Interest rates are dropping... Start saving now!! (191804)
Do you need a loan? Do you want to refinance your home? Are you worried about your credit record? Visit us today at http://www.savingsdecade.com We're here for you. We specialize in funding borrowers with less than perfect credit. We know that just like everyone else, you need a little extra boost to get ahead. And we'll give you that boost without discrimination. Not only that, but we'll get you a customized loan, suited to your needs. We know the best lenders around, so take 60 seconds to fill out our form, and we will find the most qualified and low-cost lender for you. You'll get a free, no-obligation quote. Then it's up to you to decide whether you want to avail yourself of their excellent service. Interest rates are the lowest they've been in 18 months, so it's the perfect time to get a loan. Try us first by visiting http://www.savingsdecade.com and save yourself a lot of time and hassle shopping for your new loan! * * * If you're not interested in refinancing but would like a chance to win a palm pilot, visit http://www.subtlesavings.com/draw/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - If you received this in error, we apologize. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - THIS MESSAGE IS BEING SENT IN COMPLIANCE OF THE EMAIL BILL: SECTION 301.PER SECTION, PARAGRAPH (a) (2) (c) of S. 1618. To discontinue receipt of further notice at no cost and to be removed from our database, please send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word Remove in the subject. Your email address will be removed from the database and future mailings. Any attempts to disrupt the removal email address etc., will not allow us to be able to retrieve and process the remove requests. ** 78864
Re: ORBS sucked into a black hole!
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote: The only black hole in this conversation are the Choatian posts. ORBS/RBL/etc. in principle are making statements about what they believe about other people. This is similar to movie or book reviewing. People may read my review and stay away from a movie/book, just as they read an ORBS/RBL/MAPS review and stay away from certain addresses. Malarky, they actively(!) participate. What ORBS and their ilk do is collect scans of IP's across the Internet, some do it directly, some do it through independent 3rd parties, and direct complaints. The only way ORBS will remove you from the database is if you allow(!) them to re-scan your MTA and verify to their satisfaction you are not in any way running an Open Relay. They then make this database (usually for some sort of fee) available to other groups who then actively filter submissions to their sites. In other words if I have a friend who I want to exchange private mail with, ORBS's uses their trumped excuse for justification to inject their belief system into that. Truly heinous. Since when did I have any sort of obligation to help them in their particular crusade? My duties as a citizen and human being are not to interfere. I'm not saying 'Stop', I'm only saying 'Let me off'. There is no technical or legal standard to back their actions. There is no 'authority' for them to decide who may configure their software how (and the fact that they tell a private citizen is particularly irksome, more angels among men I guess). Just another fascist bastard. Freedom for me, but not for thee... -- ...where annual election ends, tyranny begins; Thomas Jefferson Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
[camram-spam] long commentary from a knowledgeable outsider (fwd)
-- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 14:02:49 -0400 From: R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [camram-spam] long commentary from a knowledgeable outsider --- begin forwarded text Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 11:36:11 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Eric S. Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [camram-spam] long commentary from a knowledgeable outsider x-flowedI wanted to try and get a rough approximation of hardware costs and performance for a hardware based attack against hashcash postage. So I wrote to Nicko van Someren. I chose Niko because I heard him speak that the digital commerce society of Boston on some of the scaling issues regarding a micromint[1] based currency system. A nutshell, he pretty well demolished the feasibility of micromint. In general, Nicko is not a fan of proof of work systems for a variety of reasons but he has some really good information that he gave me permission to share with the hashcash group. In my opinion, the content convinced me that hashcash will provide a degree of defense against Spam. On the downside, there are some serious issues regarding theft of service and bulk generation of stamps but I don't consider them a mortal wound, it's just a wound that bleeds real heavily... Please read the entire message before commenting because I may have addressed some of the points further on. [1]http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~rivest/RivestShamir-mpay.pdf --- eric --- my question to Nicko was: My primary concern is that there is a risk that someone could define a hashcash coin generator using relatively cheap hardware (e.g. FPGA) and enable the at home spammer to generate lots of coins. I'm wondering if you would be willing to do a first-order approximation analysis on the cost versus speed curve for hardware generating hashcash coins? to which he replied: At 12:00 PM 6/8/2001 +0100, Nicko van Someren wrote: Hashcash is different to MicroMint in that, as long as the stamp is correctly constructed it will be hard to do any precomputation to make bulk mailing more efficient and the economies of scale that are both the key to and the downfall of MicroMint do not apply. That said, the cost of repetitive bulk computation is nearly always sub-linear in the amount of work to be done. The problems with proof of work schemes are many and varied. The most obvious is the inequality of the amount of processing power available to different people, or indeed to the same person in different contexts. I send mail from both a 733 MHz G4 PowerPC (in an Apple Mac) and a 16 MHz 68000 (in a Palm Pilot). Since the mail recipient can not reliably tell from which machine I sent then mail either it is going to take a couple of minutes to send a mail from the Palm or it will only take a second but I can forge spam as having come from the Palm and send hundreds a second from the Mac. To make matters worse, those who would spam have already shown themselves to not be beyond using the computing resources of others so I think that we can be confident that spam would be sent using stolen stamps. To address your specific question about hardware, as a rough guess, special hardware can do the same work as a general purpose CPU in about 0.1 to 0.2 as many clock ticks. For hash functions and some block ciphers (e.g. DES) the speed up can be even greater. What's more, since these days the fast FPGAs have more gates than you can shake a stick at you will be able to put multiple engines on one chip and I would expect that an off the shelf Xylinx development card with a big, fast gate array directly on the PCI bus would in practice be able to compute a SHA1 of something as small as an email address, date and integer at a rate a good 500 times faster than my PowerPC. This of course would depend on the hash algorithm and the amount of data used. You could strengthen against the use of hardware by using a system that needed more memory and used functions such as multiply operations which are expensive in hardware but which CPU designers spend a lot of effort upon. Given that a $2000 PCI bus card will let me send spam to 10,000 people in the same time that a legitimate user can send a party invitation to 20 friends I expect that a SHA-1 based proof of work stamp is not going to be useful to spammers. All that it will do is make the sale of email addresses more profitable since there will be a market for stamped, addresses envelopes for which you can charge $100 for 100,000 instead of the current rate of $50 per million filtered addresses. In short, I don't think proof of work based stamps will do much for reducing spam. I think that to do that we need a more innovative solution. If there were a ubiquitous micropayment scheme in
Re: Entire ISP Forced to Close
At 11:50 AM 05/16/2001 -0700, Eric Cordian wrote: Jim Dixon wrote: Still, the Internet is for the most part a Star Network, with only the very largest providers multi-homed. This is not true, unless your definition of 'the very largest' is very loose indeed. There are many thousands of multi-homed ISPs. People periodically attempt to draw graphs of the relationships between ISPs. If you look at these you see nothing similar to a star network. This hasn't been my experience here in the US. I am familiar with about 10 ISPs, from small mom and pop operations, to mid-size regional providers. The smallest ones have a single line. Even a pretty big ISP can run on a single OC3, with a backup DS3. Most of my experience is with big backbone providers, big enterprises, web hosting services, and very small ISPs. Early on, there were three main backbone providers - MCI, UUNET, Sprint - and a small ISP would buy their first T1 feed from MCI (cheapest), and as soon as they could justify a second T1, they'd buy it from one of the other providers so that hopefully there wouldn't be bad routing instabilities on both at the same time. Things have gotten much more reliable, but also much bigger, and most ISPs still buy diverse connections when they need more than one. Almost every web hosting ad talks about having multiple connections, whether that's 2 T3s or 2 OC12s to different backbones, because you still need it for reliability. If you're out of service for a day, you lose customers, fast, while if your performance is doggy for a day, they'll usually stick around. Having N thousand small ISPs, and hundreds of small web hosting businesses, plus dozens of big ISPs and hosting services means there's lots of competition - if you provide undependable service, people will leave, unless they're somewhere geographically special or have other special issues. There are a few with a handful of OC12 and OC3 circuits, but these were generally obtained for specific customers. I can't imagine an ISP with 50+ distinct peers, with separate circuits to each. Most non-huge US ISPs don't have large numbers of physical peering circuits, but ISPs that use the public exchange points or carrier hotels often peer with a number of other ISPs, because that either requires just administrative agreements (on a routed exchange point) or additional PVCs (on an ATM exchange point.) Some exchange points work by everybody peering with the exchange rather than with each other, but it's a similar effect.
RE: Automatics
At 12:46 AM 06/11/2001 -0700, Tim May replied: Well said, but: In _The Irish War_ there's a description of IRA improvised recoilless 'rifles' which, like their .mil-industrial analogues, toss an equal mass out the back end. The reacting countermass is a bunch of flakes which dissipate the KE against the atmosphere. How this Irish makeshift recoilless rifle actually works is unknown to me, but the dissipation of KE by the chaff is not germane. The expulsions of some mass (M) at some velocity (V) is germane, as above, but not the way the mass behaves once it has been propelled backward. The military recoilless rifles are more or less bazookas - their objective is to fire a relatively large and usually explosive shell to blow up tanks, trucks, and other big hard targets, while still being conveniently portable. I'm also puzzled by the flakes comments - rapidly expanding gasses are plenty of reaction mass, though perhaps there's some sort of wadding to provide increased gas pressure that gets flaked in the explosion.
Re: ORBS sucked into a black hole!
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Jim Choate wrote: What ORBS and their ilk do is collect scans of IP's across the Internet, some do it directly, some do it through independent 3rd parties, and direct complaints. Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can expect people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited? The only way ORBS will remove you from the database is if you allow(!) them to re-scan your MTA and verify to their satisfaction you are not in any way running an Open Relay. Yep, building trust is hard work. Do you expect movie critics to retract their comments unless they see that the movie (or the theater) has actually changed for the better? They then make this database (usually for some sort of fee) available to other groups who then actively filter submissions to their sites. This would indeed be the definition of criticism. Do you expect movie critics to only write positive reviews, or to write for free, or the theaters to disregard comments made by critics they trust and possibly waste their money showing a crappy movie? In other words if I have a friend who I want to exchange private mail with, ORBS's uses their trumped excuse for justification to inject their belief system into that. Who's injecting what? If you and your friend are your own ISP's, ORBS never interferes with your business. If you're not, you're trying to impose your beliefs over how SMTP should be done on the relay operator. The ISP chose to use ORBS, not the other way around. It seems ORBS is deemed useful and trustworthy, a commendable achievement for a critic. Now the question is, why doesn't the ISP trust you over ORBS? Perhaps you haven't earned the trust? Truly heinous. Au contraire - finally something that works, and quite without any legislative intervention. Are you saying critics are a heinous invention? I always thought they were a real blessing for cultural progress. So did someone else, apparently, judging by the fact that critics are paid for their effort. Since when did I have any sort of obligation to help them in their particular crusade? You don't. It's just that you're placing yourself in a minority without any good reason. Configuring your relay as you want *is* your right, but exercising it means you have to be ready to deal with the consequences. Do you expect movie theaters and distributors to intentionally help spread garbage? To deal with studios that produce it? There is no technical or legal standard to back their actions. There is no 'authority' for them to decide who may configure their software how (and the fact that they tell a private citizen is particularly irksome, more angels among men I guess). But they do have every right to be dissatisfied with you, and broadcast their views to anyone who is willing to listen. If people decide, based on ORBS data, that your behavior is not ok and that ORBS is likely to correctly represent your actions, they have absolutely no obligation to deal with you. It's true that your clients will suffer, but you are the one that brought it on them, placing them in a minority without asking them. It's all parts of a whole, really. Are you saying movie critics have to follow your standards when they appraise a work? Do you expect the critic to praise the movie as a whole when the soundtrack totally sucks? (While I once argued that shunning isn't always ok and should sometimes be viewed as comparable to initiation of force, that argument *certainly* does not extend to today's version of cyberspace. Neither life nor liberty is at stake when someone refuses to relay some email.) Just another fascist bastard. Freedom for me, but not for thee... So you're saying you should have the freedom to operate a relay that could well be used to transmit spam, yet other people have no right to protect themselves? What you're seeing with ORBS is a nice idea by an enterprising individual, and lots of enlightened self-interest on behalf of a bunch of ISPs. Clear signs of successful market self-organization. You on the other hand are trying to stamp that out so that your views may prevail, making you the fascist by a wide margin. Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], gsm: +358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front
Re: ORBS sucked into a black hole!
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote: ORBS/MAPS/etc. participate by connecting to and reviewing sites, much like I go out to and watch movies to review. Not always. If you refused to have your site reviewed, then they would literally make one up. As usual, Choate fails to grasp the point. I am not saying anyone has a duty to help them. Yes, you are stating that implicitly. In fact, as I said in an earlier post, I'm not sure I even agree with what they're doing. But I do believe they have a right to publish their reviews of mail relays, just as I have the right to publish movie reviews -- even if you disagree with what I say in them. I agree with this ONLY as far as they have actually had an encounter to review. To review my site as a series of open relays, as retailiation for my refusing to let this asshole connect to my site, is bullshit. And it remains bullshit whether or not you try to muddy the waters with completely off topic references to Choate. To tell them not to speak their mind about you is censorship no less than if you attempt to force me not to speak my mind about that rather awful Operation: Swordfish movie. And to allow them to MAKE UP what they say is pure libel. Good riddance to bad trash. Now that ORBS is dead, when are you going to follow their fine example Declan? -Declan On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 12:10:40AM -0500, Jim Choate wrote: On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote: The only black hole in this conversation are the Choatian posts. ORBS/RBL/etc. in principle are making statements about what they believe about other people. This is similar to movie or book reviewing. People may read my review and stay away from a movie/book, just as they read an ORBS/RBL/MAPS review and stay away from certain addresses. Malarky, they actively(!) participate. What ORBS and their ilk do is collect scans of IP's across the Internet, some do it directly, some do it through independent 3rd parties, and direct complaints. The only way ORBS will remove you from the database is if you allow(!) them to re-scan your MTA and verify to their satisfaction you are not in any way running an Open Relay. They then make this database (usually for some sort of fee) available to other groups who then actively filter submissions to their sites. In other words if I have a friend who I want to exchange private mail with, ORBS's uses their trumped excuse for justification to inject their belief system into that. Truly heinous. Since when did I have any sort of obligation to help them in their particular crusade? My duties as a citizen and human being are not to interfere. I'm not saying 'Stop', I'm only saying 'Let me off'. There is no technical or legal standard to back their actions. There is no 'authority' for them to decide who may configure their software how (and the fact that they tell a private citizen is particularly irksome, more angels among men I guess). Just another fascist bastard. Freedom for me, but not for thee... -- ...where annual election ends, tyranny begins; Thomas Jefferson Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
The 'theory' behind ORBS and it's ilk...
It's easier, because of the law, to go after the middle man who have nothing to do with the actions of spammers other than being there rather than the actual spammers themselves. -- ...where annual election ends, tyranny begins; Thomas Jefferson Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: ORBS sucked into a black hole!
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sampo Syreeni wrote: Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can expect people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited? Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want. -- ...where annual election ends, tyranny begins; Thomas Jefferson Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Thermal Imaging Decision Applicable to TEMPEST?
The Supreme Court's decision against thermal imaging appears to be applicable to TEMPEST emissions from electronic devices. And is it not a first against this most threatening vulnerability in the digital age? And long overdue. Remote acquisition of electronic emissions, say from outside a home, are not currently prohibited by law as far as I know. And the language of the thermal imaging decision makes it applicable to any technology not commonly in use. Conventional wisdom of security wizards are that the emissions are very difficult to acquire from more than a hundred yards or so, but James Bamford claims in his recent Body of Secrets that NSA was able to acquire leaky emissions from Russian crypto equipment 6 miles offshore Cuba in the 1960s. Advances in technology would presumbably increase that capability.
Re: Thermal Imaging Decision Applicable to TEMPEST?
I noodled over this in my article: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,4,00.html On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 08:58:36AM -0700, John Young wrote: The Supreme Court's decision against thermal imaging appears to be applicable to TEMPEST emissions from electronic devices. And is it not a first against this most threatening vulnerability in the digital age? And long overdue. Remote acquisition of electronic emissions, say from outside a home, are not currently prohibited by law as far as I know. And the language of the thermal imaging decision makes it applicable to any technology not commonly in use. Conventional wisdom of security wizards are that the emissions are very difficult to acquire from more than a hundred yards or so, but James Bamford claims in his recent Body of Secrets that NSA was able to acquire leaky emissions from Russian crypto equipment 6 miles offshore Cuba in the 1960s. Advances in technology would presumbably increase that capability.
Re: Thermal Imaging Decision Applicable to TEMPEST?
BTW John your cryptome.org writeup says: This decisions appears to be applicable to TEMPEST technology, the first instance to make use of this technology illegal. I'm not sure that's accurate. First, this is a Fourth Amendment case, and the court only decided what limits should be placed on police, not private citizens. Second, the ruling would allow TEMPEST monitoring by police if they get a warrant. No reading of it would ban police TEMPEST surveillance outright, and warrants are not that difficult to get. -Declan On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 09:21:16AM -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: I noodled over this in my article: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,4,00.html On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 08:58:36AM -0700, John Young wrote: The Supreme Court's decision against thermal imaging appears to be applicable to TEMPEST emissions from electronic devices. And is it not a first against this most threatening vulnerability in the digital age? And long overdue. Remote acquisition of electronic emissions, say from outside a home, are not currently prohibited by law as far as I know. And the language of the thermal imaging decision makes it applicable to any technology not commonly in use. Conventional wisdom of security wizards are that the emissions are very difficult to acquire from more than a hundred yards or so, but James Bamford claims in his recent Body of Secrets that NSA was able to acquire leaky emissions from Russian crypto equipment 6 miles offshore Cuba in the 1960s. Advances in technology would presumbably increase that capability.
Re: SCOTUS rulz!
At 08:51 AM 6/12/2001 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Real-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Isn't Jim Choate Prime against this ruling, on the basis that it discriminates against certain radiating frequencies? He has posted to that affect before. No, no, this is a copyright problem in Choate Prime - when people walk in front of heat sources, they make shadow animals on the walls (and on the thermal imagers), and that violates their copyright, unless the cops got prior permission to look at and record the shadow animals. (Well, really only if the people make a big (C) shadow animal first.) Also, this is a First Amendment problem, because the cops have a right to free speech in court when they describe the shadow animals they saw with their thermal imagers. Since it's possible to get statutory damages for copyright infringement, in Choate Prime the cops are entitled to court-appointed attorneys to protect their free speech rights. Unless they're mimes. -- Greg Broiles [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organized crime is the price we pay for organization. -- Raymond Chandler
Re: ORBS sucked into a black hole!
No but ORBS was not involuntary.. It did'nt make everyone on the internet use it.. It was completely up to the ISP to use it or not... If you the customer don't like it then voice your opinion with the ISP and see if they will remove it.. If not.. Change your ISP.. Freedom of Choice. I am an ISP and I block approximately 10,000 attempted relays a day however I never used ORBS. Not that I did'nt like it, I just never used it... Jon Beets Pacer Communications - Original Message - From: Jim Choate [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 7:07 AM Subject: Re: ORBS sucked into a black hole! On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sampo Syreeni wrote: Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can expect people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited? Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want. -- ...where annual election ends, tyranny begins; Thomas Jefferson Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: pap Smear
On 12 Jun 2001, Nat Love wrote: And whats to stop an untrustworthy virus from making the same claims, placing the 'trustworthy' virus on the system and deleting itself? Nothing, of course. It is a question of likelihood. And we were thinking about *probable* cause, not evidence beyond reasonable doubt. Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], gsm: +358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front
RE: Automatics
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Bill Stewart wrote: The military recoilless rifles are more or less bazookas - Hardly. A bazooka is a shoulder-held tube from which you fire a missile, the fuel in the missile burning as it goes through the air. When the missile is gone, you put another one in. A recoilless rifle fires a conventional artillery round. The motive force is supplied by fuel which burns in the barrel of the gun. When you have fired, you open the little door at the back, pull out the empty shell casing, and put in another one. their objective is to fire a relatively large and usually explosive shell to blow up tanks, trucks, and other big hard targets, while still being conveniently portable. Depends on the war. I believe that in Vietnam it was common to mix beehive and HEAT 50:50. Beehive rounds contain zillions of little darts about half an inch long. HEAT is what you are talking about - High Explosive Anti Tank. I'm also puzzled by the flakes comments - rapidly expanding gasses are plenty of reaction mass, though perhaps there's some sort of wadding to provide increased gas pressure that gets flaked in the explosion. Yes. The gas comes out of the back of a recoilless rifle a lot faster than the shell goes out the front. -- Jim Dixon VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316 fax +44 117 927 2015
Re: Pap Smear
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check out the house and, sure enough, the window has been broken into, and right by the broken window is a pile of child porn. Wouldn't ANY sensible person conclude that more likely than not it was planted there? Except if the virus code is well known, and deemed trustworthy. By the way, has this JD lawyer ever READ the constitution? The 4th clearly states and I quote no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause SUPPORTED BY OATH OR AFFIRMATION. (emphasis mine). Clearly computer generated spam doesn't meet this criterion. Admissibility also comes to mind. But those kinds of legal standards are a US specialty. The rest of us will be in trouble with the false reports. Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], gsm: +358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front
Re: Pap Smear
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sampo Syreeni wrote: Except if the virus code is well known, and deemed trustworthy. Any code can clean up after itself, leaving a well-known trustworthy code behind. I'm a bit boggled at seeing virus and trustworthy in the same sentence. -- Eugen* Leitl __ ICBMTO : N48 10'07'' E011 33'53'' http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204 57F9CFD3: ED90 0433 EB74 E4A9 537F CFF5 86E7 629B 57F9 CFD3
Re: SCOTUS rulz!
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't Jim Choate Prime against this ruling, on the basis that it discriminates against certain radiating frequencies? He has posted to that affect before. Bullshit. What I said was that basing a 'search' on the frequency of the radiation observed was bullshit. I stand by that. Just like 'common public use' is as equally full of shit. -- ...where annual election ends, tyranny begins; Thomas Jefferson Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: ORBS sucked into a black hole!
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote: The analogy's not perfect, but analogies never are. Especially when you're involved in them. If you don't like what spam critics are doing, move to a different ISP. I *AM* my own ISP you dunderhead. I don't like some asshole with zero investment or liability through my acts telling me how to configure my mail server or how often to mow my front yard. Geesh, talk about one which flew over Declans Cookoo Nest. -- ...where annual election ends, tyranny begins; Thomas Jefferson Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
No Subject
Title: ! . : . . . . , 20 . , 25 ; ; ; , . . - , , . . ,, 10% . 2001 : (095) 234-24-22, 234-24-23
Re: ORBS sucked into a black hole!
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Greg Broiles wrote: Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want. Movie theaters prevent me from watching movies I want to see by A theatre is generaly not a critic. Apples and oranges. -- ...where annual election ends, tyranny begins; Thomas Jefferson Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'/ ``::/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com.', `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
Re: snow crash really exists
At 1:48 PM -0400 6/12/01, Riad S. Wahby wrote: David Honig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In _Science_ Vol 292 1 June 01 p 1637 there's a brief reference to musicogenic epilepsy, a rare conditionin which seizures are triggered by music My good friend and roommate of two years has just such a condition. His epileptic seizures are triggered by, among other things, the Happy Birthday song. ROTFHASASMT! (Rolling on the floor having a seizure and swallowing my tongue!) --Tim May -- Timothy C. May [EMAIL PROTECTED]Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns
Re: ORBS sucked into a black hole!
At 8:27 AM -0700 6/12/01, Greg Broiles wrote: At 07:07 AM 6/12/2001 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sampo Syreeni wrote: Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can expect people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited? Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want. Movie theaters prevent me from watching movies I want to see by censoriously not showing them, frequently as a result of critics' or reviewers' comments about those movies and their quality or subject or genre. Those bastards! And the video store near my house doesn't have all of the DVDs I want to buy, either. Don't they know about the First Amendment? And some of the ones that I want are too expensive. Help! I'm being censored! Will you buy them for me, Jim? I am beginning to suspect that perhaps the newspaper is deliberately not printing all of the news . . . I'm even more concerned, even angry, about some local restaurants _restricting content_ and _limiting my choices_. (Their excuse is that they talk to other restaurant and dietary experts, a la the ORBS conspiracy, and learn which food items are popular and which are not. Like ORBS, this is a de facto conspiracy to impose food censorship on the citizen units! RICO, anyone?) Like Choate, I believe we must stop the practice of ISPs deciding how to deal with their property as they choose. And we must stop this censorious practice of allowing restaurants to restrict content! And newspapers must be forced to carry anything the Peoples want to have published. Long live the Socialist Internationale! --Tim May -- Timothy C. May [EMAIL PROTECTED]Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns
Re: Thermal Imaging Decision Applicable to TEMPEST?
Bill Stewart wrote: TEMPEST really refers to two kinds of technology - keeping equipment quiet, and reading signals from not-quiet-enough equipment. The former category is the main thing that would apply to private citizens, and it's not addressed here. Yes, and the confusion between the two sometimes leads to gaps in understanding as well as security. And I don't know the name of the technology that acquires signals by illumination of objects bouncing emissions -- some say it is all TEMPEST, others say don't be fooled by that misnomer -- ther really good stuff is several generations beyond what is know as TEMPEST. Maybe that is what NONSTOP and HIJACK and other codewords refer to. We have tried and failed to get NSA to open up more on its standards for both types and blacker stuff. TEMPEST suppliers -- products and services -- have said that it's tough getting NSA to clarify what can be exported and what cannot by any means except by submitting products for review, waiting and getting back a yes or no, but not by getting precise requirements beforehand. Maybe that will change to follow the lead of crypto as demand for TEMPEST picks up. Meanwhile it is probable that NSA is testing TEMPEST products for blacker weaknesses, again like crypto, or rather the systems and programs for crypto use. We've been told by suppliers that the export market for TEMPEST (both types) produce would blossom without restrictions on commercial/private use. Govs get approvals for the best stuff (unspecified mil grade) but not biz and citz. Don't know about banks and telecomms and drug-kingpins, maybe they get special treatment for allowing access to data and dope. Outrageous, sure, but it is reported to happen. Still, as far as this amateur knows, there is no restriction on any type of TEMPEST inside the US, so the standard of protection is victim beware. And don't believe for a second anything you see in public about how far away emissions can be acquired or how to protect against TEMPEST with market-available products. Experts in the employ of the gov whisper you won't see the truth about TEMPEST in public any time soon though there will be a whole lot of smoke. The increasing smoke I can vouch for. Even TSCM's and electronic PI's admit all the public stuff about TEMPEST standards is prefabricated sunshine. Though that might be a DIRT ploy to sell really, really, really totally reliable, better than mil-grade, protection. Did you hear how Joel McNamara was thought to have been killed fighting a forest fire? Remember the A-10 seeming to fly aimlessly over the Rockies? The suppressed AF report on its avionics going haywire? Think NONSTOP, HIJACK.
