are), well, stop tirading and deal with it. Route around the damage. You're not going to convince them, face it. Don't fill yourself with hate; mobilize. Run for congress; send spoofmail from the pres; write cryptocode; turn your grandma on to PGP; volunteer to lecture to impressionable youngsters. Once you get over the shock of realizing how much things are not what they are supposed to be, you'll be able to calm down, and think. I'm not an optimist but we have physics and mathematics and economics in our favor, to paraphrase. There *is* a reason to flame but flaming to the choir (or to the unbelievers, for that matter) isn't the solution. On secrecy, Saint Chas. Darwin sat on evolution forever, until he reviewed a paper that was going to scoop him, you know. later, David Honig honig@alum.mit.edu --------------------------------------------------- If we can prevent the government from wasting the labours of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy. -TJ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 11:45:45 +0800 To: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 4:42 PM -0800 1/8/98, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >every respondent to my post has missed the key points. >I will post soon the list an article demonstrating my >anger at the betrayal of sound government by a sinister state >that has hijacked it. Have they begun torturing you with the snakes of Medusa yet? ... >if so, they are not SCIENTISTS. a key aspect of SCIENCE is publishing >results. science cannot advance without it. name me one scientist >who did not publish an important result, or is considered a good >scientists for doing so! "Name me one..."? How about Gauss, who didn't publish many of his results. Or, of course, Fermat, ironically linked to Wiles. Not to mention Darwin, who sat on his results for almost 20 years, and only issued a paper and his famed book because he learned another naturalist was about to announce similar conclusions. Publication and, more importantly, discussion and challenge, is often very important to the advancement of science. But is some cast in stone requirement? Of course not. >>Science does not "only advance through the open literature." There are many >>other checks and balances which accomplish the same effect. > >name one. Building an artifact which embodies the science, for example. Exploding an atom bomb was pretty clearly a demonstration that the science done was correct, regardless of whether there was "open literature" or not. This is just too easy, refuting Detweiler's points. So I'll stop here. >all this is uninteresting to me-- I was making a moral point in an >essay that is obviously unintelligable to most people here. its my >big mistake in this world, to pretent that morality plays a role. >as EH once said, normative philosophies are a waste of time. what >room does the world have for someone who thinks only in terms >of how things should be? things ARE, PERIOD. good lord, no wonder >Ayn Rand is so uninfluential. I suggest he get his lithium prescription refilled. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: John Young Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 09:54:25 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Fast Elliptic Curve Math Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19980109005031.010beb24@pop.pipeline.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 7 January 1998, Nikkei Industrial Daily Toshiba Unveils Fast Formula For Elliptic-Curve Cryptography Tokyo -- Toshiba Corp. has developed an arithmetic formula which it claims offers the world's fastest processes of elliptic-curve cryptography. The formula cuts processing time by almost half from current methods used in elliptic-curve systems. Toshiba's formula is based on the Montgomery arithmetic system, a special method of calculation which requires no division. Elliptic-curve cryptography is considerably faster than the Rivest Shamir Adleman (RSA) system currently in common use. Toshiba hopes to apply the system in a wide range of fields, including corporate information systems and electronic commerce. ----- Is there other information on this? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 04:05:24 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns Message-ID: <199801081855.TAA05464@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > > Final comment: If I find the motivation, I may finish an essay I've been > > working on about how we, the Cypherpunks and the World, are *retrogressing* > > in crypto areas. Most of the exotic applications are no longer being > > discussed, and various mundane commercial products are the main focus. Yawn. > > You mean things like Onion Routers, Crowds & the like? Tim May doesn't know anything about Onion Routers, Crowds, or any of the other new privacy technologies like Adam Back's prototype Eternity service. In truth, he has lost all interest in cryptography and now spends his time talking about guns and making racist comments. He wonders why the cypherpunks list no longer attracts quality cryptographic ideas. He need look no farther than the nearest mirror. His violent rants and his off-topic, offensive posts have done more than anything to drive good people off the list. The single best thing that could happen to the cypherpunks list (and the cypherpunks movement, for that matter) would be for Tim May to leave the list and disassociate himself from the cypherpunks. He would be much more comfortable joining the KKK and the local militia. After him, Paul Bradley, William Geiger and Dimitri Vulis can follow. This will leave fine thinkers with good hearts like Adam Back, Bill Stewart, Wei Dai and others, people who still believe that cryptography can make a strong contribution to our freedom. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:38:04 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <199801090201.UAA06101@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality > Date: Thu, 08 Jan 98 16:42:43 -0800 > From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" > every respondent to my post has missed the key points. Not quite. Of course I don't agree with all of them either. There are two rules you should consider: - It's ok to have an open mind, just don't let it slosh out on the ground. - Understanding a view is not equivalent to supporting a view. You might also want to consider that two opposing views might very well *both* be right...it depends on where you sit on the fence as to what the tree looks like. > >Scientists even in schools and foundations are often secretive, too. > > > >The notion that "science" is about blabbing one's latest discoveries or > >theories is overly simplistic. Many scholars and scientists choose not to > >publicize their work for years, or decades, or, even, never. > > if so, they are not SCIENTISTS. a key aspect of SCIENCE is publishing > results. science cannot advance without it. name me one scientist > who did not publish an important result, or is considered a good > scientists for doing so! I must agree here. If a technologist (ie one who studies science for profit, hence creating a technology) chooses not to publish their results that is fine. However, a scientist is one who studies nature and its interactions, profit is not and should not be a motive. Simplistic or not; in fact some things are better understood when simplified (ala the scientific principle). A scientist has an obligation to discuss and publish their results for other scientists (and even technologist) when they are reasonably sure their results will stand up to indipendant verification (a critical issue in science, not in technology however). Don't be confused by Timy's claim to be a scientist, he is a technologist at heart. Many of his views and beliefs are motivated by issues of control *not* curiosity. > >Consider Andrew Wiles, Princeton math professor, and the prover of Fermat's > >Last Theorem. He labored in secrecy for many years, only going public when > >he felt his results were complete. (As it turned out, they were not, and he > >needed another year or two to fill in some gaps.) > > but he PUBLISHED his results, he gave a LECTURE on his findings. I am > not saying that secrecy and science are mutually exclusive in this way. > secrecy is a useful tool, I am not in general against secrecy. but > secrecy can be ABUSED, and our government is ABUSING it. Further, the *reason* he was so secretive was because of the history of failed attempts and early 'proofs' that later failed. He was motivated by getting it right and ruining his reputation; not because he thought proving Fermat's Last Theorem would provide him riches and laurels for the remainder of his mortal coil. > have you > been following that Clinton was just fined $286,00 for lying to > a judge? Which means, per the Constitution, that he should be removed from office. He broke a public trust and that means he looses any public station he currently has and is barred from future office. > I could give > >dozens of examples of where the open literature either did not exist or was > >not used...and science still advanced. Of course, this is a specious argument. If it was already in the literature it wouldn't be science advancing (learning something that wasn't known before). The whole point to science is to understand and explain what we see and don't see that creates the cosmos we inhabit. Now if your point is that Intel taking some trade secret only they are aware of and using this to make quicker chips is science then you don't know a damn thing about science. > but science eventually published the results. It is *required* for doing 'science', it isn't for doing 'technology'. As a matter of fact a little perusal of history demonstrates that science requires open and unhindered dialog while technology requires closed channels of communcication and mechanisms of control. A perfect current example is the move to cloan humans. The guy, Creed?, is right "you can't stop science"; you can however stop technology and businesses do every day. Until that oocyte goes viable it's science, from that point on it's technology. > human endeavor. how can you argue with something so obvious? You don't know Timmy very well do you... > all this is uninteresting to me-- I was making a moral point in an > essay that is obviously unintelligable to most people here. its my > big mistake in this world, to pretent that morality plays a role. Actualy your mistake is assuming that there is *one* morality. Don't fret though. Just about everyone wants to jam everyone else into their nice little easily understood molds. It makes it much easier to justify their actions to themselves and potentialy to others if they get them to swallow even once. > of how things should be? things ARE, PERIOD. good lord, no wonder > Ayn Rand is so uninfluential. Reasonable men don't change the world. If we aren't motivated by our ethics and belief that our actions can change the world into the way it 'should be' then what is the motive? Money? Even that is a veiled mechanism to make the world the way we think it should be (ie we have more money or social station than currently endowed with). Changing the world is what *makes* life worth living. The question *is* why do you want to change the world and *who* gets to profit by it? ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Michael Stutz Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:16:11 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Syn-l: Re: White House Or Red Roof Inn? (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain [This message originally appeared on the synergetics-l at , a list for the discussion of R. Buckminster Fuller's magnum opus.] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 00:38:22 GMT From: Kirby Urner Reply-To: synergetics-l@teleport.com To: synergetics-l@teleport.com Subject: Syn-l: Re: White House Or Red Roof Inn? Newsgroups: alt.politics.org.fbi,alt.politics.org.cia softwar@us.net (softwar@us.net) wrote: >friends inside the White House. Barth claimed the British were >already selling encrypted radios to China and his new boss, >Motorola, deserved a "level playing field". In fact, according >to Barth, the National Security Agency (NSA) agreed with >Motorola's request for export. > I want to be clear on your position: you are apparently against administration efforts to frustrate domestic access to strong encryption. This makes sense, since that would just put the domestic population behind the rest of the world, which has access to same through other channels. But are you saying companies like Motorola should not sell encrypted radio or television to clients not classified as "domestic"? Or is it just some clients (e.g. the Chinese) but not others that you're saying Motorola should turn away. Sounds to me like you're picking on the Chinese because they're an easy target, after all the brouhaha about where the DNC has been getting its money (are you so sure the British have never helped put their preferred candidate in power through banking channels? Is this really a new game? I think not -- USAers just aren't used to having the Asians playing it, but in retrospect you have to wonder what took them so long). My view is that we're fast coming to (already well passed?) the point where we're going to have to regard lethal-against -humans applications of high technology as uniformly negative wherever they occur -- exceptions will be few and far between. Big money is seeing a secure path into the future, but not if high explosives are factored in as wild cards -- like you're trying to plan the motherboard of a computer and some politician comes in and says "by the way, every now and then we plan to blow a whole section of circuitry sky high, maybe explode a chip or two -- think you can handle that?" The Intel engineers I know would all shake their heads and think this guy must be missing more than a few screws. Computers need it cold. The temperature needs to keep dropping, down, down, down -- to way below what jingoists and knee-jerk patriots of all stripes and coloration find comfortable, but which delicate high technology absolutely must have to operate with any integrity. Motherboard Earth is not some Hollywood movie set, where misguided Rambos can run amuk at will. Save that stuff for the video parlor or the schoolyard, where it's safe to indulge in less than grown-up behavior. If the Qualcomm kid was even inadvertently feeding data to GIS systems bound for the "brains" of Tomahawk cruise missles aimed at "external" (non-domestic) targets in another hemisphere, then Qualcomm is liable to go down in history as a felonious player, a villain. One just can't afford to misrepresent one's true intentions so blatantly and expect to survive as trusted player. Using GIS and GPS to make flying safer is a positive civilian use of the technology, but if those planes are carrying weapons of mass destruction (armed and dangerous), then we're certainly going to follow the chain of command right to the top and find out exactly what logic is driving this design decision -- like why are you wearing a gun coming into a crowded civilian restaurant Mr. CEO President? People who want to flaunt terrifying weaponry had better come clean under interrogation, or own up to a "terrorist" charge -- applied without regard for skin color, creed, or place of origin. The econosphere has become very sophisticated and techno- logical, all the more delicate and sensitive as a result of the human presence. We could have a pretty good world here in fact, if we're willing to treat it with the respect owing any high precision instrument. People who plan to simply barrel ahead with lethal weapons planning, come what may, need to provide some iron clad logic for this course or their trackers and backers simply will kiss them good buy (and good riddance) for failing to offer any credible scenarios worth funding. Big ticket weaponry just doesn't have that same sex appeal anymore, has "boondoggle" written on it even before they get off the drawing board. Like "who's gonna pay for this shit?" is the first question smart money asks. Best to not hide behind "national security" shields as in the past at this point, is what I advise the corporate R&D divisioins -- because now you know that security chiefs don't necessarily buy the company hype anymore. You better have it in writing where you got your orders, if you want to plead "not guilty" and pass the buck on up the line. So if you want to play profitable commerical games in the civilian sector, don't be so sure your weaponry subsidiaries will escape scrutiny, and don't count on preferential enforcement of statutes to protect your namebrand from being utterly trashed if you turn out to be defrauding the very people you make such a noise about wanting to protect. The people are waking up, some of them, and are finding out they don't like what's been taking place in their name. Kirby --------------------------------------------------------- Kirby T. Urner http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/kirby.html 4D Solutions http://www.teleport.com/~pdx4d/ [PGP OK] --------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:46:44 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199801090201.UAA06101@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 6:01 PM -0800 1/8/98, Jim Choate wrote: >Don't be confused by Timy's claim to be a scientist, he is a technologist at >heart. Many of his views and beliefs are motivated by issues of control *not* >curiosity. .... >You don't know Timmy very well do you... Add Choate to the list of dimbulbs who think calling me "Timmy" (or Timy) is some kind of witty insult. On this list, Detweiler and Vulis seem to favor this usage. Next he'll be putting out ASCII art Jeez, and I don't even recall insulting Choate. Perhaps he got his nose out of joint when I challenged his "all snipers use .223" piece of misinformation. Back in my killfile he goes. Incredible that he is even connected with one of the Cypherpunks distribution points. BTW, nowhere in my piece did I refer to myself as a "scientist." I spoke of Wiles, and then of Gauss, Fermat, and Darwin. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Blanc Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 14:10:27 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980108220504.00707df8@cnw.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain NuriLogical is anguished that some people are immoral: >all this is uninteresting to me-- I was making a moral point in an >essay that is obviously unintelligable to most people here. its my >big mistake in this world, to pretent that morality plays a role. >as EH once said, normative philosophies are a waste of time. what >room does the world have for someone who thinks only in terms >of how things should be? things ARE, PERIOD. good lord, no wonder >Ayn Rand is so uninfluential. ................................................................. As your hero and biggest fan, EH, said: cypherpunks do not wait for other people to become moral; cypherpunks create their own reality. (or something to that effect) How can we know which flaw (for there are many possible) causes a person - scientific or otherwise - to behave like a coward and give up their integrity for the sake of safety or money or an undeserved reputation? How can we know how someone could keep a contradiction in their head, maintaining a position of virtue in the commuity while yet depending on the slavery of those whose benefit they purport to be working for? I guess you will tell us this in your forthcoming article. (Perry, where are you when we need you? :>) just kidding!!) BTW, you should consider that when Einstein proposed the creation of a bomb, it was within the context of a war being advanced globally by an evil madman who was gathering every resource to subdue and decimate everything in his way, and that the rest of the world was desperate for a solution. Also you should remember that some brilliant people, like Newton, who was a shy man and didn't necessarily see himself as others did/do, did not care if anyone else saw the results of his work. Once he had solved the problems in his own mind, he was not exceptionally concerned that others were also struggling with the same, nor whether "the community" needed the answer. He was pursuing knowledge for reasons of his own. .. Blanc From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:11:54 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Jalon'sWorld and Evil Money Laundering In-Reply-To: <85256586.0081E136.00@openworld.com> Message-ID: <30s1ie11w165w@bwalk.dm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain jalonz@openworld.com writes: > BTW, The Digital Society Group has been selected to deploy the entire > Digital Society Package within the new Agulhas Bay Free Zone in the > People's Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe. Cool. Do you possibly happen to know a source for historical time series: Sa~o Tome Dorba exchange rates to USD and also interest rates at different tenors? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:20:30 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <199801090442.WAA06633@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 19:26:11 -0800 > From: Tim May > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality > "Name me one..."? How about Gauss, who didn't publish many of his results. > Or, of course, Fermat, ironically linked to Wiles. True, Gauss didn't publish many of his results and he wasn't famed for that either. He *was* famed because he *did* publish some of his works. In fact, if you study Gauss you find a insecure introvert who in general hated his competition. He lied in his correspondance about work he supposedly did (see his relations with Bolyai who was a friend of his from school - "Non-euclidean Geometry" by Roberto Bonola; Dover ISBN 0-486-60027-0 $5.50). Yes, Gauss was respected for his math, he was hated for his humanity, or lack thereof. If anything Gauss' bahaviour held back science because of his self-interest. Fermat in general published most of his work, however, much of it was lost including his proof. His statement was that it was too long to be written in the margin of the book, not that he didn't write it down. The implication being that he *had* written it down and it got misplaced or lost it. Both of these folks are *very* poor examples of your point. > Not to mention Darwin, who sat on his results for almost 20 years, and only > issued a paper and his famed book because he learned another naturalist was > about to announce similar conclusions. Darwin set on his results because he was aware of the results of his work and the consequence to his career. He felt he needed more stature and as a consequence more security before publishing. He also understood he was right and that the first to publish would go down in history and the second would be an also ran. If you study the others alive at the time there were many people who had suggested similar theories. His own uncle had written similar material several decades before Darwin ever set foot on the Beagle. Darwin didn't invent evolution, he did refine it. Further, Darwin *isn't* know in the scientific community for his two books intended for lay readers. He *is* known for his seminal study of finches and mollusks, both quite clearly demonstrate his beliefs and theories and both had a much bigger impact on the scientific acceptance of evolution than 'Species' ever hoped to have. You are confusing the acceptance by the lay public as equivalent to scientific acceptance. You really should read Mayr. Again, a bad example. > Publication and, more importantly, discussion and challenge, is often very > important to the advancement of science. But is some cast in stone > requirement? Of course not. Actualy the open discussion of hypothesis and the testing thereof in open and unbiased comparison by indipendant researchers *is* most certainly a requirement in science - your protest not withstanding. > Building an artifact which embodies the science, for example. Exploding an > atom bomb was pretty clearly a demonstration that the science done was > correct, regardless of whether there was "open literature" or not. Don't confuse the science of atomic physics with the engineering of building a bomb. They are not the same thing. The majority of the work done to succesfuly understand an atomic bomb was known world wide in the 1920's and early '30's. The engineering to do it along with the money and project management skills motivated by the political where with all to actualy do it didn't. You are confusing affect and effect. > This is just too easy, refuting Detweiler's points. So I'll stop here. Thanks. My smashed finger is starting to hurt and your points are pretty easy to refute as well. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:15:09 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Schneier's metrocard cracked Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I heard on the radio that the security scheme used in New York City metrocards (designed with much input frm Bruce Schneier) has been cracked and that the "hackers" can now add fare to the cards. Does anyone know any details? What encryption did Schneier use? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:28:38 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <199801090451.WAA06712@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 19:05:21 -0800 > From: David Honig > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality > chooses. The universe owes you nothing. That depends on your personal philosophy, or are you claiming to have found "The Way"? (that's rhetorical, please don't respond since the consequencial discussion leads nowhere that we aren't already) > Your goals and alliances are yours to choose. You got to choose your family and what country you were born in and how much money you have? Cool, you should consider yourself truly blessed, in the several 10's of thousands of years of humanity you are the first so gifted. > Everyone picks what they are comfortable with, and it ain't your business > what they decide. No one is > obligated to agree with you. And everyone is > obligated to let you alone, unless you violate their > right to be left alone. But you know this. No, everyone doesn't pick what they are comfortable with. Only somebody that takes their station in life with its consimmitent spoils as a given would say something this idiotic. Nobody is obliged to let you alone unless they decide to of their own volition. It only takes one to make war (the old saying is wrong) it takes two to make peace. And man being what he is wants his own way even at the expense of somebody elses way. Such is the trials and tribulations of social animals. > On secrecy, Saint Chas. Darwin sat on evolution forever, until he reviewed > a paper that was going to scoop him, you know. Oh god, somebody else who hasn't studied Darwin or Meyr.... I covered the rebuttal to this commen folk tale in a reply to Timmy. Look for it... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 13:09:17 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199801090201.UAA06101@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Jim Choate writes: The Nuriweiller wrote: > > if so, they are not SCIENTISTS. a key aspect of SCIENCE is publishing > > results. science cannot advance without it. name me one scientist > > who did not publish an important result, or is considered a good > > scientists for doing so! > > I must agree here. If a technologist (ie one who studies science for > profit, hence creating a technology) chooses not to publish their results > that is fine. However, a scientist is one who studies nature and its > interactions, profit is not and should not be a motive. Simplistic or not; > in fact some things are better understood when simplified (ala the > scientific principle). A scientist has an obligation to discuss and publish > their results for other scientists (and even technologist) when they are > reasonably sure their results will stand up to indipendant verification (a > critical issue in science, not in technology however). > > Don't be confused by Timy's claim to be a scientist, he is a technologist at > heart. Many of his views and beliefs are motivated by issues of control *not* > curiosity. That's a very interesting idea. Consider Fischer Black, who passed away a couple of years ago. His most important contribution to science was the basic Black-Sholes equation. What were his direct economic rewards for having come up with it? Not much, really. He was already a tenured full professor at MIT. However as the result of his discovery he got hired away by Goldman Sachs as a VP, and later became a full partner. He did quite a bit of work at GS; none of it as spectacular as the Black-Scholes equation; almost none of it published in the open literature. Can we say that the bulk of his $50 million was for the research he did while at MIT and not at Goldman (and which benefited everyone in the industry, not just Goldman)? Did Goldman bet that Black would deliver results comparable in importance to the B-S equation, which Goldman would keep proprietary? Did Goldman win this bet (meaning, we wouldn't really know if they did)? I know another guy whom I won't name because he's still alive. He too is a tenured professor and has published numerous papers in refereed journals. His results are used by many people in the financial industry to make money. A few years ago he made an interesting discovery in statistics. Instead of publishing it, he and his coauthor took it to some investors and showed them how to make lots of money trading on these results. The investors then said, basically: yes we signed a nondisclosure agreement, but now that we know what this is about, we're going to use it and we won't pay you a penny and you don't have the money to sue us. Which is precisely what happened; the result is still not published, but is slowly circulating through the quant investing community. The same guy informed me later that he discovered a closed-form solution to some very interesting problems 9related to Black-Scholes) which according to the open literature either can't be done accurately at all, or require incredible amounts of cpu time for monte carlo simulations. he doesn't wish tio publish it (although it would make him quite a celebrity) and now he's going crazy trying to figure out a way to sell it in such a way that he can't get screwed again. How would crypto help if at all? Oh and by the way I suspect that a few minor crypto ideas in my PhD thesis were known to certain British cryptographers in the 30s but never published in the open literature. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Blanc Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 15:07:38 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980108230250.00698184@cnw.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >The same guy informed me later that he discovered a closed-form solution to >some very interesting problems 9related to Black-Scholes) which according to >the open literature either can't be done accurately at all, or require >incredible amounts of cpu time for monte carlo simulations. he doesn't >wish tio publish it (although it would make him quite a celebrity) and >now he's going crazy trying to figure out a way to sell it in such a way >that he can't get screwed again. How would crypto help if at all? ........................................................... I don't know about crypto, but I just attended a very informative financial forum on protecting intellectual property, presented by two representatives from Arthur Andersen and Preston Gates & Ellis, LLP. I picked up a little brochure which the attorney firm had available for attendees: We counsel and represent inventors, authors, publishers, visual artists, and musicians as they face a host of new and important issues. Preston Gates attorneys negotiate the use of creative expression in the full range of media, from CD-Roms and on-line services to interactive television and video games. We monitor and advise clients on developments in consumer protection, defamation, infringement, and other legal areas that affect their ability to develop and market creative properties. {etc} web site: www.prestongates.com, email: infotech@prestongates.com .. Blanc From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Mark Rogaski Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:21:47 +0800 To: bill.stewart@pobox.com Subject: Re: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980108000200.0084fab0@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199801090404.XAA18655@deathstar.jabberwock.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- An entity claiming to be Bill Stewart wrote: : : At 07:19 PM 1/5/98 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: : >"Evolution in action." : >Thank you, Michael Kennedy, for improving humanity's gene pool. : : It's only evolution in action if it gets them before they've reproduced... : Actually, natural selection in action ... - -- [] Mark Rogaski "That which does not kill me [] wendigo@pobox.com only makes me stranger." [] [] finger wendigo@deathstar.jabberwock.org for PGP key [] anti spambot: postmaster@localhost abuse@localhost uce@ftc.gov -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNLWhyXzbrFts6CmBAQH8LQf8D09nOXOktV6P0uCEPKmRc8zc4ho2aXHF t/WhFtgVWIdKNtBqwEYjIy+nS+4Q5Pfj0ZqI2Lj6JVJOpX8B5AqbhiTna7etws4y RhfNMWN1jfA1JHs5BdEnOI5YrkR6HFD9NwtgGIt5sirinuH9kQ5YucxeydOdBw8w mbN1U614rhAaehnVXSQ9v68eTuTWvdeJ+nuLRYblr5JNGsyPvlj3Fb8fQ+9kSod8 o2NCVCkOi3IQzAQWWbyBDS8RWsq77ZR15MRZAN/U5gn5s0Fz8R5Ym3wayEV6CYLv nZ7rtoEEXyM6yjubvVZJB6jYtsE5TJVegO+k0vlocV6jKYsLFxsFtg== =2T8G -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Brian B. Riley" Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:36:18 +0800 To: "Robert A. Costner" Subject: Re: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto Message-ID: <199801090428.XAA02677@mx02.together.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On 1/8/98 3:26 PM, Robert A. Costner (pooh@efga.org) passed this wisdom: >At 10:45 AM 1/8/98 -0800, David Miller wrote: >>> An interesting feature of the digital postmark is that the USPS was making >>> the claim that if you receive an email that the USPS send to you that was >>> not meant for you, then you have committed a federal crime when you read >it. >> >>I'm not so sure about this, Robert. I've heard the rumor that it is a crime, >>but I have also heard that if something is delivered to your box, it is yours >>and you are not required to send it back unopened if it is not addressed to >>you. I tend to believe the latter, as it is the side of the story shared by >>USPS employees. > >I wasn't commenting on the legality, but on the fact that the USPS web page >was making the claim that it was a crime. Apparently whoever wrote the >legal disclaimer felt that email could be misdelivered in the same fashion >in which postal mail could be misdelivered and was making this claim. I >found the claim to be nutty and made me think they didn't know what they >were doing. Maybe they are confusing an electronic mailbox with a snailmail box ... the USPS has always contended that they (the USPS) "own" your mailbox and use that criterion to prosecute people who drive around putting things like circulars etc in mailboxes. Maybe they we on a role thinking that if they got into the e-mail business they would 'own' that piece of your hard drive so to speak. Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys The Windows PC Versus Macintosh Buying Decision: "If you want to encourage your kids to color outside the lines, think creatively and zig when the other kids zag, get the Mac. On the other hand, if you want to teach your kid that life if full of frustration and that anything worth getting takes plenty of patience and hard work, a Windows machine should do quite nicely." - David Plotnikoff in the San Jose Mercury News From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Information Security Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 13:02:03 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Schneier's metrocard cracked Message-ID: <199801090440.XAA09818@panix2.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Dr. Dim wrote: > > I heard on the radio that the security scheme used in New York City metrocards > (designed with much input frm Bruce Schneier) has been cracked and that the > "hackers" can now add fare to the cards. > > Does anyone know any details? What encryption did Schneier use? It sounds like a procedural thing. Something like there was a way to swipe cards and have the system wrongly think it updated the card. The city announced that every cardreader in the system is going to be recalibrated, and this will cause problems for "a few" existing cardholders. ---guy From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:55:20 +0800 To: nobody@replay.com (Anonymous) Subject: Re: Remailers & N.E.T. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sure. That provision of the CDA was not meant to apply to remailer operators but online services, which cut a deal on that bill. Prosecutors would point, I suspect, to legislative intent and say remailer operators aren't covered; they'd say the text of the law is not unambiguous. It is not an impenetrable shield against time in Club Fed. -Declan At 03:51 +0100 1/9/98, Anonymous wrote: >On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >> I would be very afraid of relying on the CDA's immunizing provisions as my >> sole defense against prosecution, conviction, and jail time, were I a >> remailer operator. >Could you clarify what you mean by that? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 13:28:20 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation In-Reply-To: <199801090404.XAA18655@deathstar.jabberwock.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mark Rogaski writes: > An entity claiming to be Bill Stewart wrote: > : > : At 07:19 PM 1/5/98 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > : >"Evolution in action." > : >Thank you, Michael Kennedy, for improving humanity's gene pool. > : > : It's only evolution in action if it gets them before they've reproduced... > : > > Actually, natural selection in action ... Same thing... --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 14:20:09 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199801090442.WAA06633@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Jim Choate writes: > > From: Tim May > > > "Name me one..."? How about Gauss, who didn't publish many of his results. > > Or, of course, Fermat, ironically linked to Wiles. > > True, Gauss didn't publish many of his results and he wasn't famed for that > either. He *was* famed because he *did* publish some of his works. In fact, > if you study Gauss you find a insecure introvert who in general hated his > competition. He lied in his correspondance about work he supposedly did (see > his relations with Bolyai who was a friend of his from school - > "Non-euclidean Geometry" by Roberto Bonola; Dover ISBN 0-486-60027-0 $5.50). > Yes, Gauss was respected for his math, he was hated for his humanity, or > lack thereof. If anything Gauss' bahaviour held back science because of his > self-interest. Janos Bolyai was the son of the math professor Farkas B. in Buda(best). While an undergraduate, he was working with a fellow named Szasz on non-euclidean geometry. In 1832 he published his findings as an appendix to his father's textbook. he did show that Euclid's axiom about parallel lines is independent of the others and did explore the geometry that arises if you omit this axiom. According to my sources, the appendix is "Wronski-like" to the point of unreadability. Apparently no one actually read it until B. started arguing about who did what first. The Russian mathematician Lobachavsky, in Kazan, came up with very similar results at the same time. He announced them at a talk in 1826 and published them in 1829. he was clearly first. There's no evidence that B. knew of L.'s results; these ideas were coming naturally from the work of the other mathematicians at this time. In 1837 B. submitted a paper on quaternions to some sort of competition; it received a very nagative review, which caused him to go crazy. He started working on logical foundations of geometry in weird ways, setting himself goals that he couldn't achieve. Then in 1940 he came across a German translation of Lobachevsky's paper on non-eucldiean geometry. he went totally bonkers, claiming that a) Lobachevsky is not a real person, but a "tentacle" of Gauss; b) that gauss is out to nail him, b) that their result is wrong anyway (although he never explained how). He died relatively young and totally insane. As someone pointed out, much of gauss's writings were not published until after his death. The folsk researching his notes were shocked to discover that Gauss did actually come up with very similar non-euclidean geometry ideas as early as 1818 (not surprisingly - these ideas were literally floating in the air). However he chose not to publish them, not realizing how important they would be, and also fearing that they woudn't be well accepted by his peers. Neither Bolyai nor Lobachevsky knew about Gauss's work. I have no idea what Bonola wrote, but if he's just repeating the allegations Bolyai made about Gauss while suffering from depression and paranoia, they have no more truth in them than the Timmy May rants on this mailing list. By the way, the same gossip prompted the Tom Lehrer song about Lobachevsky. I also don't see how Bolyai could have been gauss's chool friend, being 25 years younger than K.F. And it's not a dichotomy; it's a trichotomy: one can * do research and publish the results in a refereed journal. This is of use only for tenue-track faculty who need to publish to get tenured. Many refereed journals are extrmely political, with "friends" being published ahead of the queue, and "strangers" kept waiting for a couple of years while the "friends" can be advised of the manuscripts and publish their own version of the results. * do research on some practical problems whose solution interests some wealthy folks. Most tenured faculty dream of doing that; many actually do. * do research for fun/as a hobby; some wealthy folks do that, or pay others to do that. > Fermat in general published most of his work, however, much of it was lost > including his proof. His statement was that it was too long to be written in > the margin of the book, not that he didn't write it down. The implication > being that he *had* written it down and it got misplaced or lost it. Fermat was a judge. He did math for fun. (Strictly speaking, he did a lot his mathematical research to facilitate his gambling hobby - at the time when securities investment was viewed as a form of gambling no different from cards, dice, horse races, dog fights/races, cock fights, etc. How is Timmy's bet that INTC will fall (and shorting it, if he's got any brains) different from some Jose's bet that the rooster named Pedro will rip out the guts of the rooster named Jorge? I've known sports gamblers who would bet tens of thusands of dollars on a single game, and they also invested in securities; and the research they did before betting $40K on a basketball game was comparable to the research before taking a similar risk on stocks or bonds. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Blanc Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:56:18 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980109000033.0070a820@cnw.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Jim Choate wrote, regarding Newton: >He certainly went to great pains to publish it, even anonymously in some >cases and out of his own pocket. ............................................................... Okay, just this one reply on this subject, Jim. Taken from "The World of Mathematics", and article entitled "Newton, the Man", by John Maynard Keynes: " His deepest instincts were occult, esoteric, semantic - with profound shrinking from the world, a paralyzing fear of exposing his thoughts, his beliefs, his discoveries in all nakedness to the inspection and criticism of the world. 'Of the most fearful, cautious and suspicious temper that I ever knew', said Whiston, his successor in the Lucasian Chair. The too well-known conflicts and ignoble quarrels with Hooke, Flamsteed, Leibnitz are only too clear an evidence of this. Like all his type he was wholly aloof from women. He parted with and published nothing except under the extreme pressure of friends. Until the second phase of his life, he was a wrapt, consecrated solitary, pursuing his studies by intenese introspection with a mental endurance perhaps never equalled. [...] There is the story of how he informed Halley of one of his most fundamental discoveries of planetary motion. 'Yes', replied Halley, 'but how do you know that? Have you proved it?' Newton was taken aback - 'Why, I've known it for years', he replied. 'If you'll give me a few days, I'll certainly find you a proof of it' - as in due course he did." .. Blanc From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Lucky Green Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 08:28:43 +0800 To: Bill Frantz Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, 7 Jan 1998, Bill Frantz wrote: > I don't plan on using it, but the Swedes have a bit of an installed base > problem. Lotus made not secret of their GAK implementation in Notes. If the Swedish government bought Notes anyway, they have only themselves and the incompetence of their IS people to blame. Now they have to scrap a recently fielded system. Though luck. Better solutions than Notes were out there and easily to be found by the most casual buyer. -- Lucky Green PGP v5 encrypted email preferred. "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Crisavec Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:48:28 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980109002532.0084c330@alaska.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain William H. Geiger III typethed the following... > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >In <19980107001651.29456@songbird.com>, on 01/07/98 > at 03:16 AM, Kent Crispin said: > >>On Wed, Jan 07, 1998 at 01:25:45AM -0600, snow wrote: >>> > I am fairly certain that as an irregular army soldier I could inflict >>> > a substantial amount of damage upon an occupying military. With maybe >>> > $20k in equipment and several hundred hours of training, you could make >>> >>> If you were smart, you could do it for a lot less. > >>That presumes the enemy is dumb. An amusing fantasy. > >The fact that they collect a paycheck from the government is prima facie >evidence of diminished mental capacity. Don't bet on.... There is only one war, and it's not between the whites and the blacks, Labour and the Conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, or the Federation and the Romulans, it's between those of us who aren't complete idiots and those of us who are. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 14:03:44 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <199801090626.AAA07213@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 20:41:47 -0800 > From: Tim May > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) > Add Choate to the list of dimbulbs who think calling me "Timmy" (or Timy) > is some kind of witty insult. On this list, Detweiler and Vulis seem to > favor this usage. We're awful testy tonite aren't we...believe me junior, if I want to jump in your shit I'll do it direct first person and in your face. Since it seems to have got stuck in your craw, I apologize for not asking you the correct usage of your name prior to typing it into my reply. In the future I think I'll use 'that crazy indipendently wealthy ex-Intel technologist and self-important testy gun nut that lives in California who almost got to see John Denvers plane crash'; is *that* ok with you? (not really, I think my fingers would cramp) > Jeez, and I don't even recall insulting Choate. Perhaps he got his nose out > of joint when I challenged his "all snipers use .223" piece of > misinformation. Unfortunately, for you, I never made that claim (if anything you did regarding some comments I made about some police snipers liking .308's) and therefore you didn't get to refute it. Whatever strategy you're on regarding drugs and alcohol, reverse it; the dementia are back. > Back in my killfile he goes. Incredible that he is even connected with one > of the Cypherpunks distribution points. Been there before, I won't loose any sleep that is for shure. > BTW, nowhere in my piece did I refer to myself as a "scientist." I spoke of > Wiles, and then of Gauss, Fermat, and Darwin. Certainly not directly, but considering your background and past comments it is an assumption that is justified. You most certainly feel qualified to discuss the distinctions and consequences thereof. Me, I consider myself a scientist and have since I was about 6 years old. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Robert A. Costner" Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 13:47:37 +0800 To: Declan McCullagh Subject: Re: Remailers & N.E.T. In-Reply-To: <199801090251.DAA10017@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19980109004125.006a98ec@mail.atl.bellsouth.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:42 PM 1/8/98 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Sure. That provision of the CDA was not meant to apply to remailer >operators but online services, which cut a deal on that bill. Prosecutors >would point, I suspect, to legislative intent and say remailer operators >aren't covered; they'd say the text of the law is not unambiguous. I think it would be pretty hard to distinguish the Cracker Remailer from an Internet presence provider. If hotmail or tripod were to be covered under the CDA, then I would have to think Cracker would be as well. EFGA/Cracker offers accounts, has dedicated servers, and has no editorial control over content. At around 20,000 individual messages per week, I'd have to say we are as good of a small online service as anyone else - even if we only offer specialized services. Many ISPs only have 100 or so users and only about 1/6 of the connectivity of Cracker. -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh@efga.org http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 14:19:37 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Timmy May demonstrated his ignorance and stupidity by writing: > > At 6:01 PM -0800 1/8/98, Jim Choate wrote: > > >Don't be confused by Timy's claim to be a scientist, he is a technologist at > >heart. Many of his views and beliefs are motivated by issues of control *not > >curiosity. > .... > >You don't know Timmy very well do you... > > Add Choate to the list of dimbulbs who think calling me "Timmy" (or Timy) > is some kind of witty insult. On this list, Detweiler and Vulis seem to > favor this usage. I like to call Timmy "Timmy" necause it's fun to watch Timmy twitch. > Next he'll be putting out ASCII art +-----#--+ | O # | Which one is Guy Polis | |#__O | and which one is Timmy May? |._#_> \ | +-#------+ Stop AIDS! > Back in my killfile he goes. Incredible that he is even connected with one > of the Cypherpunks distribution points. When Timmy claims to killfile someone, it really means that he's paying a special obsessive-compulsive attention to anything that person writes. Here, Timmy, Timmy, Timmy! --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 14:29:49 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Darwin's preface (a short history of evolution) [fwd] Message-ID: <199801090653.AAA07502@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Hi, Below is the 3rd preface to Darwin's 'Species', in it he clearly gives credit to Wallace as a co-discover of evolutionary theory. Even to the point of co-presenting the work to the Linnean Society on July 1, 1858. Oh, Erazmus Darwin was Charles' grandfather not uncle. Sorry for any confusion. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| Forwarded message: > Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 00:46:47 -0600 > X-within-URL: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/origin/preface.html > The Origin of Species > Preface to the Third Edition > by Charles Darwin > > I will here give a brief sketch of the progress of opinion on the > Origin of Species. Until recently the great majority of naturalists > believed that species were immutable productions, and had been > separately created. This view has been ably maintained by many > authors. Some few naturalists, on the other hand, have believed that > species undergo modification, and that the existing forms of life are > the descendants by true generation of pre-existing forms. Passing over > allusions to the subject in the classical writers,(1) the first author > who in modern times has treated it in a scientific spirit was Buffon. > But as his opinions fluctuated greatly at different periods, and as he > does not enter on the causes or means of the transformation of > species, I need not here enter on details. > > Lamarck was the first man whose conclusions on the subject excited > much attention. This justly-celebrated naturalist first published his > views in 1801; he much enlarged them in 1809 in his "Philosophie > Zoologique,' and subsequently, in 1815, in the Introduction to his > "Hist. Nat. des Animaux sans Vertébres.' In these works he upholds the > doctrine that species, including man, are descended from other > species. He first did the eminent service of arousing attention to the > probability of all change in the organic, as well as in the inorganic > world, being the result of law, and not of miraculous interposition. > Lamarck seems to have been chiefly led to his conclusion on the > gradual change of species, by the difficulty of distinguishing species > and varieties, by the almost perfect gradation of forms in certain > groups, and by the analogy of domestic productions. With respect to > the means of modification, he attributed something to the direct > action of the physical conditions of life, something to the crossing > of already existing forms, and much to use and disuse, that is, to the > effects of habit. To this latter agency he seemed to attribute all the > beautiful adaptations in nature; -- such as the long neck of the > giraffe for browsing on the branches of trees. But he likewise > believed in a law of progressive development; and as all the forms of > life thus tend to progress, in order to account for the existence at > the present day of simple productions, he maintains that such forms > are now spontaneously generated.(2) > > Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, as is stated in his 'Life,' written by his > son, suspected, as early as 1795, that what we call species are > various degenerations of the same type. It was not until 1828 that he > published his conviction that the same forms have not been perpetuated > since the origin of all things. Geoffroy seems to have relied chiefly > on the conditions of life, or the 'monde ambiant' as the cause of > change. He was cautious in drawing conclusions, and did not believe > that existing species are now undergoing modification; and, as his son > adds, "C'est donc un problème à réserver entièrement à l'avenir, > supposé meme que l'avenir doive avoir prise sur lui.' > > In 1813, Dr W. C. Wells read before the Royal Society 'An Account of a > White female, part of whose skin resembled that of a Negro'; but his > paper was not published until his famous 'Two Essays upon Dew and > Single Vision' appeared in 1818. In this paper he distinctly > recognises the principle of natural selection, and this is the first > recognition which has been indicated; but he applies it only to the > races of man, and to certain characters alone. After remarking that > negroes and mulattoes enjoy an immunity from certain tropical > diseases, he observes, firstly, that all animals tend to vary in some > degree, and, secondly, that agriculturists improve their domesticated > animals by selection; and then, he adds, but what is done in this > latter case 'by art, seems to be done with equal efficacy, though more > slowly, by nature, in the formation of varieties of mankind, fitted > for the country which they inhabit. Of the accidental varieties of > man, which would occur among the first few and scattered inhabitants > of the middle regions of Africa, some one would be better fitted than > the others to bear the diseases of the country. This race would > consequently multiply, while the others would decrease; not only from > their inability to sustain the attacks of disease, but from their > incapacity of contending with their more vigorous neighbours. The > colour of this vigorous race I take for granted, from what has been > already said, would be dark. But the same disposition to form > varieties still existing, a darker and a darker race would in the > course of time occur: and as the darkest would be the best fitted for > the climate, this would at length become the most prevalent; if not > the only race, in the particular country in which it had originated.' > He then extends these same views to the white inhabitants of colder > climates. I am indebted to Mr Rowley, of the United States, for having > called my attention, through Mr Brace, to the above passage in Dr > Wells' work. > > The Hon. and Rev. W. Herbert, afterwards Dean of Manchester, in the > fourth volume of the 'Horticultural Transactions,' 1822, and in his > work on the 'Amaryllidaceae' (1837, pp. 19, 339), declares that > 'horticultural experiments have established, beyond the possibility of > refutation, that botanical species are only a higher and more > permanent class of varieties.' He extends the same view to animals. > The Dean believes that single species of each genus were created in an > originally highly plastic condition, and that these have produced, > chiefly by intercrossing, but likewise by variation, all our existing > species. > > In 1826 Professor Grant, in the concluding paragraph in his well-known > paper ('Edinburgh philosophical journal,' vol. xiv. p. 283) on the > Spongilla, clearly declares his belief that species are descended from > other species, and that they become improved in the course of > modification. This same view was given in his 55th Lecture, published > in the 'Lancet' in 1834. > > In 1831 Mr Patrick Matthew published his work on 'Naval Timber and > Arboriculture,' in which he gives precisely the same view on the > origin of species as that (presently to be alluded to) propounded by > Mr Wallace and myself in the 'Linnean journal,' and as that enlarged > in the present volume. Unfortunately the view was given by Mr Matthew > very briefly in scattered passages in an Appendix to a work on a > different subject, so that it remained unnoticed until Mr Matthew > himself drew attention to it in the 'Gardener's Chronicle,' on April > 7th, 1860. The differences of Mr Matthew's view from mine are not of > much importance; he seems to consider that the world was nearly > depopulated at successive periods, and then re-stocked; and he gives > as an alternative, that new forms may be generated ' without the > presence of any mould or germ of former aggregates.' I am not sure > that I understand some passages; but it seems that he attributes much > influence to the direct action of the conditions of life. He clearly > saw, however, the full force of the principle of natural selection. > > The celebrated geologist and naturalist, Von Buch, in his excellent > 'Description physique des Isles Canaries' (1836, p. 147), clearly > expresses his belief that varieties slowly become changed into > permanent species, which are no longer capable of intercrossing. > > Rafinesque, in his 'New Flora of North America,' published in 1836, > wrote (p. 6) as follows:- 'All species might have been varieties once, > and many varieties are gradually becoming species by assuming constant > and peculiar characters'; but farther on (p. 18) he adds, 'except the > original types or ancestors of the genus.' > > In 1843-44 Professor Haldeman ('Boston journal of Nat. Hist. U. > States, vol. iv. p. 468) has ably given the arguments for and against > the hypothesis of the development and modification of species: he > seems to lean towards the side of change. > > The 'Vestiges of Creation' appeared in 1844. In the tenth and much > improved edition (1853) the anonymous author says (p. 155):- 'The > proposition determined on after much consideration is, that the > several series of animated beings, from the simplest and oldest up to > the highest and most recent, are, under the providence of God, the > results, first, of an impulse which has been imparted to the forms of > life, advancing them, in definite times, by generation, through grades > of organisation terminating in the highest dicotyledons- and > vertebrata, these grades being few in number, and generally marked by > intervals of organic character, which we find to be a practical > difficulty in ascertaining affinities; second, of another impulse > connected with the vital forces, tending, in the course of > generations, to modify organic structures in accordance with external > circumstances, as food, the nature of the habitat, and the meteoric > agencies, these being the ''adaptations'' of the natural theologian.' > The author apparently believes that organisation progresses by sudden > leaps, but that the effects produced by the conditions of life are > gradual. He argues with much force on general grounds that species are > not immutable productions. But I cannot see how the two supposed > 'impulses' account in a scientific sense for the numerous and > beautiful co-adaptations which we see throughout nature; I cannot see > that we thus gain any insight how, for instance, a woodpecker has > become adapted to its peculiar habits of Life. The work, from its > powerful and brilliant style, though displaying in the earlier > editions little accurate knowledge and a great want of scientific > caution, immediately had a very wide circulation. In my opinion it has > done excellent service in this country in calling attention to the > subject, in removing prejudice, and in thus preparing the ground for > the reception of analogous views. > > In 1846 the veteran geologist N. J. d'Omalius d'Halloy published in an > excellent though short paper ("Bulletins de l'Acad. Roy Bruxelles,' > tom. xiii. p. 581) his opinion that it is more probable that new > species have been produced by descent with modification than that they > have been separately created: the author first promulgated this > opinion in 1831. > > Professor Owen, in 1849 ('Nature of Limbs,' p. 86), wrote as follows:- > "The archetypal idea was manifested in the flesh under diverse such > modifications, upon this planet, long prior to the existence of those > animal species that actually exemplify it. To what natural laws or > secondary causes the orderly succession and progression of such > organic phenomena may have been committed, we, as yet, are ignorant.' > In his Address to the British Association, in 1858, he speaks (p. li.) > of "the axiom of the continuous operation of creative power, or of the > ordained becoming of living things.' Farther on (p. xc.), after > referring to geographical distribution, he adds, 'These phenomena > shake our confidence in the conclusion that the Apteryx of New Zealand > and the Red Grouse of England were distinct creations in and for those > islands respectively. Always, also, it may be well to bear in mind > that by the word ''creation'' the zoologist means '"a process he knows > not what.'' He amplifies this idea by adding that when such cases as > that of the Red Grouse are enumerated by the zoologists as evidence of > distinct creation of the bird in and for such islands, he chiefly > expresses that he knows not how the Red Grouse came to be there, and > there exclusively; signifying also, by this mode of expressing such > ignorance, his belief that both the bird and the islands owed their > origin to a great first Creative Cause.' If we interpret these > sentences given in the same Address, one by the other, it appears that > this eminent philosopher felt in 1858 his confidence shaken that the > Apteryx and the Red Grouse first appeared in their respective homes, > 'he knew not how,' or by some process 'he knew not what.' > > This Address was delivered after the papers by Mr Wallace and myself > on the Origin of Species, presently to be referred to, had been read > before the Linnean Society. When the first edition of this work was > published, I was so completely deceived, as were many others, by such > expressions as 'the continuous operation of creative power,' that I > included Professor Owen with other palaeontologists as being firmly > convinced of the immutability of species; but it appears ('Anat. of > Vertebrates,' vol. iii. p. 796) that this was on my part a > preposterous error. In the last edition of this work I inferred, and > the inference still seems to me perfectly just, from a passage > beginning with the words 'no doubt the type-form,' &c. (Ibid. vol. i. > p. xxxv.), that Professor Owen admitted that natural selection may > have done something in the formation of a new species; but this it > appears (Ibid. vol. nl. p. 798) is inaccurate and without evidence. I > also gave some extracts from a correspondence between Professor Owen > and the Editor of the 'London Review,' from which it appeared manifest > to the Editor as well as to myself, that Professor Owen claimed to > have promulgated the theory of natural selection before I had done so; > and I expressed my surprise and satisfaction at this announcement; but > as far as it is possible to understand certain recently published > passages (Ibid. vol. iii. p. 798) I have either partially or wholly > again fallen into error. It is consolatory to me that others find > Professor Owen's controversial writings as difficult to understand and > to reconcile with each other, as I do. As far as the mere enunciation > of the principle of natural selection is concerned, it is quite > immaterial whether or not Professor Owen preceded me, for both of us, > as shown in this historical sketch, were long ago preceded by Dr Wells > and Mr Matthews. > > M. Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, in his lectures delivered in 1850 > (of which a Résumé appeared in the 'Revue et Nag. de Zoolog.,' Jan. > 1851), briefly gives his reason for believing that specific characters > "sont fixés, pour chaque espèce, tant qu'elle se perpétue au milieu > des mèmes circonstances: ils se modifient, si les circonstances > ambiantes viennent à changer.' 'En résumé, l'observation des animaux > sauvages démontre déjà la variabilité limité des espèces. Les > expériences sur les animaux sauvages devenus domestiques, et sur les > animaux domestiques redevenus sauvages, la démontrent plus clairement > encore. Ces memes expériences prouvent, de plus, que les différences > produites peuvent etre de valeur générique.' In his 'Hist. Nat. > Généralé (tom. ii. p. 430, 1859) he amplifies analogous conclusions. > > From a circular lately issued it appears that Dr Freke, in 1851 > ("Dublin Medical Press,' p. 322), propounded the doctrine that all > organic beings have descended from one primordial form. His grounds of > belief and treatment of the subject are wholly different from mine; > but as Dr Freke has now (1861) published his Essay on the 'Origin of > Species by means of Organic Affinity,' the difficult attempt to give > any idea of his views would be superfluous on my part. > > Mr Herbert Spencer, in an Essay (originally published in the 'Leader,' > March, 1852, and republished in his 'Essays,' in 1858), has contrasted > the theories of the Creation and the Development of organic beings > with remarkable skill and force. He argues from the analogy of > domestic productions, from the changes which the embryos of many > species undergo, from the difficulty of distinguishing species and > varieties, and from the principle of general gradation, that species > have been modified; and he attributes the modification to the change > of circumstances. The author (1855) has also treated psychology on the > principle of the necessary acquirement of each mental power and > capacity by gradation. > > In 1852 M. Naudin, a distinguished botanist, expressly stated, in an > admirable paper on the Origin of Species ('Revue Horticole, p. 102; > since partly republished in the 'Nouvelles Archives du Muséum,' tom. > i. p. 171), his belief that species are formed in an analogous manner > as varieties are under cultivation; and the latter process he > attributes to man's power of selection. But he does not show how > selection acts under nature. He believes, like Dean Herbert, that > species, when nascent, were more plastic than at present. He lays > weight on what he calls the principle of finality, 'puissance > mystérieuse, indéterminée; fatalité pour les uns; pour les autres > volonté providentielle, dont l'action incessante sur les ètres vivants > détermine, à toutes les époques de l'existence du monde, la forme, le > volume, et la durée de chacun d'eux, en raison de sa destinée dans > l'ordre de choses dont il fait partie. C'est cette puissance qui > harmonise chaque membre à l'ensemble, en l'appropriant à la fonction > qu'il doit remplir dans l'organisme général de la nature, fonction qui > est pour lui sa raison d'ètre.'(3) > > In 1853 a celebrated geologist, Count Keyserling ("Bulletin de la Soc. > Gèolog.,' 2nd Ser., tom. x. p. 357), suggested that as new diseases, > supposed to have been caused by some miasma, have arisen and spread > over the world, so at certain periods the germs of existing species > may have been chemically affected by circumambient molecules of a > particular nature, and thus have given rise to new forms. > > In this same year, 1853, Dr Schaaffhausen published an excellent > pamphlet ('Verhand. des Naturhist. Vereins der preuss. Rheinlands,' > &c.), in which he maintains the development of organic forms on the > earth. He infers that many species have kept true for long periods, > whereas a few have become modified. The distinction of species he > explains by the destruction of intermediate graduated forms. 'Thus > living plants and animals are not separated from the extinct by new > creations, but are to be regarded as their descendants through > continued reproduction.' > > A well-known French botanist, M. Lecoq, writes in 1854 ('Etudes sur > Géograph. Bot.,' tom. i. p. 250), 'On voit que nos recherches sur la > fixité ou la variation de l'espèce, nous conduisent directement aux > idées émises, par deux hommes justement célèbres, Geoffroy > Saint-Hilaire et Goethe.' Some other passages scattered through M. > Lecoq's large work, make it a little doubtful how far he extends his > views on the modification of species. > > The 'Philosophy of Creation' has been treated in a masterly manner by > the Rev. Baden Powell, in his "Essays on the Unity of Worlds,' 1855. > Nothing can be more striking than the manner in which he shows that > the introduction of new species is "a regular, not a casual > phenomenon,' or, as Sir John Herschel expresses it, 'a natural in > contradistinction to a miraculous, process.' > > The third volume of the "Journal of the Linnean Society' contains > papers, read July 1st, 1858, by Mr Wallace and myself, in which, as > stated in the introductory remarks to this volume, the theory of > Natural Selection is promulgated by Mr Wallace with admirable force > and clearness. > > Von Baer, towards whom all zoologists feel so profound a respect, > expressed about the year 1859 (see Prof. Rudolph Wagner, a > "Zoologisch-Anthropologische Untersuchungen,' 1861, s. 51) his > conviction, chiefly grounded on the laws of geographical distribution, > that forms now perfectly distinct have descended from a single > parent-form. > > In June, 1859, Professor Huxley gave a lecture before the Royal > Institution on the 'Persistent Types of Animal Life.' Referring to > such cases, he remarks, "It is difficult to comprehend the meaning of > such facts as these, if we suppose that each species of animal and > plant, or each great type of organisation, was formed and placed upon > the surface of the globe at long intervals by a distinct act of > creative power; and it is well to recollect that such an assumption is > as unsupported by tradition or revelation as it is opposed to the > general analogy of nature. If, on the other hand, we view 'Persistent > Types' in relation to that hypothesis which supposes the species > living at any time to be the result of the gradual modification of > pre-existing species a hypothesis which, though unproven, and sadly > damaged by some of its supporters, is yet the only one to which > physiology lends any countenance; their existence would seem to show > that the amount of modification which living beings have undergone > during geological time is but very small in relation to the whole > series of changes which they have suffered.' > > In December, 1859, Dr Hooker published his 'Introduction to the > Australian Flora.' In the first part of this great work he admits the > truth of the descent and modification of species, and supports this > doctrine by many original observations. > > The first edition of this work was published on November 24th, 1859, > and the second edition on January 7th, 1860. > > Footnotes > > (1) Aristotle, in his 'Physicae Auscultationes' (lib. 2, cap. 8, s. > 2), after remarking that rain does not fall in order to make the corn > grow, any more than it falls to spoil the farmer's corn when threshed > out of doors, applies the same argument to organization: and adds (as > translated by Mr Clair Grece, who first pointed out the passage to > me), 'So what hinders the different parts [of the body] from having > this merely accidental relation in nature? as the teeth, for example, > grow by necessity, the front ones sharp, adapted for dividing, and the > grinders flat, and serviceable for masticating the food; since they > were not made for the sake of this, but it was the result of accident. > And in like manner as to the other parts in which there appears to > exist an adaptation to an end. Wheresoever, therefore, all things > together (that is all the parts of one whole) happened like as if they > were made for the sake of something, these were preserved, having been > appropriately constituted by an internal spontaneity, and whatsoever > things were not thus constituted, perished, and still perish. We here > see the principle of natural selection shadowed forth, but how little > Aristotle fully comprehended the principle, is shown by his remarks on > the formation of the teeth. > > (2) I have taken the date of the first publication of Lamarck from > Isid. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire's ('Hist. Nat. Générale,' tom. ii. p. > 405, 1859) excellent history of opinion on this subject. In this work > a full account is given of Buffon's conclusions on the same subject. > It is curious how largely my grandfather, Dr Erasmus Darwin, > anticipated the views and erroneous grounds of opinion of Lamarck in > his 'Zoonomia' (vol. i. pp. 500-510), published in 1794. According to > Isid. Geoffroy there is no doubt that Goethe was an extreme partisan > of similar views, as shown in the Introduction to a work written in > 1794 and 1795, but not published till long afterwards: he has > pointedly remarked ('Goethe als Naturforscher,' von Dr Karl Medinge s. > 34) that the future question for naturalists will be how, for > instance, cattle got their horns, and not for what they are used. It > is rather a singular instance of the manner in which similar views > arise at about the same time, that Goethe in Germany, Dr Darwin in > England, and Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (as we shall immediately see) in > France; came to the same conclusion on the origin of species, in the > years 1794-5. > > (3) From references in Bronn's 'Untersuchungen über die > Entwickenlungs-Gesetze,' it appears that the celebrated botanist and > palaeontologist Unger published, in 1852, his belief that species > undergo development and modification. Dalton, likewise, in Pander and > Dalton's work on Fossil Sloths, expressed, in 1821 a similar belief. > Similar views have, as is well known, been maintained by Oken in his > mystical 'Natur-philosophie.' From other references in Godron's work > 'Sur l'Espéce,' it seems that Bory St Vincent, Burdach, Poiret, and > Fries, have all admitted that new species are continually being > produced. > > I may add, that of the thirty-four authors named in this Historical > Sketch, who believe in the modification of species, or at least > disbelieve in separate acts of creation, twenty-seven have written on > special branches of natural history or geology. > > > Contents > Introduction > > > > > > > Home Page | Browse | Search | Feedback | Links > The FAQ | Must-Read Files | Index | Creationism | Evolution | Age of > the Earth | Flood Geology | Catastrophism | Debates > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 14:42:09 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <199801090707.BAA07580@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 22:06:38 -0800 > From: Blanc > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality > BTW, you should consider that when Einstein proposed the creation of a > bomb, it was within the context of a war being advanced globally by an evil > madman who was gathering every resource to subdue and decimate everything > in his way, and that the rest of the world was desperate for a solution. Um, actualy Einstein didn't propose a bomb. I believe Leo Szilard approached Einstein with a letter asking the President to begin an initiative. The motivation was because most of the really worthwhile German physicists working on the Nazi programs left the Nazi sphere. The fear was that since Germany had the *only* supply of heavy water in the world and the only state backed program in the field that if the US didn't do something they would loose the bomb in a series of bright flashes. I also, don't believe the war had actualy started when Einstein was approaced by Leo on Aug. 2, 1939. > Also you should remember that some brilliant people, like Newton, who was a > shy man and didn't necessarily see himself as others did/do, did not care > if anyone else saw the results of his work. He certainly went to great pains to publish it, even anonymously in some cases and out of his own pocket. > Once he had solved the > problems in his own mind, he was not exceptionally concerned that others > were also struggling with the same, nor whether "the community" needed the > answer. He was pursuing knowledge for reasons of his own. He pursued knowledge for deep religous reasons, according to his notes. Newton was also the Exchequer of England and had 3 peopled hanged for stealing gold from the government mint. He took the job because he had pissed so many people off at the time because of his attitude that he couldn't find work. It was prior to him becoming know as the 'Lion of England' and gaining life tenure. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 15:07:38 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <199801090731.BAA07695@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) > From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Date: Thu, 08 Jan 98 23:45:25 EST > > Janos Bolyai was the son of the math professor Farkas B. in Buda(best). Who also worked with Gauss and probably beat Gauss to any solution to the problem of non-euclidean geometry (see Kurzer Grundriss eines Versuchs, p. 46). > In 1832 he published his findings as an appendix > to his father's textbook. Actualy his father published it as an afterthought to get him to quit working on Euclids Parallels. It was published in Tomus Secundus (1833, pp. 265 - 322) written by his father. > arises if you omit this axiom. According to my sources, the appendix > is "Wronski-like" to the point of unreadability. Apparently no one > actually read it until B. started arguing about who did what first. Both John Bolyai's "The Science of Absolute Space" and Nicholas Lobachevski's "The Theory of Parallels" are included in Roberto Bonola's "Non-euclidean Geometry" (Dover, ISBN 0-486-60027-0 $5.50). I certainly had no problem reading the 3 combined books. I was just looking at the translators notes to Lobachevski, it was done by George Bruce Halsted of 2407 San Marcos St, Austin, Tx. May 1, 1891. > well accepted by his peers. Neither Bolyai nor Lobachevsky knew about > Gauss's work. Not true, Bolyai wrote him several letters as described in his book and the various prefaces. Lobachevski's book was promoted by Gauss as the first and truely critical work on non-euclidean geometry. In a rare show of magnamity Gauss even admits that Lobachevski's work exceeded his own. > I have no idea what Bonola wrote, but if he's just repeating the allegations > Bolyai made about Gauss while suffering from depression and paranoia, they > have no more truth in them than the Timmy May rants on this mailing list. He wrote a classic work on non-euclidean geometry that was quite popular in 1912 when it was printed. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:56:11 +0800 To: cypherpunks@algebra.com Subject: Re: [Censored] Quote of the Day (fwd) Message-ID: <6a88eb4a1c645a0937bc001a779b25d1@anon.efga.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain John Young wrote: >DPS sumbitch ran me down near DFW, me and my crap filled van, >my mangy hide and shaggy hair, my NY plates, my wildly dumped >substances, and sat behind for a few drags of AC in 100 degree heat, >miked in the number, adjusted his mirrors, tilted the vidcam skyward, >and climbed out, a big, very big widowmaker high on his fat ass, >hustled his privates, spat juice, and farted hard enough to quiver the >VW and me. I think John has been skipping his meds again. Come on, John, the pill is your friend! From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:55:56 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Remailers & N.E.T. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801090251.DAA10017@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Declan McCullagh wrote: > I would be very afraid of relying on the CDA's immunizing provisions as my > sole defense against prosecution, conviction, and jail time, were I a > remailer operator. Could you clarify what you mean by that? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Lucky Green Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 13:47:45 +0800 To: Jrbl Pookah Subject: Re: Encrypted Telephony Products In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, Jrbl Pookah wrote: > > > I've recently begun looking for internet telephony products that > employ reasonably secure encryption on-the-fly. Now, I've found Nautilus, > and PGPFone, but neither product appears to have been updated for quite a > while now. I was just wondering if anybody could give me recommendations > for more up-to-date products, and perhaps comparisons between those > available. The most popular encrypting Internet telephony product at the moment is SpeekFreely. http://www.fourmilab.ch/speakfree/windows/ Have fun, -- Lucky Green PGP v5 encrypted email preferred. "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: anonymous304@juno.com (Anony J Man) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 20:17:18 +0800 To: real@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19980109.065815.3334.0.anonymous304@juno.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, 8 Jan 1998 13:54:41 -0700 (MST) Graham-John Bullers writes: >On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Mix wrote: > >I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him. I think so too what's his email address????? Anonymous304 >> Tim C. May's reheated, refurbished, and regurgitated cud is >> completely inappropriate for the mailing lists into which it is >> cross-ruminated. >> >> | | >> | O | Tim C. May >> (--|--) >> | >> / \ >> > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Graham-John Bullers Moderator of >alt.2600.moderated >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > email : : > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 14:22:48 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Accounts payable Message-ID: <199801090607.HAA01799@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Timmy C[rook] May is just a poor excuse for an unschooled, retarded thug. (_) _____ (_) /O O\ Timmy C[rook] May ! I ! ! \___/ ! \_____/ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Secret Squirrel Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:56:14 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: a good example of bad crypto hype Message-ID: <7e0eaee2121f060fe7825adfc519b545@squirrel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >at http://www.meganet.com/explain.htm >you can test your critical thinking skills... Bawahahahaha. That's the biggest bunch of complete bullshit I've read in years. Thanks, Meganet, you made my night. They must be smoking crack and a lot of it. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ryan Lackey Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 21:42:54 +0800 To: David Honig Subject: Re: Jim Bell... lives... on... in... Hollywood! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain (David Honig) writes: > At 10:48 PM 1/7/98 -0800, Sergey Goldgaber wrote: > > > >1 - Anonymity is technically feasable. > > > >2 - This requirement is a legal necessity. Otherwise, the organization > > may be seen as advocating murder. > > > >Obviously, if the "Death Pool" was fully anonymous, there would be > >no way to tell if the winner had contributed in any way to the death. > > > >Thus, I think we may be well on our way to Assasination Politics. > > > > - Sergey Goldgaber > > I agree, but "contribute to death" needs to be operationalized. Here's a > proposal: > If a homicide suspect is arrested within N months, they will be isolated > from the net > and the owner of the winning ID will have to perform a challenge-response. > Since > the suspect couldn't have replied, they are different; if a pair > collaborated, well, > when a hit man is caught, his payoff matrix will usually make him turn in > the client. Given strong cryptography and something like my current Eternity DDS almost prototype (a reliable distributed way of selling storage-compute-bandwidth being the relevant part), why couldn't the incarcerated person have left an agent out on the net to handle the challenge for him, and hold the money in anonymous trust for him until he gets out? I can't think of any anonymity-preserving system which contains an "is-a-person" predicate -- even if you asked an AI-hard question, you could blind the question and post it to usenet or CNN or something and quote one of those responses (which would be wise to do anyway for styleometry prevention). The other option is having a non-anonymous system, or one that is anonymous until someone tries to collect the prize, but in that case, it's not all that interesting a problem. Ryan the Nightshifted -- Ryan Lackey rdl@mit.edu http://mit.edu/rdl/ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 23:02:50 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <199801091519.JAA08621@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 00:01:22 -0800 > From: Blanc > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) > " His deepest instincts were occult, esoteric, semantic - with profound > shrinking from the world, a paralyzing fear of exposing his thoughts, his > beliefs, his discoveries in all nakedness to the inspection and criticism > of the world. 'Of the most fearful, cautious and suspicious temper that I > ever knew', said Whiston, > The too > well-known conflicts and ignoble quarrels with Hooke, Flamsteed, Leibnitz > are only too clear an evidence of this. Would you or Keynes like to explain how such an aloof character could have had so many 'well-known' conflicts without publishing and discussing his and others work? How can somebody who supposedly never published have become so well know? I guess he got somebody else to stand in for him in the various discourses he partook of at the Royal Society meetings. > He parted with and published nothing except under the > extreme pressure of friends. I would suggest a simple trip to the library and look at what is published by Newton. If I get the chance I'll take a look and catalog some of the anonymous publishing that are attributed to him. It may take a while, this unfortunately can't reside very high on my list of priorities; sorry. > Until the second phase of his life, he was a > wrapt, consecrated solitary, pursuing his studies by intenese introspection > with a mental endurance perhaps never equalled. Would you or Keynes like to explain exactly how a government employee, ,as the Exchequer or as a Professor of Natural Philosophy (Physics) would remain solitary? I guess Newton went to the various mints (if memory serves at the time there were 3) and did his other duties including presenting cases in court related to theft and counterfeiting by proxy? > There is the story of how he informed Halley of one of his most fundamental > discoveries of planetary motion. 'Yes', replied Halley, 'but how do you > know that? Have you proved it?' Newton was taken aback - 'Why, I've known > it for years', he replied. 'If you'll give me a few days, I'll certainly > find you a proof of it' - as in due course he did." Yeah, Halley had just seen the comet and was trying to figure out it's orbit. He approached many people on the issue and Newton was the only one who could resolve the issue in England. Because of the long periodicity and the fact that Halley didn't have 3 sightings he couldn't use the standard orbit calculations. By using calculus, which Newton had invented and Halley didn't know, it was possible to calculate an envelope of orbits. Haley then researched records of sightings and determined that only one comet with a 75+ year orbit could be it. If Newton was so unknown from not publishing why did Halley even care to ask Newton? Halley was a pretty notable character in his own right. He was given a ship to do the first magnetic map of the N. Atlantic, he called it 'Paramour Pink' (Pink Lover). He and the prince of Russia would also push themselves around London in a wheelbarrow drunk as skunks... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:54:16 +0800 To: matrix@meganet.com Subject: a good example of bad crypto hype Message-ID: <199801090825.JAA16425@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >at http://www.meganet.com/explain.htm >you can test your critical thinking skills... Bawahahahaha. That's the biggest bunch of complete bullshit I've read in years. Thanks, Meganet, you made my night. They must be smoking crack and a lot of it. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 23:09:56 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <199801091529.JAA08683@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: Forwarded message: > Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1998 00:01:22 -0800 > From: Blanc > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) > " His deepest instincts were occult, esoteric, semantic - with profound > shrinking from the world, a paralyzing fear of exposing his thoughts, his > beliefs, his discoveries in all nakedness to the inspection and criticism > of the world. 'Of the most fearful, cautious and suspicious temper that I > ever knew', said Whiston, Sorry, I didn't think of this before... Did either Keynes or Whiston happen to mention that Newton was an alchemist? ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 02:22:06 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980109093824.007acbb0@206.40.207.40> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 12:42 AM 1/9/98 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >Timmy May demonstrated his ignorance and stupidity by writing: > >> >> At 6:01 PM -0800 1/8/98, Jim Choate wrote: >> >> >Don't be confused by Timy's claim to be a scientist, he is a technologist at >> >heart. Many of his views and beliefs are motivated by issues of control *not >> >curiosity. >> .... >> >You don't know Timmy very well do you... >> >> Add Choate to the list of dimbulbs who think calling me "Timmy" (or Timy) >> is some kind of witty insult. On this list, Detweiler and Vulis seem to >> favor this usage. > >I like to call Timmy "Timmy" necause it's fun to watch Timmy twitch. Didn't you have siblings to taunt as an adolescent? Didn't your mother tell you its not attractive? Haven't you learned that jabs at ideas are not the same at jabs at the person? ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ian Sparkes Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:56:08 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com Subject: Re: Silly Shrinkwrapped Encryption In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19980109094653.006a7a4c@q9f47.dmst02.telekom.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >Lotus made not secret of their GAK implementation in Notes. If the Swedish >government bought Notes anyway, they have only themselves and the >incompetence of their IS people to blame. > >Now they have to scrap a recently fielded system. Though luck. Better >solutions than Notes were out there and easily to be found by the most >casual buyer. > People buy Notes for the databases - the mail is just a freebie for most, a bit like the radio in your car. The mail's not even very good (adequate at most). Anyone know if the databases are encrypted with the same GAK scheme? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 02:22:39 +0800 To: Ryan Lackey Subject: Re: Jim Bell... lives... on... in... Hollywood! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980109094914.007b36b0@206.40.207.40> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 08:28 AM 1/9/98 -0500, Ryan Lackey wrote: > (David Honig) writes: > >> >> I agree, but "contribute to death" needs to be operationalized. Here's a >> proposal: >> If a homicide suspect is arrested within N months, they will be isolated >> from the net >> and the owner of the winning ID will have to perform a challenge-response. >> Since >> the suspect couldn't have replied, they are different; if a pair >> collaborated, well, >> when a hit man is caught, his payoff matrix will usually make him turn in >> the client. > >Given strong cryptography and something like my current Eternity DDS >almost prototype (a reliable distributed way of selling >storage-compute-bandwidth being the relevant part), why couldn't the >incarcerated person have left an agent out on the net to handle the >challenge for him, and hold the money in anonymous trust for him until >he gets out? I can't think of any anonymity-preserving system which >contains an "is-a-person" predicate -- even if you asked an AI-hard >question, you could blind the question and post it to usenet or CNN >or something and quote one of those responses (which would be wise to >do anyway for styleometry prevention). > >The other option is having a non-anonymous system, or one that is >anonymous until someone tries to collect the prize, but in that case, >it's not all that interesting a problem. > >Ryan the Nightshifted >-- >Ryan Lackey >rdl@mit.edu >http://mit.edu/rdl/ > I think this gets into legal issues. Consider fraudelent insurance and gambling schemes involving collaboration -illegal, but hard to detect unless someone turns. Consider a hit man who takes the fall for the boss, so that his family is taken care of. In these cases and in an AP scheme, the law can't prove much if certain parties collaborate. Maybe the winner of the "BATF agents blown up in 97" bet *is* John Doe III; but since the investigation claims no such person, and the winner is not in jail now, the winner has fairly earned their reward via their skill in actuarial matters. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 02:10:03 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: In God We Antitrust, from the Netly News In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 9:15 AM -0800 1/9/98, Declan McCullagh wrote: >In God We Antitrust >by Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com) > > Bill Gates likes to portray himself as a businessman hounded by > hordes of boorish bureaucrats who resent his success. "It's absolutely > clear that our competitors are spending an enormous amount of time and > money trying to whip up anti-Microsoft sentiment in Washington, D.C.," > says spokesman Mark Murray. "For the past year, Netscape, Sun and > other competitors have been crawling all over Washington, D.C., trying > to use the government as a weapon against Microsoft -- rather than > competing head-to-head in the marketplace." > > Of course, that's what you'd expect a PR flack to say, whether > it's true or not. But maybe, just maybe, Microsoft has a point. Of course they have a point. CNN reported yesterday that "popular sentiment" is shifting *against* Microsoft, that they are losing the war of words with Our Friend, The Government. The sheeple believe what the Government media machine spews. The "ganging up" on MS is the ganging up on anyone who is too successful and who doesn't play the game properly. (Some of us have already commented on how Microsoft's failure to tithe enough to the political machines may have something to do with their problems. Ironically, many companies have been indicte *bribery* charges (e.g., Lockheed, others) for doing what the political machines in Amerika expect to be done...only we call the bribes "voluntary" donations...sort of a political campaign version of "mandatory voluntary.") The next such battle will be about Intel, which, if anything, has even more of a commanding presence in the market than MS has. Besides "investigations" (a DC codeword meaning: "donate money to the ruling party"), the antitrust buzz is that the Intel-DEC deal may be scotched. Intel's failed competitors (Cyrix, AMD, Motorola, Sun, SGI/MIPS, Intergraph) can be counted on to run crying to Mother Government, crying that Intel is too successful. A truly fucked up country. We need to cut the head off the beast. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 00:54:39 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199801090731.BAA07695@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Jim Choate writes: > > From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > > Date: Thu, 08 Jan 98 23:45:25 EST > > > > Janos Bolyai was the son of the math professor Farkas B. in Buda(best). > > Who also worked with Gauss and probably beat Gauss to any solution to the > problem of non-euclidean geometry (see Kurzer Grundriss eines Versuchs, > p. 46). I'm sorry, I don't have the time to look this up. If you're trying to prove that Gauss was not a nice person, I don't believe it. And if the best argument you can make is to cite Bolyai's claims that Lobachevsky was not a real person but a "tentacle" of Gauss, created to persecute Bolyai (gee, that sounds vaguely familiar...), and you can't find any more dirt on Gauss, then it proves to me that he was indeed a remarkably nice person. Gauss rose from poverty to become one of the premier mathematicians of his time - in the era when sciences were considered a hobby suitable only for the noble-born and wealthy. Gauss did a lot to help other people in many ways, both as individuals, and in targeting his research to solve practical problems for good of the humanity. I was very fortunate to have met Paul Erdos and some living people whom I regard as mathematicial geniuses (not necessarily on par with Gauss); without exception their talents make them wonderful helpful people. You also haven't explained how Bolyai could have been Gauss's school friend, being 25 years younger. Crypto-relevant stuff: In 11-17 centuries, mathematicians who weren't independently wealthy, made their living by selling their service to/as "reckoners" (computers), accountants, bookkeepers, and astrologers. There was, you may recall, a similar dispute between Tartagla and some other Italian about who first discovered the formula for roots of 3rd order polynomials. This problem had some use in computing the internal rate of return (a practical accounting problem of interest at that time), but the main reason why each wanted to claim priority was for marketing reason: being its inventor would have enhanced their reputation and allowed them to charge higher fees or to get new clients for their bookkeeping businesses (because that's what they did for a living). So, the following technique emerged and was widely used by mathematicians at that time to claim the peiority. They would write out their result (or the proof); they would make an anagram, or take the first letter of each (latin) word, etc; and they would mass-mail it to every mathematician they knew, so they'd receive it at about the same time; then they'd publish it at leisure, knowing that once they decode the anagram or publish the proof whose first letters coincide with their broadcast, it will be evident that they had it on the date it was first mailed, yet they haven't revealed enough information for anyone to steal the result. The nice folks in goettingen who kept publishing Gauss's papers up until WW2 found that he too came up with a non-Euclidean geometry in 1818 (when Bolyai was 16 years old). They did not report finding any communications from Bolyai to Gauss about non-euclidean geometry in that time frame. Unfortunately if Bolyai makes the claims that he communicated his results privately to Gauss and that Gauss then concocted a tentacle named Lobachevsky, who's not a real person, then I have to discard the entire claim as a figment of his psychotic imagination. > > > arises if you omit this axiom. According to my sources, the appendix > > is "Wronski-like" to the point of unreadability. Apparently no one > > actually read it until B. started arguing about who did what first. > > Both John Bolyai's "The Science of Absolute Space" and Nicholas > Lobachevski's "The Theory of Parallels" are included in Roberto Bonola's > "Non-euclidean Geometry" (Dover, ISBN 0-486-60027-0 $5.50). I certainly had > no problem reading the 3 combined books. > > I was just looking at the translators notes to Lobachevski, it was done > by George Bruce Halsted of 2407 San Marcos St, Austin, Tx. May 1, 1891. What's your point? Are you suggesting that Lobachevsky first published it that year? He was long dead by then. He first gave a talk on non-euclidean geometry in 1825 and published the seminal paper in 1829 - before Bolyai's work was published in 1832 as an appendix to his father's textbook. Bolyai saw the German translation of Lobachevsky's paper in 1840. Are you trying to say that a paper's not really published until it's translated into english by some guy in Texas? :-) > > > well accepted by his peers. Neither Bolyai nor Lobachevsky knew about > > Gauss's work. > > Not true, Bolyai wrote him several letters as described in his book and the > various prefaces. Lobachevski's book was promoted by Gauss as the first and > truely critical work on non-euclidean geometry. In a rare show of magnamity > Gauss even admits that Lobachevski's work exceeded his own. What exactly is your beef with Gauss promoting Lobachevsky? When Lobachevsky's paper reached Europe, the "consensus" (I hate consensuses) among the working mathematicians was that non-euclidean geometry was nuts. Incidentally, Bolyai was among the people screaming that it was all wrong and renouncing his own 1832 publication. Gauss could have announced that he came up with the same results before Lobachevsky, but never bothered to publish them. Gauss could have also announced that he's gone through Lobachevsky's papers and endorses the results. His reputation capital was such that either claim would have been accepted by the mathematical community. He did neither. He endorsed Lobachevsky's paper as being sufficiently interesting to be translated and studied and checked; perhaps he himself was not sure that it was error-free. He also pushed for Lobachevsky's election into the Hannover academy of sciences - not just for the non-euclidean theory, for for his many other interesting results. Gauss also promoted many other people who did outstanding mathematical work. There wasn't a "consensus" that non-euclidean geometry was kosher until about 1865, by which time all 3 were dead or retired. Likewise when Kantor first announced that the infinite number of real numbers is greater that the infinite number of integers, the "consensus" among working mathematicians was that this was crazy. Likewise when a certain well-known Dutch mathematician mass-mailed many people a few years ago announcing that he's been having sex with the mother goddess, the "consensus" was that he's gone nuts. Finally, if Gauss said that Lobechevsky's paper was more complete and detailed than Gauss's unpublished notes from 1818, it may very well have been true. > > > I have no idea what Bonola wrote, but if he's just repeating the allegation > > Bolyai made about Gauss while suffering from depression and paranoia, they > > have no more truth in them than the Timmy May rants on this mailing list. > > He wrote a classic work on non-euclidean geometry that was quite popular in > 1912 when it was printed. > If the book repeats the bizarre claims made by Bolyai, when he was paranoid, depressed, and outright psychotic - such as the claim that Lobachevsky was not a real person, but a "tentacle" of Gauss created to torture Bolyai - then it's not worth reading. Sadly, some people do go insane. Trying to find the truth in their paranoid rants is a waste of time, just like reading Timmy May's rants is a waste of time. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 02:54:59 +0800 To: Ray Arachelian Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980109104802.007be1e0@206.40.207.40> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 12:47 PM 1/9/98 -0500, Ray Arachelian wrote: >15)From: SpyKing@thecodex.com >Subject: Re: Deadly Physical Force > If this guy IS >convicted the rules of engagement change forever... SWAT teams will have >to think twice before firing into dwellings... > >FBI sniper ordered to stand trial in Ruby Ridge case The rules for an Assault/Entry are different than the rules for a Sniper, I think. That is the issue: a sniper must know what they are shooting at. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Trei, Peter" Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 00:14:03 +0800 To: "'cypherpunks@Algebra.COM> Subject: RE: Question on U.S. Postal Service and crypto Message-ID: <6B5344C210C7D011835C0000F80127668B15D4@exna01.securitydynamics.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain My understanding is that a post BOX has to be a design acceptable to the USPS; and that no one else can put things INTO it. This is a pretty narrow restriction; door slots can be used by anyone for anything, and many postboxes either share a support post with a newspaper delivery tube or have an external rack for stuffing newspapers, etc. Back about 20 years ago, some company (FedEx, UPS????) tried to get into the first class mail delivery business, and they dealt with this by putting mail in a plastic bag and hanging it on the doorknob. Where I live (*small* town in New England), FedEx and UPS regularly leave packages unattended; either by the front door, the back door, or in the garage (this is a very low crime area). Around 1979, when the existence of email was just beginning to penetrate (there where only a few hundred thousand people on the Arpanet), there was considerable debate over the legality of email. Since access to Arpanet was theoretically only for people working on Federally funded projects, it was widely thought that it should only be used for project related work, and any personal mail was a misuse of government funds. Columbia University (where I was working at the time) allowed unlimited internal use, but had tinkered their mail client to ignore addresses to off-campus addresses. I think my very first hack involved defeating this restriction. About the same time, I remember that the Postal Carriers Union realized (quite correctly) that email was a threat to their civil service jobs, and came out with a statement to the effect of 'We don't quite understand what this thing is, but the USPS owns it." They wanted to require that email be received only at Post Offices, where it would be printed, stamped, and delivered (by one of their members) along with the rest of the mail. Peter Trei ptrei@securitydynamics.com > ---------- > From: Brian B. Riley[SMTP:brianbr@together.net] > > Maybe they are confusing an electronic mailbox with a snailmail box > ... > the USPS has always contended that they (the USPS) "own" your mailbox > and > use that criterion to prosecute people who drive around putting things > > like circulars etc in mailboxes. Maybe they we on a role thinking that > if > they got into the e-mail business they would 'own' that piece of your > hard drive so to speak. > > > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 01:09:49 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <199801091729.LAA09084@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) > From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Date: Fri, 09 Jan 98 10:24:24 EST > I'm sorry, I don't have the time to look this up. If you're trying to prove > that Gauss was not a nice person, I don't believe it. Anyone who would tell their dying wife, via their son, to wait a moment until he had finished his calculations is not a nice person. > argument you can make is to cite Bolyai's claims that Lobachevsky was not > a real person but a "tentacle" of Gauss, created to persecute Bolyai > (gee, that sounds vaguely familiar...), and you can't find any more dirt > on Gauss, then it proves to me that he was indeed a remarkably nice person. What the hell are you talking about here? I made no such claims at all. Lobashevski was the first person to write in modern history on non-euclidean geometry. Gauss was a contemporary and was quite familiar with Lobashevski's work. He was even asked to review "The Theory of Parallels". Gauss, in an uncharacteristic act, even admitted that Lobachevski's work had progressed farther than his own. > only for the noble-born and wealthy. Gauss did a lot to help other > people in many ways, both as individuals, and in targeting his research > to solve practical problems for good of the humanity. Gauss did a lot of harm as well. He characteristicaly denied works of others and trivialized their contributions while at the same time promoting his own. He was prone to bouts of drunken anger and is known to have physicaly attacked quite a few people while in that state. His usual treatment of contemporaries was based on contempt, not respect. > You also haven't explained how Bolyai could have been Gauss's school friend, > being 25 years younger. Bolyai's father worked with Gauss (as I explained) and his son John also worked with Gauss from the time he (Bolyai) was in school; not Gauss. I am going to refrain from going on with the remainder of your 'points'. You have strayed so far afield, as usual, or misconstrued comments that it has no relevance to what the original discussion was about, which was science advances when people publish and share their work - not when it is held back and unpublished. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 04:18:46 +0800 To: Ryan Anderson Subject: Re: In God We Antitrust, from the Netly News In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:01 AM -0800 1/9/98, Ryan Anderson wrote: >On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Tim May wrote: >> Intel's failed competitors (Cyrix, AMD, Motorola, Sun, SGI/MIPS, >> Intergraph) can be counted on to run crying to Mother Government, crying >> that Intel is too successful. > >Failed? AMD is farfrom a failed competitor. Intel is nowhere near being a >monopoly. In this industry,Intel creates a chip, then AMD,Cyrix, etc take >the published specs on that chip and duplicate the work. They same some Charitably, I'll assume you just don't follow the industry very closely. I don't mean in terms of claims and press announcements, I mean in terms of the "ground truth" of what is real. Intel conservatively is now two full iterations ahead of AMD/Nexgen and/or National/Cyrix. The AMD K6 may not be quite the dog the K5 was, but AMD is woefully unable to *make* the part! (Manufacturing is more essential than most people realize. I could elaborate on this for pages and pages, but this is well-trod ground in, say, the Silicon Investors Forum and other such groups.) There have been reliable reports, from several kinds of sources, that AMD's Fab 25 in Austin is yielding only a handful of workingn (at speed) K6s per 8-inch wafer, versus well over 100 working (at full rated speed, importantly) Pentium IIs (and variamts) devices per 8-inch wafer. Intel is running at a nearly perfect yield rate (most die are functional, a very nice position to be in, and a very hard one to arrange). Intel also has about an order of magnitude more clean room space capable of making the Pentia (and Merced and Gunnison, etc.) than AMD has in Fab 25. ("Fab 25," by AMD's naming convention, means the fab opened in the25th year of business, not their 25th fab.) >effort from having to make opcode decisions, but then they don't get first >crack at the market. AMD has a *Very* good chip in the K6, receiving much >attention as being a serious competitor to Intel's chips. Well, look at their profits, Ryan! Go to Yahoo and look at both their earnings reports over the last, say, 5 years. Also look at their stock patterns. AMD is now trading at $18. Five years ago it was trading at the same price. In fact, it's been a narrow range between about 20 and 30 for most of that time, briefly blipping up to 40 before dropping back to the level it was half a decade ago. In fact, it's where it was in 1983, 15 years ago. (Check the charts.) Meanwhile, Intel has moved from $15 to $72 (today's price) in 5 years, and from something like $2 (or less, as the charts don't go back to '83 for Intel), up a factor of 30 or more times. Market caps are similarly skewed. Intel's market value is $120 billion, AMD's is $2.5 billion, a factor of 50 times lower. (They were within a factor of 3 of each other 15 or so years ago.) The problem AMD faces is not the adequacy of its design, "borrowed" from Intel, but its inability to compete in manufacturing costs. Even as AMD struggles to get yields up, and struggles to invest in the next generation of production equipment, Intel is building several new $2 billion fabs, all equipped with the latest equipment. (Intel continued to book orders for production equipment through the last mini-downturn in '95-'96, ordering equipment from Applied Materials, Lam Research, and so on. Guess what? When AMD and other small fry decided it was time to order, pronto, they found that the Applied Materials, etc. production was already committed to go to Intel! Jerry Sanders, top guy at AMD, cried "foul," but the fact was that Intel's enormous financial and market position strength allowed it to plan ahead and order the equipment and manufacturing space they'd need.) I have no doubt that some companies will design in the K6, and even the Cyrix version. I would if I were them, if only to put some pricing pressure on Intel. But the market share of Intel, at something like 90% (I won't dissect the various segments, but they range from 80% to 95%), and the huge costs to compete in the _next_ generation, really makes it almost impossible for small fry like AMD and Cyrix to do anything significant. Even if their yields were significantly higher than Intel's, which is technically impossible, their lack of capacity limits the inroads they can make. And my point is a larger, longer-range one. I haven't said I expect Justice Department action this year, or even next. But if Intel's Merced displaces workstation chips (the DEC deal, Sun to work on a competitive Solaris for Merced, the H-P/Intel alliance, and several other major deals), and if AMD and Cyrix are unable to make a dent in Intel's market share for PC chips, and if the motherboard integration continues (with Intel supplying motherboards that competitors can't readily match the peformance and pricing of), then I expect a Democratic Justice Department to move on Intel. Of course, those who feel AMD and Cyrix are about to knock Intel out of its present position have the best of all ways to vote their beliefs: by buying AMD (or National/Cyrix) stock at the current low prices. I wish you luck, really. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 01:25:28 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: In God We Antitrust, from the Netly News Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 11:57:07 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh To: politech@vorlon.mit.edu Subject: FC: In God We Antitrust, from the Netly News ************ http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1678,00.html The Netly News (http://netlynews.com/) January 9, 1998 In God We Antitrust by Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com) Bill Gates likes to portray himself as a businessman hounded by hordes of boorish bureaucrats who resent his success. "It's absolutely clear that our competitors are spending an enormous amount of time and money trying to whip up anti-Microsoft sentiment in Washington, D.C.," says spokesman Mark Murray. "For the past year, Netscape, Sun and other competitors have been crawling all over Washington, D.C., trying to use the government as a weapon against Microsoft -- rather than competing head-to-head in the marketplace." Of course, that's what you'd expect a PR flack to say, whether it's true or not. But maybe, just maybe, Microsoft has a point. A close look at the history of antitrust law reveals that its enforcement has always been political. The demand for antitrust regulations in the first place came from midwestern butchers who wanted to block competition from more efficient meat-packing plants in Chicago. Since then, execution of the 1890 Sherman Act has been highly partisan: Democratic administrations are nearly twice as likely to bring antitrust cases as Republicans. Antitrust regulations are also protectionist: Regulators wield them to protect domestic companies from overseas competitors. If it's politics and not policy that prompted the Justice Department to assail Microsoft this time around, the paper trail may not become public until well into the next century. For now, though, we can look at antitrust history instead: ITT and Nixon: President Richard Nixon intervened in an antitrust action against International Telephone & Telegraph in 1971 in exchange for a bribe -- a hefty contribution to the 1972 Republican convention. "I don't know whether ITT is bad, good or indifferent," he said on April 19, 1971, White House tapes reveal. "But there is not going to be any more antitrust actions as long as I am in this chair... goddamn it, we're going to stop it." [...snip...] -------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology To subscribe: send a message to majordomo@vorlon.mit.edu with this text: subscribe politech More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ray Arachelian Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 01:51:07 +0800 To: cypherpunks MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 15)From: SpyKing@thecodex.com Subject: Re: Deadly Physical Force This thread might be getting tired but I ran across something that is applicable. I make no judgement on who is right or wrong. I was not there and only those who were know the truth. I'm posting this to show that despite being acquitted in one court the shooter in this case is being charged and brought to trial in another court on similiar charges. Some will scream double jeapordy and others will say justice is prevailing. The jury will have to decide... but I'll say one thing... If this guy IS convicted the rules of engagement change forever... SWAT teams will have to think twice before firing into dwellings... FBI sniper ordered to stand trial in Ruby Ridge case BONNERS FERRY, Idaho (Reuters) - An FBI sharpshooter has been ordered to stand trial on charges of involuntary manslaughter over the 1992 standoff at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in which three people died, prosecutors said Wednesday. Idaho Magistrate Quentin Harden ruled there was enough evidence to allow the sharpshooter, Lon Horiuchi, to face trial on charges he acted with negligence when he fired a shot that killed the wife of white separatist Randy Weaver at his cabin. The standoff near Weaver's cabin turned into a rallying cry for extreme right-wingers who condemned what they saw as federal government excesses and held up Weaver as a hero. Boundary County prosecutor Denise Woodbury last August charged Horiuchi and Weaver's friend Kevin Harris with the deaths of two people killed in the standoff. The charges against Harris were later dismissed on the grounds that he had already been acquitted of those charges in federal court. In filing charges against Horiuchi, Woodbury accused the sharpshooter of using a gun in a reckless manner by firing through the front door of Weaver's house without first determining whether anyone other than his intended target was behind the door. Horiuchi could face up to 10 years in prison if convicted. The standoff began Aug. 21, 1992, when U.S. Marshals approached Weaver's cabin to arrest him for failing to appear in court on gun charges. U.S. Marshal William Degan and Weaver's 14-year-old son Sammy were killed in a gun battle near the cabin, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation was called in later that day. The next day, Horiuchi wounded Weaver and Harris and killed Vicki Weaver. Weaver and Harris surrendered 10 days later and were acquitted of murder charges in the killing of Degan in a 1993 federal trial. Weaver said in a telephone interview from his home in Montana that he was pleased by Harden's ruling. ``It's taken a long time, but sometimes the wheels of justice grind slowly. We are looking to see some justice in all of this,'' Weaver said. ``To be honest I hope that he (Horiuchi) eventually sees that he is just one of two scapegoats and that eventually he will tell the whole truth.'' Horiuchi's lawyers were due to appear next Monday before a federal judge in Boise to ask that the case against the FBI sniper be moved to federal court. Horiuchi was scheduled to be arraigned Friday, Feb. 13, in Idaho district court in Boundary County, but that could change if his case is remanded to federal court. Neither Horiuchi's lawyers nor Woodbury were immediately available for comment on Harden's ruling. 16)From: SpyKing@thecodex.com Subject: Germany to restore bugging Thursday January 8, 1:58 PM GMT Germany to restore bugging banned since Nazi-era BONN, Jan 8 (Reuters) - German political leaders agreed on Thursday to allow police to bug apartments of suspected criminals, restoring a crime-fighting tool banned since abuses by the secret police in the Nazi era. Leaders from Chancellor Helmut Kohl's centre-right coalition and the opposition Social Democrats (SPD) said they had reached a deal allowing police to plant microphones in private homes of suspected criminals for the first time since 1945. Both houses of parliament are now expected to quickly pass the long-debated measure, which police have argued was needed to better fight organised crime and bring the country in line with other nations that allow electronic surveillance. Germany, which reacted to the Gestapo's abuses with some of the Western world's most extensive civil liberties laws, has long resisted any relaxation in constitutional protections that have kept police out of private homes. Interior Minister Manfred Kanther said the agreement would give police the necessary tool to fight organised crime. "This is a decisive step towards more effectively fighting crime," Kanther said. "We can now keep surveillance on suspected gangster apartments and we will be able to better fight money laundering." The opposition SPD, which controls the upper house of parliament, the Bundesrat, said it would support the measure after the government agreed to partial exemptions for some professional groups such as priests, attorneys and journalists. Police will be required to obtain advance court permission for any surveillance. Previously, police were only given rare exemptions to the constitutional law protecting the private home. They were allowed to use listening devices or electronic surveillance only with court permission if there was concrete evidence that a serious crime was about to take place. Now authorities will have the power to use eavesdropping methods far more extensively and will also for the first time be able to bug apartments after a crime has been committed to obtain evidence. Germany's post-war constitution barred police from electronic surveillance, telephone taps and intercepting mail. The bans on telephone taps and mail intercepts were relaxed in the 1970s amid a wave of left-wing guerrilla attacks. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: David Honig Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 05:42:24 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Germany not so worried about Gestapo wiretaps now Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980109131833.007b0bd0@206.40.207.40> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain There are several examples of sacrificing liberty for security in a G7 country in the article below. Also the justification of "getting in line with other countries" is used for allowing civilian SIGINT practices previously banned. Thursday January 8 11:32 AM EST Germany to Restore Surveillance BONN, Germany (Reuters) - German political leaders agreed Thursday to allow police to bug apartments of suspected criminals, restoring a crime-fighting tool banned since abuses by the secret police in the Nazi era. Leaders from Chancellor Helmut Kohl's center-right coalition and the opposition Social Democrats (SPD) said they had reached a deal allowing police to plant microphones in private homes of suspected criminals for the first time since 1945. Both houses of parliament are now expected to quickly pass the long-debated measure, which police have argued was needed to better fight organized crime and bring the country in line with other nations that allow electronic surveillance. Germany, which reacted to the Gestapo's abuses with some of the Western world's most extensive civil liberties laws, has long resisted any relaxation in constitutional protections that have kept police out of private homes. Interior Minister Manfred Kanther said the agreement would give police the necessary tool to fight organized crime. "This is a decisive step toward more effectively fighting crime," Kanther said. "We can now keep surveillance on suspected gangster apartments and we will be able to better fight money laundering." The opposition SPD, which controls the upper house of parliament, the Bundesrat, said it would support the measure after the government agreed to partial exemptions for some professional groups such as priests, attorneys and journalists. Police will be required to obtain advance court permission for any surveillance. Previously, police were only given rare exemptions to the constitutional law protecting the private home. They were allowed to use listening devices or electronic surveillance only with court permission if there was concrete evidence that a serious crime was about to take place. Now authorities will have the power to use eavesdropping methods far more extensively and will also for the first time be able to bug apartments after a crime has been committed to obtain evidence. Germany's post-war constitution barred police from electronic surveillance, telephone taps and intercepting mail. The bans on telephone taps and mail intercepts were relaxed in the 1970s amid a wave of left-wing guerrilla attacks. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu "How do you know you are not being deceived?" ---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ryan Anderson Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 03:15:48 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: In God We Antitrust, from the Netly News In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, Tim May wrote: > The next such battle will be about Intel, which, if anything, has even more > of a commanding presence in the market than MS has. Besides > "investigations" (a DC codeword meaning: "donate money to the ruling > party"), the antitrust buzz is that the Intel-DEC deal may be scotched. > > Intel's failed competitors (Cyrix, AMD, Motorola, Sun, SGI/MIPS, > Intergraph) can be counted on to run crying to Mother Government, crying > that Intel is too successful. Failed? AMD is farfrom a failed competitor. Intel is nowhere near being a monopoly. In this industry,Intel creates a chip, then AMD,Cyrix, etc take the published specs on that chip and duplicate the work. They same some effort from having to make opcode decisions, but then they don't get first crack at the market. AMD has a *Very* good chip in the K6, receiving much attention as being a serious competitor to Intel's chips. Intel is in no way nearly as hated as Microsoft. Many people hate MS products irrationally, some of those also hate the 80x86line of chips. The number hating the chips is muhc lower than the number hating MS. Maybe because Intel tends to have more reliable produts? Who knows. Intel is *not* in any danger of being a target for an antitrust suit in the near futur, in truth they don't even have the signs going for them. (No dumping of products, no tying of products, though Slot-1 might cqualify as this, I doubt it.) Even the industry mags point out this difference between the two. It's a lot easier to develop competing hardware than a competing OS. Ryan Anderson - Alpha Geek PGP fp: 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57 E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9 print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 06:15:26 +0800 To: David Honig Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 1:18 PM -0800 1/9/98, David Honig wrote: >There are several examples of sacrificing liberty for >security in a G7 country in the article below. >Also the justification of "getting in line with other countries" >is used for allowing civilian SIGINT practices previously banned. >Germany, which reacted to the Gestapo's abuses with some of the Western >world's most extensive civil >liberties laws, has long resisted any relaxation in constitutional >protections that have kept police out of >private homes. ... I suspect this is only a cosmetic change, in terms of realpolitik. The BND and other intelligence/law enforcement agencies have very probably been using the available SIGINT and COMINT tools....maybe just not using the captured data in courtrooms. (As with the U.S., where illegal wiretaps and bugs are used for ancillary purposes, even if not sanctioned by the courts.) But this still signals a move toward a '1984' situation, with Germany likely now to relax some of its objections to OECD plans for crypto restrictions (recall that Germany was opposed to some of the key escrow plans). And now that Japan has fallen into line (e.g., by banning the export of the RSA chip so touted by Bidzos and NTT), the OECD/New World Order is set to make some moves in '98. (Things have been quiet on the crypto legislation/international agreements front, from a news point of view, but we can safely assume that all of these bad things are moving along behind the scenes, and will once again become cause celebres.) --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Robert Hettinga Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 03:40:01 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Microsoft Windows98 - Make your own decision. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain --- begin forwarded text X-Sender: jnoble@pop.dgsys.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 13:09:13 -0400 Reply-To: Law & Policy of Computer Communications Sender: Law & Policy of Computer Communications From: John Noble Subject: Re: Microsoft Windows98 - Make your own decision. To: CYBERIA-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM At 10:22 AM -0600 1/9/98, Virginia Metze wrote: >Those are the Fortune 500 figures which they identify as total revenues and >which I take to mean gross. Incidentally, Microsoft is 172, IBM #6. >Destruction of Microsoft's Word revenues, which accounts for a lot of their >profit, is what >would really seriously damage them, and note the push of IBM into the >desktop applications market... > >And IBM is going to be way out in front of everyone no matter how it >is measured. > I share Virginia's sentiment about MS-bashing, but if I were going to measure market power I'd look at profit margins. These figures are provided by Hoovers Stockscreener http://www.stockscreener.com which is a lot of fun to play with. Market Value (mils.): General Electric Company 243000.0 The Coca-Cola Company 164792.0 Microsoft Corporation 157473.0 Exxon Corporation 146881.0 Nippon Telegraph and Telephone 135252.0 Merck 127673.0 Intel 121575.0 Philip Morris Companies Inc. 112867.0 Royal Dutch Petroleum Company 112039.0 The Procter & Gamble Company 108281.0 Toyota Motor Corporation 105326.0 IBM 102912.0 Revenues (mils) (for mkt caps over 100 bil): Exxon Corporation 119507.0 Toyota Motor Corporation 98740.6 General Electric Company 86658.0 Royal Dutch Petroleum Company 85784.7 IBM 77928.0 Philip Morris Companies Inc. 71512.0 Nippon T & T 71262.4 AT&T Corp. 52839.0 The Procter & Gamble Company 36216.0 Intel Corporation 25003.0 Merck & Co., Inc 22810.9 The Coca-Cola Company 18610.0 Microsoft Corporation 12193.0 Pfizer Inc 12169.0 PROFIT MARGIN (for mkt caps over 100 bil.): Microsoft Corporation 30.4% Intel Corporation 24.7% Merck & Co., Inc. 19.6% The Coca-Cola Company 18.8% Pfizer Inc 17.1% AT&T Corp. 11.0% The Procter & Gamble Company 9.5% General Electric Company 9.3% Philip Morris Companies Inc. 9.1% IBM 7.1% Royal Dutch Petroleum Company 6.9% Exxon Corporation 6.4% Toyota Motor Corporation 3.2% Nippon T & T 2.9% John Noble --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 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' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 04:21:44 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: In God We Antitrust, from the Netly News (fwd) Message-ID: <199801092045.OAA10031@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 12:11:44 -0800 > From: Tim May > Subject: Re: In God We Antitrust, from the Netly News > There have been reliable reports, from several kinds of sources, that AMD's > Fab 25 in Austin is yielding only a handful of workingn (at speed) K6s per > 8-inch wafer, versus well over 100 working (at full rated speed, > importantly) Pentium IIs (and variamts) devices per 8-inch wafer. Intel is > running at a nearly perfect yield rate (most die are functional, a very > nice position to be in, and a very hard one to arrange). > Intel also has about an order of magnitude more clean room space capable of > making the Pentia (and Merced and Gunnison, etc.) than AMD has in Fab 25. >From my contacts at AMD and personal experience working on the Semiconductor Technology program through Austin Community College 2 years ago I would have to agree with these claims. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "James A. Donald" Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 07:04:32 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Has anyone exported Crypto Kong yet? Message-ID: <199801092257.OAA21085@proxy3.ba.best.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -- It seems likely that the current release candidate http://www.jim.com/jamesd/Kong is going to be the actual release 1.0. Being a good respectable law abiding American resident alien I intend to set up two buttons, one that you click on if you are are a US or canadian citizen, and one that you click on if you are not. It would be nice if the non citizen link led somewhere. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 7kglYb5GYi3VEyvppMeDd0zlnuKkh/uYzEXVxIl1 4uDBDw9n+6DVIw9foYasgSkcQcPEt7kui6qxpfkfc --------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the state. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Vipul Ved Prakash Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 21:38:34 +0800 To: mikhaelf@mindspring.com Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment In-Reply-To: <3.0.16.19980101170044.0dff4600@pop.mindspring.com> Message-ID: <199801091545.PAA01120@fountainhead.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Mikhael Frieden wrote: > >You clearly have no comprehension of the principles of the free market > >and the rights of businesses and individual to hire and fire whoever the > >fuck they like for any reason whatsoever. I am no racist, but I defend > >your right to be as racist as you see fit. > You are obviously an evil person if you do so against the self > annointed, even though they self identify themselves as 30% racist. This reminds me of the self-righteous political leaders of India who enforced 47% reservations for Schedule Cast/Tribe groups in all government subsidized institutions couple of years back. And, it all starts with the same fallacious interpretation of "equal opportunity". Whatever your political philosophy might be you won't like to see a doctor who is likely to kill you with an overdose of codeine. Or would you? Best, Vipul -- "So Beck was the hacker and Oda was the backer. The oldest and most troublesome relationship in the technological world." -- "Diamond Age", Neal Stephenson. ================================================================== Vipul Ved Prakash | - Electronic Security & Crypto mail@vipul.net | - Web Objects 91 11 2233328 | - PERL Development 198 Madhuban IP Extension | - Linux & Open Systems Delhi, INDIA 110 092 | - Networked Virtual Spaces From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 23:28:42 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Cute Message-ID: <199801091520.QAA29876@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tim May is cute and cuddly! (_) _____ (_) /O O\ Timmy C[uddly] May ! I ! ! \___/ ! \_____/ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Paul Bradley Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 03:39:17 +0800 To: Anonymous Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: <199801081855.TAA05464@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > Tim May doesn't know anything about Onion Routers, Crowds, or any of > the other new privacy technologies like Adam Back's prototype Eternity > service. Judging Tim May in this way seems rather unfair as I have no reason to believe you know any of this to be true, although your anonymity prevents me from knowing either way. > In truth, he has lost all interest in cryptography and now spends > his time talking about guns and making racist comments. True, Tim spends little time posting about crypto now, but maybe he feels he has said what he wants to, and moved on, maybe he`ll post about crypto again in the future, maybe not. If you don`t like his writing killfile him, or use the delete key, if you don`t like the content on the list now, write something yourself, start a thread you find interesting, do something to change the situation rather than bemoaning the state of the list. > He wonders why the cypherpunks list no longer attracts quality > cryptographic ideas. He need look no farther than the nearest mirror. People who have something to say about crypto will post here, look at the number of good cryptographers on the list and tell me where else you will find such an accumulation of talented thinkers and writers. Cypherpunks was never intended to be a pure crypto list anyway (as I see it), more of an applied crypto list discussing applications of technology as a defence of personal freedom, related issues will inevitably be discussed and that includes guns and "anti-discrimination" laws. If you don`t like the list, change it or leave, sci.crypt and sci.crypt.research are excellent groups on a more pure cryptography topic than cpunx, apart from the massive number of "where do I get PGP for my PC" questions on sci.crypt (sci.crypt.research is moderated and much lower traffic). > His violent rants and his off-topic, offensive posts have done more than > anything to drive good people off the list. "good people" as you see them presumably have the level of technical competence required to set up procmail, and put those who they see as "ranting" in their killfile. > The single best thing that could happen to the cypherpunks list (and the > cypherpunks movement, for that matter) would be for Tim May to leave the > list and disassociate himself from the cypherpunks. Oh worthy anonymous one, please enlighten us with your next pronouncement on the best thing we can do for the movement. > He would be much more comfortable joining the KKK and the local > militia. How do you know Tim isn`t already a member of his local militia? Why do you feel Tims predisposition towards active methods of preserving his freedom rule out his participation in this group? > After him, Paul Bradley, William Geiger and Dimitri Vulis can follow. Never let it be said that I post in my own defence against a silly flamebait message such as this, but I cannot see the writers problem with ignoring me if he doesn`t like what I post. > This will leave fine thinkers with good hearts like Adam Back, Bill > Stewart, Wei Dai and others, people who still believe that cryptography > can make a strong contribution to our freedom. I still believe cryptography can make a contribution to freedom, but I am gradually persuaded more and more to the belief that other means of defence may become necessary as a last resort, and I believe in being prepared for all possible outcomes. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Adam Tuliper" Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 06:21:24 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: SSL DLL's? Message-ID: <199801092207.OAA09121@toad.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Anyone know if there is a SSL winsock type control out there and what the name of it is? Thanks,... Adam From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Vipul Ved Prakash Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 21:35:42 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks) Subject: oracle on feds (fwd) Message-ID: <199801091711.RAA01466@fountainhead.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Selected-By: David Bremner The Internet Oracle has pondered your question deeply. Your question was: > DearOralemostwisepleasetellme... > > Look, I'm sorry to rush this, but the IRS, BATF, IRS, CIA, INS, IMF and > CFR agents (not to mention the black helicopters) are at my front door. > What should I do? And in response, thus spake the Oracle: ENTERTAINING FEDERAL AGENTS with MARTHA STEWART Hello, I'm Martha Stewart, welcome to my answer. Our good friend The Internet Oracle is not able to answer your question right now, and so he has asked me to try to help. Let's take a look at your situation, shall we? Entertaining large groups of Federal agents is always a bit of a challenge, especially when we're pressed for time. Of course, it's always best to be prepared for visitors. You should have a neatly trimmed and freshly painted entryway, with a large Welcome mat and perhaps some cut flowers. A wooden rocking chair on the porch adds a homey touch of camouflage. When Federal agents are expected, I like to take a little time beforehand and knit a large Plywood Cozy for each window to catch some of the broken glass. Don't forget to save the shards! They can be dyed later and arranged into a stunning stained glass mosaic. For autumn, have plenty of hot mulled cider ready. Not only is it healthy and aromatic, it's better than water for extinguishing fires! If your electricity is sabotaged, use your supply of flares in tasteful candle holders. Finally, don't be afraid to think creatively. Although many people think of large-caliber bullets as merely a nuisance, they can be recovered and used as decorative accessories and paper weights, or hammered into distinctive buttons. With a little brown paint, a smoke grenade can also be fashioned into a quaint pineapple arrangement! As always, remember to be courteous and kind, and just relax and be yourself. It takes only a small extra effort to be remembered for your own unique style of entertaining. Enjoy! You owe the Oracle a throw rug woven from yellow "Police Line" tape. -- "So Beck was the hacker and Oda was the backer. The oldest and most troublesome relationship in the technological world." -- "Diamond Age", Neal Stephenson. ================================================================== Vipul Ved Prakash | - Electronic Security & Crypto mail@vipul.net | - Web Objects 91 11 2233328 | - PERL Development 198 Madhuban IP Extension | - Linux & Open Systems Delhi, INDIA 110 092 | - Networked Virtual Spaces From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jon Galt Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 06:50:16 +0800 To: Anonymous Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <0af1f50d709c70d6ee98863386f81e59@anon.efga.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Mon, 22 Dec 1997, Anonymous wrote: > >> I also wouldn't trust Lance Cottrell. He's selling privacy for the > >$$, not > >> for the ideology; he'll bend over the moment he thinks there's more > >$$ in > >> bending over, which is usually the case. > >What is wrong selling privacy for money? > > It usually involves making it shitty. Oh yeah, that's the way free enterprise works... if you make your product shitty, your customers will pay more for it! Hey maybe if I do a crappy job, my employer will pay me more! ______________________________________________________________________ Jon Galt e-mail: jongalt@pinn.net website: http://www.pinn.net/~jongalt/ PGP public key available on my website. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. ______________________________________________________________________ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 07:52:43 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Microsoft's Future 2/2 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Chances are it's a safe bet. While Microsoft concedes that Windows NT servers won't replace the world's supply of mainframe computers anytime soon, Jeffrey S. Raikes, Microsoft's group vice-president for sales and marketing, predicts that in the next few years, NT could unseat IBM's stalwart AS/400 minicomputer--a $3.4 billion annual business. By selling NT, Office 97, and a suite of networking software called BackOffice, Raikes' goal is to increase Microsoft's average annual revenues per corporate computer user from less than $150 today to more than $200 in the next two years. Analysts like what they see. They predict the software maker will sell $5 billion worth of NT and BackOffice by 2000, double what's expected this fiscal year. ''Today, we see Microsoft software at the heart of almost every desktop,'' says analyst Neil Herman of Salomon Smith Barney. ''In 10 years, we'll see Microsoft software at the heart of 90% of the servers out there, too.'' One company already feeling the heat is Netscape. On Jan. 5, the Silicon Valley highflier announced that its quarterly sales would be $125 million to $130 million--well below the $165 million analysts had expected. Worse, it will report its first loss in nine quarters. The reason: Netscape's server and browser sales are down because of stiff competition from Microsoft and IBM (page 69). ''Microsoft is the primary cause of Netscape's problems,'' says analyst Bruce D. Smith of Merrill Lynch & Co. That doesn't mean Microsoft will own enterprise. The operating system accounts for just 20% of the installed base of computer servers. And for the rest of that business Microsoft faces a revitalized IBM that is well entrenched in Corporate America and becoming a formidable competitor on the Net. After stumbling in the early '90s, IBM has made a remarkable comeback by using PC technology to sell mainframe computers costing less than one-tenth what customers paid in the late 1980s. That has kept many major customers true blue. Database giant Oracle also has an incredibly loyal following. It has 39% of that sector, vs. less than 4% for Microsoft's SQL Server. Microsoft's database software is still seen as not powerful enough to handle the really big jobs at giant corporations. ''Microsoft has given their database away, but it hasn't helped--because their database isn't any good,'' says Oracle's Ellison. And then there's Java. Sun Microsystems' much hyped programming language offers the prospect of an alternative to Windows, since applications written in it can run on any operating system. So far, Microsoft has convinced hundreds of corporate customers that they can save money by running even their biggest jobs on NT. But many companies still have millions invested in mainframes, and moving everything to Windows could take years. Java offers an alternative. This software--used to write other programs--runs on a variety of computer architectures. That helps it to act as a digital glue for creating programs that allow companies to use existing software, such as mainframe programs, while still tapping into new Internet businesses. Early this year, Java will get better yet. Improved security and performance could make it more appealing to use on a slew of devices. ''Between Java cards and Java rings and Java phones and Java set-top boxes and Java everything else, we're going to destroy them on unit volume,'' predicts Sun CEO Scott G. McNealy. For all this, analysts don't see Java replacing Windows anytime soon. The 700,000 software developers using Java pales next to the 4.5 million that Windows claims. Even John F. Andrews, chief information officer for transportation giant CSX Corp. and a huge Java fan, says: ''Java's a punch, but it's not a knockout.'' That's because Microsoft is well protected. Many corporations have already standardized on Windows and its desktop applications. So now, they're interested in buying software from Microsoft that can help tie their computer systems together more simply and run their large databases, accounting systems, and manufacturing operations. ''The plan ultimately is to run everything on one platform. That's the carrot out there,'' says Dean Halley, an information-systems executive at Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. THE INTERNET When it comes to new markets, none is as vast and potentially lucrative as the Internet. Analysts predict that Net revenues from software and commerce will reach dizzying heights--as much as $100 billion by 2000. And no single company is investing so much or so broadly--or holds as many of the pieces--as Microsoft. In the two years since it vowed to become a leader in cyberspace, Microsoft has been true to its word. The most visible proof is Internet Explorer. Since releasing the first version of IE a little more than two years ago, Microsoft has jetted from zero to 40% of the market. Moreover, if the software maker's plans to weave the browser into Windows 98 go unhampered by the Justice Dept., analysts expect IE to shoot past market leader Netscape to become No.1 this year. Microsoft's browser has one huge draw: It's free. Cash-rich Microsoft can afford such tactics, while scrappy rivals such as Netscape have to charge a few dollars. And that can make a difference. Internet service provider Concentric Network Corp., for example, switched from Netscape's browser to IE over price. ''We're operating on slim margins, so it matters,'' says Vice-President James Isaacs. That has sent Netscape looking for more lucrative server business. ''If I had to depend on the browser for profits, I'd be flat-ass broke,'' says Netscape CEO James L. Barksdale. In the face of a loss for the quarter, Netscape may be forced to match Microsoft's giveaway strategy. Internet Explorer is just the tip of the iceberg. Across the board, Microsoft is making the Net its No.1 priority. ''It's hard to think of much that we're doing that isn't influenced by the Internet,'' says Gates. ''All of our software is very tied up in helping people use the Internet in a better way.'' That includes deep-pocketed corporate customers. As they refashion their businesses around the Internet, Microsoft is out to make sure that Windows NT will be the software of choice. In the past few months, Microsoft has updated all of its corporate software to boost the latest Internet features. BackOffice, for example, now includes Commerce Server, specialized software that companies such as Barnes & Noble Inc. and Dell Computer Corp. use to run their online sales operations. As it does in the browser market, Microsoft gives away much of its basic Internet server software. It packages Internet programs, such as Site Server for managing Web sites, with BackOffice at no additional cost. And each copy of NT includes Internet Information Server, a basic Web-server program. That has helped catapult Microsoft's share of Web and corporate intranet servers to 55%, with all rival Unix makers combined at No.2, with a 36% share. The Net initiatives that draw the most attention, though, are Microsoft's attempts at building new Web-style businesses. It has set up 16 Web sites for everything from online investing to travel reservations to home buying. Some of these Web sites are already leaders in their categories. Microsoft's Expedia is in a dead heat with Preview Travel and Travelocity for the top spot in online travel, with more than $2 million in bookings a week. CarPoint has quickly become a popular spot for car buyers. This year, CarPoint is expected to begin offering insurance and financing services that will make it a one-stop shop for auto needs. Forrester Research Inc. predicts that CarPoint will rack up sales of $10 million a month within a couple of years. MSNBC, Microsoft's news venture with NBC, ranks third--after Softbank's news site ZDNet, and Walt Disney's site--in the most recent PC Meter Survey of Web-site viewership in the news, information, and entertainment category. Microsoft plans to launch a couple of new sites this year. One, code-named Boardwalk, will let home buyers shop for real estate and mortgages. The other is an online bill-paying service that will be operated as a joint venture with First Data Corp. ''There will be three or four major networks on the Internet, and we expect to be one of them,'' says Jeff Sanderson, general manager for Microsoft Network, the software giant's online service. By some measures, Microsoft is already there. PC Meter rates Microsoft's 16 Web sites combined as No.4 in its monthly survey--behind only America Online, Yahoo!, and Netscape. LOCAL UPRISING. The prospect of Microsoft entering everything from travel to car sales has put competitors on alert. Indeed, even a rumor of Microsoft's imminent arrival can jolt formerly complacent industries into action. Take newspaper publishers. Last year, when Microsoft announced it would launch Sidewalk, a series of Web sites offering local-entertainment listings, newspaper publishers geared up to protect their $24 billion in annual local advertising. Some 136 newspapers signed up with Zip2 Corp., a Mountain View (Calif.) supplier of online publishing technology that helps publishers create electronic versions of their newspapers. ''Microsoft tries to scare people into giving up, but it's just not working,'' says Zip2 CEO Rich Sorkin, who claims that his combined newspaper sites are racking up 8 million viewers a month--nearly triple the traffic Microsoft's 10 Sidewalk sites are drawing. So are critics' fears founded? Gates claims Microsoft has no grand plan to control the Net. What's more, not all of his Web ventures have been hits. Microsoft Network, the company's online service, has failed to live up to its early hype. LONG-TERM VIEW. While some of these new business are starting to pay off, Microsoft views the estimated $250 million a year it spends on Web sites as an investment in the future. ''Anybody involved in this is projecting out 5 to 10 years and asking what can they start to build now that can become more valuable as the Internet becomes more mainstream,'' says Gates. For that reason, Microsoft's biggest Web opportunity may lie in doing what it does best--creating software for others to use and build upon. It has begun selling its online travel software to airlines, including Northwest Airlines Corp. and Continental Airlines Inc. And American Express Co. is selling travel services to corporations based on Microsoft software called Microsoft Travel Technologies. ''They paid us quite a bit for that,'' says Gates. The potential looks huge: American Express Interactive is being rolled out in 20 large corporations, including Monsanto and Chrysler. An additional 180 companies will be using it by the end of 1998. All told, these companies represent more than $5 billion in yearly travel purchases, according to Microsoft's Richard Barton, general manager of Expedia. Still, it is unlikely that Microsoft will dominate the Web the way it has PC software. For one, it must compete against the giants in their fields, be they bankers, stock brokerages, real estate empires, auto makers, or travel agents. And the Web is still a work in progress, with new sites and opportunities popping up every day. Even with Windows as a starting point for most computer users, ''everything else is just a click away,'' says Bill Bass, a new-media analyst for Forrester Research. For his part, Gates doesn't show any willingness to let up to placate his critics or government investigators. And there's no sign in Redmond of complacency. In fact, Gates sees threats all around--even from operating systems that few people have ever heard of and Web sites that haven't been created yet. The key for Microsoft, he says, is satisfying customers, innovating, and keeping prices low. ''If we don't do all of these things,'' says its 43-year-old chairman, ''Microsoft will be replaced.'' It's that sort of paranoia that has enabled Mircosoft to survive and thrive. It's possible, of course, that competitors will blunt his new attack in at least some areas. But unless the government succeeds in a full-scale antitrust assault, Bill Gates and Microsoft are destined to become a still more potent force in the world's most important industry. By Steve Hamm in Redmond, Wash., with Amy Cortese in New York and Susan B. Garland in Washington, D.C. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 07:57:39 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Microsoft's Future Message-ID: <8bd5d769a398c8464c62c1ebd07d42ed@anon.efga.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain MICROSOFT'S FUTURE A band of powerful foes is determined to slow the Gates juggernaut, but Microsoft's reach already extends further than you may think In December, Samuel Goodhope stood hunched over an Austin conference-room table eyeing a dismembered personal computer. As a special assistant in the Texas Attorney General's office and point man in its antitrust investigation into Microsoft Corp., he needed a keen understanding of a PC's innards. So a technician painstakingly explained how each of the components is supplied by a different company, but they must all work with the critical Windows operating system made by a single corporation, Microsoft. That's when it hit him: Microsoft owns a key monopoly in the Digital Age, and the software maker is a lot like the Borg. These fictional Star Trek characters--part flesh, part machine--prowl the universe conquering other races. ''Resistance is futile,'' says Goodhope in a mechanical, Borg-like voice. ''You will be assimilated.'' Microsoft and its hypercompetitive chairman, William H. Gates III, are no science-fiction fantasy. And the Texas Attorney General's office fully intends to resist. Indeed, Goodhope predicts that two dozen states will soon join his effort--amassing some 100 attorneys for a Big Tobacco-style courtroom battle that he says could reshape the computing landscape. ''We're talking about what the high-tech world is going to look like in five years,'' says Goodhope. ''Will the Information Superhighway become the Bill Gates toll road?'' Microphobia, a national pastime in recent years, is reaching a new frenzy. Since October, the most influential company in the $700 billion U.S. computer industry has been under siege from all quarters. Texas and eight other states have launched investigations into whether the software giant is using anticompetitive tactics. Consumer advocate Ralph Nader is calling for a breakup of the company. The European Commission is mulling a probe of its own. And Microsoft is embroiled in a knock-down, drag-out fight with the Justice Dept. over whether it is violating a 1995 consent decree by requiring PC makers to ship its Internet browser with Windows 95. ''This kind of product-forcing is an abuse of monopoly power--and we will seek to put an end to it,'' vows Joel I. Klein, Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Div. For his part, Gates denies violating any laws and says the earlier consent decree with Justice allows Microsoft to enhance Windows. Browsing, he says, is a natural addition to an operating system. ''What we're doing is quite straightforward and quite pro-customer,'' Gates says. ''In no way are we eliminating choice.'' He also bristles at the notion that Microsoft wants to turn the Internet into its personal toll road. ''We'll get our revenue from selling great software.'' Microsoft's dispute with the Justice Dept. is no mere joust over the mechanics of linking a Web browser to the ubiquitous Windows 95. The passions aroused in the government and industry alike reflect the realization that this is a bruising fight over which companies will dominate the Internet and move into new markets from there. The prize is huge. The Net not only opens the possibility of a vast new marketplace for everything from banking to buying cars, but it is also the electronic gateway into homes and--perhaps more important--into corporations. Owning the browser and Internet server software could well become as key to the new age of Net computing as Windows is to PCs. If Gates extends his PC hegemony to these new realms, the little software company he co-founded in 1975 could come to dominate the nexus of computing and communications well into the 21st century. ''The question is, are we looking forward to the Information Age, or will it be the Microsoft Age?'' asks Lawrence J. Ellison, chairman of database maker Oracle Corp. ''It's kind of like Microsoft vs. mankind--and mankind is the underdog.'' A BROADER CASE? Hyperbole aside, Microsoft wants to move into every business where software matters--from the chilled rooms of mainframe computing to the household appliances that are being computerized. Gates wants to expand into the corporate-enterprise market--from databases to E-mail. And he wants to play in consumer electronics--from TV set-top boxes to car navigation systems. Rivals and critics hope the Justice Dept. can slow down Microsoft's pace. The current dispute, which centers on Windows 95, is likely to have little effect on Microsoft. But if Justic broadens its suit to cover the upcoming Windows 98--something it has hinted it might do--or attacks Windows NT as well, Microsoft would suffer a devastating blow. ''Unless we're allowed to enhance Windows, I don't know how to do my job,'' says Gates. It would also set an ominous precedent that cuts to the heart of the software maker's strategy of melding Internet capabilities into all of its products--from PC software to new consumer-electronics offerings to corporate enterprise programs. It could get worse for Gates. No matter how the current dispute is resolved, Klein and his team could bring a broader antitrust case. Caswell O. Hobbs, a Washington (D.C.) antitrust attorney with Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, says the current consent violation case is just ''an opening salvo. I'm sure it's not the last of the proceedings.'' In its thinking on Microsoft, Justice is relying on a novel theory in antitrust law. It's not only about monopoly pricing power, as in the days of the Robber Barons. Information technology, after all, is an industry in which prices fall. Rather, Justice is concerned that Microsoft's operating system is so dominant that it is the de facto standard, the very springboard for all sorts of new applications software. By controlling the standard, Justice fears, Microsoft stifles innovation. That means competing technologies, even if they're better, stand little chance, making it tough for startups to bring whizzy new inventions to market. ''They're hell-bent on dominating the entire information infrastructure of the world,'' says attorney Gary Reback, who represents rival Netscape Communications Corp., ''and it scares the daylights out of me.'' Such talk rankles Gates. He says his rivals should spend less time obsessing about Microsoft and more time on their own businesses. What's more, he argues, there's no assurance Microsoft will succeed in any new markets, much less dominate them. The emergence of Netscape's popular Navigator browser and Sun Microsystems Inc.'s Java programming language--threats to Windows, as he sees it--shows that the industry is highly competitive. ''No one has a guaranteed position,'' says Gates. Point taken. But if ever there was a company that has the best seat in the house, it's Microsoft. It practically owns the PC software market. Its Windows operating system claims some 86% of that segment, and its Office suite of productivity programs, including a spreadsheet and word processor, has an 87% lock. Game won--and the victor has emerged enormously wealthy. Microsoft is expected to reel in more than $4 billion in profits this fiscal year, which ends in June, on $14 billion in revenues, up 23% over a year ago. It looks even richer when compared with the rest of the software industry: In calendar year 1996, its $8.7 billion in revenues accounted for 10% of all sales for the 613 publicly traded software and information-services companies, says Standard & Poor's Compustat. More significantly, its $3.1 billion in operating profits was a remarkable 30% of all such profits. With the company's pockets lined with riches from Windows and related software, it can spend a staggering $2.5 billion a year on new-product development--more than the annual profits of the next 10 largest software companies combined. And what it can't develop fast enough, the company can buy. In the past two years, Microsoft has invested in or acquired 37 companies. On Dec. 31, it added Hotmail, an Internet E-mail startup founded by Sabeer Bhatia and Jack Smith, for an estimated $350 million in stock (page 37). It has snapped up technologies for surfing the Web via TV, for viewing video over the Net, for authoring Web pages, and for computers to understand voice commands. And still its cash hoard keeps climbing--from $6.9 billion in mid-1996 to $10 billion today. That has helped Microsoft extend its reach to brand-new terrain. In the past year, Microsoft has gotten a jump in online travel services, car sales, investment advice, and gaming. And Gates isn't shy about his ambitions. ''We will not stop enhancing Windows,'' he says. ''We will not succumb to the rhetoric of our competitors. We won't stop listening to customers and being aggressive about meeting their needs.'' Indeed, 1998 may be the year Gates makes his biggest push yet beyond the PC. Starting this month, planned new products will move Windows into car dashboards, cell phones, point-of-sale devices, and on up the food chain into powerful server computers that can do the job of a mainframe. In short, the world ain't seen nothin' yet. Here's where Microsoft is headed. CONSUMER ELECTRONICS On Jan. 10, the next chapter unfolds. That's when Gates will head to the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas to demonstrate new $300-to-$500 palm-size devices that use a pint-size version of Windows called CE, for consumer electronics. These gizmos go a long way toward fulfilling Gates's dream of a ''wallet PC''--a tiny device for keeping phone numbers, schedules, and zapping E-mail, all of which can be synchronized with Windows PCs. A half-dozen manufacturers are ready to ship the new palmtops, including Philips Electronics and Samsung Co. The real buzz at the electronics show could come from the debut of Microsoft's ''Auto PC'' operating system. This version of Windows CE is built into a car's sound system. It can handle cell-phone calls, fetch E-mail, and dispense travel information--much like a ''Java car'' unveiled by rivals Sun, Netscape, and IBM in November. Nissan Motor Co. will be the first to show Auto PC in an Infinity I-30 concept car. So far only a handful of carmakers, including Volkswagen and Hyundai, have signed up. Microsoft is betting that aftermarket car-component companies will make Auto PC a hit. ''Windows CE gives us an opportunity to sell more software to more people,'' says Kathryn Hinsch, senior director of marketing for Windows CE. ''This could be the next billion-dollar business for Microsoft.'' Windows CE is a classic example of how Microsoft stubbornly pushes its way into new fields, even if it takes years. CE is the software giant's third attempt to crack the handheld market--after its At Work and Winpad operating systems that never caught on. Microsoft didn't give up. Over the past seven years, it has continued to invest several hundred million dollars to improve the basic software. CE was launched in fall, 1996, and nine months later claimed 20% of the handheld market, according to market researcher Dataquest Inc. Today, CE is licensed by more than a dozen handheld manufacturers, and it's finding its way into all manner of machines. Atlanta-based Radiant Systems Inc., for example, plans to sell Windows CE point-of-sale devices to fast-food restaurants this winter. Customers press buttons on a screen to select the food and drinks they want--and orders are instantly whisked to the kitchen. Such devices could help boost Windows CE to 60% of the U.S. handheld market this year, says International Data Corp. What happens when even the try, try again approach fails? Consider Microsoft's attempts to corral the TV set-top box market--the fulcrum for software, entertainment, and Net cruising. In 1994, it debuted a scheme for digital set-top boxes, but it fizzled along with the market for interactive TVs. So Microsoft tried a different method: acquiring the leading business. Last winter, Microsoft spent $425 million to buy Silicon Valley startup WebTV, which had pioneering technology for surfing the Net via TV. Since then, Microsoft has improved WebTV with a faster setup and, during the holiday shopping season, an added carrot--a $100 rebate to anyone who bought a $279 WebTV device and signed up for six months of the $19.95-a-month service. The result: WebTV has racked up 250,000 subscribers, up from 50,000 a year ago, say WebTV executives. Still, the world of TV is proving tricky for Microsoft. Last spring, the software maker once again began stumping to sell its designs to the nation's cable-TV operators for their next-generation interactive systems. The pitch: Microsoft would provide software for set-top boxes, networks, and servers that pump info across the cable network. When Microsoft paid $1 billion in June for a piece of cable operator Comcast, it looked as though it might buy its way into becoming a top supplier of software for interactive-cable systems. But no such luck--at least, not yet. In October, the cable industry announced it would require all suppliers to comply with a set of industry-standard specifications--not necessarily those of Microsoft. Gates regrouped. Microsoft revised its pitch to cable operators--agreeing to comply with the specs and to sell pieces of its software a la carte. It's unclear how Microsoft will fare, but one thing is certain: Cable execs have seen how successful Microsoft is in PCs and are determined not to let it control a key piece of cable-network technology. ''We don't want to be Bill Gates's download,'' says Tele-Communications Inc. President Leo J. Hinderly Jr. Still, rumors are swirling that TCI is about to accept financing from Microsoft--which could turn it into an ally overnight. CORPORATE COMPUTING Microsoft's high-stakes bid for the $30 billion corporate market has never looked so good. Four years ago, it was nearly a no-show in so-called ''enterprise'' software, which spans databases to E-mail to powerful servers. After a dogged three years and $1 billion spent beefing up its industrial-strength Windows NT, Microsoft is gaining ground. Today, NT accounts for nearly 40% of server operating systems, up from 24.5% a year ago, says IDC. That share could take off even more when Microsoft ships its fifth and most powerful version of NT late this year. With some 27 million lines of code, it is the most ambitious program Microsoft has ever tackled--and it could prove to be its trump card. NT 5.0 is designed to handle the largest computing tasks, giving Microsoft a sorely needed piece to push beyond midsize networks and small server jobs. Says James E. Allchin, Microsoft senior vice-president of Personal & Business Systems: ''Microsoft is betting the company on this.'' From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 09:31:08 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: In God We Antitrust, from the Netly News In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <55e3ie25w165w@bwalk.dm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tim May writes: > AMD is now trading at $18. Five years ago it was trading at the same price. > In fact, it's been a narrow range between about 20 and 30 for most of that > time, briefly blipping up to 40 before dropping back to the level it was > half a decade ago. In fact, it's where it was in 1983, 15 years ago. (Check > the charts.) > > Meanwhile, Intel has moved from $15 to $72 (today's price) in 5 years, and > from something like $2 (or less, as the charts don't go back to '83 for > Intel), up a factor of 30 or more times. This is not the way to compare 2 stocks. Let me illustrate this with a numericl example. Stock A has been trading at about $10 for the last 10 years. Every year it paid $5 in dividends. (OK, so why is it to fucking cheap) Stock B has appreciated from $10 to $20 over the last 10 years. Which has better total returns? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 09:32:13 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199801091729.LAA09084@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <17F3ie27w165w@bwalk.dm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Jim Choate writes: > > From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > > > I'm sorry, I don't have the time to look this up. If you're trying to prove > > that Gauss was not a nice person, I don't believe it. > > Anyone who would tell their dying wife, via their son, to wait a moment > until he had finished his calculations is not a nice person. Do you have proof that Gauss did that? This sounds like another one of those urban legends the envious sheeple like to invent about celebrities, like the claim that Leonrado da Vinci was a cocksucker. > > argument you can make is to cite Bolyai's claims that Lobachevsky was not > > a real person but a "tentacle" of Gauss, created to persecute Bolyai > > (gee, that sounds vaguely familiar...), and you can't find any more dirt > > on Gauss, then it proves to me that he was indeed a remarkably nice person. > > What the hell are you talking about here? I made no such claims at all. You're citing janos Bolyai, who claimed exactly that. Unfortunately, the poor chap went insane. > > You also haven't explained how Bolyai could have been Gauss's school friend > > being 25 years younger. > > Bolyai's father worked with Gauss (as I explained) and his son John also > worked with Gauss from the time he (Bolyai) was in school; not Gauss. You're confused, Jim. Farkas Bolyai (the father) never claimed to have invented non-euclidean geometry. He published a math textbook in 1829, with an appendix credited to his son, Janos, which contained the results published by Lobachevsky in 1829. He's lucky we're not accusing him of plagiarism. > I am going to refrain from going on with the remainder of your 'points'. Because if you tried to do that, you would again expose your ignorance, as you did when you tried arguing about Soviet-Japanese skirmishes in the 1930s. Coward. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 09:31:07 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Cracking a program (fwd) Message-ID: <199801100152.TAA11108@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > From: "Ching Yen Choon" > Subject: Cracking a program > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 08:46:24 +0800 > Let's say I have this encryption program and I don't know what's the > algorithm used in it. Is there a technique I can analyse and break it? Are > there any books or sites which teaches us how to do it? Applied Cryptography: Protocols, Algorithms, and Source Code in C Bruce Schneier ISBN 0-471-11709-9 $49.95 US Internet Cryptography Richard E. Smith ISBN 0-201-92480-3 ~$40.00 US Disappearing Cryptography Peter Wayner ISBN 0-12-738671-8 $29.95 US Decrypted Secrets: Methods and Maxims of Cryptology F.L. Bauer ISBN 3-540-60418-9 $39.95 US ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jewish Personals Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 10:07:29 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Reminder Message-ID: <199801100143.RAA10447@toad.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Dear Friend, At JewishPersonals, (http://www.JewishPersonals.com), we are dedicated to bringing Jewish Singles together. JewishPersonals is here to find your love, friendship or just e-mail buddies. Our site features, anonymous email, contests, bookstore, chat rooms and the unique Personal Agent feature which notify you automatically of any potential match according to your selection criteria. Come and join over 7,000 active members with pictures from around the world with a majority from North America. We invite you to visit our site and join us - It is fun, easy, FREE and it WORKS! Don't forget to tell your friends about http://www.JewishPersonals.com -- Sincerely, Deborah Moss (mailto:info@JewishPersonals.com) 19 W. 44 St., NY, NY 10036, 212 302 3366. Fax: 212 730 1681 Sign for your FREE* copy of Jewish Ink delivered to your door, the only Jewish Internet magazine and more from JCN -- http://www.jewishink.com/register.asp The JewishGuide to New York is open! http://www.jewishguide.com - more cities to follow. All services are provided by Jewish Communication Network, the premier Jewish Internet Company visits us at http://www.jcn18.com This e-mail was sent using an evaluation copy of dbMail by Mach5 Software. You can download a copy from http://www.mach5.com/. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: John Young Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 09:39:07 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Germany not so worried about Gestapo wiretaps now Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19980110013045.006e9b2c@pop.pipeline.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tim May wrote: >(Things have been quiet on the crypto legislation/international agreements >front, from a news point of view, but we can safely assume that all of >these bad things are moving along behind the scenes, and will once again >become cause celebres.) A clue to what's coming: BXA is due to issue its regulations for implementing the Wassenaar Arrangement about January 26, so wrote Jim Lewis at the agency. (Most here know that Wassenaar is an international agreement among thirty-plus nations to control export of technology, including encryption.) Other nations who have signed Wassenaar will probably follow suit, preceded already by Australia and maybe others. Scuttlebutt is that they're awaiting the US giant's move (or dealing for better incentives). Further, there's surely preparatory work going on for crypto legislation in the upcoming session, and we may see a push early in the term in concert with Wassenaar and perhaps other Net regulations stimulated by fear of infrastructure terrorism. What's worth pondering is what new arguments will be made for controlling/decontrolling crypto, new ways to divide the baby so every interest group can have a chunk, new serendipitous incidents, accidents and incentives. Recall Bill Renisch's comment that nothing has ever boosted interest in BXA-who like encryption, as several legislators and other who's-thats in and out of gov have discovered. Any topic that generates public attention is not to be ignored for long. Along parallel lines, The New Yorker mag of January 12 has two stories of note: A short one on how blame the militants for the OKC bombing so powerfully argued before the trials of McVeigh and Nichols was not pursured during the trials. It suggests an apology to militants is in order for groundless accusations. Another much longer on the economic theory behind Justice's attack on Microsoft and how it challenges free market theory, especially for high technology. That government intervention may be needed for the pervasive dependency of society on such technology because it has such vast potential for harm. A curious parallel to the argument for Wassenaar. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 03:51:57 +0800 To: coderpunks@toad.com Subject: Batch DSA Message-ID: <199801091935.UAA03400@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Batch DSA Amos Fiat invented a way to do multiple RSA signatures using only one full-sized exponentiation [J Cryptology v10 n2 p75]. The trick is to sign each one with a different RSA key, where the keys all share the same modulus n but differ in their public exponents e. A similar technique allows DSA signatures to be batched. As with Batch RSA, each message ends up being signed with a different DSA key, where the keys share the same p, q, and g values, but differ in their public y values, where y = g^x mod p for a secret x. These techniques may be useful for situations where heavily loaded servers need to digitally sign many responses. A DSA signature on a message M (where M is the hash of the actual data) is done as follows: Choose a random value k. k must be different for every signature. Calculate R = g^k mod p mod q. Calculate S from S*k = M + R*x mod q. Then (R, S) is the signature. The time consuming part of this is the calculation of g^k. This is the only exponentiation which must be done. All the other calculations can be very fast. We can't re-use a k value because it allows x to be discovered very easily. If two signatures (R, S_1) and (R, S_2) use the same k value, we have (mod q): S_1*k = M_1 + R*x S_2*k = M_2 + R*x The capitalized values are known, the lower case k and x are the unknowns. We have two equations in two unknowns, which allows us to recover k and x. If different x values are used for each signature, then it should be safe to re-use k. This is how Batch DSA would work. The signer would publish his public key as p, q, and g as usual, but now he would publish multiple y_i = g^x_i values. The convention is that any message is considered signed by the key if it is signed by any of the y_i. To sign a batch of messages, one k value is used for all of them. The same calculation as above is used: R = g^k mod p mod q (same for all) S_i * k = M_i + R * x_i mod q The signature is (R, S_i, i), where the index i is included to tell the verifier which y_i to use. This is not vulnerable to the problem above of re-using k. The multiple signatures have the relationships: S_1*k = M_1 + R*x_1 S_2*k = M_2 + R*x_2 S_3*k = M_3 + R*x_3 ... We always have more unknowns than there are equations, which hides the values of k and x_i. This same technique can be applied to most other discrete log signatures, which generally have the same structure although they differ in the details of how x and k are used to construct R and S. With Batch RSA, there is a tradeoff between batch size and efficiency. The calculations become inefficient for batch sizes larger than tens of messages when keys are about 1K bits. Batch DSA can efficiently handle larger batches, but it has a tradeoff between batch size and key size. Each key variant requires specifying a full-sized y value, while with Batch RSA the variants just required listing a small e value (and possibly not even that, if the exponents are the small primes). This will limit Batch DSA in most circumstances to similar batch sizes of on the order of tens of messages, otherwise the keys become unreasonably large. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 10:16:02 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) Message-ID: <199801100237.UAA11439@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Ok, my absolutely last post on this issue. Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) > From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) > Date: Fri, 09 Jan 98 19:50:35 EST > > Anyone who would tell their dying wife, via their son, to wait a moment > > until he had finished his calculations is not a nice person. > > Do you have proof that Gauss did that? This sounds like another one of > those urban legends the envious sheeple like to invent about celebrities, > like the claim that Leonrado da Vinci was a cocksucker. It is a commen citation in several of his biographies. The first place I saw it was in a science history book that Isaac Asimov wrote (you know who he is I assume, known for writing world-class sci-fi and one of the best bio-chemistry textbooks around in the 70's and early 80's) back in the late 70's. It's the same book where he talks about Torricelli (he invented the mercurey barometer) and how he sent his brother-in-law into the bandit infested hills to actualy test the device. There seems to have been some indication that Torricelli had an alterior motive in this action. Unfortunately I think I have attempted to read a large fraction of the 300+ books that Asimov wrote at one time or another since about 1965 when I really started to read sci-fi and as a result they all seem to run together. I looked in the couple of Asimov books that I actualy own but unfortunately it isn't in either of them. I will look at the library I keep at the shop next time I go out there but it is equaly likely it was destroyed in my house fire 3+ years ago. If somebody out there knows which book this is I would appreciate the citation. I will add this to my 'hunt-list' that I keep as I tour the many bookstores here in Austin. If I find it I'll holler. > > > argument you can make is to cite Bolyai's claims that Lobachevsky was not > > > a real person but a "tentacle" of Gauss, created to persecute Bolyai > > > (gee, that sounds vaguely familiar...), and you can't find any more dirt > > > on Gauss, then it proves to me that he was indeed a remarkably nice person. > > > > What the hell are you talking about here? I made no such claims at all. > > You're citing janos Bolyai, who claimed exactly that. Unfortunately, the > poor chap went insane. No, I am citing the translator of Bolyai's book; Dr. George Bruce Halsted. If you want to discuss this further and intelligently it might do you well to have actualy read the book, which by your own admission you never have. Don't be a miser, spend the $6.00 US. I *might* take your comments a hell of a lot more seriously if just once you would cite a single reference to *any* of your comments or claims. It is interesting that when it comes down to proof you don't have the time to do the research nor do you *ever* fill any request for references. > You're confused, Jim. Farkas Bolyai (the father) never claimed to have > invented non-euclidean geometry. Your twisting words and dangerously approaching straight out lying. Both Farkas Bolyai and Gauss worked together on non-euclidian geometry. Let me quote the translators notes for the book: " But to prove Euclid's system, we must show that a triangle's angle-sum is exactly a straight angle, which nothing human can ever do. However, this is anticipating, for in 1799 it seems that the mind of the elder Bolyai, Bolyai Farkas, was in precisely the same state as that of his friend Gauss. Both were intensely trying to prove what now we know is indemonstable. ..." As to my making mistakes, big fucking deal. Everyone does. The difference between you and me is that I am not trying to do anything other than figure out what happened and why. If I'm wrong I'll admit it (and I am at least once a day). I am also willing to do the research (as best I can with what resources I have) and also willing to cite it. All I ask from those who wish to debate issues with me is equal treatment, in short the opportunity to review their sources and an honest opportunity to refute those sources. You seem to have a personal motive in everything you submit and further *never* cite any sort of source that can be reviewed and repudiated or supported. To put it bluntly, you lack honesty in your dealings with others. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 10:32:42 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com Subject: index.html Message-ID: <199801100253.UAA11537@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Welcome to the Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer. The purpose of this mailing list is to explore the frontier of cryptography, civil liberty, economics, and related issues. This is a very high traffic mailing list. Several members of the mailing list are involved in various types of events through the year. Participation by members of the list does not construe any support or affilliation with the mailing list. Contact the author of all works obtained through the remailer network. They retain original rights. There are currently 4 indipendant but cooperating sites supporting full cross posting of traffic. The goal is to provide a mechanism for improved list stability as well as making moderation and other forms of attacks harder to mount. These sites are: ssz.com algebra.com cyberpass.net htp.com (Japan) If you have specific questions about the list or particular remailer host sites please contact postmaster@domain_name for further information. Should you be interested in participating as a CDR host then make an announcement on the list. This will allow all the sites to update their maps. All that is required to become a member is some form of remailer or forwarding mechanism and a means to delete multiple copies of the same message. Currently there are several remailer programs but majordomo is the most popular. In general a procmail script is used to remove duplicates. Please let others know about this mailing list, the more the merrier! To subscribe to the CDR you should contact the individual operators as conditions at each remailer site may be quite different. To subscribe through SSZ you should send a note to list@ssz.com or send an email to majordomo@ssz.com with 'subscribe cypherpunks email_address' in the body. If you have questions or problems contact list@ssz.com There may be local groups of members who have regular (or not) meetings in order to discuss the various issues and projects appropriate to their individual membership. These groups generaly announce their meetings via the CDR. Please feel free to make appropriate announcements of activity in your area. Some popular books that are well respected for learning about Cryptography and the various issues are: Applied Cryptography: Protocols, Algorithms, and Source Code in C Bruce Schneier ISBN 0-471-11709-9 Disappearing Cryptography Peter Wayner ISBN 0-12-738671-8 Internet Cryptography Richard E. Smith ISBN 0-201-92480-3 Decrypted Secrets: Methods and Maxims of Cryptology F.L. Bauer ISBN 3-540-60418-9 Some sites that that might be of interest: Austin Cypherpunks Soda Cypherpunks - Original site From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Adam Back Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 08:18:22 +0800 To: tcmay@got.net Subject: Re: In God We Antitrust, from the Netly News In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801092140.VAA00255@server.eternity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tim May writes: > [snip] > The AMD K6 may not be quite the dog the K5 was, I've got a K5, seems like a fine CPU to me... around the performance of a P166 for about 1/2 the price. Why do you say the K5 is a dog? K6 is similarly value for money. I also bought a AMD 486 120Mhz a while ago for similar value for money reasons. I thought for a while Cyrix or AMD had faster processors available than Intel. (Just prior to to Pentium II, where the Pentium Pro was highly priced and for some applications slower than an Pentium clocked at the same speed). I may not be off to buy AMD stock, but I like competition, and will buy AMD or Cyrix any time they have a cheaper and compatible product. Adam -- Now officially an EAR violation... Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 05:18:50 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Batch RSA for stego data Message-ID: <199801092105.WAA15456@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Problem: Suppose there is a source of data which looks like random noise but which contains embedded messages. This may be a subliminal channel in a crypto protocol, steganographically embedded data, or even a simple message pool where you want to disguise what key each message is for. How do you scan and identify messages for you? Solution: Extract bits as appropraite, apply whatever selection rules are necessary to pull them out of the stego'd data or other source. Some fraction of what results is messages for you, the remainder is noise or messages for someone else, which will be indistinguishable. Method 1: For finding messages sent by someone you have communicated with previously. Use shared secret data to flag the message. Method 1A: each time you send a message, include (in the encrypted portion) a 64-bit random value which will be used to flag the next message to them. Prepend the encrypted message with the 64 bit random value from the previous message. Each person keeps a list of the next random value to be expected from each communicant. The extracted data can be easily scanned to see if it matches anything on the list. Method 1B: use shared secret data and a sequence number to calculate a hash which will be used to flag the next message sent. This can be used to calculate the flag value to be expected for the next message from each sender, which can be compared against each potential message. For both methods 1A and 1B, once the message is recognized a shared secret key is used to decrypt the remainder of the data past the flag portion. The shared secret key can be changed after each message using similar techniques to changing the flags. (Safety tip: don't make the shared secret key the same as the flag value.) Method 2: For finding messages sent by someone you have never communicated with previously. Method 2A: Sender encrypts a low-entropy flag message with receiver's public key, pads it so it looks like random noise, and puts that at the start of each message. Receiver decrypts the beginning of each message using his private key, looking to see if the results are low entropy. When such a message is detected the secret key for decrypting the remainder of the message can be embedded in the low-entropy portion. Method 2B: Like 2A, but use Fiat's "Batch RSA" to decrypt multiple messages in one batch. Recipient publishes his public key with multiple legal exponents (say, the first 16 primes). Sender encrypts his low-entropy message choosing one of the encryption exponents at random. He checks to see if the low bits of the encryption output match the index of the encryption exponent (e.g. if the 7th encryption exponent was chosen then the low order 4 bits should hold the value 7). He repeatedly encrypts with different random padding until he finds an encrypted form which properly encodes the exponent. Receiver batches messages together such that the low order 4 bits of each message in the batch are different, and applies the Batch RSA decryption to try decrypting each message. As before the receiver looks to see if the result is low entropy. For both 2A and 2B it may be possible to do the decryption using only one of the two RSA primes, if the encrypted data was smaller than that prime value. (This idea comes from Shamir.) Even if not, the Batch RSA algorithm can be applied separately for the two primes and then the results combined at the end for each message via the CRT, as is often done for RSA decryption. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Declan McCullagh Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 11:39:08 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Will the First Puppy go under the ax? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Q: Mike, before getting to more important issues, how come you guys aren't neutering Buddy? (Laughter.) MCCURRY: There are a lot of people around here who have been neutered, but I haven't heard a discussion of Buddy being neutered. I do not know the answer to that. I will talk to the First Dog owner and get the answer to that question. Q: You would know if there was going to be an announcement today, wouldn't you? MCCURRY: I would not go beyond what I just said -- the Treasury Department is the place to go. Q: On the neutering? (Laughter.) MCCURRY: Not on neutering. Can you spay or neuter a puppy? Q: Six months. MCCURRY: Any dog owners out there that can help us? Q: Mike, neutering is usually six months -- MCCURRY: That's what I thought. It's got to be a little bit older. Q: I heard that you were planning not to neuter him. MCCURRY: I wasn't planning to do anything with him. (Laughter.) Other than sucking up to the president by scratching little Buddy's belly from time to time. (Laughter.) Q: It will, however, be at risk. (Laughter.) MCCURRY: I'll find out on that. And I know your insatiable appetite for dog trivia -- I will see if I can find out about that. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 11:40:30 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Spies like US Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain http://www.telegraph.co.uk:80/et?ac=000602131144806&rtmo=0sKsx2bq&atmo 0sKsx2bq&pg=/et/97/12/16/ecspy16..html A European Commission report warns that the United States has developed an extensive network spying on European citizens and we should all be worried. Simon Davies reports [INLINE] Cooking up a charter for snooping Spies everywhere A GLOBAL electronic spy network that can eavesdrop on every telephone, email and telex communication around the world will be officially acknowledged for the first time in a European Commission report to be delivered this week. The report - Assessing the Technologies of Political Control - was commissioned last year by the Civil Liberties Committee of the European Parliament. It contains details of a network of American-controlled intelligence stations on British soil and around the world, that "routinely and indiscriminately" monitor countless phone, fax and email messages. It states: "Within Europe all email telephone and fax communications are routinely intercepted by the United States National Security Agency transfering all target information from the European mainland via the strategic hub of London then by satellite to Fort Meade in Maryland via the crucial hub at Menwith Hill in the North York moors in the UK." The report confirms for the first time the existence of the secretive ECHELON system. Until now, evidence of such astounding technology has been patchy and anecdotal. But the report - to be discussed on Thursday by the committee of the office of Science and Technology Assessment in Luxembourg - confirms that the citizens of Britain and other European states are subject to an intensity of surveillance far in excess of that imagined by most parliaments. Its findings are certain to excite the concern of MEPs. "The ECHELON system forms part of the UKUSA system (see 'Cooking up a charter for snooping') but unlike many of the electronic spy systems developed during the Cold War, ECHELON is designed primarily for non-military targets: governments, organizations and businesses in virtually every country. "The ECHELON system works by indiscriminately intercepting very large quantities of communications and then siphoning out what is valuable using artificial intelligence aids like MEMEX to find key words". According to the report, ECHELON uses a number of national dictionaries containing key words of interest to each country. For more than a decade, former agents of US, British, Canadian and New Zealand national security agencies have claimed that the monitoring of electronic communications has become endemic throughout the world. Rumours have circulated that new technologies have been developed which have the capability to search most of the world's telex, fax and email networks for "key words". Phone calls, they claim, can be automatically analysed for key words. Former signals intelligence operatives have claimed that spy bases controlled by America have the ability to search nearly all data communications for key words. They claim that ECHELON automatically analyses most email messaging for "precursor" data which assists intelligence agencies to determine targets. According to former Canadian Security Establishment agent Mike Frost, a voice recognition system called Oratory has been used for some years to intercept diplomatic calls. The driving force behind the report is Glyn Ford, Labour MEP for Greater Manchester East. He believes that the report is crucial to the future of civil liberties in Europe. "In the civil liberties committee we spend a great deal of time debating issues such as free movement, immigration and drugs. Technology always sits at the centre of these discussions. There are times in history when technology helps democratise, and times when it helps centralise. This is a time of centralisation. The justice and home affairs pillar of Europe has become more powerful without a corresponding strengthening of civil liberties." The report recommends a variety of measures for dealing with the increasing power of the technologies of surveillance being used at Menwith Hill and other centres. It bluntly advises: "The European Parliament should reject proposals from the United States for making private messages via the global communications network (Internet) accessible to US intelligence agencies." The report also urges a fundamental review of the involvement of the American NSA (National Security Agency) in Europe, suggesting that their activities be either scaled down, or become more open and accountable. Such concerns have been privately expressed by governments and MEPs since the Cold War, but surveillance has continued to expand. US intelligence activity in Britain has enjoyed a steady growth throughout the past two decades. The principal motivation for this rush of development is the US interest in commercial espionage. In the Fifties, during the development of the "special relationship" between America and Britain, one US institution was singled out for special attention. The NSA, the world's biggest and most powerful signals intelligence organisation, received approval to set up a network of spy stations throughout Britain. Their role was to provide military, diplomatic and economic intelligence by intercepting communications from throughout the Northern Hemisphere. The NSA is one of the shadowiest of the US intelligence agencies. Until a few years ago, it existence was a secret and its charter and any mention of its duties are still classified. However, it does have a Web site (www.nsa.gov:8080) in which it describes itself as being responsible for the signals intelligence and communications security activities of the US government. One of its bases, Menwith Hill, was to become the biggest spy station in the world. Its ears - known as radomes - are capable of listening in to vast chunks of the communications spectrum throughout Europe and the old Soviet Union. In its first decade the base sucked data from cables and microwave links running through a nearby Post Office tower, but the communications revolutions of the Seventies and Eighties gave the base a capability that even its architects could scarcely have been able to imagine. With the creation of Intelsat and digital telecommunications, Menwith and other stations developed the capability to eavesdrop on an extensive scale on fax, telex and voice messages. Then, with the development of the Internet, electronic mail and electronic commerce, the listening posts were able to increase their monitoring capability to eavesdrop on an unprecedented spectrum of personal and business communications. This activity has been all but ignored by the UK Parliament. When Labour MPs raised questions about the activities of the NSA, the Government invoked secrecy rules. It has been the same for 40 years. Glyn Ford hopes that his report may be the first step in a long road to more openness. "Some democratically elected body should surely have a right to know at some level. At the moment that's nowhere". See also in this week's issue: Pretty good Phil bounces back (a report on the consolidation of the reputation of Phil Zimmermann, creator of PGP). 14 October 1997: Europe's private parts to expand From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: m2cresumes@earthlink.net Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 15:09:33 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Access Over 1 MILLION Resumes! Message-ID: <1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain NOT a job site, NOT a search engine, NOT a career board, NOT a newsgroup AND we do NOT limit you to a single database! U S Resume is a true technological leap. It allows subscribers access the OVER 1 MILLION resumes on the ENTIRE INTERNET (source: Electronic Recruiting Index, Dec. 1996). It finds your candidates and also downloads their resumes to your hard drive all automatically, so you can browse them later with NO Internet wait time. You gain access to the same "virtual robotics" technology used by our Fortune 500 clients, enabling you to spend less time looking for qualified candidates and more time placing them. Prices start as low as $295 per month, no more than an ordinary job board and less than just one typical help wanted display ad. Why not have the ENTIRE INTERNET as your own PERSONAL DATABASE? For additional information please visit us at http://www.usresume.com If the site doesn't answer all your questions, please don't hesitate to call Dave Weltman or Jeff Eisenberg at 914-627-2600. Thanks! P.S If you would like to be added to our DO NOT EMAIL LIST, please reply to this message with the word REMOVE in the Subject of your reply. When our Robot finds the word REMOVE in the Subject of any message, it will automatically add the senders email address to our DO NOT EMAIL LIST. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 13:07:53 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Einstein quotes Message-ID: <199801100530.XAA12109@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text I thought I'd share these quote... The one quote that I found really funny is the one where Einstein says that had he known he would have been a locksmith. At some point after he came to the US somebody asked him what he would have been if he hadn't taken up physics. His reply was a plumber. He was promptly made an honorary member of the national plumbers union. Forwarded message: > X-within-URL: http://www.humboldt1.com/~gralsto/einstein/quotes.html > > ALBERT EINSTEIN QUOTES > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "It is best, it seems to me, to separate one's inner striving from > one's trade as far as possible. It is not good when one's daily break > is tied to God's special blessing." -- Albert Einstein > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "It may affront the military-minded person to suggest a reqime that > does not maintain any military secrets." -- Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it > would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described > a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure." -- Albert > Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "So long as they don't get violent, I want to let everyone say what > they wish, for I myself have always said exactly what pleased me." -- > Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > "Teaching should be such that what is offered is perceived as a > valuable gift and not as a hard duty." -- Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "Gravity cannot be held responsible for people falling in love." -- > Albert Einstein > > Thanks to Rick Burress > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two > minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it seems like > two hours that's relativity." -- Albert Einstein > > Thanks to Glen E Kelly > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned > my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, scince for > him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization > should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless > brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all > this, how despiceable an ignoreable war is; I would rather be torn to > shreds than be a part of so base an action! It is my conviction that > killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder." -- > Albert Einstein > Thanks to Alexander Elsing > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not > certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to > reality."--Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Sometimes one pays most for the things one gets for nothing. -- Albert > Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called > research, would it?" > - Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age > eighteen." > - Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Albert Einstein, when asked to describe radio, replied: > "You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull > his tail in New York and his head is meowing in Los Angeles. Do you > understand this? And radio operates exactly the same way: you send > signals here, they receive them there. The only difference is that > there is no cat." > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > God doesn't play dice. > -- Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > God may be subtle, but He isn't plain mean. -- Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World > War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." -- Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > If A equals success, then the formula is _ A = _ X + _ Y + _ Z. _ X is > work. _ Y is play. _ Z is keep your mouth shut. -- Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "If I had only known, I would have been a locksmith." > -- Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Man usually avoids attributing cleverness to somebody else > -- unless it is an enemy. > > -- Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax. -- > Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." > --Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." --Albert > Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "I never think of the future. It comes soon enough." --Albert Einstein > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and > I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish." --Albert > Einstein (1879-1955) > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is at all > comprehensible." --Albert Einstein (1879-1955) > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "The release of atomic energy has not created a new problem. It has > merely made more urgent the necessity of solving an existing one." > --Albert Einstein (1879-1955) > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." --Albert > Einstein (1879-1955) > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing > is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle." --A. > Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. > The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly > submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his > intelligence." --Einstein, Albert > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, > education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would > indeeded be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of > punishment and hope of reward after death." --Einstein, Albert > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the > creation of the world." --Albert Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > "If one studies too zealously, one easily loses his pants." --Albert > Einstein > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Through the release of atomic energy, our generation has brought into > the world the most revolutionary force since prehistoric man's > discovery of fire. This basic force of the universe cannot be fitted > into the outmoded concept of narrow nationalisms. > For there is no secret and there is no defense; there is no > possibility of control except through the aroused understanding and > insistence of the peoples of the world. We scientists recognise our > inescapable responsibility to carry to our fellow citizens an > understanding of atomic energy and its implication for society. In > this lies our only security and our only hope - we believe that an > informed citizenry will act for life and not for death. > A. Einstein, 1947 d.C. > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor. > > > _________________________________________________________________ > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 14:58:44 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199801100237.UAA11439@einstein.ssz.com> Message-ID: <5BT3ie33w165w@bwalk.dm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Jim Choate writes: > > Ok, my absolutely last post on this issue. (Pointing to the horse) "He's dead, Jim." > > > Anyone who would tell their dying wife, via their son, to wait a moment > > > until he had finished his calculations is not a nice person. > > > > Do you have proof that Gauss did that? This sounds like another one of > > those urban legends the envious sheeple like to invent about celebrities, > > like the claim that Leonrado da Vinci was a cocksucker. > > It is a commen citation in several of his biographies. The first place I saw > it was in a science history book that Isaac Asimov wrote (you know who he is > I assume, You're getting desperate, Jim, and resorting to cheap personal shots again. Yes, I know who Isaac Asimov was. In fact, I met him in person. He made many little mistakes in his "popular science" writings. I don't consider him to be a credible source as far as personal gossip about dead science personnages is concerned. Any other citations for your bizarre accusation? > > > > argument you can make is to cite Bolyai's claims that Lobachevsky was n > > > > a real person but a "tentacle" of Gauss, created to persecute Bolyai > > > > (gee, that sounds vaguely familiar...), and you can't find any more dir > > > > on Gauss, then it proves to me that he was indeed a remarkably nice per > > > > > > What the hell are you talking about here? I made no such claims at all. > > > > You're citing janos Bolyai, who claimed exactly that. Unfortunately, the > > poor chap went insane. > > No, I am citing the translator of Bolyai's book; Dr. George Bruce Halsted. > If you want to discuss this further and intelligently it might do you well to > have actualy read the book, which by your own admission you never have. > Don't be a miser, spend the $6.00 US. It's not the money, it's my time. I am indeed being miserly with my time, Jim. Sorry, I don't think it's worth my time to read the rants of an insane person claiming that Lobachevsky was not a real person, but a "tentacle" of Gauss. We get more than enough of those on the cypherpunks list, from Timmy May &co. > I *might* take your comments a hell of a lot more seriously if just once you > would cite a single reference to *any* of your comments or claims. It is > interesting that when it comes down to proof you don't have the time to do > the research nor do you *ever* fill any request for references. You're lying, Jim. For example, you've asked me for a reference to the national origins act, which barred inter alia Japanese-born immigrants from 1924 to 195x; something you should have been able to verify for yourself. I gave you a reference to a Russian book on US history, knowing that being an ignorant American you can only read English. If you like, I can cite a number of Russian books on history of math as well, which won't do you any good. > Your twisting words and dangerously approaching straight out lying. And I've just caught you straight out lying. > Farkas Bolyai and Gauss worked together on non-euclidian geometry. Let me > quote the translators notes for the book: > > " But to prove Euclid's system, we must show that a triangle's angle-sum is > exactly a straight angle, which nothing human can ever do. > However, this is anticipating, for in 1799 it seems that the mind of the > elder Bolyai, Bolyai Farkas, was in precisely the same state as that of his > friend Gauss. Both were intensely trying to prove what now we know is > indemonstable. ..." Probably hundreds of mathematicians since Euclid's times have tried and failed to prove the 6th axiom as a theorem that follows from the other axioms. Farkas may have been one of the hundreds of people who wasted time trying to prove a false statement during two millenia. Gauss, Lobachevsky, and Janos Bolyai (the son) all proved that this axiom is independent of the others and pondered what kind of geometry would arise if it were omitted. Do you understand the difference? Do you have any evidence that Farkas's waste of time in 1799 contributed to either Gauss's or Janos Bolyai's impressive results 20+ years later? > As to my making mistakes, big fucking deal. Everyone does. The difference > between you and me is that I am not trying to do anything other than figure > out what happened and why. If I'm wrong I'll admit it (and I am at least > once a day). I am also willing to do the research (as best I can with what > resources I have) and also willing to cite it. All I ask from those who wish > to debate issues with me is equal treatment, in short the opportunity to You should cut down on personal attacks and flaming. > review their sources and an honest opportunity to refute those sources. You > seem to have a personal motive in everything you submit and further *never* > cite any sort of source that can be reviewed and repudiated or supported. Again, you're lying. Have you tried to refute the national origins act? My sources are Russian books on the history of math. Since you can't read Russian, there's no point for me to site them for you. > To put it bluntly, you lack honesty in your dealings with others. Jim, why do you insist on turning any discussion into a barrage of personal attacks, cheap shots, and outright lies? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Rabid Wombat Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 06:33:02 +0800 To: Crisavec Subject: Re: cypherpunks and guns In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980109002532.0084c330@alaska.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > > > >The fact that they collect a paycheck from the government is prima facie > >evidence of diminished mental capacity. > > Don't bet on.... > > > There is only one war, and it's not between the whites and the > blacks, Labour and the Conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, or > the Federation and the Romulans, it's between those of us who aren't > complete idiots and those of us who are. > > Who's side are you on? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Ryan Anderson Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 20:08:41 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: This may be of interest... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain http://www.law.emory.edu/ELJ/volumes/sum96/lessig.html If it doesn't hit you immediately, let me help. The lawyer who wrote this is the "Special Master" in the DOJ vs. MS case. It's an interesting paper, and should shed some interesting light on his viewpoint in the MS case. Enjoy! Ryan Anderson - Alpha Geek PGP fp: 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57 E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9 print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 09:08:21 +0800 To: Subject: Cracking a program Message-ID: <199801100849.IAA17818@acs.unitele.com.my> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Let's say I have this encryption program and I don't know what's the algorithm used in it. Is there a technique I can analyse and break it? Are there any books or sites which teaches us how to do it? Any help is much appreciated Thank you. YeN ChOoN From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 16:51:08 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Surprise - Anonymous Journalist Opposes Laundering [1/4] Message-ID: <199801100844.JAA10497@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain The following series of posts is extracted from E-Communist. In this article the writer (but a mere cog in the Anonymous Entity known as GovernMedia NLC), exhibits the guVermin cheerleading so pervasive among those in his/her profession. In keeping with the spirit of anonymous advocacy favoring global fiscal tyranny, "our" collectivistic comments are in brackets as indicated: [S'n'S] Originally assigned the staid title 'Money Laundering', "we" have taken the indecent liberty of naming each post separately: Part 1 "Know Your Journalist" [1/4] [1/4] ... countries set up the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) [not to be confused with the BATF] in 1989. Based at the OECD [worthle$$ bureaucracy #2] in Paris, this now has 26 member countries, which are supposed to abide by its 40 recommendations. Among other things, these encourage mutual assistance in laundering cases. International co-operation is also being fostered by financial-intelligence units [FiUs], some of which recently set up a special computer network to swap information about laundering cases. A statistical black hole What effect has all this had? It is hard to tell for sure, but such evidence as looks reliable is hardly encouraging [discouraging]. A report published in 1995 by AUSTRAC, [worthle$$ bureaucracy #3] Australia's financial-intelligence unit, concluded that between A$1 billion and A$4.5 billion ($740m-3.3 billion) was washed through Australia each year. The report noted that if this figure is accurate, then Australian poLice were recouping [recouping?, proceeds of voluntary exchanges are considered stolen when in fact those doing the "recouping" are the criminals] barely 1% of all the ["]dirty["] money that they [_]guess[_] is flowing into [but not flowing out of? It must be all those "dirty" foreigners corrupting the innocent Aussie drug addicts and tax evaders] the country--a surprisingly low figure given that Australia is widely acknowledged to have one of the most comprehensive anti-laundering regimes in the world. [so AUSTRAC thugs are basing their conclusions on guesstimates, which, if as accurate as they kinda sorta think they might be indicates: Minions of the Australian FIU stole, that is, recouped, some 10-45mil AUD in cash and an unspecified amount of other property, but this is "barely 1%" of the _potential_ bounty to be had in the lucrative worldwide industry of asset forfeiture. Allow me to "guesstimate" a couple of other conclusions they may have made: 1) AUSTRAC lacks sufficient funding (AUSTRAC clerks still lack vacation slush funds). 2) AUSTRAC lacks sufficient personnel (AUSTRAC entry teams are still without APCs and close air support).] When it comes to prosecutions of money launderers, few countries keep reliable statistics, often because laundering was only recently deemed a separate ["]crime["]. One that does is the Netherlands. According to its justice ministry, in 1995 some 16,125 [subjectively] ["]suspect["] transactions were reported to the country's financial-intelligence [looting] unit. Only 14% of these were sufficiently dubious [read: juicy confiscatable assets of sufficient size coming to their attention due to amateurish operations that lacked political protection which made these "suspect" assets worth the time and effort to grab] to pass to the poLice, and only 0.5% of the original total led to prosecutions. [no mention of the % of cases that led to confiscations] Anecdotal evidence suggests a similar lack-of-["]success["] elsewhere. Why aren't more laundrymen being caught? [what about laundrywomen, the sexist pigs!] The answer, say those leading the fight against dirty [free] money, is that most anti-laundering regimes are still in their infancy. [yet to grow into the horrid monsters of their wet dreams] But, they say, at least the situation is improving. [deteriorating] Stanley Morris, FINCEN's [worthle$$ named bureaucracy #4] director [thug], says undercover operations in America show that launderers' fees have risen from around 6% of the money washed in the early 1980s, to 25-28% today. The explanation is that laundering is getting harder and riskier--and hence more expensive. Some experts also claim that a recent increase in the ["]smuggling["] of cash across borders is a sign that [gasp] more ["]criminal["] ["]loot["] is shunning banks. [meaning people are fed up with American banks, American regulators and America in general: "sell off, cash in and drop out".] There has also been some progress internationally. A few well-known haunts of launderers, such as Switzerland and the Cayman Islands, have made it easier for bankers to report ["]suspect["] transactions [reclaiming lost virginity] without breaking bank-secrecy laws, and for their financial gumshoes to co-operate with foreign ones. [meaning they already have so much money on deposit that it won't effect profits significantly, besides which, the typical lazy African dictators' first choice remains CH and those who are concerned about such matters have long since moved to greener pastures anyway...] In February, Antigua, another Caribbean haven, closed five out of six Russian offshore banks because of concerns that they had been laundering money for Russia's mafia. [no security through obscurity there] The FATF has also cracked down. [pun intended?] Last year, for the first time, it publicly upbraided one of its members, Turkey, for not introducing an anti-laundering law. [Turkey, a typical 3rd world pit, is too busy stealing from its citizens via hyperinflation to bother with passing pro-looting legislation.] And it gave banks a warning abot dealing with Seychelles after the government offered anyone placing $10m or more in certain investments immunity from prosecution [no STO there either]. The law containing this open invitation [more like comic relief] to crooked cash has since been shelved. > E-Communist > 25 St James's Street > London SW1A 1HG > www.economist.com Fly low S'n'S Pro:__Money Laundering__Self Medication__Militia Grade Arms__Realism________ __Indirect Taxation___________Adults___________Individual Irrevocable Right$ } Smurf N Sniff Non-Member, Gunfiscators of Canberra | } P.O. Bunker 6669 "We don't want to be like those paranoid | } Hohoe, Ghana Americans, this is a social DemoBracy." | } fn-fal@edict.gov.un +233 55 1234 boycott GovernMedia NLC | ANTI:_feral guVermin____Vooters__________blue hellmutts______nihilists______ __biometric herd management__"(The) children"__state granted privilege_____! From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Anonymous Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 17:07:25 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: your mail Message-ID: <199801100900.KAA11892@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >On Thu, 8 Jan 1998 13:54:41 -0700 (MST) Graham-John Bullers > writes: >>On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Mix wrote: >> >>I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him. > >I think so too what's his email address????? > > > >Anonymous304 Uh, you subscribe to the list but you can't find Vulis' address? Just how stupid are you? From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 23:48:46 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <199801100900.KAA11892@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Anonymous writes: > >On Thu, 8 Jan 1998 13:54:41 -0700 (MST) Graham-John Bullers > > writes: > >>On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Mix wrote: > >> > >>I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him. > > > >I think so too what's his email address????? > > > > > > > >Anonymous304 > > Uh, you subscribe to the list but you can't find Vulis' address? Just how > stupid are you? Guy Polis is indeed very stupid. His former colleagues at J.P.Morgan and Salomon bros, where he used to be a consultant, remember him as a very stupid guy. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: anonymous304@juno.com (Anony J Man) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 23:13:13 +0800 To: m2cresumes@earthlink.net Subject: REMOVE Message-ID: <19980110.100047.3422.1.anonymous304@juno.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On 9 Jan 1998 22:41:02 GMT m2cresumes@earthlink.net writes: >NOT a job site, NOT a search engine, NOT a career board, NOT a >newsgroup >AND we do NOT limit you to a single database! > >U S Resume is a true technological leap. It allows subscribers access >the OVER 1 MILLION resumes on the ENTIRE INTERNET (source: Electronic >Recruiting Index, Dec. 1996). It finds your candidates and also >downloads their resumes to your hard drive all automatically, so you >can browse them later with NO Internet wait time. You gain access to >the same "virtual robotics" technology used by our Fortune 500 >clients, enabling you to spend less time looking for qualified >candidates and more time placing them. > >Prices start as low as $295 per month, no more than an ordinary job >board and less than just one typical help wanted display ad. > >Why not have the ENTIRE INTERNET as your own PERSONAL DATABASE? > >For additional information please visit us at http://www.usresume.com > >If the site doesn't answer all your questions, please don't hesitate >to call Dave Weltman or Jeff Eisenberg at 914-627-2600. > >Thanks! > >P.S If you would like to be added to our DO NOT EMAIL LIST, please >reply to this message with the word REMOVE in the Subject of your >reply. When our Robot finds the word REMOVE in the Subject of any >message, it will automatically add the senders email address to our DO >NOT EMAIL LIST. > > > From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 01:08:10 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4qm4ie46w165w@bwalk.dm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} writes: > > Why there is even discussion on this point on a list whose membership is > > composed mainly of market anarchists is beyond me, > > Since when has a crypto anarchist been a market anarchist? You can't realy be one without the other. You can't be a little bit statist. You can't be a little bit pregnant. > > the NAP and rights of > > association should clearly define the answer to this question, no > > agression is involved in the act of firing or declining to hire people > > based on their colour/nationality or any other factor whatsoever. > > Ok a for instence, if I was your boss and I sated that I would fire you > unless you would go *u-hum* cave exploring with me[1]. Such situations > have occured in the past, would you support them. If the sole owner of a business has a female secretary brought into his office, pulls down his pants, and orders her to kiss his dick; and fires her for refusing; then he's engaging in behavior that's been viewed for centuries as one of the occupational hazards for working women and nothing out of the ordinary. Of course if the "sexual harasser" happens to be governor bill clinton, then he can do no wrong; if the boss himself works for a corporation thrn we have an agency problem: she can complain to his boss, or the board of directors, or the shareholders, that he's harming the business by firing a valuable employee over his own sexual problems. If the secretary sues him in the US, she might win some money, turn most of it over to her lawyers, and never find another job; etc. Wouldn't it be easier to say that if you don't like your present job for any reason (including your boss making amorous advances, or too little pay, or the color of the paint on the walls of your office), you should look for another one? > To me a person with that amount of power is uneceptable. You'd rather give his power to the employee or to the state? Don't forget that this power is balanced by the employee's right to get up and leave. Would you have preferred the model popular in the medieval europe, where the boss was forced to care for the worker (peasant) if he got too old/sick to work, but the worker/peasant couldn't get up and leave just because he felt like it? Apparently that involved the boss's right to fuck the peasant and his family any time he pleased (ever heard of droit de segnor?) > > the model is ethically right in that it allows businesses > > and individuals to behave as they please as long as it harms no other > > person, > > So allowing someone to stave to death because thay have the wrong collour > of skin, or unwilling to get up close and personal with the boss, is not a > form of harm. Given the choice, some people indeed would rathe starve to death than work. However all modern societies provide some sort of marxist safety net: those who are too sick/old to work, or can't find work, or perhaps unilling to work are given some of the wealth taken away by the state from those who have it (mostly from those who do work). This redistribution of wealth is another contraversial issue, but it has very little connection to the question of an employer's right to discrminate on criteria other than bona fide occpuational qualifications. Indeed, if all the employers in the world conspired not to hire redheads, they still wouldn't starve; they'd get welfare (dole, whatever it's called in ozland), and the more enterprising ones would start businesses of their own and hire their fellow redheads. As US blacks once did that and were in much better shape than they are now. > Immagion there is a truck rolling out of conrol in your direction, > keeping silent may harm you by preventing you from jumping out of the way, > but this is not an agressive act, it is a passive one: I have declined to > warn you. The inaction that you've described is highly unethical, but hardly illegal. Likewise racial discrimination is very unthical, and I'd generally try not to deal with anyone who practices it, but it shouldn't be illegal. > [1] Not that I am thay way enclined. We know, you prefer kangaroos. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 03:23:42 +0800 To: paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Subject: Freedom, Starvation, and Uncoerced Relationships In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 6:17 AM -0800 1/10/98, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >On Sun, 4 Jan 1998, Paul Bradley wrote: > >[...] > >> > My rights to swing my fists end at your noise. When ever you interact >> > with other peaple your rights are tempered by there rights. Even Adam >> > Smith recognised that its was gorverments dutie to redress the failing of >> > the market. >> >> Why there is even discussion on this point on a list whose membership is >> composed mainly of market anarchists is beyond me, > >Since when has a crypto anarchist been a market anarchist? And how else could it be? >> the NAP and rights of >> association should clearly define the answer to this question, no >> agression is involved in the act of firing or declining to hire people >> based on their colour/nationality or any other factor whatsoever. > >Ok a for instence, if I was your boss and I sated that I would fire you >unless you would go *u-hum* cave exploring with me[1]. Such situations >have occured in the past, would you support them. Employees and employers make agreements all the time. To wear funny uniforms, to bark when the boss says bark, to write in certain languages, and so on. If an employee does not wish to do what an employer instructs, he or she may leave. Sounds fair to me. (And most employers will value work output--profits--over lesser considerations. So, even though a boss has every "right" to demand that employees where dunce caps to work, for example, few will. Those who do will lose their employees and go out of business. Sounds fair to me.) >So allowing someone to stave to death because thay have the wrong collour >of skin, or unwilling to get up close and personal with the boss, is not a >form of harm. I "allow people to starve to death" each and every day because they are not doing something I want. Think about it. Every time I elect not to send money to starving Bengalis or Hutus or Ugabugus I am "allowing them to starve," quite literally. So? If an employer chooses not to hire certain types of persons this is really no different from my choosing not to marry certain types of persons (and I can imagine I could save a woman from "starving" by simply flying to Bangla Desh, finding a starving woman, marrying her, and then supporting her. So?). These are well-covered issues in many books on libertarianism and freedom. Freedom means freedom. That some people will not have as much food as they would like to have in a free society is no reason to discard freedom. More to the point, crypto anarchy means taking such decisions about whether to discard freedom or not out of the hands of others. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "James A. Donald" Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 03:41:52 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: The name "Crypto Kong" Message-ID: <199801101918.LAA06148@proxy4.ba.best.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -- I have received some negative feedback about the name "Crypto Kong". Two people have complained that it is unprofessional sounding. This is not necessarily grounds for alarm. One reason the name irritates people is that it sticks in the mind like a bad song, which was of course an important reason for choosing it. No one is likely to say "Hey, I saw this plug for some digital signing tool, but I can't remember the name." On the other hand ... What do you think? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG dOmrVP48CpP0XXqoK97INGkIpJVWXfGzg3ZO/DO5 40BWwXgdXOaD0gGym/BpRFmyDIg3eYHNBgULka9Ix --------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the state. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 01:07:28 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: [Humor] Kennedy's New Legislation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} writes: > On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Mark Rogaski writes: > > > > > An entity claiming to be Bill Stewart wrote: > [...] > > > : It's only evolution in action if it gets them before they've reproduced > > > : > > > > > > Actually, natural selection in action ... > > > > Same thing... > > There is a diffrence. It is only evoltion if there is a combernation of > natural verence and natural selection. If you have a population of > unchanging clones (your typical 'master race') you don't get any evoltion > or improvement. In case of homo sapiens, it is the same thing. Assholes like the Kennedys kill themselves though drugs and reckless skiing before they have a chance to breed (or breed more). One of the reasons why all drugs should be legal is that people who should not breed will use the drugs to kill themselves, leaving more room/wealth/resources for their genetic superiors. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 03:54:52 +0800 To: John Young Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:12 AM -0800 1/10/98, John Young wrote: >John Cassidy writes in the January 12 New Yorker mag >of the controversial economic theory which undergirds DoJ's >antitrust action against Microsoft. > >He cites a seminal 1984 paper by Brian Arthur, "Competing >Technologies and Lock-in by Historical Small Events: The >Dynamics of Choice Under Increasing Returns." I've followed Brian Arthur's work for a decade or so, and find much in it that seems quite accurate. One of his main observations is that size _does_ matter, that larger economic agents often tend to get larger. There are various plausible reasons for this, but it does seem to match reality. (I'm avoiding jumping to conclusions that Brian Arthur is anti-capitalist or any such thing. Just discussing reality as it is.) We see this in the "Intel-Cisco-Sun-Microsoft-Oracle" universe, where each of these players has about an 80% or better market share in its respective niche. Now Brian Arthur doesn't claim that such dominant market shares will last indefinitely--the dominant companies in 1900 are mostly no longer even in existence in any recognizable form, and even the dominant companies in 1950 have mostly been completely replaced by "upstarts." But size does matter, bringing economies of scale, the ability to set and enforce standards, and the ability to withstand competitive onslaughts for longer times (than smaller, less financially solid, companies). >After years of disparagement the theory seems to have >caught on, at least at Justice and with others who oppose the >theory of free market determination of winners and losers. >Arthur argues that market dominance by inferior products >is possible, and cites MS-DOS as an example. Sure, there are many, many "non-optimal" products. Much of society is non-optimal, even in the infrastructure. Roads don't go where they "should," the wrong kind of electrical sockets were adopted, and so on, for examples I don't need to spend time listing. A way of viewing this is of _inertia_ or _sticking friction_. Once certain standars have been set, it is just not possible to roll back history and proceed down another path. For example, it might well be that the world would have been better off using the Motorola 68000 family in places where the Intel x86 dominated (for possibly accidental, local reasons, as anyone who has read the history of IBM's adoption of the x86 knows). And ditto for adoption of a better OS than MS-DOS was (same accidental decision). But we are not in that world, and the installed base of PCs and x86 systems and MS-DOS or Windows systems is so large that it is simply impossible to "jump tracks." Now eventually things will change. Some new paradigm will come along. There is no guarantee that in 2025 the dominant players today will still be dominant. Let's not forget that two years ago many were saying Microsoft would be wiped out by the advent of "Web browsers as operating systems and office suites," with Netscape Navigator being the Swiss army knife of programs. Recall that analysts were sagely predicting that Bill Gates had "missed out" on the Internet. Now we have the spectacle of Netscape demanding that the government give it back its dominant Web position! (Maybe then the University of Illinois can get the DOJ to sue Netscape to take away Netscape's dominant position!) > >Arthur is now a scientist at the Santa Fe Institute. He says >his theory "stands a great deal of economics on its head." >One critic said to Arthur, "If you are right, capitalism can't >work." Which is nonsense. All Brian Arthur has done is to analyze some of the "physics of markets" (my name). Schumpeter said much the same thing when he talked about the "creative destructionism" of capitalism. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: The Sheriff Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 02:00:14 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Spam Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I've got a question for y'all. Some idiot finally sent me a junk e-mail message that I couldn't do anything about with what I have the knowledge to do -- reading the headers turned up only one ISP, which was apparently owned by the spammer. I'm hoping you guys would know where I could find out more about this individual -- I'm hoping that he does in fact buy his service from someone else, and if so, I'm not sure how to find that out. If he doesn't, is there anything I can do? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0 for non-commercial use Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNLenyABMw4+NR29ZAQHvrgf+NnvFR55ExZrzp2m/XDT5MisT2rem4Hct /okK9HV/DkZJzCsklbqjOrJkEHg96txCPyQ+DKBWatP5ywoaw4O47Tn8udiuDNwI 7DGiFcbYtG5fFHKYzDxM3KWtXbIDn1bliFF80xSoYzYdJKqxCkYPtuaDjasr1EIG iYC9Sm+BQoeFb2n0ptxwB8PsK7Pi5nlf5DCXsIMGrQmcm6GqhgkzC3aNPqNucka4 lyY0YjLnx9WC2JDRrg0Xji1zffC5MiZJrf/1ne9HXylEubWXHh49UdCeAXwyzmDS 5vW7FY2XeQL2OcPOKRVU26eiqnyCxxkx/tLi3yq4yRDt/MfIDHBOuQ== =5oGu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 02:44:17 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment (fwd) Message-ID: <199801101908.NAA14049@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 13:32:31 -0500 (EST) > From: Jon Galt > Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment > > On 23 Dec 1997, Colin Rafferty wrote: > > > Oppression is done by a society. It can only be stopped by acting > > against the individuals in the society that are doing the oppressing. > > Well make up your mind! Is it done "by a society" or by "individuals"??? Actualy it's both, societies, their beliefs and actions, are individuals acting in concert. The relationship is identical to that of a tree in a forest. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jon Galt Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 02:40:57 +0800 To: Colin Rafferty Subject: Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On 23 Dec 1997, Colin Rafferty wrote: > Oppression is done by a society. It can only be stopped by acting > against the individuals in the society that are doing the oppressing. Well make up your mind! Is it done "by a society" or by "individuals"??? ______________________________________________________________________ Jon Galt e-mail: jongalt@pinn.net website: http://www.pinn.net/~jongalt/ PGP public key available on my website. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. ______________________________________________________________________ From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Uhh...this is Joe [Randall Farmer]" Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 04:15:22 +0800 To: The Sheriff Subject: Re: Spam In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > I've got a question for y'all. > > Some idiot finally sent me a junk e-mail message that I couldn't do anything > about with what I have the knowledge to do -- reading the headers turned up > only one ISP, which was apparently owned by the spammer. Well, if it's used only for spam, get it on some block lists. > > I'm hoping you guys would know where I could find out more about this > individual -- I'm hoping that he does in fact buy his service from someone > else, and if so, I'm not sure how to find that out. Well, it's pretty easy to harass or otherwise push someone off of the Net (I guess that's why we've got Eternity servers and anonymous remailers)...do a traceroute and an Internic whois. This will reveal his/her/its/their upstream provider (a hop or two before the end of the traceroute or as a contact on the whois results), among other things. > If he doesn't, is there anything I can do? Well, although I don't think this would be warranted for anything short of an emergency, you could try a more direct DoS attack by hacking, death threats, or DoS Politics, or you could try to get more powerful entities than yourself pissed off at the spammer. Like I said, though, I don't think it's wise to start a Scientology-esque netwar whenever an ISP turns you a deaf ear. Can't imagine being a remailer operator trying to defend against all this, though... --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Randall Farmer rfarmer@hiwaay.net http://hiwaay.net/~rfarmer From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 03:43:19 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: Freedom, Starvation, and Uncoerced Relationships (fwd) Message-ID: <199801102007.OAA14257@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 11:15:42 -0800 > From: Tim May > Subject: Freedom, Starvation, and Uncoerced Relationships > >Since when has a crypto anarchist been a market anarchist? > > And how else could it be? Easily. The acceptance of freedom of speech is not equivalent to the acceptance to spend and earn money freely and without regulation. Speech and money are *not* equivalent. This is as specious as Vulis' argument that these positions are equivalent to pregnancy in the logical realm, in short you are or aren't. The reality is that few people, other than statists or extremists look at the world let alone their personal beliefs in that simplistic fashion. I believe in the unregulated exercise of speech, including the dissemination and use of crypto technology. To do otherwise implies some sort of ownership of the individual by the society doing the regulating. Clearly an incorrect conclusion. The ability of those same groups to spend their money as they see fit is not supportable by that same logic. Groups must have regulated monetary systems or else they collapse because of the monopolization and therefore loss of vitality of markets. To believe otherwise is to accept the premise that these monopolies could somehow buy an individuals rights. Clearly a result even a market anarchist can't accept. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 03:46:36 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: The name "Crypto Kong" (fwd) Message-ID: <199801102011.OAA14307@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 11:18:17 -0800 (PST) > From: "James A. Donald" > Subject: The name "Crypto Kong" > I have received some negative feedback about the name > "Crypto Kong". > > Two people have complained that it is unprofessional > sounding. Two people? That's it? > This is not necessarily grounds for alarm. One reason the > name irritates people is that it sticks in the mind like a > bad song, which was of course an important reason for > choosing it. No one is likely to say "Hey, I saw this plug > for some digital signing tool, but I can't remember the > name." When I think of it I think of 'Donkey Kong'. > What do you think? Unless the loss would result in ten's of thousands of dollars of income leave it. If it would effect a large sales market it under a more acceptable name to the business community. Nothing unethical about selling the same product under two different names... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: John Young Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 03:15:06 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Theory Behind USA v. Microsoft Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19980110191251.0101e398@pop.pipeline.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain John Cassidy writes in the January 12 New Yorker mag of the controversial economic theory which undergirds DoJ's antitrust action against Microsoft. He cites a seminal 1984 paper by Brian Arthur, "Competing Technologies and Lock-in by Historical Small Events: The Dynamics of Choice Under Increasing Returns." After years of disparagement the theory seems to have caught on, at least at Justice and with others who oppose the theory of free market determination of winners and losers. Arthur argues that market dominance by inferior products is possible, and cites MS-DOS as an example. Arthur is now a scientist at the Santa Fe Institute. He says his theory "stands a great deal of economics on its head." One critic said to Arthur, "If you are right, capitalism can't work." For those unable to get the magazine, we offer a copy of Cassidy's essay: http://jya.com/arthur.htm (33K) A side note: the same issue has a short piece noting that the early charges of militant conspiracy behind the OKC bombing have disappeared from the trials of McVeigh and Nichols, and proposes that an apology is due militants, militia and other paranoiac targets. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 21:35:27 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Surprise - Anonymous Journalist Opposes Laundering [2/4] Message-ID: <199801101328.OAA07071@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Part 2 "Journalistic Secrecy is a Serious Problem" [2/4] [2/4] Taken to the cleaners ["]Un["]fortunately, some of this is not as encouraging as it sounds. For a start, the ["]dirty["] money leaving banks may end up polluting other businesses [MONEY LAUNDERING IS GOOD FOR BUSINESS]. PoLice in Texas say that foreign-exchange bureaux there have been a primary conduit for channelling drug money to and from Mexico. Insurers are also vulnerable. One recent laundering wheeze involves buying single-premium insurance policies with ["]dirty["] money. These are then cashed in early in return for a "clean" cheque from the insurer, or used as collateral for a bank loan. [On the way: Currency Transaction Reports for purchase of insurance policies with cash and Early Redemption Reports for policies held less than 50 years. Insurance agents will be required to report "suspicious" policy holders and report possible "structuring" violations. Then they'll wonder why customers are "shunning" insurance companies.] Even the rising cost of laundering may not be unalloyed good news. It may simply reflect the emergence of a new group of professional launderers who are better at beating the system, and charge more for doing so. [Or as Comrade Clinton would put it, "getting their fair share"] Some poLiceman fear that these experts may soon be using electronic-cash systems to speed up the wash cycle (see box on next page). [See post 4/4] Worse [Better], as old laundering centres close their doors, new ones are opening theirs. The table above [shown below this paragraph] shows the countries that the State Department thinks face a severe money-laundering problem. (Even states with tough anti-laundering rules, such as America and Britain, are listed if their vigilance is considered essential in the global fight against laundering.) The striking thing about the ranking is that it includes islands such as Cyprus, a ["]hive["] of offshore activity for the Russian mafia, and Aruba, a Dutch dependency in the Caribbean, which were not associated with laundering a few years ago. [Translation: Aruba et. al. have always been on their shit list, and now that they've taken out the higher-priority targets e.g. CH and Cayman, the NWO _Microchip Extremists_ are setting their sights on shutting down the lower-yield peripheral sites. (which they've "only just recently discovered" are pro-privacy areas)] Another notable inclusion is Mexico, which the report describes as "the money-laundering haven of choice for initial placement of US currency in the world's financial system". In March, the [criminal] Mexican government unveiled a series of anti-laundering [fig leaf] measures in a belated effort to clean up its reputation. Laundry list "High-priority" laundering centres, March 1997 A B C D Aruba yes . . yes Canada yes yes yes yes Cayman Islands yes yes . yes Colombia yes . . yes Cyprus yes na yes yes [Doesn't indicate differences between Greek and Turkish regs, if any.] Germany yes . . yes Hong Kong yes yes . yes Italy yes yes yes yes Mexico yes . yes . Netherlands yes yes yes yes Netherlands Antilles yes . . yes Nigeria yes . . na Panama . . yes yes Russia . . . . Singapore yes . yes yes Thailand . . . . Turkey . . . . Britain yes yes yes yes United States yes yes yes yes Venezuela yes . yes yes A Banks required (or permitted) to report suspicious transactions. [Communese translation: entry-level bank tellers required (or permitted) to make subjective determinations as to customers' intent and/or state of mind. Required (or permitted) to report people encountered on city streets who may be shunning banks in favor of foreign-exchange houses and cheque-cashing outlets. Development of mind-reading skills mandated by executive order.] B Government permits sharing of seized assets with other governments that assisted the underlying investigation. [Communese translation: Thieves drawing paycheques from extorted proceeds allowed to share stolen goods with accomplices in other jurisdictions. The Legislator/B-Crat/Snitch/Judge motto: "We Know Em When We Seize Um"] C Non-banks must meet same anti-laundering provisions as banks. [Communese translation: The woman with an appearance approximating the Wicked Witch of the West sitting behind the .357 Magnum resistant plastic that slips you 10,000,000 Bongonian bellylints in exchange for 10 euros is also a deputized collectivist agent/informant.] D Financial institutions and employees who provide otherwise confidential data to investigators pursuing authorized investigations are protected from prosecution. [Communese translation: Deputized Government Agents/Informants (that is, anyone with whom you exchange legal tender bank notes, a.k.a. "dirty" money) who provide "otherwise confidential" data so that "authorized investigators" may empty your bank account are not accomplices to looters with sovereign immunity.] Source: US Department of State (International Narcotics Control Strategy Report) [Source: Illegitimate Spawn of Hegel (Global Currency Confiscation Strategy Report)] [Notice again that the less fiscally totalitarian states are those actively engaged in recalling their worthless currencies, forbidding (in theory) their domestic hostages from sending capital abroad, forbidding (in theory) holding gold or using other means of protection from criminal governments, defaulting on foreign loans and various shenanigans in a similar vein. From this it can be concluded that for those on the outside looking in, chronic economic mismanagement and chaos are not necessarily a negative, these areas provide excellent entry points in the "rewire-chain"...] In the future, more Asian countries could be added to the list. Rick McDonell [, looter ], the FATF's representative [of Satan] in Asia, warns that the region is ["]vulnerable["] to laundering because many of its economies are heavily cash-based. [Solution: go hire Jerry Seinfeld, Patrick Stewart and all the other convenience-card whores to shill for the cashless society in Bangkok, Guangzhou and Kuala Lumpur?] Moreover, some countries such as India and Pakistan have large "underground" banking systems which sit alongside official ones [hawala]. Usually based on family or regional networks, these shift large amounts of money [and other stored units of value, e.g. crates of Avtomat Kalashnikova, "illegal" cash crops, RPGs, precious stones] around anonymously and cheaply. [25-28% markup indeed! Forget that rubbish] Such attractions, plus a lack of anti-laundering legislation, have already turned Thailand into a launderers' paradise. A report published last year [yet another report, this journalist needs to get out into the real world, hanging with fiscal bureaucrats and professors is stunting Anon-E-Communists' growth] by Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University put the amount of money washing through the country each year at 730 billion baht ($28.5 billion). This is equivalent to 15% of Thai GDP. [In future watch for the following commercials to be run in these vulnerable-to-laundering cash-based-economy television markets: (Jackie Chan dubbed in various local dialects) Amarakan Sexpress - don weave shantytown witoutit VIZA - accep at FinSEN office wowide MassaCard - it's swave money] > E-Communist > 25 St James's Street > London SW1A 1HG > www.economist.com Fly low S'n'S Pro: Money Laundering, Self-Medication, Militia-Grade Arms, Realism Pro: Indirect Taxation, Adults, Individual Irrevocable Rights } Smurf N Sniff Non-Member, Gunfiscators of Canberra | } P.O. Bunker 6669 "We don't want to be like those paranoid | } Hohoe, Ghana Americans, this is a social DemoBracy." | } fn-fal@edict.gov.un +233 55 1234 boycott GovernMedia NLC | Anti: feral guVermin, Vooters, rapacious tyrants, nihilists Anti: biometric herd management, "(The)" children, state granted privileges From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 07:07:49 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801102300.PAA06067@netcom7.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain [scientists] >"Name me one..."? How about Gauss, who didn't publish many of his results. >Or, of course, Fermat, ironically linked to Wiles. the mathematical establishment does not look with favor on Gauss' secrecy. the commentary is generally that it is a shame he was so secret and lost credit for his accomplishments. by the way, I don't agree that publishing is merely about getting credit, although because humans are egotistical, that can be a powerful motivator. as for Fermat, -- I find it interesting you are now mentioning various mathematicians; have never heard you refer to them. Fermat sent letters to many of the great mathematicians of his time, and wouldn't even be known if it weren't for his challenges. his famous theorem was published by his *son* and this amazing gem came close to being lost in all obscurity. >Not to mention Darwin, who sat on his results for almost 20 years, and only >issued a paper and his famed book because he learned another naturalist was >about to announce similar conclusions. in every case you cite, these people eventually published, and science is mostly aware of only their published results. agreed, science does not require that people publish immediately or even in their own lifetime. it does demand that they eventually publish. there are many informative episodes in which people who discovered various scientific principles failed to convey them, or weren't interested in it, and they had to be rediscovered by other scientists. these scientists advanced the knowledge by themselves publishing. science as a way of dealing with data can be practiced in private. this is a feeble form. science in its most potent form, as the *advancement of the human condition* can only be practiced in public. >Publication and, more importantly, discussion and challenge, is often very >important to the advancement of science. But is some cast in stone >requirement? Of course not. bzzzzzzzt. science atrophies without it. it is crucial to science. it is central to it. but I don't wish to be considered an authority on science or a defender of it. it has serious deficiencies as practiced today. >Building an artifact which embodies the science, for example. Exploding an >atom bomb was pretty clearly a demonstration that the science done was >correct, regardless of whether there was "open literature" or not. you refer to science in a narrow sense of merely constructing things. this is not the sense of science that is of crucial importance to humanity as a whole. the atom bomb was in some ways a serious regression of the collective human condition. this is all so easy, refuting Timmy's feeble grasp of science, that I might soon quit. unless I get the sense (which I have a finely honed detector) that his veins are popping, in which case I'll post a few treatises on the subject. p.s. >>I will post soon the list an article demonstrating my >>anger at the betrayal of sound government by a sinister state >>that has hijacked it. > >Have they begun torturing you with the snakes of Medusa yet? > hee, hee. there are many more snakes and conspiracies in politics than there are in all of cyberspace. I've set my sights higher than nailing lame conspiracist wannabes on an obscure mailing list degenerating into the total noise it was always destined for. there are some people that are not merely traitors to their government or various ideals, but to the whole human race. but I'm the first to give credit where it is due. I have always thanked all my enemies profusely for expanding my horizons. From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 08:21:40 +0800 To: Blanc Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19980108220504.00707df8@cnw.com> Message-ID: <199801110017.QAA10591@netcom7.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >BTW, you should consider that when Einstein proposed the creation of a >bomb, it was within the context of a war being advanced globally by an evil >madman who was gathering every resource to subdue and decimate everything >in his way, and that the rest of the world was desperate for a solution. uh huh, and we stopped him by ... bombing hiroshima AND nagasaki? I think there are greater madmen in the world than their poster boy Hitler who financed his rise.... >Also you should remember that some brilliant people, like Newton, who was a >shy man and didn't necessarily see himself as others did/do, did not care >if anyone else saw the results of his work. bzzzzzzzzzzt, he eventually published at the urging of his friend Halley and then got involved in bitter disputes about credit .. Once he had solved the >problems in his own mind, he was not exceptionally concerned that others >were also struggling with the same, nor whether "the community" needed the >answer. He was pursuing knowledge for reasons of his own. bzzzzzzzzt, I believe he was a member of scientific communities at the time. he also was intensely involved in reforming the government monetary system. as a younger person he was a loner, I agree. hey everyone, go see "wag the dog" and think one nanosecond about the world we live in and how it came to be the way it is.... From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 08:30:08 +0800 To: Tim May Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199801110024.QAA10953@netcom7.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > >>Don't be confused by Timy's claim to be a scientist, he is a technologist at >>heart. Many of his views and beliefs are motivated by issues of control *not* >>curiosity. >.... >>You don't know Timmy very well do you... > >Add Choate to the list of dimbulbs who think calling me "Timmy" (or Timy) >is some kind of witty insult. On this list, Detweiler and Vulis seem to >favor this usage. an insult? quite to the contrary, I have always considered it a term of endearment!! From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Gary Harland Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 08:43:47 +0800 To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Nervous Nellies at the PO Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Came across this by chance...having never heard of this 'disgruntled' web site, I'm curious as to how the PO managed to learn about the offending story...if they fired him because of an explicity fictional article expressing a fantasy shared by vast hordes of Americans then it kind of looks like the Post Office 'went postal' on one of their employees. > DISGRUNTLED POSTAL WORKER > > A South Bay postal worker has been fired for a fictional article he > got published on the Internet, in which he depicted a worker who was > so fed up with conditions in his San Jose office that he pulled out a > gun and shot his dictatorial and much despised supervisor. The article > appeared in December in the on-line publication Disgruntled, which > bills itself as the business magazine for people who work for a > living. > > The story, "Scrooged Again," appeared to have struck a nerve with his > employer, who informed him that he would be removed from his job at > the postal service effective Jan. 27 because of "unacceptable and > disrespectful conduct." > > The Web page site for Disgruntled is: http://www.disgruntled.com > ----------------------------------------------------------------- foggy@netisle.net lat:47d36'32" long:122d20'12" "Rather perish than hate and fear, and twice rather perish than make oneself hated and feared." -F. Nietzche- ----------------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Tim May Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 08:54:28 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 3:00 PM -0800 1/10/98, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >[scientists] >>"Name me one..."? How about Gauss, who didn't publish many of his results. >>Or, of course, Fermat, ironically linked to Wiles. > >the mathematical establishment does not look with favor on Gauss' >secrecy. the commentary is generally that it is a shame he was Doesn't matter how the establishment (whatever that might be) looked on him or not...you challenged me to name _one_ example, and I named several. Oh, and it is not true as you later claim that all of my examples "eventually published" all of their findings. Fermat did not, Gauss did not. My main point has been to refute your notion that any one who elects not to publish in the open literature cannot be a scientist. I know of many scientists who could not publish, or chose not to for various reasons. I mentioned the Manhattan Project scientists. (Choate made some bizarre claim after this mention that all of the science was known in the 20 and 30s, and that no actual science was done by MP "engineers" and "technicians." Might be a surprise to Ulam, Teller, von Neumann, and all the others who worked in secrecy on the atom bomb, then the hydrogen bomb, and so on.) Oh, and what of all the many fine Russian scientists of this century, nearly all restricted in what they could publish? Because they could not submit their work to open publication were they not doing science? The point being that open publication is only a part of the methodology of doing science, and a fairly recent one, too. >as for Fermat, -- I find it interesting you are now mentioning various >mathematicians; have never heard you refer to them. Fermat sent letters I know Detweiler that you hang on my every word, compiling indices of what I and my tentacles have been beaming out to you, but I don't track such trivia about whether or not I have ever mentioned mathematicians. I would asssume I have, as I recall discussing von Neumann, Hadamard, and other mathematicians over the years. But I'll leave it to you to search the archives over the past 5 years.... >hee, hee. >there are many more snakes and conspiracies >in politics than there are in all of cyberspace. You ought to know. --Tim May and his Tentacles The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 00:45:24 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Surprise - Anonymous Journalist Opposes Laundering [3/4] Message-ID: <199801101640.RAA00139@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Part 3 "Our Enemy: the Journalist" [3/4] [3/4] Whitewash [The Predictable Agenda Revealed] All these developments suggest that the world's existing ["]defences["] against ["]dirty["] money are ["]inadequate["]. [And we all know what their definition of "adequate" would be.] [*]Banking secrecy is a serious problem[*]. As the table shows, bankers in a number of "high-priority" centres can still be prosecuted [heaven forbid!] if they hand over confidential information to officials investigating laundering cases. [So, absent probable cause that a _real_ crime has been committed, "officials" must be allowed to engage in fishing expeditions without repercussion. Therefore, we must give these "officials" carte blanche access to: 1) private (actually public) bank data. 2) safe deposit boxes (send a spare key to FATF when you rent a box). 3) private records (unrecoverable encryption made a felony). 4) physical warrantless searches of "suspected currency smugglers" (on the spot or no-knock). Carte Blanche access is the ultimate goal. All done "confidentially" you understand. I won't tell the victim if you don't. And people would wonder why I don't have a domestic bank account.] It also shows that several of these centres have yet to extend their anti-laundering regimes to cover non-bank financial institutions. [the operative word being _yet_.] No wonder some financial poLiceman claim they are being asked to fight laundrymen with one hand tied behind their backs. [a straightjacket and possibly rope + oak tree would be appropriate ] As if that were not bad [good] enough, the current approach to tackling the [non-]problem of onshore and offshore laundering havens is flawed, too. The FATF has done some useful work, [like what exactly?] but it has not been tough enough with slowcoaches. It only censured Turkey several years after it became a member. [Turkey should tell this ATF to go take a flying leap] And it has yet to take action against Austria, another member, which still has anonymous savings accounts [which due to their membership in the reconstituted Holy Roman Empire they will eventually sell out or at best phase out with grandfather clauses] for its citizens [and many non-citizens as well, leave our Sparbuchen alone thank you very much] despite an FATF [*]edict[*] banning anonymity. [A most curious use of language: "despite an edict banning anonymity". And just who is it that supposedly granted FATF the authority to issue _edicts_ (as in dictate, force, coerce) or _ban_ a single goddamn thing?! Apparently a collective "hive" of enthroned, unaccountable, power-usurping bureaucrats are justifying their existence by rendering decisions "for" the little people and sees itself fit to spew forth proclamations unbeknownst to many under imaginary authority it has granted unto itself. How very regal of them. Is said edict (banning anon accounts) an example of the "useful work" this _anonymous_ journalist refers to? The irony is delicious. Does this represent the type of government-by-edict rule that he/she/it finds so agreeable? Perhaps she-he-it spends too much time attending WTO meetings and schmoozing with those-who-know-better to discuss the latest nuances of negotiated edict proclamations. You (anonymous, E-Communist writer) need to get out more, buckwheat. How about putting this edict thingy up for a vote of the Austrian people? An antiquated idea I realize but it would give you and your associates an opportunity to further propagandize the great unwashed to the cause of Total State Control. OTOH, then these aspiring fiscal tyrants would have to crawl out of their committee meetings and explain to the rabble why it is so urgent that private banking be abolished (confidentially, of course). Besides which, owners of anonymous accounts like them just the way they are and would find another way to keep their property out of your greedy little paws regardless (even if you did somehow manage to convince 50.0001% of the vooters to help you fight non-crime. "We" don't have to show you no steeenkin' passport).] Some anti-laundering campaigners say that criticism of members in evaluation reports is often watered down for diplomatic reasons [how can an evaluation be watered down when it starts with zero substance?]. "Every report was put through so many whitewashes", complains Sue Thornhill, [parasite, ] a consultant on laundering to the British Bankers Association. The FATF's fans [such as they are outside the GovernMedia sphere of influence] admit that some plea-bargaining goes on, but insist that it does not let countries off lightly. [What is this utter nonsense: "plea-bargaining" (?) "does not let countries off lightly" (?) Are representatives of "guilty" nations hauled off to some FATF Star Chamber and forced to perform lewd acts with smart cards?!?] Whatever the truth, [the truth being that money laundering is not a crime; acknowledgment of which would run counter to your basic philosophical premise and thus be dismissed as extremist libertarian kookery] there is an even bigger problem with the task force's approach [the problem is the existence of FATF and other agencies of its ilk]. Every time it persuades a financial centre [against it's best interests] to crack down on laundering, crooks will move to new ones [as would any normal person who places a value on customer service]. As the amount of money that comes with them grows, so the incentive for these other havens to change their ways will dimish. [until they become fat and happy like Helvetia, then they begin to evidence a strange desire to look 'respectable' in front of the 'world community' and now readily strap on the knee-pads for their pimp: the United States] The FATF seems to be hoping that peer-group pressure is the solution. [Oh yeah? Just because your friends have abolished (de facto) bank secrecy and have ceased jailing informants and foreign moles does that mean you're going to do it as well? What would your mother say about that?] It has set up a regional Caribbean task [tax] force and is ["]supporting["] the creation of an Asia-Pacific anti-laundering group. [picture an enterprising cretin at FATF calling some string-puller over at the IMF: 'Tell them to give us all the access we want to foreign account holder data or else no more taxpayer coerced bailout for you Asians'...] But even if this attempt to sign up new members works, such an approach will take a long time. And there is a danger that many members will sign up to get the FATF's badge of respectability [and the cushy do-nothing jobs that go along with it for political hacks and career bureaucrats], and then drag their feet over implementing its recommendations. [confusing, are they _edicts_ or _recommendations_ ?] So are economic sanctions against refuseniks the answer? The sort of "economic warfare" envisaged by Senator Kerry is not. Banning citizen[-hostage]s of a few rich countries from dealing with known laundromats would hurt legitimate businesses, while crafty launderers would find ways round the restrictions. [Senator Kerry, (Looter-Taxachusetts): "Yeah right, that's a wimpy apologetic journalist pretending to present both sides of an issue, let's get real here, no _legitimate_ business would need to have an Aruban bank account when our local S&L offers backup withholding, full disclosure on request to any and all government employees, demands for SSN's and fingerprints, deposit insurance and CTRs, in short all the protection and benefits the surveillance state has to offer. So those who have the mistaken notion that all assets DO NOT belong to the state and DO NOT submit to the fact that those assets they are trying to keep from our grasp belong TO US and are only on temporary loan to individual shee, um, people need to be set straight and made an example of. I say we must pull another Panama and invade these small narco-terrorist haven countries and shut all their banks down permanently. If citizens of these pathetic excuses for states want a bank account, our good Bwoston banks are more than happy to serve them."] That leaves Mr Tanzi's proposed strategy as the only current proposal with something to recommend it. Of course, getting an international agreement on minimum anti-laundering standards will not be an easy task. But it is worth a try. For without a concerted global response [= global surveillance of every transaction = dictatorial global bureaucracies] to the problem of ["]dirty["] money, the world's money-laundering machine will be off on yet another devastating [to whom?] cycle. [Summary: Banking secrecy is a serious problem. Unreported asset possession is a serious problem. Non-governmental ComSec is a serious problem. Non-intelligence-agency laundering is a serious problem. Anonymous ownership transfers are a serious problem. Unreported cash transactions are a serious problem. Cash is a serious problem. Teenage fucking is a serious problem. Non-alcohol, non-prescription drug consumption is a serious problem. Contraband smuggling is a serious problem. The emerging e-cash threat is a serious problem. Anonymous accounts are a serious problem. Bearer shares are a serious problem. Multiple identities are a serious problem. Unregistered gun ownership is a serious problem. Inadequate government staffing is a serious problem. Inadequate international cooperation is a serious problem. Inadequate tax revenue is a serious problem. Freedom is a serious problem. Unacceptable. These activities will be stopped. You will be assimilated. These FATF swine need a good ass-kicking.] > E-Communist > 25 St James's Street > London SW1A 1HG > www.economist.com Fly Low S'n'S Pro:__Money Laundering__Self Medication__Militia Grade Arms__Realism________ __Indirect Taxation___________Adults___________Individual Irrevocable Right$ } Smurf N Sniff Non-Member, Gunfiscators of Canberra | } P.O. Bunker 6669 "We don't want to be like those paranoid | } Hohoe, Ghana Americans, this is a social DemoBracy." | } fn-fal@edict.gov.un +233 55 1234 boycott GovernMedia NLC | ANTI:_feral guVermin____Vooters__________blue hellmutts______nihilists______ __biometric herd management__"(The) children"__state granted privilege_____!--------------------------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 00:45:19 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: Surprise - Anonymous Journalist Opposes Laundering [4/4] Message-ID: <199801101641.RAA00151@basement.replay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Part 4 "Fighting the Next War" [4/4] [4/4] Next, cyberlaundering? If there is one thing that money launderers hate it is cash; physical cash, that is [No, we hate criminal governments who refuse to issue larger denomination notes]. Shipping huge wads of banknotes is a logistical nightmare [which would be less onerous if, by way of example, the US guVermin recirculated $500, $1000, $5000 and $10,000 FRNs. The printing plates for such "money-laundering friendly" notes having been de-activated since the reign of dictator Roosevelt; refusal to issue higher denomination FRNs to keep pace with Accumulated Wealth Tax extractions (commonly referred to as "inflation") since the 1930s is nothing less than slow-motion, backdoor currency recall]. It also raises the risk that couriers will be intercepted [they mean robbed] and the ["]loot["] traced back to its source. Transferring money electronically is both quicker and easier [but not necessarily safer in certain nations]. [*]Hence concerns in law-enforcement circles that new forms of electronic money could render obsolete traditional methods of tracking ["]tainted["] money, which rely heavily on the poLicing of bank transactions[*]. ["Hence concerns in law-evasion circles that new forms of vooter sanity threatening to outlaw drug Prohibition could render obsolete traditional streams of tax-free income."] ["Hence concerns in law-enforcement circles that new forms of vooter sanity threatening to outlaw drug Prohibition could render obsolete traditional pretexts for increased budgets, privacy deprivation and sheeple tracking."] Electronic-money systems come in three different forms. There are stored-value cards, which allow customers to load money onto a microchip-bearing piece of plastic. This can then be carried around like a credit card. There are computer-based systems, for example, those involving payments over the Internet. and there is talk of hybrid systems, which allow smart cards and network-based payments to work together. Although these new gizmos are still under development, financial regulators and policemen have been studying them intently. And they have raised several questions to which they want answers. One is whether limits will be placed on value that can be held on chip-bearing cards. A card without a limit "could break my back", [then there would be no need for a tree] worries Stanley Morris, [the anti-christ, ] who heads FINCEN, the American government's financial-intelligence unit [FiU]. He thinks launderers could use it to shift millions of dollars on a piece of plastic. The anti-laundering brigade [brigands?!] also wants reassurance that crooks will not be able to set themselves up as e-money issuers. [I guess as opposed to the crooks who set themselves up as fiat banknote issuers] And they want to know whether all transactions in whatever system will be logged at a central point, so that investigators can reconstruct an [unencrypted??] electronic audit trail ["]if necessary["]. [B.S., they don't "want reassurance" or "want to know" squat, this is their non-negotiable DEMAND; they will try to rob, kidnap, jail, and murder anyone who thinks different] At least one card-based system currently being developed by Mondex, a company owned by Master-Card, [MassaCard] is designed to allow money to be transferred directly between cards, without leaving such a trail. DigiCash, which is developing a computer-based payment system, is using what it calls a "one-way privacy" method, which allows payers to check who received money from them, but does not allow the recipients to find out where it came from. [as in a postal money order (but sans the silly $700 per m.o. limit and the ridiculous $2999.99 daily limit) sent to a payee anonymously] While these and other issues, such as who will have jurisdiction over laundering on the Internet, [I smell a brand new Global Bureaucracy in the air] suggest the new systems could cause the authorities a few headaches, some experts beg to differ. A report published last year by the Bank for International Settlements, [another report cited, another worthle$$ bureaucracy, amazing isn't it?] the central bankers' central bank, [in other words, a den of iniquity] noted that in most cases, measures designed to protect the new systems against fraud--such as attaching unique electronic serial numbers to transactions--would make them less attractive for criminal activities than many existing payment systems. At the moment, all financial regulators can do is watch and wait. > E-Communist > 25 St James's Street > London SW1A 1HG > www.economist.com [Remember if you do your banking in a socialist country, there are three parties involved in any transaction: 1) you, the presumed criminal. 2) the (non-)bank employee, snitch/narc/mind-reader. 3) the guVermin employee, looter/thief/spy.] Fly Low S'n'S Pro: Money Laundering, Self-Medication, Militia-Grade Arms, Realism Pro: Indirect Taxation, Adults, Individual Irrevocable Rights } Smurf N Sniff Non-Member, Gunfiscators of Canberra | } P.O. Bunker 6669 "We don't want to be like those paranoid | } Hohoe, Ghana Americans, this is a social DemoBracy." | } fn-fal@edict.gov.un +233 55 1234 boycott GovernMedia NLC | Anti: feral guVermin, Vooters, rapacious tyrants, nihilists Anti: biometric herd management, "(The)" children, state granted privileges From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Steve Schear Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 07:15:32 +0800 To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: GPS Jamming [FWD] Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain I think this might have been mentioned in a CP thread sometime back. At least it should have ;-) --------------- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 22:29:14 +0000 From: "Marcus L. Rowland" Subject: GPS Jamming *New Scientist* (8 Jan 1998, http://www.newscientist.com) included an article saying that a Russian company called Aviaconversia was offering a 4-watt GPS/Glonass jammer for less than $4000 at the September Moscow Air Show. It says that it could stop civilian aircraft locking onto GPS signals over a 200 Km radius; military aircraft would be harder to jam, but a more powerful unit could be built. The risks (terrorism etc.) are fairly obvious, and it's mentioned that it would probably be easy to build one even if this company's product is somehow removed from the market. Marcus L. Rowland http://www.ffutures.demon.co.uk/ ------------- GPS uses a wideband Direct Sequence Spread Rectum technology. DSSS, as implemented in GSP, is excellent for distance an direction finding due to its inherent, very accurate, time base. In order to conserve satellite power and provide a reasonable signal level at small (e.g., handheld) receivers, it spreads a low data rate signal over wide band, achieving a 63dB 'process gain' (equivalent to about a 2 million fold increase in receive signal level). DSSS signals (in general) can be jammed by very narrow (e.g., CW or continuous wave) carriers, especially pulsed, with relatively modest power. GPS includes significant provisions for anti-jam and although I haven't done a detailed analysis, I'd be surprised if a 4-watt transmitter would render a 200 km radius unfit for GPS navigation. See "Spread Spectrum Communications Handbook," ISBN 0-07-057629-7. --Steve PGP mail preferred, see http://www.pgp.com and http://web.mit.edu/network/pgp.html RSA fingerprint: FE90 1A95 9DEA 8D61 812E CCA9 A44A FBA9 RSA key: http://keys.pgp.com:11371/pks/lookup?op=index&search=0x55C78B0D --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear | tel: (702) 658-2654 CEO | fax: (702) 658-2673 Lammar Laboratories | 7075 West Gowan Road | Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | Internet: schear@lvdi.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 11:03:19 +0800 To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM Subject: area 51, enviro crime, secrecy==abuse? Message-ID: <199801110257.SAA20519@netcom13.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Environment of Secrecy A lawsuit alleges environmental crimes at the country's most secret military base Amicus Journal, Spring 1997, a publication of the National Resources Defense Council by Malcom Howard August, 1994: Standing atop a desert ridge in central Nevada, Glenn Campbell peers through binoculars at a remote duster of buildings in the valley below. "It's the most famous secret militaryfacility in the world," he says. The scattering of airplane hangars and radar dishes below, barely visible through the haze, is a secluded Air Force test facility known as Area 51-- or, more fancifully, "Dreamland"-- that is believed to have launched the most sophisticated Cold War aircraft, from supersonic spy planes to the radar-evading Stealth bomber. Campbell has made a mini-industry of showing off this clandestine outpost, built on a barren pancake of alkali just inside the Air Force's restricted Nellis Gunnery Range north of Las Vegas. His self-published tour book describes how to get a stealthy, yet fully legal, view of Area 51. Tourists pass electronic sensors on the road and watch helicopters patrol above, and are tailed by men in unmarked white jeeps who train high-powered video cameras on their every move. Though Campbell's tour stays entirely on public land, once on the ridge his clients stand only yards from the Area 51 boundary. Signs prohibiting photography and warn that "use of deadlyforce" is authorized against trespassers. These days, Glenn Campbell's not-for-profit tour business has fallen on hard times. In 1995, the Air Force all but shut him down: it seized the 4,500 acres of public land where Campbell's customers used to get their best views. The move demonstrates just how touchy the Air Force is about this military sanctum sanctorum-- since, in order to close out a few ragtag sightseers, it inevitably whipped up a storm of speculation among the conspiracy buffs, tabloid press, UFO trackers, aviation hounds, and government accountability activists who are fascinated by Dreamland. One can only imagine, then, the consternation in the upper ranks of the Air Force when four former Area 51 employees and widows of two others brought their now celebrated lawsuit, alleging that the secrecy surrounding the site had been used to commit and then cover up environmental crimes. "My husband came home one day screaming," says Helen Frost, whose late husband, Robert, was a sheet- metal worker at Area 51. "He was screaming, 'My face is on fire.' His face was bright red and swollen up like a basketball. Then he got three- inch scars on his back. A year later, he died." In 1990, the year after Frost's death, a posthumous worker's compensation hearing found that the liver disease that killed him stemmed from heavy drinking, not toxic industrial chemicals. But Helen Frost disputes that finding. She points to testimony from a Rutgers University chemist who found high levels of dioxins and dibenzofurans in her husband's tissue. Those extremely dangerous chemicals, wrote Dr. Peter Kahn-- best known for his role in the Agent Orange commission-- were likely the result of industrial exposure. Helen Frost and her co-plaintiffs filed the original lawsuit in 1994, alleging that the military and its contractors regularly and illegally burned huge volumes of toxic waste in the desert, exposing workers to dangerous fumes. Defense contractors from the Los Angeles area, they claimed, routinely trucked 55-gallon drums full of paints and solvents into Area 51. Employees would dig large trenches, toss in the drums, spray on jet fuel, and finally light the toxic soup with a flare. The plaintiffs named the Department of Defense, the National Security Agency, and the Air Force in the suit, charging that they allowed the burning in violation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the nation's keystone hazardous waste law. In a parallel suit, they charged the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with failing to inspect and monitor waste disposal at the facility, as RCRA requires. The plaintiffs have said that many other Area 51 workers are suffering from ailments similar to Frost's. They do not seek damages-- just information about what chemicals they were exposed to, help with their medical bills, and an end to the burning. The extreme secrecy shrouding Area 51 has turned the lawsuit into something out of a Cold War spy novel, replete with sealed motions, confidential hearings, blacked-out docket sheets, and classified briefings. "We're in the rather unenviable position of suing a facility that doesn't exist, on behalf of workers who don't officially exist," says Jonathan Turley, the George Washington University law professor who is representing the plaintiffs. The existence of the workers is fairly straightforward: because they took secrecy oaths in order to work at Dreamland, they fear recrimination for going to court, and so the judge has allowed them to sue anonymously. But the existence of Area 51 is more problematic. The base is absent from even the most detailed defense flight charts. Ask the Air Force communications office about the facility, and a spokesman will read from a script: "There is an operating location in the vicinity of Groom Dry Lake. Some specific activities conducted on the Nellis Range both past and present remain classified and can't be discussed." In court, the Air Force tactics have been just as convoluted. In the early days of the lawsuit, argued before U.S. District Court Judge Phillip M. Pro, much of the contention centered on the Air Force's refusal to name the place at issue. The plaintiffs have all sworn that they worked at a facility called "Area 51," and Turley has introduced evidence, such as his clients' employee-evaluation forms and various government documents, that refer to the site as "Area 51." Air Force lawyers, however, have said that naming the base would undermine national security, because enemy powers could make valuable inferences from any verified names. In response, the plaintiffs accused the Air Force of cynically invoking national security in order to wriggle out from under the evidence that illegal practices were going on at a place called "Area 51." After all, Turley argued in court, "If the defendants confirmed 'Area 51' is often used to identify this facility, a foreign power would be no more educated as to [the facility's] operations than their previous knowledge, derived in no small part by the defendants' own public statements." But the name of the facility was only the first of a barrage of secrecy arguments the plaintiffs have faced. Throughout pretrial proceedings, Air Force lawyers repeatedly invoked the military and state secrets privilege, a rarely used tenet of common law that allows the executive branch to withhold information from trial if its disclosure might jeopardize U.S. soldiers or diplomatic relations. To support the claim, Air Force Secretary Sheila Widnall submitted two afffidavits, one public and one for the judge's eyes only, in which she argued that any environmental review of the facility entered into the record could educate foreign powers about U.S. military technology. "Collection of information regarding air, water, and soil is a classic foreign intelligence practice because analysis of these samples can result in the identification of military operations and capabilities," Widnall wrote. Turley-- himself a former staff member of the National Security Agency-- believes that the Air Force is improperly using the military secrets privilege to hamstring his case. Most of the chemicals burned at Area 51, he says, were standard solvents, paints, and the Like that are found at any aircraft production facility. If sensitive data did emerge, such as traces of the chemicals used in the radar-blunting coat of the Stealth fighter, they could simply be stricken from the record. Whatever the case, so far the tactics of the Air Force have largely prevailed. True, the plaintiffs have changed the course of environmental policy at the base; because of their suit, the Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation into the charges on EPA's behalf, and EPA has conducted the first hazardous waste inventory of Area 51. But that inventory remains off limits to the plaintiffs, even though RCRA requires EPA to make such documents public because Judge Pro ruled that the president could grant a special exemption for national security reasons. RCRA has always allowed a president to create this kind of exemption; what is unusual about this case is that the judge allowed a president to do so after allegations of environmental crime had already emerged. And the exemption was duly granted: late in 1995, President Clinton signed an executive order exempting Area 51 "from any Federal, State, interstate or local provision respecting ... hazardous waste disposal that would require the disclosure of classified information ... to any unauthorized person." In the wake of the president's intervention, in the spring of 1996 Judge Pro dismissed the main case against the Pentagon on national security grounds. Turley has appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. To date, the court has not issued a ruling. In some senses, the lawsuit is unique: there is only one Area 51. The military has dozens of other restricted bases where highly secret weapons tests are carried out-- but, to the best of any civilian's knowledge, all of these sites are already listed on EPA's dockets. Environmental information about standard military bases is freely available. In general, says NRDC nuclear arms expert Stan Norris, the Air Force's behavior in the Area 51 case is "not representative of the Department of Defense. They're not naturally secretive in [the environmental] area." Compared to the environmental traditions of the Department of Energy-- which opened up information on its nuclear weapons production sites only after years of public pressure and lawsuits-- when it comes to the Department, Norris says, "We're awash in information." But Turley and other students of military secrecy believe that at issue in the Area 51 case is a bedrock principle. "In the end, this case can be boiled down to one question," says Turley "Can the Department of Defense create secret enclaves that are essentially removed from all civilian laws and responsibilities?" Borrowed from English common law, the military and state secrets privilege is as old as the nation itself. Ever since Aaron Burr stood trial for treason in 1807, the executive branch has, from time to time, sought to block information in civil and criminal trials. In Burr's case, the government refused to release letters written by one of Thomas Jefferson's generals. The defendant swore the letters would clear his name, but federal lawyers argued that the private notes "might contain state secrets, which could not be divulged without endangering the national safety." The secrecy powers were used most heavily during the Cold War, when military and intelligence agencies sought to hide technology from the Soviets and protect eavesdropping methods used against civilian activists. The Dreamland litigation, however, marks the first time the military and state secrets privilege has been invoked in a civil suit over toxic waste. It represents a fundamental clash between the demands of national security, in which stealth is an asset, and the right of public scrutiny that is at the core of U.S. environmental laws. National security and environmental law scholars take a keen interest in the case. "It seems to me that specific details of weapons programs can properly be held secret," comments Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, which litigated some of the key state secrets cases of the 1980s. "The question is, is secrecy being used as a way of of avoiding accountability, compliance with environmental law, or worker-safety standards?" Others see such speculation as both paranoid and naive. "Just because the Soviet Union is no longer around doesn't mean we don't need to keep secrets," says Kathleen Buck, former Pentagon general counsel for President Reagan. She argues that, since President Clinton's defense review revealed continued threats of ballistic missile attack, nuclear proliferation, rogue states, and terrorist cells, secrecy is a strategic advantage the United States still needs. "But we have to make sure that in building up the national defense, we don't destroy the very thing we're trying to protect," objects Steve Dycus, professor of national security and environmental law at Vermont Law School. A victory for the Pentagon over Area 51, he believes, could frustrate EPA's efforts to enforce environmental laws at sensitive military sites-- and the Pentagon, with more than a hundred active Superfund sites, is considered by many to be among America's worst polluters. Moreover, a military victory could have a chilling effect on other military employees who find themselves considering the difficult act of whistleblowing. After all, Dycus notes, RCRA is designed in part to enlist the help of citizens and states in enforcing environmental protection. While scholars debate policy, the employees of Area 51 wait for justice. The Air Force denies the charge of illegal burning, and Judge Pro dismissed the lawsuit without deciding on its substantive charges; so the plaintiffs have no answers to their questions about the painful skin disorders they say they suffer from. And, unless their appeal to the Ninth Circuit is granted, President Clinton's exemption precludes them from obtaining any information about what they might have been exposed to. Ironically, that exemption was made public the same day Clinton announced that the government would compensate victims of nuclear radiation experiments. "Our greatness is measured not only in how we so frequently do right," he said, "but also how we act when we have done the wrong thing." Has the United States done the wrong thing at Area 51? Without some kind of break in the intense secrecy that surrounds the place, the public has no way of knowing. To Glenn Campbell, who has made it his life's work to inform Americans about Area 51, the existence of this level of concealment-- and the lack of accountability that comes with it-- are cause for suspicion. "The military is the only governmental branch that has the prerogative to keep things secret from the public," he says. "The problem is, where there's excessive secrecy, there's usually abuse." From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 09:05:03 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com Subject: Gauss.html Message-ID: <199801110130.TAA15141@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain JOHANN CARL FRIEDRICH GAUSS _________________________________________________________________ Born: 30 April 1777 in Brunswick, Duchy of Brunswick (now Germany) Died: 23 Feb 1855 in Göttingen, Hanover (now Germany) [LINK] Show birthplace location Previous (Chronologically) Next Biographies Index Previous (Alphabetically) Next Welcome page _________________________________________________________________ Carl Friedrich Gauss worked in a wide variety of fields in both mathematics and physics incuding number theory, analysis, differential geometry, geodesy, magnetism, astronomy and optics. His work has had an immense influence in many areas. At the age of seven, Carl Friedrich started elementary school, and his potential was noticed almost immediately. His teacher, Büttner, and his assistant, Martin Bartels, were amazed when Gauss summed the integers from 1 to 100 instantly by spotting that the sum was 50 pairs of numbers each pair summing to 101. In 1788 Gauss began his education at the Gymnasium with the help of Büttner and Bartels, where he learnt High German and Latin. After receiving a stipend from the Duke of Brunswick- Wolfenbüttel, Gauss entered Brunswick Collegium Carolinum in 1792. At the academy Gauss independently discovered Bode's law, the binomial theorem and the arithmetic- geometric mean, as well as the law of quadratic reciprocity and the prime number theorem. In 1795 Gauss left Brunswick to study at Göttingen University. Gauss's teacher there was Kaestner, whom Gauss often ridiculed. His only known friend amongst the students was Farkas Bolyai. They met in 1799 and corresponded with each other for many years. Gauss left Göttingen in 1798 without a diploma, but by this time he had made one of his most important discoveries - the construction of a regular 17-gon by ruler and compasses This was the most major advance in this field since the time of Greek mathematics and was published as Section VII of Gauss's famous work, Disquisitiones Arithmeticae . Gauss returned to Brunswick where he received a degree in 1799. After the Duke of Brunswick had agreed to continue Gauss's stipend, he requested that Gauss submit a doctoral dissertation to the University of Helmstedt. He already knew Pfaff, who was chosen to be his advisor. Gauss's dissertation was a discussion of the fundamental theorem of algebra. With his stipend to support him, Gauss did not need to find a job so devoted himself to research. He published the book Disquisitiones Arithmeticae in the summer of 1801. There were seven sections, all but the last section, referred to above, being devoted to number theory. In June 1801, Zach, an astronomer whom Gauss had come to know two or three years previously, published the orbital positions of Ceres, a new "small planet" which was discovered by G Piazzi, an Italian astronomer on 1 January, 1801. Unfortunately, Piazzi had only been able to observe 9 degrees of its orbit before it disappeared behind the Sun. Zach published several predictions of its position, including one by Gauss which differed greatly from the others. When Ceres was rediscovered by Zach on 7 December 1801 it was almost exactly where Gauss had predicted. Although he did not disclose his methods at the time, Gauss had used his least squares approximation method. In June 1802 Gauss visited Olbers who had discovered Pallas in March of that year and Gauss investigated its orbit. Olbers requested that Gauss be made director of the proposed new observatory in Göttingen, but no action was taken. Gauss began corresponding with Bessel, whom he did not meet until 1825, and with Sophie Germain. Gauss married Johanna Ostoff on 9 October, 1805. Despite having a happy personal life for the first time, his benefactor, the Duke of Brunswick, was killed fighting for the Prussian army. In 1807 Gauss left Brunswick to take up the position of director of the Göttingen observatory. Gauss arrived in Göttingen in late 1807. In 1808 his father died, and a year later Gauss's wife Johanna died after giving birth to their second son, who was to die soon after her. Gauss was shattered and wrote to Olbers asking him give him a home for a few weeks, to gather new strength in the arms of your friendship - strength for a life which is only valuable because it belongs to my three small children. Gauss was married for a second time the next year, to Minna the best friend of Johanna, and although they had three children, this marriage seemed to be one of convenience for Gauss. Gauss's work never seemed to suffer from his personal tragedy. He published his second book, Theoria motus corporum coelestium in sectionibus conicis Solem ambientium, in 1809, a major two volume treatise on the motion of celestial bodies. In the first volume he discussed differential equations, conic sections and elliptic orbits, while in the second volume, the main part of the work, he showed how to estimate and then to refine the estimation of a planet's orbit. Gauss's contributions to theoretical astronomy stopped after 1817, although he went on making observations until the age of 70. Much of Gauss's time was spent on a new observatory, completed in 1816, but he still found the time to work on other subjects. His publications during this time include Disquisitiones generales circa seriem infinitam , a rigorous treatment of series and an introduction of the hypergeometric function, Methodus nova integralium valores per approximationem inveniendi , a practical essay on approximate integration, Bestimmung der Genauigkeit der Beobachtungen , a discussion of statistical estimators, and Theoria attractionis corporum sphaeroidicorum ellipticorum homogeneorum methodus nova tractata . The latter work was inspired by geodesic problems and was principally concerned with potential theory. In fact, Gauss found himself more and more interested in geodesy in the 1820's. Gauss had been asked in 1818 to carry out a geodesic survey of the state of Hanover to link up with the existing Danish grid. Gauss was pleased to accept and took personal charge of the survey, making measurements during the day and reducing them at night, using his extraordinary mental capacity for calculations. He regularly wrote to Schumacher, Olbers and Bessel, reporting on his progress and discussing problems. Because of the survey, Gauss invented the heliotrope which worked by reflecting the Sun's rays using a design of mirrors and a small telescope. However, inaccurate base lines were used for the survey and an unsatisfactory network of triangles. Gauss often wondered if he would have been better advised to have pursued some other occupation but he published over 70 papers between 1820 and 1830. In 1822 Gauss won the Copenhagen University Prize with Theoria attractionis... together with the idea of mapping one surface onto another so that the two are similar in their smallest parts . This paper was published in 1825 and led to the much later publication of Untersuchungen über Gegenstände der Höheren Geodäsie (1843 and 1846). The paper Theoria combinationis observationum erroribus minimis obnoxiae (1823), with its supplement (1828), was devoted to mathematical statistics, in particular to the least squares method. From the early 1800's Gauss had an interest in the question of the possible existence of a non-Euclidean geometry. He discussed this topic at length with Farkas Bolyai and in his correspondence with Gerling and Schumacher. In a book review in 1816 he discussed proofs which deduced the axiom of parallels from the other Euclidean axioms, suggesting that he believed in the existence of non-Euclidean geometry, although he was rather vague. Gauss confided in Schumacher, telling him that he believed his reputation would suffer if he admitted in public that he believed in the existence of such a geometry. In 1831 Farkas Bolyai sent to Gauss his son János Bolyai's work on the subject. Gauss replied to praise it would mean to praise myself . Again, a decade later, when he was informed of Lobachevsky's work on the subject, he praised its "genuinely geometric" character, while in a letter to Schumacher in 1846, states that he had the same convictions for 54 years indicating that he had known of the existence of a non-Euclidean geometry since he was 15 years of age (this seems unlikely). Gauss had a major interest in differential geometry, and published many papers on the subject. Disquisitiones generales circa superficies curva (1828) was his most renowned work in this field. In fact, this paper rose from his geodesic interests, but it contained such geometrical ideas as Gaussian curvature. The paper also includes Gauss's famous theorema egregrium: If an area in E ^3 can be developed (i.e. mapped isometrically) into another area of E ^3 , the values of the Gaussian curvatures are identical in corresponding points. The period 1817-1832 was a particularly distressing time for Gauss. He took in his sick mother in 1817, who stayed until her death in 1839, while he was arguing with his wife and her family about whether they should go to Berlin. He had been offered a position at Berlin University and Minna and her family were keen to move there. Gauss, however, never liked change and decided to stay in Göttingen. In 1831 Gauss's second wife died after a long illness. In 1831, Wilhelm Weber arrived in Göttingen as physics professor filling Tobias Mayer's chair. Gauss had known Weber since 1828 and supported his appointment. Gauss had worked on physics before 1831, publishing Uber ein neues allgemeines Grundgesetz der Mechanik , which contained the principle of least constraint, and Principia generalia theoriae figurae fluidorum in statu aequilibrii which discussed forces of attraction. These papers were based on Gauss's potential theory, which proved of great importance in his work on physics. He later came to believe his potential theory and his method of least squares provided vital links between science and nature. In 1832, Gauss and Weber began investigating the theory of terrestrial magnetism after Alexander von Humboldt attempted to obtain Gauss's assistance in making a grid of magnetic observation points around the Earth. Gauss was excited by this prospect and by 1840 he had written three important papers on the subject: Intensitas vis magneticae terrestris ad mensuram absolutam revocata (1832), Allgemeine Theorie des Erdmagnetismus (1839) and Allgemeine Lehrsätze in Beziehung auf die im verkehrten Verhältnisse des Quadrats der Entfernung wirkenden Anziehungs- und Abstossungskräfte (1840). These papers all dealt with the current theories on terrestrial magnetism, including Poisson's ideas, absolute measure for magnetic force and an empirical definition of terrestrial magnetism. Dirichlet's principal was mentioned without proof. Allgemeine Theorie... showed that there can only be two poles in the globe and went on to prove an important theorem, which concerned the determination of the intensity of the horizontal component of the magnetic force along with the angle of inclination. Gauss used the Laplace equation to aid him with his calculations, and ended up specifying a location for the magnetic South pole. Humboldt had devised a calendar for observations of magnetic declination. However, once Gauss's new magnetic observatory (completed in 1833 - free of all magnetic metals) had been built, he proceeded to alter many of Humboldt's procedures, not pleasing Humboldt greatly. However, Gauss's changes obtained more accurate results with less effort. Gauss and Weber achieved much in their six years together. They discovered Kirchhoff's laws, as well as building a primitive telegraph device which could send messages over a distance of 5000 ft. However, this was just an enjoyable pastime for Gauss. He was more interested in the task of establishing a world-wide net of magnetic observation points. This occupation produced many concrete results. The Magnetischer Verein and its journal were founded, and the atlas of geomagnetism was published, while Gauss and Weber's own journal in which their results were published ran from 1836 to 1841. In 1837, Weber was forced to leave Göttingen when he became involved in a political dispute and, from this time, Gauss's activity gradually decreased. He still produced letters in response to fellow scientists' discoveries usually remarking that he had known the methods for years but had never felt the need to publish. Sometimes he seemed extremely pleased with advances made by other mathematicians, particularly that of Eisenstein and of Lobachevsky. Gauss spent the years from 1845 to 1851 updating the Göttingen University widow's fund. This work gave him practical experience in financial matters, and he went on to make his fortune through shrewd investments in bonds issued by private companies. Two of Gauss's last doctoral students were Moritz Cantor and Dedekind. Dedekind wrote a fine description of his supervisor ... usually he sat in a comfortable attitude, looking down, slightly stooped, with hands folded above his lap. He spoke quite freely, very clearly, simply and plainly: but when he wanted to emphasise a new viewpoint ... then he lifted his head, turned to one of those sitting next to him, and gazed at him with his beautiful, penetrating blue eyes during the emphatic speech. ... If he proceeded from an explanation of principles to the development of mathematical formulas, then he got up, and in a stately very upright posture he wrote on a blackboard beside him in his peculiarly beautiful handwriting: he always succeeded through economy and deliberate arrangement in making do with a rather small space. For numerical examples, on whose careful completion he placed special value, he brought along the requisite data on little slips of paper. Gauss presented his golden jubilee lecture in 1849, fifty years after his diploma had been granted by Hemstedt University. It was appropriately a variation on his dissertation of 1799. From the mathematical community only Jacobi and Dirichlet were present, but Gauss received many messages and honours. From 1850 onwards Gauss's work was again of nearly all of a practical nature although he did approve Riemann's doctoral thesis and heard his probationary lecture. His last known scientific exchange was with Gerling. He discussed a modified Foucalt pendulum in 1854. He was also able to attend the opening of the new railway link between Hanover and Göttingen, but this proved to be his last outing. His health deteriorated slowly, and Gauss died in his sleep early in the morning of 23 February, 1855. References (67 books/articles) Some pages from works by Gauss: A letter from Gauss to Taurinus discussing the possibility of non-Euclidean geometry. An extract from Theoria residuorum biquadraticorum (1828-32) References elsewhere in this archive: You can see another picture of Gauss in 1803. Tell me about the Prime Number Theorem Show me Gauss's estimate for the density of primes and compare it with Legendre's Tell me about Gauss's part in investigating prime numbers Tell me about Gauss's part in the development of group theory and matrices and determinants Tell me about his work on non-Euclidean geometry and topology Tell me about Gauss's work on the fundamental theorem of algebra Tell me about his work on orbits and gravitation Other Web sites: You can find out about the Prime Number Theorem at University of Tennessee, USA _________________________________________________________________ Previous (Chronologically) Next Biographies Index Previous (Alphabetically) Next Welcome page History Topics Index Famous curves index Chronologies Birthplace Maps Mathematicians of the day Anniversaries for the year Search Form Simple Search Form Search Suggestions _________________________________________________________________ JOC/EFR December 1996 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Bill Stewart Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 11:48:14 +0800 To: "James A. Donald" Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980110194009.00883460@popd.ix.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain At 11:18 AM 1/10/98 -0800, James A. Donald wrote: >I have received some negative feedback about the name >"Crypto Kong". >Two people have complained that it is unprofessional sounding. Keep it. If you're going for the liberal non-techie market, it's good; if you're going for the financial market it's still ok, and if you need to, you can publish a standard for it, and some small Nevada corporation with a boring name can distribute a Crypto-Kong-compatible product with a boring name for you :-) Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 From cypherpunks@MHonArc.venona Wed Dec 17 23:17:14 2003 From: Jim Choate Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 09:26:35 +0800 To: cypherpunks@ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer) Subject: LUC Public Key Crypto... Message-ID: <199801110150.TAA15260@einstein.ssz.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text Hi, In the process of doing some research on Gauss I stumbled across this... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage@ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| Forwarded message: > Dr. Dobb's Web Site > > LUC PUBLIC-KEY ENCRYPTION > > > > A secure alternative to RSA > > Peter Smith > > Peter has worked in the computer industry for 15 years as a > programmer, analyst, and consultant and has served as deputy editor of > Asian Computer Monthly. Peter's interest in number theory led to the > invention of LUC in 1991. He can be reached at 25 Lawrence Street, > Herne Bay, Auckland, New Zealand. > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > According to former NSA director Bobby Innman, public-key cryptography > was discovered by the National Security Agency in the early seventies. > At the time, pundits remarked that public-key cryptography (PKC) was > like binary nerve gas--it was potent when two different substances > were brought together, but quite innocuous in its separate parts. > Because the NSA promptly classified it, not much was known about PKC > until the mid-seventies when Martin Hellman and Whitfield Diffie > independently came up with the notion and published papers about it. > > Traditional cryptographic systems like the venerable Data Encryption > Standard (DES) use the same key at both ends of a message > transmission. The problem of ensuring correct keys leads to such > expensive expedients as distributing the keys physically with trusted > couriers. Diffie and Hellman (and the NSA) had the idea of making the > keys different at each end. In addition to encryption, they envisioned > this scheme would also lead to a powerful means of source > authentication known as digital signatures. > > RSA, developed in 1977, was the first reliable method of source > authentication. The RSA approach (patented in the early eighties) > initiated intense research in "number theory," one of the most > recondite areas of mathematics. Although C.F. Gauss studied this topic > in the early 1800s (referring to it then as "higher arithmetic"), very > little real progress has been made in solving the problem of factoring > since then. The means available today are essentially no better than > exhaustive searching for prime factors. In terms of intractability > theory, however, no one has yet proved that the problem is > intractable, although researchers believe it to be so. > > > > The RSA Algorithm > > > > RSA works by raising a message block to a very large power, then > reducing this modulo N, where N (the product of two large prime > numbers) is part of the key. Typical systems use an N of 512 bits, and > the exponent to which blocks are raised in decryption is of the same > order. An immediate problem in implementing such a system is the > representation and efficient manipulation of such large integers. > (Standard microprocessors don't really have the power to handle normal > integer sizes and functions; even numeric coprocessors are inadequate > when integers of this size are involved.) > > RSA has dominated public-key encryption for the last 15 years as > research has failed to turn up a reliable alternative--until the > advent of LUC. Based on the same difficult mathematical problem as > RSA, LUC uses the calculation of Lucas functions instead of > exponentiation. (See text box entitled, "How the Lucas Alternative > Works.") > > Because we're working in the area of mathematics, we can formally > prove that LUC is a true alternative to RSA. Furthermore, we can show > that a cipher based on LUC will be at least as efficient. More > importantly, we can show that LUC is a stronger cipher than RSA. The > reason is that under RSA, the digital signature of a product is the > product of the signatures making up the product; in mathematical > terms, M{e}L{e}=(ML){e}. This opens RSA to a cryptographic attack > known as adaptive chosen-message forgery. Ironically, this is outlined > in a paper co-authored by Ron Rivest (the "R" in RSA). LUC is not > multiplicative and therefore not susceptible to this attack. Using > Lucas functions, V[e](M,1)V[e](L,1) is not equal to V[e](ML,1). In > other words, the use of exponentiation leads to RSA being > multiplicative in this way, while LUC's use of Lucas functions avoids > this weakness. > > Choosing the Algorithms > > > > Lucas functions have been studied mainly in relation to primality > testing, and it was to these sources we turned when researching > efficient algorithms for implementing LUC. For given parameters, the > Lucas functions give rise to two series, U[n] and V[n]. The first > algorithm (see Listing One, page 90) calculated both, even though we > were only interested in V[n]. It was only in a paper on factoring > integers that we found a means of calculating V[n] alone (see Listing > Two, page 90). The pseudocode examples show that both algorithms have > two phases: The work done when the current bit is a 0 is half the work > necessary when the current bit is a 1. > > More Details. > > Typically, in systems like LUC the exponent used for encryption is a > much smaller integer than that used for decryption. A commonly chosen > encryption exponent is the prime number 65,537. This is a good choice > for fast encryption as all but 2 of the 17 bits are 0s. We have no > such control over the decryption exponent, but there is a way of > halving the work, and thus, of introducing a limited degree of > parallelism into the calculation. > > Since LUC is a public-key cryptosystem, we can always assume that the > possessor of the private decrypting keys knows the two primes (p and > q) which make up the modulus, N. Consequently, we can reduce the > exponent and message with respect to the two primes, in each case at > least halving the amount of work. At the end of the calculation with > respect to the primes, we bring the results together to produce the > final plain text (see Listing Three, page 90). > > Large-integer Arithmetic > > > > There's really only one source of information about large-integer > arithmetic: Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming. We found that > almost every time we referred to his book, we came up with some new > angle or way of tweaking some extra performance out of our code. > > We decided to represent the large integers as 256-byte arrays, with > the low byte giving the length (in bytes) of the integer. For > instance, the 8-byte hexadecimal number 1234567890ABCDEF would appear > in a file view as 08 EF CD AB 90 78 56 34 12. These arrays became a > Pascal-type har (for hexadecimal array). We can store integers of over > 600 decimal digits in our hars, but because the hars must be able to > hold the results of a multiplication, we are limited to manipulating > integers up to 300 decimal digits in length. > > Implementation of addition, subtraction, and multiplication went quite > smoothly; implementation of division took more effort. (We took > comfort in not being the first to encounter problems with division. > Lady Ada Lovelace, the first computer programmer, said, "I am still > working at some most entangled notations of division, but see my way > through them at the expense of heavy labor, from which I shall not > shrink as long as my head can bear it.") We tried various methods, > including one based on Newton which calculated the inverse of the > divisor and then multiplied. (See Knuth's discussion.) We finally > opted for Knuth's Algorithm D, despite his warning that it contained > possible discontinuities. At that stage, we were working on a 16-bit > 80286 PC; see Listing Four, page 90. > > Of course there was much more than the division routine to consider, > but we found that it was the critical routine in terms of getting LUC > to run at a reasonable speed. Once we had upgraded to an 80386, we > converted to a full 32-bit implementation. The assembler code for the > division (still Algorithm D) is given in Listing Five (page 91). > Although space constraints prevent a complete presentation of the > code, suffice to say that we have been able to achieve a > signing/decryption speed on a modulus of 512 bits of over 200 bits per > second (33-MHz 80386, 0 wait states). > > Other Issues > > > > Central to any cryptographic system are keys. In LUC, if an adversary > is able to find p and q, the prime factors of modulus N, then all > messages sent with N can be either read in the case of encryption or > forged in the case of signing. > > Since the days of Gauss, research on factoring has come up with > various so-called "aleatoric" methods of factoring some numbers. These > methods are like cures for poison ivy: numerous, and occasionally > efficacious. One old method, found by Pierre Fermat, is very quick at > factoring some types of composite numbers. If N is the product of two > primes which are close together, then it can be easily factored. For > example, if p=1949, and q=1951, then N=3802499. Taking the square root > of N, we find that it is approximately 1949.999. Adding 1 to the > integral part of this (giving 1950), we square this, giving 3802500. > If we now subtract N from this square, we get a difference of 1, which > is the square of itself. This means that N has been expressed as the > difference of two squares. As we learned in high school, x{2}-y{2} = > (x-y)(x+y), and so we obtain the two factors. > > Fermat's method works whenever the ratio of the factors is close to an > integer. (Note that the ratio is close to 1 in the above discussion.) > This attack, as cryptographers call methods used to break a cipher, > has to be guarded against in generating the modulus N. > > Another guard is that neither (p + 1) and (q + 1) nor (p - 1) and (q - > 1) should be made up of small prime factors. There are many other > guards of varying degrees of importance, but the entire area needs > consideration depending on the level of security required, and how > long the keys are meant to last. > > The basic idea behind LUC is that of providing an alternative to RSA > by substituting the calculation of Lucas functions for that of > exponentiation. While Lucas functions are somewhat more complex > mathematically than exponentiation, they produce superior ciphers. > > This substitution process can be done with systems other than the RSA. > Among these are the Hellman-Diffie-Merkle key exchange system (U.S. > Patent number 4,200,770), the El Gamal public-key cryptosystem, the El > Gamal digital signature, and the recently proposed Digital Signature > Standard (DSS), all of which use exponentiation. > > The nonmultiplicative aspect of Lucas functions carries over, allowing > us to produce alternatives to all these. In the case of the DSS, Lucas > functions allow us to dispense with the one-way hashing cited (but not > specified) in the draft standard. > > A New Zealand consortium has been set up to develop and license > systems based on LUC, which is protected by a provisional patent. For > more information, contact me or Horace R. Moore, 101 E. Bonita, Sierra > Madre, California 91024. > > References > > > > Athanasiou, Tom. "Encryption Technology, Privacy, and National > Security." MIT Technology Review (August/September, 1986). > > Diffie, W. and M.E. Hellman. "New Directions in Cryptography." IEEE > Transactions on Information Theory (November, 1976). > > El Gamal, Taher. "A Public Key Cryptosystem and a Signature Scheme > Based on Discrete Logarithms." IEEE Transactions on Information Theory > (July, 1985). > > Gauss, C.F. "Disquisitiones Arithmeticae," Article 329. > > Goldwasser, S., S. Micali, and R. Rivest. "A Digital Signature Scheme > Secure Against Adaptive Chosen Message Attack." SIAM J. COMPUT (April, > 1988). > > Kaliski, Burton S., Jr. "Multiple-precision Arithmetic in C." Dr. > Dobb's Journal (August, 1992). > > Knuth, D.E. The Art of Computer Programming: Volume II: Semi-Numerical > Algorithms, second edition. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1981. > > Schneier, Bruce. "Untangling Public Key Cryptography." Dr. Dobb's > Journal (May, 1992). > > Williams, H.C. "A p + 1 method of factoring." Mathematics of > Computation (vol. 39, 1982). > > How the Lucas Alternative Works > > > > As with RSA encryption, use of the Lucas alternative involves two > public keys: N and e. The number N is assumed to be the product of two > large (odd) prime numbers, p and q. Encryption and decryption of a > message is achieved using Lucas sequences, which may be defined as > shown in Example 1. Note that P and Q are integers. > > If a message P is to be sent, it is encoded as the residue P1 modulo N > of the eth term of the Lucas sequence V[n](P,1), and then transmitted. > The receiver uses a secret key d (based on the prime factorization of > N) to decode the received message P1, by taking the residue modulo N > of the dth term of the Lucas sequence V[n](P1,1). The secret key d is > determined so that V[d](V[e](P,1),1) = P modulo N, ensuring the > decryption of the received message P1 as P. The existence of such a > key d is based on the following theorem. > > Theorem > > > > Suppose N is any odd positive integer, and P is any positive integer, > such as P{2}-4 is coprime to N. If r is the Lehmer totient function of > N with respect to D = P{2}-4 (see Example 2), then V[mr+1](P,1)=P > modulo N for every positive integer m. The condition that P{2}-4 be > coprime to N is easily checked, as P{2}-4=(P+2)(P-2). Also, because > V[d](V[e](P,1),1)=V[de](P,1), according to Example 4(e), the key d may > simply be chosen so that de=1 modulo r. > > The Lehmer Totient Function > > > > Suppose P and Q are integers, and a and b are the zeros of X{2}-Px+Q > (so that P = a+b while Q = ab). Also, let D be the discriminant of > x{2}-Px+Q. That is, D = P{2}-4Q = (a-b){2}. > > The Lucas sequences U[n] = U[n] (P,Q) and V[n] = V[n] (P,Q) are > defined for n = 0,1,2, and so on by the equation in Example3. > > In particular, U[0] = 0, U[1] = 1, and then U[n+1] = PU[n] - QU[n-1] > (for n = 1,2,3,...), while V[0] = 2, V[1] = P, and similarly V[n+1]= > PV[n]-QV[n-1] (for n = 1,2,3,...). These sequences satisfy a number of > identities, including the following which may be simply obtained from > the definitions in Example 4. > > Next, suppose N is any positive integer, and let r be the Lehmer > totient function of N with respect to D = P{2}-4Q, defined the same > way as in the statement of the theorem. In the special case where N is > an odd prime p, the Lehmer totient function of p with respect to D is > the number given by the equation in Example 5(a). In this case, the > Lucas-Lehmer theorem states that if p does not divide Q then the > equation in Example 5(b) holds true. > > Example of LUC > > > > Let N = pxq = 1949x2089=4071461, and P = 11111, which equals the > message to encrypt/decrypt. The public keys will be e and N; the > private key will be d. First, calculate r, the Lehmer totient function > of P with respect to N. To do this we need to calculate the Legendre > of p and q. Let D = p{2}-4; then (D/1949) =-1 and (D/2089)=-1 are the > two Legendre values. Hence r is the least common multiple of 1949 + 1 > and 2089 + 1; see Example 6(a). Choosing e = 1103 for our public key, > we use the Extended Euclidean Algorithm to find the secret key d, by > solving the modular equation ed = 1 mod r. d turns out to equal 24017. > > To encrypt the message 11111, we make the calculation shown in Example > 6(b). To decrypt the encrypted message, we calculate as in Example > 6(c). --P.S. > > > _LUC PUBLIC-KEY ENCRYPTION_ > by Peter Smith > > > [LISTING ONE] > > { To calculate Ve(P,1) modulo N } > Procedure LUCcalc; > {Initialise} > BEGIN > D := P*P - 4; ut := 1; vt := P; u := ut; v := vt; > If not odd(e) then BEGIN u := 0; v := 2; END; > e := e div 2; > {Start main} > While e > 0 do > BEGIN > ut := ut*vt mod N; vt := vt*vt mod N; > If vt < 3 then vt := vt + N; > vt := vt - 2; > If odd(e) then > BEGIN > c := (ut*v + u*vt) mod N; > v := (vt*v + D*u*ut) mod N; > If odd(v) then v := v + N; v := v/2; > If odd(c) then c := c + N; u := c/2; > END; > e := e div 2; > END; > END; {LUCcalc} > > { The required result is the value of v.} > > > > > > > [LISTING TWO] > Pseudocode for calculating Lucas Functions > > Procedure wiluc { V = V(M) Mod N, the Mth Lucas number(P,1) } > Var > V,Vb,P,Vf,N,M,NP, Vd, Vf : LargeInteger ; > carry, high_bit_set : boolean ; > bz : word ; > BEGIN > Va := 2 ; { V[0] } Vb = P ; { V[1] } > NP := N - P; bz := bits(M) -1 ; { test bits from high bit downwards } > For j := 1 to bz do > BEGIN > Vc := Vb * Vb; Vf = Vc ; If Vf < 2 then Vf := Vf + N > Vf := Vf - 2; Vd := Va * Vb > { Vc := V, Vd := V*Vb, Vf := V-2} > If high_bit_set Then > BEGIN > Vb := P * Vc; If Vb < Vd then Vb := Vb + N; Vb := Vb - Vd; > If Vb < P then Vb := Vb + N; Vb := Vb - P; Va := Vf > END ; > Else BEGIN { "even" ie high bit not set } > Va := Vd; If Va < P then Va := Va + N; Va := Va - P; > Vb := Vf; > END ; > High_bit_set := next_bit_down(M); > {This boolean function determines the setting of the next bit down} > Va := Va Mod N; Vb := Vb Mod N > END ; { for j to bz } > END ; {wiluc} > > > > > > > [LISTING THREE] > > { Pseudocode for splitting decryption/signing over p and q > (N = p*q) } > Procedure hafluc ( var s,p,q,m,e : LargeInteger ; qix : word ) ; > var ep,emq, > temp,pi,qi, > b,n,pa,qa : LargeInteger ; > > { This procedure applies only to decipherment and signing, where the primes > making up the modulus N ( = p * q) are known (or can be easily deduced, > since both keys are known). Applying it allows us to halve the amount of > work. Encipherment is usually done with a small key - standard is 65537. } > Begin > Qpr (pa,qa,p,q,m,qix ) ; {} {assumes qix already calculated } > ep = e ; ep = ep Mod pa > emq = e ; emq = emq Mod qa > mp = m ; mp = mp Mod p > mq = m ; mq = mq Mod q > wiluc(q2,mq,emq,q) ; wiluc(p2,mp,ep,p) ; > if p2 < q2 then > Begin > temp = q q = p p = temp > temp = q2 q2 = p2 p2 = temp > End ; > temp = p2 temp = temp - q2 > n = p * q > { Solve with Extended Euclidean algorithm qi = 1/q Mod p. The algorithm > for the Extended Euclidean calculation can be found in Knuth. } > r = temp * p > r = r mod N > s = r * qi > s = s Mod n > s = s + p2 > End ; { hafluc } > Procedure SignVerify ; > Begin > h4 = 4 > p = large prime... > q = large prime... > n = p * q > bz := bits(n) ; > {write(cf,' generate 4 keysets (d,e) for p1,q1') ;} > { > qix table for T[qix] > Convention for qix > This calculation is explained below. > Lehmer totient qix Legendre values for p and q > i.e. T[qix] = LCM > (p - 1),(q - 1) 1 1 1 > (p - 1),(q + 1) 2 1 -1 > (p + 1),(q - 1) 3 -1 1 > (p + 1),(q + 1) 4 -1 -1 > e = encryption key, small prime eg 65537 > mu = message as large integer less than n > Solve e * d[qix] = 1 Mod T[qix] using Extended Euclidean Algorithm > where T[qix] is lcm(p1,q1), the Lehmer totient function of N > with repect to mu, according to the above table. > This gives 4 possible values of d, the decryption/signing key. > The particular value used depends on the message mu, as follows: > Let D = mu2 - 4. Calculate the Legendre values of D with respect to > both p and q. This value is -1 if D is a quadratic non-residue of > p (or q), and equal to 1 if D is a quadratic residue of p (or q). > N.B. This part is the most difficult part of LUC! Take care. > > Signing (Deciphering): > hafluc (a,pu,qu,mu,d,qix) > > Verifying (Enciphering): > Use Wiluc. > End. > > > > > > > [LISTING FOUR] > > Algorithm D in 32-bit Intel assmbler > Author: Christopher T. Skinner > Short version of Mod32.Txt with scalings just as comments > Modulus routine for Large Integers > u = u Mod v > Based on: > D.E.Knuth The Art of Computer Programming > Vol 2 Semi-Numerical Algorithms 2ed 1981 > Algorithm D page 257 > We use a Pascal Type called "har" ( for "hexadecimal array") > Type > har = Array[0..255] of byte ; > Var u,v : har ; > Note that u[0] is the length of u and that the > integer begins in u[1] > It is desirable that u[1] is on a double word boundary. > > ; Turbo Pascal Usage: ( Turbo Pascal v6.0) > ; {$L Mod32a} { contains mod32 far } > ; {$F+} { far pointers } > ; procedure Mod32 ( var u,v : har ) ; > ; Turbo Assembler code: (TASM v2.01)--requires 32-bit chip ie 386 or 486 > ; nb FS and GS can be used as temporary storage. Don't try to use them as > ; segment registers because Windows 3.0 restricts their allowed range, even > ; after you have finished out of Windows. You will hang for sure, unless you > ; have used a well-behaved protected-mode program to reset them, or cold boot. > > Data Segment Word Public Use16 > vdz dw ? ; size v words > va dd ? ; hi dword v > vb dd ? ; 2nd " v > vi dw ? ; ^v[1] > savdi dw ? ; used in addback > Data EndS > > Code Segment Word Public Use16 > Assume cs:Code, ds:Data ,es:Nothing > Public mod32 > ; Pascal Parameters: > u Equ DWord Ptr ss:[bp+10] ; Parameter 1 of 2 (far) > v Equ DWord Ptr ss:[bp+ 6] ; parameter 2 of 2 > uof equ word ptr ss:[bp+10] > vinof equ word ptr ss:[bp+ 6] > > mod32 Proc far > push bp > mov bp,sp > push di > push si > push ds ; save the DS > > ; Before using Mod32 check that: > ; v > 0 > ; v < u u <= 125 words > ; v[0] is a multiple of 4 and at least 8 > ; v[top] >= 80h (may need to scale u & v) > ; make u[0] = 0 Mod 4 (add 1..3 if required) > domod: > ; now point to our v > mov ax,seg v > mov ds,ax > assume ds:Data > mov si, offset v > cld > assume es:Nothing > xor ah,ah > mov al,es:[di] ; ax = size of u in bytes "uz" > mov cx,ax ; cx = uz > mov bx,ax ; bx = uz > mov al,[si] > mov dx,ax ; dx = size v bytes > shr ax,2 > mov vdz,ax ; vdz " dwords vz = 0 mod 4 > sub bx,dx ; bx = uz - vz difference in bytes > mov ax,bx ; ax = uz - vz > sub ax,3 ; ax = uz - vz - 3 -> gs > sub cx,3 ; cx = uz - 3 > add cx,di ; cx = ^top dword u > add ax,di > mov gs,ax ; gs = ^(uz-vz-3) u start (by -4 down to 1) > inc di > mov fs,di ; fs = uf = ^u[1] , end point > inc si > mov vi,si ; vi = ^v[1] > add si,dx > mov eax,[si-4] > mov va,eax ; va = high word of v > mov eax,[si-8] > mov vb,eax ; vb = 2nd highest word v > mov di,cx ; set di to ut , as at bottom of loop > d3: > mov edx,es:[di] ; dx is current high dword of u > sub di,4 > mov eax,es:[di] ; ax is current 2nd highest dword of u > mov ecx,va > cmp edx,ecx > jae aa ; if high word u is 0 , never greater than > div ecx ; mov ebx,eax > mov esi,edx ; si = rh > jmp short ad ; Normal route -- -- -- -- --> > aa: mov eax,0FFFFFFFFh > mov edx,es:[di] ; 2nd highest wrd u > jmp short ac > ab: mov eax,ebx ; q2 > dec eax > mov edx,esi ; rh > ac: mov ebx,eax ; q3 > add edx,ecx > jc d4 ; Knuth tests overflow, > mov esi,edx > ; normal route: > ad: > mul vb ; Quotient by 2nd digit of divisor > cmp edx,esi ; high word of product : remainder > jb d4 ; no correction to quot, drop thru to mulsub > ja ab ; nb unsigned use ja/b not jg/l > cmp eax,es:[di-4] ; low word of product : 3rd high of u > ja ab > d4: ; Multiply & subtract * * * * * * * > mov cx,gs > mov di,cx ; low start pos in u for subtraction of q * v > sub cx,4 > mov gs,cx > xor ecx,ecx > Mov cx,vdz ; word count for q * v > mov si,vi ; si points to v[1] > xor ebp,ebp ; carry 14Oct90 bp had problems in mu-lp > even > ; ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** > ba: lodsd ; eax <- ds[si] > mul ebx ; dx:ax contains product carry set if dx > 0 > add eax,ebp > adc edx,0 > sub es:[di],eax > adc edx,0 > mov ebp,edx > add di,4 > loop ba ; dec cx , jmp if not 0 > ; .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. . . .. > sub es:[di],edx > jnc d7 > > mov si,vi ; add back (rare) > mov savdi,di > mov di,gs > add di,4 > clc > mov cx,vdz > bb: lodsd ; eax = ds[si] si + 2 > adc es:[di],eax > inc di > inc di > inc di > inc di > loop bb > xor eax,eax > mov es:[di],eax > mov di,savdi > ; test with: > ; 1,00000000,00000000,00000001/ 80000000,00000000,00000001 > d7: > mov bx,fs ; fs ^u[1] > mov ax,gs ; gs = current u start position > cmp ax,bx ; current - bottom > jb d8 > sub di,4 > jmp d3 > d8: > ; here we would scale u down if it had been scaled up > quex: ; quick exit if v < u > cld ; just in case > pop ds > pop si > pop di > pop bp > ret 8 ; 2 pointers = 4 words = 8 bytes > mod32 EndP ; > Code Ends > End > > > > > > [LISTING FIVE] > > Algorithm D in 16-bit Intel assembler > Author: Christopher T. Skinner > mod16.txt 21 Au8 92 16 bit modulus > ; divm Modulus > Data Segment Word Public > vwz dw ? ; size v words > va dw ? ; hi word v > vb dw ? ; 2nd " v > vi dw ? ; ^v[1] > uf dw ? ; ^u[3] > uz dw ? ; size u byte > vz dw ? ; " v " > ua dw ? ; ^( u[0] + uz - vz -1 ) , mul sub start > ut dw ? ; ^ u[topword] > qh dw ? > uzofs dw ? ; ttt > vzofs dw ? ; ttt > Data EndS > Code Segment Word Public > Assume cs:Code, ds:Data > Public diva > > u Equ DWord Ptr [bp+10] ; ES:DI > v Equ DWord Ptr [bp+6] ; DS:SI > ; NB v Must be Global, DS based... > diva Proc far > push bp > mov bp,sp > push ds > cld ; increment lodsw in mulsub > lds si,v > les di,u > xor ah,ah > mov al,es:[di] ; ax = uz size of u in bytes N.B. uz is not actually used > mov cx,ax ; cx = uz > mov bx,ax ; bx = uz > mov al,ds:[si] > mov dx,ax ; dx = size v bytes > shr ax,1 > mov vwz,ax ; vwz " words > sub bx,dx ; bx = uz - vz difference in bytes > mov ax,bx ; ax = uz - vz > dec ax ; ax = uz - vz - 1 -> ua > dec cx ; cx = uz - 1 > add cx,di ; cx = ^top word u > mov ut,cx ; ut = ^top word u > add ax,di > mov ua,ax ; ua = ^(uz-vz-1) u start (by -2 down to 1) > inc di > mov uf,di ; uf = ^u[1] , end point > inc si > mov vi,si ; vi = ^v[1] > add si,dx > mov ax,ds:[si-2] > mov va,ax ; va = high word of v > mov ax,ds:[si-4] > mov vb,ax ; vb = 2nd highest word v > mov di,cx ; set di to ut , as at bottom of loop > d3: > mov dx,es:[di] ; dx is current high word of u > dec di > dec di > mov ut,di > mov ax,es:[di] ; ax is current 2nd highest word of u > mov cx,va > cmp dx,cx > jae aa ;if high word u is 0 , never greater than > div cx ; > mov qh,ax > mov si,dx ; si = rh > jmp ad ; Normal route -- -- -- -- --> > aa: mov ax,0FFFFh > mov dx,es:[di] ; 2nd highest wrd u > jmp ac > ab: mov ax,qh > dec ax