Applied Crypto: question on skid3
I have a question on what seems to be a defect in the Applied Crypto book, and I couldn't get an answer out of Schneier. Could any of you please clarify my issue? My question is regarding Schneier's write up of SKID3 on page 56. He states that the protocol is not secure against man-in-the-middle attacks because no secrets are involved. I'm finding this hard to accept, because SKID3 uses a MAC, which requires a shared secret key between the two parties. I played out the scenario, and cannot see how a man in the middle could attack w/out knowing the secret key used in the MAC.
Re: pledge of allegiance in schools
On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 06:17:25 +, you wrote: Look at this shit on fox news, look how they bias the question and mis-represent the issue. They ask Should children be allowed to say the Pledge of Allegiance in school?. As if the children wanted to, and were being prevented! http://q13.trb.com and the stats after voting no -- 88% yes. Adam The polls done by these news sites are not designed to gain an accurate, statistically valid measure of opinion, rather they are designed as user participation devices to get involvement by the user with the web site. Like Rush Limbaugh or Donahue, the networks magnify controversy to gain interest. Probably the same group that watches professional wrestling, thrives on this kind of rabble rousing. No one takes them seriously. They are about building readership and money, not learning and conveying the truth. ~~~
pledge of allegiance in schools
Look at this shit on fox news, look how they bias the question and mis-represent the issue. They ask Should children be allowed to say the Pledge of Allegiance in school?. As if the children wanted to, and were being prevented! http://q13.trb.com and the stats after voting no -- 88% yes. Adam
Durdenian Analysis of Bush's radio address
Let me attempt some deconstruction here: It will be difficult to help freedom read: the US take hold read take over in a country that has known three decades of dictatorship, secret police, internal divisions, and war. read: in a country where cities are filled with snipers and boobytraps. I *think* he's talking about Iraq. Oh, he's DEFINITELY talking about Iraq. Here's the analysis: Bush is starting to lay a face-saving foundation for NOT attacking Iraq, just in case it becomes obvious the whole world's going to bum-rush his show. The explicit spinning sound bite will go like: We have decided that democracy in Iraq may not be achievable now. In particular, we have weighed the possibility of launching a costly and difficult urban campaign that may require many American lives and have decided that the price of attempting to free people who do not want to be free is too high. (Perhaps the UN should one day deploy troops in the US to protect the US's citizens from a power-mad dictator that's in charge of history's most effective military machine...) -TD _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: From Bush's radio address
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 17:20:47 -0500, you wrote: on Saturday... It will be difficult to help freedom take hold in a country that has known three decades of dictatorship, secret police, internal divisions, and war. I *think* he's talking about Iraq. Maybe Kuwait? How is democracy and freedom faring there more than a decade after the first Iraq war? Can women vote there? No? Has there been an election, or it is still a hereditary dictatorship? Oh, the latter. I see... Maybe it wasn't about freedom and democracy? Maybe something else? The troops are generally too stupid and ill informed to notice this incongruity. They will just go and kill people on command, while getting teared up over the land of the free and the home of the brave. -Declan
Re: interesting (fwd)
On Friday, February 28, 2003, at 01:35 PM, Sunder wrote: This was slashdotted - sorry for the spam if you've already seen this, but it's damned interesting reading - especially contrasted to current US media reports on various topics including war on terror and economics. -- Forwarded message -- http://www.topica.com/lists/psychohistory/read/ message.html?mid=1711891071sort=dstart=4389 -- With apologies for the group email... I thought this was interesting enough to pass along. These are the notes from a friend of a friend who writes for Newsday. Adam Davis Director, EPRIsolutions Environment Division ... \Vicente Fox -- who I had breakfast with -- proved sexy and smart like a --- well, a fox. David Stern (Chair of the NBA) ran up and gave me a hug. The world isn't run by a clever cabal. It's run by about 5,000 bickering, sometimes charming, usually arrogant, mostly male people who are accustomed to living in either phenomenal wealth, or great personal Welcome to Earth: meet the leaders. Ciao, Laurie Who is this Laurie? I presume it's not Ben Laurie. Sounds like a bimbette reporter, flushed with witnessing the white males she/he talks about. --Tim May The Constitution is a radical document...it is the job of the government to rein in people's rights. --President William J. Clinton
Re: Man decapitated while fleeing police
This sure sounds like bullshit. How could a body be decapitated falling on a fence like that? The human body just ain't all that fragile. R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/metro/atlanta/0203/16suspect.html [ The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 2/16/03] Man decapitated while fleeing police By LINDSAY JONES Atlanta Journal-Constitution Staff Writer *Atlanta/South Metro community page A narcotics traffic stop on the Downtown Connector turned deadly Saturday afternoon when a man climbed over the interstate railing, fell about 35 feet and was decapitated on a wrought-iron fence, Atlanta police said. Officers in a marked car stopped the man about 4:30 p.m., as he drove south on the interstate above Auburn Avenue. The man, who has not been identified, stopped his vehicle and tried to flee by climbing over the railing, Lt. Danny Agan said. Police still are investigating whether the man jumped or fell off the raised interstate. This is a new one for me in 29 years, Agan said. The decapitation shocked people who work in the neighborhood. Gary White, an income tax preparer, came out of his office when he heard the commotion. It's surreal, White said. Agan said narcotics officers had been trailing the man for much of the day. Agan did not know if the officers who tried to arrest the man would be placed on administrative leave. This is not something normally covered under the [standard operating procedure] of the department, he said. -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 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'
Re: Trivial OTP generation method? (makernd.c)
At 6:11 PM -0800 2/28/03, Thomas Shaddack wrote: Yes. The intention of the check in this version was to prevent operator blunders like feeding the program from a switched-off signal source. Better statistical check would be a good thing, though; however, my math-fu isn't good enough yet to come up with something simple. FIPS-140 is your friend. They did the math. Cheers - Bill - Bill Frantz | Due process for all| Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | used to be the | 16345 Englewood Ave. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | American way. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA
Who Owns the News
Adam Back writes: Look at this shit on fox news, look how they bias the question and mis-represent the issue. FOX recently fired two reporters after they refused to change the facts of a news story. Fox said to them, We paid $13 billion for these stations, and we'll tell you what the news is. In a unanimous decision, the 2nd District Court of Appeals overturned a $425,000 jury award to another FOX reporter who was fired after refusing to alter the facts of a story. THe judge ruled FOX had a right to lie, deceive, and mislead. MSNBC just fired Phil Donahue after a marketing report outlined a nightmare scenario in which MSNBC was perceived as giving a forum to anti-war sentiment while all other networks were engaged in patriotic flag-waving. MSNBC has now hired Jesse Ventura and Michael Savage, in order to try and compete with FOX on its own level. When CNN tried to cover the Palestinian side of the Mideast Conflict, Israel threatened to drop CNN and pick up FOX instead. CNN caved instantly. All CNN copy is now required to be reviewed by upper management in Atlanta before broadcast, and anything that isn't pro-Israel is killed. FOX's star ratings performer is of course Bill O'Reilly, a former schoolteacher and Asshole Douche of the first magnitude. Americans want Rah Rah reporting. America is Great. Our war is noble. God is on our side. Anyone who opposes us is evil. We've pretty much gotten to the point where the only places real news can be found in America these days is on Indymedia and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. A sad situation for a country with an alleged free press. I guess markets control the press even better than government ownership does. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law
Re: Man decapitated while fleeing police
This sure sounds like bullshit. How could a body be decapitated falling on a fence like that? The human body just ain't all that fragile. We're probably going to find out the guy's got a few dozen entries wounds in his back, in attempt to alter the man's course as he fell towards the fence. -TD From: Anonymous [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Man decapitated while fleeing police Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 18:05:11 +0100 (CET) This sure sounds like bullshit. How could a body be decapitated falling on a fence like that? The human body just ain't all that fragile. R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/metro/atlanta/0203/16suspect.html [ The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 2/16/03] Man decapitated while fleeing police By LINDSAY JONES Atlanta Journal-Constitution Staff Writer *Atlanta/South Metro community page A narcotics traffic stop on the Downtown Connector turned deadly Saturday afternoon when a man climbed over the interstate railing, fell about 35 feet and was decapitated on a wrought-iron fence, Atlanta police said. Officers in a marked car stopped the man about 4:30 p.m., as he drove south on the interstate above Auburn Avenue. The man, who has not been identified, stopped his vehicle and tried to flee by climbing over the railing, Lt. Danny Agan said. Police still are investigating whether the man jumped or fell off the raised interstate. This is a new one for me in 29 years, Agan said. The decapitation shocked people who work in the neighborhood. Gary White, an income tax preparer, came out of his office when he heard the commotion. It's surreal, White said. Agan said narcotics officers had been trailing the man for much of the day. Agan did not know if the officers who tried to arrest the man would be placed on administrative leave. This is not something normally covered under the [standard operating procedure] of the department, he said. -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 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' _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: Press Coverage, Snarky Media Personalities, and War
On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 16:14:58 -0600, Shawn K. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At least two of my prior e-mail addresses made never ever spam these addresses lists (unlike remove lists, these are actually heeded by a lot of spamming vermin), so I know that this can work. Where can one sign up to these never ever spam lists? Dave Hodgins
Press Coverage, Snarky Media Personalities, and War
On Saturday, March 1, 2003, at 08:40 AM, lcs Mixmaster Remailer wrote: On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 06:17:25 +, you wrote: Look at this shit on fox news, look how they bias the question and mis-represent the issue. They ask Should children be allowed to say the Pledge of Allegiance in school?. As if the children wanted to, and were being prevented! http://q13.trb.com and the stats after voting no -- 88% yes. Adam The polls done by these news sites are not designed to gain an accurate, statistically valid measure of opinion, rather they are designed as user participation devices to get involvement by the user with the web site. Like Rush Limbaugh or Donahue, the networks magnify controversy to gain interest. Probably the same group that watches professional wrestling, thrives on this kind of rabble rousing. No one takes them seriously. They are about building readership and money, not learning and conveying the truth. Fox is also worse than some of the others. Nearly every news program is dripping with chauvinism, rah-rah patriotism, and overall snarkiness. The level of political debate in the U.S. is declining. I don't think it's just my age. Even partisan programs like Crossfire, on CNN, used to be more interesting. This even when Pat Buchanan and Michael Kinsley were the main hosts, circa 1990. The few times I've turned it on in recent years I've found it expanded to a one-hour show, complete with whooping audience and two caricatures as hosts: ultra-liberal airhead Paul Begalla and sneering, smarmy, preppie Tucker Carlson. Speaking of sneering, this seems to be the main technique. Anne Coulter, usually described as a leggy blonde, is a rail-thin-but-attractive blonde who has written several best-sellers and who specializes in hair flips, eye rolls, and sneers. She reminds me of my sister as a high schooler: Oh, I am SO SURE! does not make for a very illuminating political commentary. Bill O'Reilly, currently the darling of conservatives, is even worse. While he doesn't do the hair flips that Anne Coulter has trademarked, he routinely cuts off his guests in mid-sentence. I expect I'd last about two minutes with him before standing up, on camera, removing my earpieces, and saying Fuck this. Part of this is television and shorter attention spans. The yahoos (TM, The Yahoo Corporation, All Rights Reserved) won't watch dry, detailed discussion such as we used to see in the 60s, 70s, and 80s on Firing Line, for example. William F. Buckley doesn't fit with the zoomy, snide, MTV approach of today, where political ideas are packaged in sound bites and set to a music track. Charlie Rose, on PBS, is much better. He'll interview a guest for 30 minutes, sometimes an entire hour. And the interview is polite, with no eye rolls, few interruptions (some are normal in any conversation), and no Oh, COME ON!!s substituting for making actual points. So, as should be apparent, I don't watch much of the CNN or Fox or MSNBC coverage. I have my t.v. on with the sound down most of the time I'm here sitting in front of my computer (actually, leaning back in my high tech recliner with a flat panel monitor positioned perfectly, satellite receiver and 35-inch t.v. in front of me). But I can't stand to listen to what's being said for more than a minute or two. And when I see Fearless Leader telling us about nucular threats and evil doers and how we're gonna open a can of Texas whoop-ass on those bad boys!, I mute the sound instantaneously. I voted for this yahoo (TM) as the lesser of two evils, but he's gotten much worse, much faster, than I expected. We're seeing the transformation of a C-student Texas frat boy into an anything is OK as long as it gets whoops and cheers American-style world policeman. The Republican ideology of limited government, of fiscal conservatism, and of not running around doing nation-building, all of this is now in the dustbin of history. Republicans now stand for empire. And liberals are no better. Where are the Dems in this debate? In fact, where's Congress? Where are the heated floor debates about going to war? Where's the resolution for war? Congress shall have the power to declare war. seems to have been forgotten, conveniently. If this War on Some Terrorists somehow goes spectacularly well in Iraq, and Columbia, and North Korea, and Nigeria, then the Dems will say they supported it along. If it turns into a train wreck, a clusterfuck, a Blackhawk Down scenario of heavy fighting in the streets of Baghdad, then the Dems will cluck that they never supported it in the first place. Why are so few in the press pointing this out? (a rhetorical question, as we know the reasons) Note that my e-mail address has changed. --Tim May Friends, After more than 7 years with my got.net e-mail address, [EMAIL PROTECTED], the amount of unsolicited e-mail I am getting on a daily basis has escalated sharply in recent months. So my new address is [EMAIL
Re: Trivial OTP generation method? (makernd.c)
* Using the output to seed MD5 for the next block exposes that part of the state of the RNG. Might be better to use half the MD5 output as seed for the next block, and the other half as output data. The RNG takes most of its input (except the initial seeding) from the external source of de-facto-impossible-to-predict-accurately data. However, it's a good comment; the program should allow to switch on this mode, trading added entropy for output stream rate (the program was originally intended as moderate-bandwidth, to produce a CD worth of random data in no more than few hours). * Your RNG takes input from an attackable source. The input - the TV tuner card audio device - was chosen on the basis of being available without me having to leave my chair when I got the idea; I am aware about this risk, though I don't expect an active attack of this kind ot be feasible against an offline OTP generator. However, I was playing with the idea of using a just-slightly-modified program to continually feed the entropy pool. Then the risk of active attack becomes more real. Also, vast majority of my computers don't have a tuner card in, so they will be dependent on an external noise source. Here a real noise generator has to come to play. Looking for something simple, powered from +5V. At this moment, I am pondering to design a small analog noise generator for the microphone input of a sound card (as most of my servers which could need this toy have an onboard soundcard). The mike input is designed for the electret microphone, which needs a power supply; the input is AC-coupled with a capacitor and connected to the power supply through a resistor. So there is a miliamp or two on few volts that I can use for the noise generator. Its usability as a power supply is likely to depend on the board/soundcard; I measured available voltages being 0.7V on a motherboard-integrated card, 2.5V on my POS laptop, and 4.8V on a PCI128 soundcard. With a simple noise-generator circuit (possibly a 1458 opamp fed with something like a Zener diode noise or anything similar suitable), it could be a very cheap and simple random noise generator (the whitening of the signal through a hash function is a must here, though, as the desired simplicity of the circuit will likely result in an uneven spectral distribution of the output, thus lower-than-optimal entropy). Even if the soundcard mike input won't offer high enough voltage, we can borrow +5V from keyboard, mouse, joystick, or USB port, for the cost of another connector and another piece of wire (which then turns an elegant neat clean sleek single-plug design into a wirey mess, but on the other hand allows us to put it all inside the server's case - then we can even take advantage of +12V available from the HDD power supply connector, and feed the signal into the CD-IN on the onboard sound card; using two independent noise generators and feeding their outputs to left and right channel could neatly double the input bandwidth). The point of this device isn't to have an absolutely-bulletproof system, but to provide good-enough-for-nearly-everyone el-cheapo HW RNG for under $10-15. be attackable - it would depend on how well I could manipulate the /dev/dsp output via my transmitter. You could eg. get the system to receive a continuous clean sine wave, or - more likely - feed it with high-amplitude impulses. Until I'll talk myself into putting together the hardware RNG from the previous paragraph. The present check only requires that some pair of bytes differ by 16 - something that might be relatively easy to cause with a transmitter. Yes. The intention of the check in this version was to prevent operator blunders like feeding the program from a switched-off signal source. Better statistical check would be a good thing, though; however, my math-fu isn't good enough yet to come up with something simple. Of course, reading 128 bytes buys you a lot of entropy even just from marginal noise, so you may still be okay. This was what I hoped for. :)
Re: Who Owns the News
Funny. Some time ago I saw some Israelis murder a Palestinian kid on numerous stations, Fox among them. Well, the cynical part of me chalks this up to the fact that there's some vague pro-Palestinean sentiment brewing, and they don't want to get caught with their pants down. -TD From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Who Owns the News Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 19:41:33 -0800 -- On 1 Mar 2003 at 11:25, Eric Cordian wrote: FOX recently fired two reporters after they refused to change the facts of a news story. Fox said to them, We paid $13 billion for these stations, and we'll tell you what the news is. In a unanimous decision, the 2nd District Court of Appeals overturned a $425,000 jury award to another FOX reporter who was fired after refusing to alter the facts of a story. THe judge ruled FOX had a right to lie, deceive, and mislead. MSNBC just fired Phil Donahue after a marketing report outlined a nightmare scenario in which MSNBC was perceived as giving a forum to anti-war sentiment while all other networks were engaged in patriotic flag-waving. You are making all this crap up. For example Donahue was fired because few were watching him sneer at them. Liberals cannot succeed in talk shows because they hate and despise their audience. He was getting about one quarter the audience of the competion. The nightmare scenario that MSNBC was so alarmed by was that no one was watching him vomit hatred over his audience. Much the same for all your other stories When CNN tried to cover the Palestinian side of the Mideast Conflict, Israel threatened to drop CNN and pick up FOX instead. CNN caved instantly. All CNN copy is now required to be reviewed by upper management in Atlanta before broadcast, and anything that isn't pro-Israel is killed. Funny. Some time ago I saw some Israelis murder a Palestinian kid on numerous stations, Fox among them. Channel surfing last night I saw bits of a long boring documentary where the camera followed various Palestinians around in their daily lives, depicting the distressing effect on the Palestinians of various Israeli collective punishments. Not sure what station it was on. Terribly earnest public good stuff. Sure the press is biased, but there is plenty of stuff that is very far from pro Israel, even on channels that are openly pro Israel, such as Fox. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG mmaHCD9F1B++2Aq7X7ytnGlqgDM6kFzF3Ua7X2Ke 4bHENQyj656gmwUnwj85NQSorfvZ2KiZtsroyXrdv _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: Who Owns the News
At 07:41 PM 03/01/2003 -0800, James A. Donald wrote: MSNBC just fired Phil Donahue after a marketing report outlined a nightmare scenario in which MSNBC was perceived as giving a forum to anti-war sentiment while all other networks were engaged in patriotic flag-waving. You are making all this crap up. For example Donahue was fired because few were watching him sneer at them. Liberals cannot succeed in talk shows because they hate and despise their audience. He was getting about one quarter the audience of the competion. Nah. It's not that liberals hate and despise their audiences any more than conservatives do (oh, come on now, can you tell me Ollie North doesn't disrespect the people he lies to?) I don't get the impression that Oprah's a flaming conservative, though she may not be the most liberal person around, but she seems to do just fine at _her_ talk show. And Howard Stern seems to be successful, in between getting kicked off the air occasionally for tastelessness. Donahue stopped being on the air years ago because he'd used up his supply of imagination and interestingness (not that I was ever a fan of his), and dragging back someone who used to be interesting just because you hope maybe he'll be interesting again is usually a losing game; talk shows aren't sitcoms and they don't make good nostalgic reruns, though an occasional rerun of, say, David Frost interviewing Nixon might be fun. (There are a few exceptions, like the Canadian import Sue Johangten doing the Sunday Night Sex Show on cable tv.) Most of the national talk shows on radio are either conservatives or ranting right wingers or sports shows (which don't count.) The ranters get some mileage out of insulting people for a while, trying to keep finding new people to hate and insult, but it gets old after a while, and now that there's no longer a Clinton Administration supplying easy targets, it's hard to sustain. Some of them manage to be entertaining and interesting for a long time, but it's hard to get more than your fifteen minutes of fame unless you're really skilled at it (anybody still remember Mort Downey Jr?) And radio talk is easier to do well than TV talk; even Limbaugh couldn't sustain the latter, and I assume Dr. Laura's gone too. The more interesting problem is watching the national syndicated shows try to take over for the locals. Limbaugh's the classic, and in general it's been conservatives who succeeded, though Jim Hightower was around for a while. Most of the nationalists have been political, while the locals have had much more mixed topics, typically focusing on local issues as well as national, and not all politics, and they're often more likely to be liberals, like Bernie Ward in SF.
Re: Who Owns the News
-- On 2 Mar 2003 at 1:00, Bill Stewart wrote: Most of the national talk shows on radio are either conservatives or ranting right wingers or sports shows (which don't count.) The ranters get some mileage out of insulting people for a while, trying to keep finding new people to hate and insult, but it gets old after a while, and now that there's no longer a Clinton Administration supplying easy targets, it's hard to sustain. You take for granted that news shows are to the right of their audience. This does not seem to be the case. Fox has determined the political views of the typical person who is interested in news, and Fox is dead center on that demographic. If O'Reilly is neither right nor left, but instead balanced, even if far from fair, then existent talk shows are fairly representative of their audience, about equally split between right and left, which of course makes them all extreme right wing as compared to most of the people who run the news. As to which side is spewing rage and hatred, try googling for references to Ann Coulter. Anne laughs at her opponents. I get the feeling that they would put me in the gulag if they could, along with most of their audience. Similarly recall the debate between Chagnon and his various opponents. The joke so often made about feminists is also very much applicable to those than in the America call themselves liberals. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG gs4XF9FlWtm8J1QfFNuWUi7Oq6NmCglTocpcIxAG 44Ui+eIfir//QVw+66bb3d5P+L4iWlBIkDXQFVERa
Re: Press Coverage, Snarky Media Personalities, and War
On Sun, 2 Mar 2003, Dave Howe wrote: you find the author of one of those 10,000 verified email addresses! cds you blow up his car, burn down his house, paint little targets on his kids, and cut his telephone connection. Given that a hit job by Russian mafia ran for about 5 k$ not so very long ago, the apparent immunity to mayhem by so many who've been begging for it for a oh so long time restores my faith into fundamental niceness of the average monkey.
Re: Revealed: US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,905899,00.html Revealed: US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war Secret document details American plan to bug phones and emails of key Security Council members Read the memo http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,905954,00.html The memo is directed at senior NSA officials and advises them that the agency is 'mounting a surge' aimed at gleaning information not only on how delegations on the Security Council will vote on any second resolution on Iraq, but also 'policies', 'negotiating positions', 'alliances' and 'dependencies' - the 'whole gamut of information that could give US policymakers an edge in obtaining results favourable to US goals or to head off surprises'. Dated 31 January 2003, the memo was circulated four days after the UN's chief weapons inspector Hans Blix produced his interim report on Iraqi compliance with UN resolution 1441. It was sent by Frank Koza, chief of staff in the 'Regional Targets' section of the NSA, which spies on countries that are viewed as strategically important for United States interests. Do you think Mr. Koza would answer questions about it? The pre- Total Information Awareness system seems to indicate he can be reached at 410-964-3814 in Columbia, MD, a 25 minute drive from Fort Meade. If he's encouraging tapping people's home phones, surely he can't object to a phone call simply asking for information. Learning more about this is clearly in the public interest. He should be given an opportunity to explain this disturbing news. Koza specifies that the information will be used for the US's 'QRC' - Quick Response Capability - 'against' the key delegations.
Re: Press Coverage, Snarky Media Personalities, and War
At 09:30 AM 3/1/2003 -0800, Tim May wrote: On Saturday, March 1, 2003, at 08:40 AM, lcs Mixmaster Remailer wrote: The Republican ideology of limited government, of fiscal conservatism, and of not running around doing nation-building, all of this is now in the dustbin of history. Republicans now stand for empire. Oh, come on now. The Republican rhetoric of smaller government was always just that, rhetoric. Where you do you think the Republicans came from? Most came from the Whig Party who central platform was mercantilism. After the Union put down the Southern Rebellion the size of the federal government grew by leaps and bounds, under Republican hegemony, until at least the end of Reconstruction. Since the time of Franklin Roosevelt, post-FDR Republicans have preached the free-enterprise, private-property, limited-government line of their pre-FDR Republican predecessors. In real life, however, post-FDR Republicans have lived the life of the lie. For they have embraced and supported every single socialistic, welfare-state scheme that has been implemented in America in the 20th century. The congressional elections of 1994 flushed Republicans out into the open. Once the elections were over, the fatal flaw the life of the lie was exposed for all to see. Not only was nothing of substance abolished or dismantled, there was not even an attempt to do so. The lie of the Republican fiscal conservatism is like the lie of moral justifications for wars. Despite the free-enterprise rhetoric, the Republican revolution was never about freedom for the American people. Rather, it was what it has been since 1932 a way to win Republican control over the lives and fortunes of the American people, mostly to serve their aspirations of empire and as What would a real revolution look like? It would be a libertarian revolution. And it would be one of the most exciting events in history. An example might involve new amendments to the U.S. Constitution. For example: 1. No law shall be passed by either the national or state governments respecting the regulation of peaceful activity, including commerce, or abridging the free exercise thereof. 2. No subsidy, grant, welfare, aid, loan, or other special privilege shall be provided to anyone, domestic or foreign, by either the national or state governments. 3. Neither the national government nor the states shall engage in any business or commercial enterprise, including the delivery of mail. 4. No law shall be passed by either the national or state governments respecting the establishment of education or abridging the free exercise thereof. Compulsory school-attendance laws and school taxes are prohibited. 5. No law shall be passed by either the national or state governments respecting the ownership of weapons or abridging the free exercise thereof. 6. No law shall be passed by either the national or state governments respecting the establishment or regulation of money or banking. Legal-tender laws and a central government bank are prohibited. 7. Trade and immigration controls, by both the national and state governments, are prohibited. 8. The imposition of taxes by the national and state governments is prohibited. All governments shall be funded voluntarily, or not at all. To fund the national government, the government of each state shall be required to remit ten percent of gross revenues to the national government. 9. Conscription is prohibited. Governmental involvement in foreign wars is prohibited. 10. Except for the White House, the Capitol, and the Supreme Court building, and the corresponding buildings in the respective states, governmental ownership of real property is prohibited. And liberals are no better. Where are the Dems in this debate? In fact, where's Congress? Where are the heated floor debates about going to war? Where's the resolution for war? Congress shall have the power to declare war. seems to have been forgotten, conveniently. Yes, its true they do have that power but it seems, like much else in the Constitution, the word shall has been twisted through textural interpretation to mean may. The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. -- H.L. Mencken
Re: Press Coverage, Snarky Media Personalities, and War
At 09:15 PM 03/01/2003 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: The congressional elections of 1994 flushed Republicans out into the open. Once the elections were over, the fatal flaw the life of the lie was exposed for all to see. Not only was nothing of substance abolished or dismantled, there was not even an attempt to do so. While I agree with most of your article, I semi-disagree with this section. The Contract On America struck a real chord with American voters, and the Republicans got a lot of people elected by it, and they did kill off Clinton's health-care nationalization (yay!) but they failed to get most of the rest of their program accomplished because Clinton was a better politician and poker player than they were. Their relentless attacks over the Monica Lewinsky affairs showed that they were a really tacky self-serving bunch who'd say anything for power, and with the budget showdown, the blinked and Clinton didn't - remember the shutting down the government charades, with the usual paying overtime for park rangers to block the entrances to the Washington Monument and Yellowstone Park (while not sending home any annoying bureaucrats who wouldn't be missed)? They'd tried pretty hard to cut out programs they didn't like, and got the Clintonistas to buy into Welfare Reform for poor people, though of course welfare for defense contractors got increased, but they lost the showdown and couldn't get their budget though.
Re: interesting (fwd)
Some background on this. This wasn't meant for public consumption, rather a post to her friends - one of whom spilled it to the net. This message turned into a debate about the dangers of email - i.e. as secure as postcards, trust of friends, etc. I found the contents of her email (the economic outlook, ramifications of the war on terror, etc. as opposed to what is actually reported in the media) far more interesting than the obvious preaching to the choir debate about not using email for personal things that the following url's discuss. See: http://www.topica.com/lists/psychohistory/read/message.html?mid=1711891071sort=dstart=4389 for the leaked email. See: http://slashdot.org/articles/03/02/28/1823256.shtml?tid=158 for the slashdot posting/discussion about this. See: http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/modules.php?name=Newsfile=articlesid=938 for a debate discussing the implications of the privacy spil, etc. As to the identity of said journalist, here is an excerpt from the above Yale link: Laurie Garrett is a science journalist and Pulitzer prize-winner; her best-known work is The Coming Plague. She's a medical and science writer for Newsday, a daily New York City newspaper; last month, she attended the World Economic Forum in Davos. --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Tim May wrote: On Friday, February 28, 2003, at 01:35 PM, Sunder wrote: This was slashdotted - sorry for the spam if you've already seen this, but SNIP Who is this Laurie? I presume it's not Ben Laurie. Sounds like a bimbette reporter, flushed with witnessing the white males she/he talks about. SNIP
Re: interesting (fwd)
On Saturday, March 1, 2003, at 10:11 AM, Sunder wrote: As to the identity of said journalist, here is an excerpt from the above Yale link: Laurie Garrett is a science journalist and Pulitzer prize-winner; her best-known work is The Coming Plague. She's a medical and science writer for Newsday, a daily New York City newspaper; last month, she attended the World Economic Forum in Davos. Who is this Laurie? I presume it's not Ben Laurie. Sounds like a bimbette reporter, flushed with witnessing the white males she/he talks about. Oh, I know of _this_ Laurie. I bought her Plague book several years ago. And it turns out she went to UC Santa Cruz and she has done a few book signings around here...I skipped them, of course. Santa Cruz may well be where she got her ideological slant about persons of whiteness dominating the economy. I thought her report on Davos was boring, frankly, but perhaps I was put off by the weird mix of adulation of and hatred for male power figures. --Tim May A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. --Robert A. Heinlein
Re: interesting (fwd)
I think Tim hit the nail on the head: http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/modules.php?name=Newsfile=articlesid=938 -- Neil Johnson http://www.njohnsn.com PGP key available on request.
Re: Press Coverage, Snarky Media Personalities, and War
David W. Hodgins wrote: Where can one sign up to these never ever spam lists? Its quite simple. you find the author of one of those 10,000 verified email addresses! cds you blow up his car, burn down his house, paint little targets on his kids, and cut his telephone connection. if he misses the telephone connection enough, he will add you to the list. I am told the Monks use the list as a way of keeping score though - some have dozens of entries on it now :)
Re: Press Coverage, Snarky Media Personalities, and War
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday March 1 2003 15:43, Eric Cordian wrote: I'm pretty sure, based on my spam volume, that spammers grep Cypherpunks for email addresses. So you're probably already hosed. The spam volume I get remains rather low on this account, and I think this is primarily because I report every single spam I receive via SpamCop. In contrast, my Yahoo! Mail account gets so much spam it's unusable, and it's barely possible to report spam via the Web interface anymore. (Some incredible genius over there decided that nobody needed to forward messages with full headers, so you now have to cut and paste the whole message. Except for the fact that I rarely use that address and that doing this could cost $25/year, it would be tempting to sign up for their paid POP3 service and fire off a barrage of spam complaints from that acccount.) At least two of my prior e-mail addresses made never ever spam these addresses lists (unlike remove lists, these are actually heeded by a lot of spamming vermin), so I know that this can work. - -- Shawn K. Quinn -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+YTDnQVXDBVmaIp0RAtzXAJ99y1wdZ88mPDS3omb0pOhmewlO7wCfcLKt 0E6wneH73dezFUhKdw6bRMU= =9AeY -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Who Owns the News
-- On 1 Mar 2003 at 11:25, Eric Cordian wrote: FOX recently fired two reporters after they refused to change the facts of a news story. Fox said to them, We paid $13 billion for these stations, and we'll tell you what the news is. In a unanimous decision, the 2nd District Court of Appeals overturned a $425,000 jury award to another FOX reporter who was fired after refusing to alter the facts of a story. THe judge ruled FOX had a right to lie, deceive, and mislead. MSNBC just fired Phil Donahue after a marketing report outlined a nightmare scenario in which MSNBC was perceived as giving a forum to anti-war sentiment while all other networks were engaged in patriotic flag-waving. You are making all this crap up. For example Donahue was fired because few were watching him sneer at them. Liberals cannot succeed in talk shows because they hate and despise their audience. He was getting about one quarter the audience of the competion. The nightmare scenario that MSNBC was so alarmed by was that no one was watching him vomit hatred over his audience. Much the same for all your other stories When CNN tried to cover the Palestinian side of the Mideast Conflict, Israel threatened to drop CNN and pick up FOX instead. CNN caved instantly. All CNN copy is now required to be reviewed by upper management in Atlanta before broadcast, and anything that isn't pro-Israel is killed. Funny. Some time ago I saw some Israelis murder a Palestinian kid on numerous stations, Fox among them. Channel surfing last night I saw bits of a long boring documentary where the camera followed various Palestinians around in their daily lives, depicting the distressing effect on the Palestinians of various Israeli collective punishments. Not sure what station it was on. Terribly earnest public good stuff. Sure the press is biased, but there is plenty of stuff that is very far from pro Israel, even on channels that are openly pro Israel, such as Fox. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG mmaHCD9F1B++2Aq7X7ytnGlqgDM6kFzF3Ua7X2Ke 4bHENQyj656gmwUnwj85NQSorfvZ2KiZtsroyXrdv
Re: Press Coverage, Snarky Media Personalities, and War
Tim May wrote: P.S. I plan to make strong efforts to stop my new address from being harvested by spammers, such as using [EMAIL PROTECTED] in Usenet posts. I hope this works. --Tim, [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm pretty sure, based on my spam volume, that spammers grep Cypherpunks for email addresses. So you're probably already hosed. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law
Re: Press Coverage, Snarky Media Personalities, and War
On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 01:43:58PM -0800, Eric Cordian wrote: Tim May wrote: P.S. I plan to make strong efforts to stop my new address from being harvested by spammers, such as using [EMAIL PROTECTED] in Usenet posts. I hope this works. I'm pretty sure, based on my spam volume, that spammers grep Cypherpunks for email addresses. I don't think that spammers bother to subscribe to mailing lists directly. I think they use google to search for email addresses on the web. Cpunks is web archived. /[EMAIL PROTECTED](com|net)/ is probably a great way to find valid addresses. So you're probably already hosed. I probably spend half an hour to an hour a week on spam blocks of various sorts. This week I blocked 3800 spams to lne.com, and foiled another thousand SMTP name searches. lne.com only has a few users. That spam count doesn't count the spam that goes to cpunks, most of which is filtered out before I see it. It's to the point where I'm considering actively fighting back. Eric
