Re: new list ?

[juan]

On Mon, 5 Sep 2016 08:47:01 +0300
Georgi Guninski  wrote:

> new list(s) was already suggested these days.
> 
> please go and make a few. there are even free lists providers.



Actually, the people who should make a new list are the people
who don't agree with basic libertarian tenets (you Georgi for
instance) and who want to discuss useless an irrelevant
technical matters (you Georgi)

People who are not interested in (crypto) anarchy, and are
interested in stupid hardware and software bugs and how to
'exploit' them should go to the so called 'cryptography'
mailing list. 

Here's the address again, in case you can't find it.



http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

""Cryptography" is a low-noise moderated mailing list devoted
to cryptographic technology and its political impact." 


translation : 

"Cryptography" is a content-free, censored cesspool.

Now, go there and enjoy yourself Georgi, and all the rest. 







> 
> people who want to subscribe, will subscribe. isn't this obvious?
> 
> i suppose you can name them whatever you want.
> 
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 03:12:01PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > Folks who want their cypher unsullied have plenty of many and varied
> > lists, but should have their full pure cyphered punk (whatever that
> > means to them) without the "stress" of non cypher which appears
> > evidently stressful.
> > 
> > As was said last year, my personal intent is to respect the intenet
> > of the founders of this forum/list.
> > 
> > Lists are neither complicated, difficult nor with singificant
> > overhead, to run.
> > 
> > And it appears evident there is a smallish but loud number of
> > emotionally pained individuals who want to not be adulterated by
> > calls to action, discussion of politics, defense of fundamental and
> > essential principles to any community we can imagine, or anything
> > outside their personal expectations for what the cypherpunks list
> > "should be".
> > 
> > Far be it for us to cause any undue stress to the poor darlings.
> > 
> > 
> > -
> > So, once again, there is a fair whack of offlist, and in the past on
> > list, support for an similar but alternative email mailing list.
> > 
> > Of course there has also been both on and offlist calls to not
> > split the list.
> > 
> > The possible 'new list' would be "just like cypherpunks, only a
> > little less elitist about what can be discussed", including and
> > especially tech, cypher, politico, anarcho, actiono, liberto and
> > any other old o, topics :)
> > 
> > In fact, this alternative list is not elitist at all - if you wanna
> > talk it, bloody well talk it, the list shall forever be uncesored,
> > just expect no mercy on the "constructive" or "vehement" feedback
> > side :)
> > 
> > If "you can't HANDLE the response!" then stick to cyphussy-whipped.
> > 
> > One could even consider this new list an "anarchist" list.
> > 
> > The only (should be self evident) proviso is that your speech be
> > lawful in the jurisdiction of the listserv operator, for (what
> > ought be self evidently) obvious reasons.
> >  -
> > 
> > 
> > And now, the final call! ::
> > 
> >Are there any loud "no, please don't split the list" calls which
> > can make a convincing argument as to why a few cotton wool footed,
> >excessively schooled, overly emotional Westerners with delicate
> >communication sensibilities and inadequate personal technical
> >ability, ought not have their little CIA dominated pow wow room
> > under the current name, and a new anarchist list under a slightly
> >distinguished and eminently distinguishable alternative name?
> > 
> > As a little reminder, alternative alternative lists, providing
> > abundent opportunity for free form but self moderated or actually
> > censored crypto techno discussion are, for example:
> > 
> >nettime
> >metzdowd
> >securityfocus
> >many universities
> >djb lists
> >eff
> >tor-talk, tor-project etc
> >many newsgroups
> >and a whole internet more, just a search away
> > 
> > 
> > Finally, before those tenderfoots jump in with "yes please", perhaps
> > read this again:
> > http://cryptome.org/2013/09/cpunks-crypto.htm
> > 
> > including its many choice quotes including:
> > 
> > - "the political has won out over the technical".
> > 
> > 
> > - this one reminds of the total overthrow and take over of Tor Inc
> >   that's just gone down in front of us all, along with the public,
> >   professional and very personal destruction of Jacob Applebaum:
> > 
> >   "What has been shown in the discussion is that the technical
> > wizards are not nearly as competent at the messy political"
> > 
> > 
> > - "petty squabblling and exchange of slurs has replaced rational
> >   discourse. Thus the convo has become 

Fw: Political Cypherpunks Trumps Apolitical Cryptography

[Zenaan Harkness]

Forwarding the following for our collective prayer:


- Forwarded message -
Could not, agree, more !

Identify yourselves, all defeatists, trolls, counter intelligence
"professionals", cold water bots, and horsey nay sayers all polluting
relevant, indeed dire discussion with distracts and "comedy" !

Better still, don't !

Read. Absorb. Imbibe.

Then contemplate for at least three nights.

Then, carefully, draft even the smallest, as long it be constructive.

Then re-read that draft. Consider it be useful for those who might
have but a small flame, that flame which might be gently fostered and
fanned with others into a bright and future defining flame!


And if your soul weeps for truth, for compassion as much as passion,
warmth and empathy as much as strength and bold eclat, and with your
humble words you have passed your own test, then post!

Speak to this world which so desperately needs your care, your ability,
your genuine contribution.

anon



On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 09:12:25AM -0400, John Young wrote:
> What is striking about discussion on the two cryptography mail
> lists, both set up to minimize discussing political and social
> issues to avoid cypherpunks acceptance of them, is the
> tentative reconsideration of those issues due to Snowden's
> revelations, miniscule as they are.
> 
> Notable among those raising the political threat are those
> who disdained the issue on cypherpunks and stomped off
> to set up alternatives ham-handedly moderated to cease
> and desist the "off-topic."
> 
> A few now say, bray more like it, NSA has betrayed us
> through political manipulation of officials and the public,
> and that is an important point which often came up on
> cypherpunks and still does, with somewhat less
> complaining about it.
> 
> For Snowden has shown the political has won out over
> the technical, and the technicals are fraught with what to
> do about it, and much fingerpointing is going on along with
> a few claims of having forewarned this betrayal would
> happen. No moderation yet has shut down this "off-topic."
> But much gumming and gnawing of the futility of technical
> means against the vulgar political.
> 
> What has been shown in the discussion is that the
> technical wizards are not nearly as competent at the
> messy political as they are at technical sophistication.
> The resulting conversation is a mish-mash of fairly
> high level technical discourse interleaved with fairly
> clumsy political opinionating. So technical clubs
> are being swung to answer political jabs, that is
> petty squabblling and exchange of slurs has replaced
> rational discourse. Thus the convo has become
> politicized with as much stupidity and ignorance
> as sharp thinking and mutual respect.
> 
> NSA and its bosses would be happy if this became
> the norm in cryptography as in the real world. And some
> opine that this outcome is being, and has been in the
> past, and will be in the future, orchestrated for just
> that result.
> 
> That sounds like what cypherpunks was set up
> to combat, the withdrawal from politcial affairs into
> safe sanctuary of infallible mathematics coated with
> unending challengences to implement illusory
> protection from political mayhem. So it has come
> to pass, there is no refuge from politics, and the once
> reviled tin-hats of conspiracy theories are replacing
> anomymous masks, especially by the best and brightest
> cryptographers who have been hoodwinked far more
> than dreamed of in earliest days of cypherpunks.
> 
> Still, there are die-hard PR-driven comsec experts
> rolling out advice for what to do to protect the public --
> meaning, cynically protecting their severely damaged
> reputation of "concern for the public interest (R)".
> Not yet willing to admit losing the comsec and privacy
> war so avidly promoted with HTTPS, SSL, PGP, PFS,
> OTR, Tor, on and on, they continue to hustle comsec
> customers with promises of here's what we have got
> to do, take it from us experienced veterans (read my
> remarks, hear my TV interviews, read my messages
> on cryptography, gorge on recyclings on Slashdot,
> Twitter, Reddit, Voice of America, EFF. Guardian,
> New York Times, ProPublica, ACLU, EPIC, on and
> on):
> 
> Lo, special prosecute NSA, take it to the courts, a
> tired political gambit for media semaphoring, fund
> raising, conceding technical defeat and begging
> political rescue by what's that you say, account
> churning lawyers, political lobbyists and journalistic
> hacks.
> 
> That is so obnoxious, murmurs the cryptography mail
> lists, so opportunistically off-topic, moderator do your
> censoring, let's get back to the good stuff. Despite
> the murmurrings there recurs calls for "cut the cowardly
> shit, let's fight." One guess who said that.

Re: New list confirmation (Re: cpunks list relocation imminent (was: Re: moving on))

[Riad S. Wahby]

Bardi Harborow  wrote:
> The lack of SPF, DKIM and DMARC records, as well as TLS, on the new
> list is still wreaking havoc with my spam filter. Any chance of a fix?
> I'd be happy to provide assistance.

I'm guessing the big change since we moved the list is TLS.

SPF is already in place.

There's a DKIM pubkey with the selector "email" to which Greg's server
(presumably) has the secret. But it is somewhat unusual, as far as
I know, for listservs to add their own DKIM signatures when passing
mail through; certainly mine never did. Usually the idea is that you
check the sender's DKIM, and the listserv should just avoid munging
headers so that the signatures can still be checked by the recipient.

I'd be surprised if DMARC changes much since I never had it set up
either, but of course I could be wrong.

-=rsw

Re: New list confirmation (Re: cpunks list relocation imminent (was: Re: moving on))

[Александр]

2016-09-05 0:21 GMT+03:00 Zenaan Harkness :

> CCing Juan and Alex now - what do you guys think?


I already told you a year ago, brother, that i am FOR this idea.
In my opinion, it *must* be done, because the tension from the
crypto-freaks and golden caged morrons is all the time "there", as asoon as
we start a serious conversation.
I/you/... we want to publish AND comment without being attacked on a
regular basis about the "offtopic" arguments.

Re: New list confirmation (Re: cpunks list relocation imminent (was: Re: moving on))

[Razer]

On 09/04/2016 08:28 PM, Bardi Harborow wrote:
> The lack of SPF, DKIM and DMARC records, as well as TLS, on the new
> list is still wreaking havoc with my spam filter. Any chance of a fix?
> I'd be happy to provide assistance.
> Yours sincerely,
> 
> Bardi Harborow
> Software Engineer
> Mobile: +61481816153
> Web: bardiharborow.com


I was having some problem with occasional listmail passed thru
riseup.net marked as spam on the first day. It appears to have subsided now

Rr

> 
> I acknowledge the Wurundjeri people, who are the custodians of the
> land upon which I live and work. I pay respect to their elders past
> and present.
> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Bardi Harborow
>  wrote:
>> The mail server doesn't appear to use TLS when forwarding mail to
>> subscribers. Additionally you may wish to look at configuring SPF,
>> DKIM and DMARC records.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 2:36 AM, Greg Newby  wrote:
>>> As I just wrote, this message should be going out via the *new* server and 
>>> settings.  It's addressed to cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org, as opposed to 
>>> the regular address, cypherpu...@cpunks.org
>>>
>>> Viva la Resistance!
>>>   - Greg
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 09:35:04AM -0700, Greg Newby wrote:
 Dear cpunks subscribers,

 As discussed on the list last week, Riad S. Wahby is exiting gracefully 
 from hosting the Cypherpunks list at https://cpunks.org

 We have coordinated a transfer of the list to a server I manage, and the 
 configuration appears to be fairly functional.  We have put this at 
 cpu...@lists.cpunks.org (versus cpu...@cpunks.org).

 I will send a test message to the NEW list momentarily, so subscribers 
 will knoow they are getting both.

 Please write back to this list, or directly to me, if you notice any 
 problems or anomalies.  The mailman list settings, subscribership, etc. 
 should be the same, except that subscribers since around August 25 are not 
 yet on the new list.

 You can check your list settings and view the archives at the new 
 location: https://lists.cpunks.org/

 Once everything is confirmed to be functional, we will change from the old 
 list to the new list, and update DNS and server records so the old email 
 address and list URL work on the new location.  We've set DNS TTL to 
 expire quickly, once the changeover happens.

 Best,
   Greg

Re: Troll Tools

[Steve Kinney]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1



On 09/04/2016 09:46 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> Further to Steve Kinney's proposed DISCLAIMER wording, which I ACK
> +1, perhaps a link to the Troll Tools email in the archive should
> be added - a quick way for those who want to get up to speed with
> troll being or troll spotting?
> 
> 
> On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 07:49:04PM -, Noven wrote:
>> 1. COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control
>> of a internet forum 2. Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation 3.
>> Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist 4. How to Spot a Spy
>> (Cointelpro Agent) 5. Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Yay, let's present new subscribers with a manual on how to fuck up a
forum!

;o)


-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJXzOooAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqOxQH/igtCW+i8LvGk4P97RcyG0W7
Nx5hY2RM1JT1sGiNkWeIvD9p95yfPGFpu+UEkTbipQ8w+NO1PNsb01pBEa0Ttko9
6biDBYFdbsH6XGcvggjmztUFe9FYxvCmmLFcfsZwgSoH7U15z/U8Kl0rAIBEmLv7
EMvoILhUrP0tCft1EtKzu9V1QHDzuO+jqKyeZHeomw62r5ovdWssrVi2zH4sCHek
zfyM3B1NrBy3emxQ5aaFC+g36nhidB8PrIApxGvfBguLEgk+sxe2EFl8vGPL3qIj
RrwRYNIzB/wqqHoc/B+b0J/9WqwKJRFDGdCSN4Z1tf8QkCLQxiFWsq2Y0MPUF1Y=
=gI9Q
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: New list confirmation (Re: cpunks list relocation imminent (was: Re: moving on))

[Bardi Harborow]

The lack of SPF, DKIM and DMARC records, as well as TLS, on the new
list is still wreaking havoc with my spam filter. Any chance of a fix?
I'd be happy to provide assistance.
Yours sincerely,

Bardi Harborow
Software Engineer
Mobile: +61481816153
Web: bardiharborow.com

I acknowledge the Wurundjeri people, who are the custodians of the
land upon which I live and work. I pay respect to their elders past
and present.


On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Bardi Harborow
 wrote:
> The mail server doesn't appear to use TLS when forwarding mail to
> subscribers. Additionally you may wish to look at configuring SPF,
> DKIM and DMARC records.
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 2:36 AM, Greg Newby  wrote:
>> As I just wrote, this message should be going out via the *new* server and 
>> settings.  It's addressed to cypherpunks@lists.cpunks.org, as opposed to the 
>> regular address, cypherpu...@cpunks.org
>>
>> Viva la Resistance!
>>   - Greg
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 09:35:04AM -0700, Greg Newby wrote:
>>> Dear cpunks subscribers,
>>>
>>> As discussed on the list last week, Riad S. Wahby is exiting gracefully 
>>> from hosting the Cypherpunks list at https://cpunks.org
>>>
>>> We have coordinated a transfer of the list to a server I manage, and the 
>>> configuration appears to be fairly functional.  We have put this at 
>>> cpu...@lists.cpunks.org (versus cpu...@cpunks.org).
>>>
>>> I will send a test message to the NEW list momentarily, so subscribers will 
>>> knoow they are getting both.
>>>
>>> Please write back to this list, or directly to me, if you notice any 
>>> problems or anomalies.  The mailman list settings, subscribership, etc. 
>>> should be the same, except that subscribers since around August 25 are not 
>>> yet on the new list.
>>>
>>> You can check your list settings and view the archives at the new location: 
>>> https://lists.cpunks.org/
>>>
>>> Once everything is confirmed to be functional, we will change from the old 
>>> list to the new list, and update DNS and server records so the old email 
>>> address and list URL work on the new location.  We've set DNS TTL to expire 
>>> quickly, once the changeover happens.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>   Greg
>>>
>>>

Re: foundations for sanity

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 08:09:07PM -0700, Razer wrote:
> On 09/04/2016 07:43 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> >> - respect for the freedom, inherent dignity, rights and sovereignty of
> >>   every human
> >> Although we may 'punish' or otherwise un-sanction our fellow society
> >> dwellers who enage in activities in ways which fail to demonstrate
> >> reasonable consideration for the safety of others, we shall limit our
> >> collective enforcement to not include activities which infringe no soul
> >> other than the individual soul himself.
> > 
> > Punishment by 'peers' must also be decided by peers, not just the guilt
> > of a peer, and the penalties or punishments ought be proportionate
> > between cases and between crimes.
> 
> Welp!(says the heretic) Whose going to regulate 'proportionate punishment'?

That would be written words only - guidence to the 'jury of peers', and
would therefore also provide a hint to the defendant "well so and so
only got X years for murder, I should get similar, and certainly not
2X".

Re: Suggestion to list admins for warning/disclaimer on the web for new subscribers

[Steve Kinney]

On 09/04/2016 08:28 PM, Razer wrote:
>
>
> On 09/04/2016 04:43 PM, Steve Kinney wrote:
>
>> I seem to be missing the real fun.  Lemme see the sabotage and
>> COINTELPRO content.


> COINTELPRO was a REAL Barrel o' laughs... Unless ofc you were Fred
> Hampton, or a number of other folks the US government simply had
> assassinated with local police assistance and firepower.
>
> Yeah... Sure ... "the real fun"

My point - such as it was:  COINTELPRO != forum trolling.  Besides
being a thing of the past, since replaced by many other programs with
similar objectives and methods.  Anyone who may be subject to that
kind of State attention either knows very well that everything they
expose on the public Internet is known to their adversaries at once,
or has already done as much damage to themselves by "saying too much"
as they are going to by saying more.

:o/

Re: individual responsibility - was Re: Nationalism vs Globalism

[Razer]

On 09/04/2016 05:26 PM, Mark Steward wrote:
> On 4 Sep 2016 01:53, "Mirimir"  > wrote:
>>
>> On 09/03/2016 05:25 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> ...
>> > What kind of conversations are worthy of this list?
>>
>> Maybe this is just too obvious, but consider what "cypherpunk" means.
>> The term was coined in the "punk rock" era. So by analogy, cypherpunk is
>> about co-opting crypto against the system. So that's what this list is
>> for, I believe. It's not a list for social/political/economic theory or
>> the fucking US presidential race or sucking Putin's dick or whatever.
>>
> 
> Also cyberpunk. Imagine a dystopic future of lonely, once angry, now
> tired individuals who lash out at any suggestion they are wrong. Back in
> the 90s they might have been nudged to tinker with crypto and empowering
> the world, but instead they spent their time seeing how many times they
> could fit "fuck" and "retard" into an email post.
> 
> Mark
> 


Perfect...

I know it's probably offtopic but Johnny Rotten wold have sucked Putin's
dick, or whatever. Just because it would piss somebody off.

The reference to 'punk', 'against the shitstem', I might add, also
implies 'counterculture'...

Rr

Re: Continual Violation of List Charter

[juan]

On Mon, 5 Sep 2016 01:12:10 +0100
Mark Steward  wrote:

> On 4 Sep 2016 22:13, "juan"  wrote:
> >
> ...
> > > > "Form your own group, your own mailing list, with a catchy
> > > > name, something like "The Privacy Education Foundation," or
> > > > "The American Civil Liberties Union" (whoops, taken), or
> > > > "The Society for the Preservation of Cyberspatial Liberty."
> > > > "
> > > > "Evolution in action. The market in action. A better
> > > > approach than trying to get the name and the charter changed."
> > >
> > > A market in action...
> >
> > My point is that the CHARTER of the mailing list is
> > supposed to be LIBERTARIAN.
> >
> 
> I don't think you have a clue what libertarian means.


Right back at you.

Notice the mention of the LIBERTARIAN party (which
is not actually libertarian, but should give you a clue about
what libertarianism means)

Of course, I know you must be one of those lefty geniuses who
believe that 'libertarian' only means 'anarcho' commie, or
'libertarian' socialism. Well, in contemporay english it doesn't.

Plus

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=libertarian

according to which it was a 'theological' term from 1789

(and 'libertarian' socialists are 'libertarian' as long as
people obey their orders)



> >
> 
> I see you're authoritarian about language too.


I see you are a totalitarian clown straight out of 1984. So
yeah, we can float this room if we want, and redefine language
as much as we want, too.




> Philosophy's history,
> much like Scientology's, owes more to narcissism than etymology.


Sure, philosophy is like scientology. And what kind of
'intellectual' credentials are you claiming, now that you
admited to being an anti-philosophy anti-intelectual?

I know, I know, logic is a patriarchalistical construction used
to oppress anti-naricissiticalistical victims like you.



> 
> Mark

Re: Suggestion to list admins for warning/disclaimer on the web for new subscribers

[juan]

On Sun, 4 Sep 2016 17:20:38 -0700
Greg Newby  wrote:


> In forums like Cypherpunks, we enjoy some of the Simple Sabotage
> techniques daily.  I especially appreciate the demands to provide
> full evidence and citations to any claims.

Oh OK. So go ahead and provide them? Seems like the responsible
thing to do. If you are claiming that some posters, out of the
rather small number of posters here, work for (mostly I guess)
the US government, then it would be useful to know who they
are. So that we can in turn know what the sabotage looks like.

I do have my list of course. It includes rayzer, mirimir, and
grarpamp (and grarpamp's sockpuppet, now defunct, coderman).





>  Also the indigenent
> objections that COINTELPRO techniques are ancient history, and no
> such thing happens any more.
> 
>   - Greg
> 
>

Re: Suggestion to list admins for warning/disclaimer on the web for new subscribers

[Razer]

On 09/04/2016 04:43 PM, Steve Kinney wrote:

> I seem to be missing the real fun.  Lemme see the sabotage and
> COINTELPRO content.

COINTELPRO was the NYPD "Bureau of Special Services" aka Red Squad
getting my name off the blotter after a guerrilla theater protest (Ted K
shortly after Chappaquidick and NY Senator Abe Ribicoff) at NYU's Queens
campus and using the file cabinet/phonecall/whoknowswheretheygotitfrom
info to threaten my dad's US Army/NASA security clearance.

What fun. Everyone should experience that sort of institutional attack
because they're a 16 year old antiwar protester Captain Finnegan's
thugs (We called him "The Silver Fox b/c hair color and he looked a lot
like whathisname from the A Team... really.) were already at the demos
photographing protesters and singling people out for 'special
treatment'. The unit was eventually disbanded after grand jury hearings
about it's abuses. Right. Sure.

The group I was involved in ended up having three or four police agents,
informers, freelancing john birchers... including the group's
photographer. One of them was the snitch who put Sam Melville in Attica.

COINTELPRO was a REAL Barrel o' laughs... Unless ofc you were Fred
Hampton, or a number of other folks the US government simply had
assassinated with local police assistance and firepower.

Yeah... Sure ... "the real fun"

Rr


> On 09/04/2016 04:51 PM, juan wrote:
>> On Sun, 4 Sep 2016 10:33:11 -0700 Greg Newby 
>> wrote:
> 
>>> Dear Zenaan, Georgi:
>>>
>>> Good suggestions, thanks!  I edited the list public HTML based
>>> on what's below, and also the nice Pastebin article that was
>>> posted here recently.
>>>
>>> https://lists.cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo
> 
> 
>> "Sabotage, COINTELPRO and other forms of subversion or attack are
>> often observed."
> 
> Hum.  Examples of sabotage would be interesting to see.  Would that
> include posting links to live HTML-borne exploits against browsers or
> MUAs to the list, links to sites offering trojan installers (i.e.
> Sourceforge or worse), or jokes like advice to do "sudo rm -rf ./*"?
> One normally thinks of sabotage as attacks against physical or digital
> assets.
> 
> COINTELPRO was a Hoover-era FBI political warfare program, grounded in
> the proposition that U.S. Civil Rights, Anti-War and radical political
> activities in general were 5th column operations sponsored and
> controlled by communist States.  Calling today's U.S. domestic
> political warfare programs COINTELPRO is reminiscent of Conspiracy
> Theorist wannabes who call notional present-day Illuminati sponsored
> mind control operations MKULTRA (and spell it wrong).
> 
>> So you have a fair amount of clear examples of all that. Please
>> link them?
> 
> +10
> 
> I seem to be missing the real fun.  Lemme see the sabotage and
> COINTELPRO content.
> 
> Also, grammar nazi time:  "misdirection and control of a internet
> forum." (vs. "an Internet forum")
> 
> Overall the disclaimer seems redundant to me, and sounds too much like
> a script kiddie brag.  Posting it as a sign out front is something a
> party interested in "dilution, misdirection and control" would do to
> suggest that a forum is sponsored and populated by teenage poseurs.
> 
> An abbreviated form like this would be more than sufficient IMO:
> 
> "The Cypherpunks list is an unmoderated forum.  Prospective
> subscribers should be aware that the tenor of conversation is often
> contentious, offensive, and always politically incorrect.  New
> subscribers are encouraged to observe the conversation before posting:
>  Lurk before you leap."
> 
> :o)
> 
> Steve Kinney
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: individual responsibility - was Re: Nationalism vs Globalism

[Mark Steward]

On 4 Sep 2016 01:53, "Mirimir"  wrote:
>
> On 09/03/2016 05:25 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
...
> > What kind of conversations are worthy of this list?
>
> Maybe this is just too obvious, but consider what "cypherpunk" means.
> The term was coined in the "punk rock" era. So by analogy, cypherpunk is
> about co-opting crypto against the system. So that's what this list is
> for, I believe. It's not a list for social/political/economic theory or
> the fucking US presidential race or sucking Putin's dick or whatever.
>

Also cyberpunk. Imagine a dystopic future of lonely, once angry, now tired
individuals who lash out at any suggestion they are wrong. Back in the 90s
they might have been nudged to tinker with crypto and empowering the world,
but instead they spent their time seeing how many times they could fit
"fuck" and "retard" into an email post.

Mark

Re: Continual Violation of List Charter

[Mark Steward]

On 4 Sep 2016 22:13, "juan"  wrote:
>
...
> > > "Form your own group, your own mailing list, with a catchy
> > > name, something like "The Privacy Education Foundation," or
> > > "The American Civil Liberties Union" (whoops, taken), or
> > > "The Society for the Preservation of Cyberspatial Liberty."
> > > "
> > > "Evolution in action. The market in action. A better
> > > approach than trying to get the name and the charter changed."
> >
> > A market in action...
>
> My point is that the CHARTER of the mailing list is supposed to
> be LIBERTARIAN.
>

I don't think you have a clue what libertarian means.

>
> >  I even found time to
> > correct Tim May, who cried uncle sort of. ;-)  I happened to have
> > personal knowledge of that situation.
> >
> > I wasn't mature enough to philosophize much then.
>
>
> And you think you are know? Do you know the etymology of the
> word "philosophy", I suppose?
>
> Philo-sophy means love of knowdlege/wisdom. See, the requirement
> for philosophy is not 'maturity'(whatever you mean by that).
> The requirement for philosophy is the love of truth and
> intellectual honesty.
>

I see you're authoritarian about language too. Philosophy's history, much
like Scientology's, owes more to narcissism than etymology.

Mark

Re: Continual Violation of List Charter

[Razer]

On 09/04/2016 02:19 PM, juan wrote some telling information about 'where
he's been'; a 'place' some of us may not have 'been to'..


> Families and businesses are dictatorial beacause they operate
>   in a dictatorial environment - child raising tends to be pretty
>   dictatorial per se. What is your point. 

I've said this before. Your world is lonely and miserable.

Rr





> On Sun, 4 Sep 2016 00:22:04 -0700
> "Stephen D. Williams"  wrote:
> 
>> On 9/3/16 11:32 PM, juan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Playing with the 92-98 archive...
>>>
>>>
>>> From: tc...@got.net (Timothy C. May)
>>> Date: Wed, 13 Sep 95 10:48:20 PDT
>>> To: cypherpu...@toad.com
>>> Subject: Re: CYPHERPUNK considered harmful.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Similarly, there's the Libertarian Party, with similar
>>> themes to our own..."
>>>
>>>
>>> "Getting back to your suggestion that "we" change the name
>>> to something more respectable. How could "we" do this, given that
>>> "we" are an effective anarchy?" 
>>
>> The group was "an effective anarchy".  So is hanging out with your
>> friends.  Corporations (and families for that matter) are,
>> classically, dictatorships.  Does that make the political and
>> economic system they operate in dictatorships too?
> 
> 
>   Families and businesses are dictatorial beacause they operate
>   in a dictatorial environment - child raising tends to be pretty
>   dictatorial per se. What is your point. 
> 
>   My point was to inform people that the 'themes' of the
>   cypherpunk 'movement' are supposed to be libertarian themes
>   (forgetting for a second that the US libertarian party is a
>   joke)
> 
> 
> 
>>
>>> "Form your own group, your own mailing list, with a catchy
>>> name, something like "The Privacy Education Foundation," or
>>> "The American Civil Liberties Union" (whoops, taken), or
>>> "The Society for the Preservation of Cyberspatial Liberty."
>>> "
>>> "Evolution in action. The market in action. A better
>>> approach than trying to get the name and the charter changed."
>>
>> A market in action...
> 
>   My point is that the CHARTER of the mailing list is supposed to
>   be LIBERTARIAN. 
> 
> 
>>
>>> ps: messages from the great philosopher Stephen D. Williams? 77 in
>>> total, stopped posting in 1995 - messages are either content free or
>>> nerdy, useless, technical stuff.
>>>
>> And firewalls:
>> http://www.greatcircle.com/firewalls/archive/firewalls.199502
>>
>> We were talking about crypographic and security related topics, like
>> firewalls and protocols, time stamping services (which I implemented
>> a couple times for widely used services), etc.
> 
> 
>   Cool. And you sabotaged them as well, as per orders from your
>   government I assume. Why don't you tell us about that? 
> 
> 
> 
>>  I even found time to
>> correct Tim May, who cried uncle sort of. ;-)  I happened to have
>> personal knowledge of that situation.
>>
>> I wasn't mature enough to philosophize much then.
> 
> 
>   And you think you are know? Do you know the etymology of the
>   word "philosophy", I suppose? 
> 
>   Philo-sophy means love of knowdlege/wisdom. See, the requirement
>   for philosophy is not 'maturity'(whatever you mean by that).
>   The requirement for philosophy is the love of truth and
>   intellectual honesty.
> 
> 
>   
> 
>>
>> I lurked later, being extremely busy implementing things and other
>> pursuits.
> 
>>
>> sdw
>>
> 

Re: individual responsibility - was Re: Nationalism vs Globalism

[John Newman]

> On Sep 3, 2016, at 8:59 PM, Mirimir  wrote:
> 
>> On 09/03/2016 06:51 AM, John Newman wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 12:03:56AM -0600, Mirimir wrote:
>>> I wouldn't say monastic. Just private. Read old Bill Burroughs' stuff
>>> about the Johnson Family.
>> 
>> It's been years since I read Naked Lunch or any of the other cut-up
>> novels (although I did re-read Junkie and Queer recently)...
> 
> If you like the Johnsons, you gotta read his last trilogy: _Cities of
> the Red Night_, _The Place of Dead Roads_ and _The Western Lands_.
> 

Funny you mention it - The Western Lands is on my book shelf right now. I don't 
seem to have copies of the other two, but I can dig them up somewhere ...  


John

>> Still, I remember the Johnsons... the correct interpretation of WWJD 
>> is, of course, What Would a Johnson Do ?
> 
> Right, WWJD :) His Johnsons are cypherpunks. Recall who he was. An heir
> of Burroughs Corporation founders.
> 
>> John
>> 
>> 

Re: The NSA’s stash of digital holes is a threat to everyone online

[Cecilia Tanaka]

On Sep 4, 2016 7:35 PM, "J.M. Porup"  wrote:
>
> The CSE's also:
>
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/security-flaws-cyberweapons-1.3742751
>
> by me, reporting for the CBC.

Cool, thank you!  Very interesting!  :D

Re: Suggestion to list admins for warning/disclaimer on the web for new subscribers

[Razer]

On 09/04/2016 10:37 AM, oshwm wrote:
> Should the list really be forwarding new people to pastebin considering
> it sits behind Cloudflare?


Pastebin is using Cloudflare?

Sigh... add another to the shit list.

Rr

> 
> Or maybe the list really isn't what it used to be?
> 
> oshwm.
> 
> On 04/09/16 18:33, Greg Newby wrote:
>> Dear Zenaan, Georgi:
>>
>> Good suggestions, thanks!  I edited the list public HTML based on what's 
>> below, and also the nice Pastebin article that was posted here recently.
>>
>>   https://lists.cpunks.org/mailman/listinfo
>>
>>   - Greg
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 09:31:12PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 02:23:48PM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote:
 The wikipedia page on cypherpunks have nothing to do with the current
 state of this list. History gets rewritten (from experience).

 I suggest after list discussion the list admins to put a warning on the
 list web page. Something along the lines of (clearly needs rewriting):

 
 The list is not it used to be and has nothing to do with the wikipedia
 page.

 The list has spooks, paid trolls, other similar whores and possibly
 crackpots.

 Some of them post actively, others rarely.

 Their motivation might include:
 * social engineering
 * manipulating opinions
 * profiting from the past reputation of the term cypherpunk
 * killing the list

 "What You See is NOT What You Get"

 Use common sense when reading or posting to the list.
 
>>>
>>> Excellent suggestion - full disclosure and pre-forewarning is highly
>>> recommended. We have a duty of care to newcomers to make sure they don't
>>> get involved in anything they might want to not get involved in, and
>>> they ought be suitably forewarned :)
> 

Re: 4096 bit SSL keys

[John Newman]

> On Sep 3, 2016, at 8:29 PM, Riad S. Wahby  wrote:
> 
> John  wrote:
>> The reason I asked: updating a few certs at office recently I nuked
>> an older F5 LTM device by installing a 4096 bit key/cert pair - the
>> load on the appliance (Linux based) shot up from less than 1 to about
>> 30 and became so excruciatingly slow it was nearly impossible to back
>> the change out (web GUI and ssh were both nearly non-responsive)..
> 
> Multiplying two n-bit numbers naively costs O(n^2) operations (one
> can do better with Karatsuba and related tricks), and exponentiation
> costs O(n) multiplications (so O(n^3) in total). So assuming the device
> is using something like Montgomery multiplication you'd expect about
> 8x increased load. 30x sounds like there *could* be some other issue
> with the implementation, but a significant slowdown is not unexpected.
> 

I /think/ the explanation to why the load went SO fucking crazy with the
new cert/key combo is this particularly old F5 (a 3400) has some sort of 
silicon dedicated to 2048 decrypts, where-as the 4096 is done 
completely in software… but I’m not sure. It was Friday, and I
didn’t (and haven’t) dug back into it at all since getting it fixed.

Also, while the load did peak around 30, the actual jump was from about
0.8 to a range between 10 and 30.  It probably stayed closer to 20 until
I got everything reverted (updated the client ssl profiles, removed the
4096 bit cert/key, restored the two VIPs I had updated to using the
2048 bit certs..) Regardless, this particular machine did not handle 
high load well … I was lucky I had an established ssh session in, the
web gui just became completely fucked, and even my ssh session
was barely usable. The newer models work much better, and in fact
I had installed about a dozen 4096-bit certs for some VIPs on a 3600,
and the load didn’t jump at all.

Thanks for the response… great info!

—
John


>> On modern hardware, including modern F5s, this problem doesn't
>> exist... but from what reading I've done it seems 4096 buys you
>> very little anyway ?
> 
> Depends who you ask.
>https://www.keylength.com/
> 
> - NSA Suite B recommends at least 3072 bits.
> 
> - BSI says 2048 bits for now, but 3072 bits for 2017 and beyond.
> 
> - ANSSI and NIST both say 2048 bits should be fine through 2030.
> 
> All of the above recommendations seem to assume the adversary is
> classical rather than quantum.
> 
>> With a theoretical quantum computer attacking is there any
>> significant gain with the bigger key size?
> 
> Shor's algorithm runs in time O(n^2) and requires O(n) qubits to
> factor an n-bit number. The first doesn't offer much help: you're
> only increasing the time by 4x going from 2048 to 4096 bits. I'm not
> qualified to comment on how much the second helps because it's not
> at all clear to me how the expense/difficulty of building a quantum
> computer scales with the number of qubits.
> 
> But if you're worried about defending against general-purpose quantum
> computers, there are other weak points you should be shoring up (no pun
> intended): 256-bit symmetric ciphers, preferably with 256-bit blocks
> (so Rijndael-256 rather than AES-256); and ephemeral key exchanges
> that don't rely on Diffie-Hellman (Google is deploying RLWE and LWE
> schemes in the next coupld years; supersingular isogeny D-H also
> looks promising, but there's a recent attack that suggests caution).
> 
> In sum: it's a strange and scary new world once general-purpose quantum
> computers arrive. In the next few years we're going to see the rollout
> of new post-quantum ciphersuites. For now, maybe we should learn to
> stop worrying and love the qubit :)
> 
> -=rsw

Re: The Unsettling Relationship Between Russia and Wikileaks

[jim bell]

 From: grarpamp 
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/world/europe/wikileaks-julian-assange-russia.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3769958/Does-Wikileaks-help-Russia-Information-leaks-Julian-Assange-benefit-Kremlin.html

>Now, Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks are back in the spotlight, roiling the
>geopolitical landscape with new disclosures and a promise of more to
>come.
And I hope they hurry up with all the leaks that they can muster, as early as 
possible.              Jim Bell


   

Re: Continual Violation of List Charter

[Stephen D. Williams]

On 9/3/16 11:32 PM, juan wrote:
>
>
>   Playing with the 92-98 archive...
>
>
> From: tc...@got.net (Timothy C. May)
> Date: Wed, 13 Sep 95 10:48:20 PDT
> To: cypherpu...@toad.com
> Subject: Re: CYPHERPUNK considered harmful.
>
>
>   "Similarly, there's the Libertarian Party, with similar themes
>   to our own..."
>
>
>   "Getting back to your suggestion that "we" change the name to
>   something more respectable. How could "we" do this, given that
>   "we" are an effective anarchy?" 

The group was "an effective anarchy".  So is hanging out with your friends.  
Corporations (and families for that matter) are,
classically, dictatorships.  Does that make the political and economic system 
they operate in dictatorships too?

>   "Form your own group, your own mailing list, with a catchy
>   name, something like "The Privacy Education Foundation," or
>   "The American Civil Liberties Union" (whoops, taken), or "The
>   Society for the Preservation of Cyberspatial Liberty."
> "
>   "Evolution in action. The market in action. A better approach
>   than trying to get the name and the charter changed."

A market in action...

> ps: messages from the great philosopher Stephen D. Williams? 77 in
> total, stopped posting in 1995 - messages are either content free or
> nerdy, useless, technical stuff.
>
And firewalls:
http://www.greatcircle.com/firewalls/archive/firewalls.199502

We were talking about crypographic and security related topics, like firewalls 
and protocols, time stamping services (which I
implemented a couple times for widely used services), etc.  I even found time 
to correct Tim May, who cried uncle sort of. ;-)  I
happened to have personal knowledge of that situation.

I wasn't mature enough to philosophize much then.

I lurked later, being extremely busy implementing things and other pursuits.

sdw

Re: Continual Violation of List Charter

[juan]

Playing with the 92-98 archive...


From: tc...@got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 95 10:48:20 PDT
To: cypherpu...@toad.com
Subject: Re: CYPHERPUNK considered harmful.


"Similarly, there's the Libertarian Party, with similar themes
to our own..."


"Getting back to your suggestion that "we" change the name to
something more respectable. How could "we" do this, given that
"we" are an effective anarchy?" 

"Form your own group, your own mailing list, with a catchy
name, something like "The Privacy Education Foundation," or
"The American Civil Liberties Union" (whoops, taken), or "The
Society for the Preservation of Cyberspatial Liberty."
"
"Evolution in action. The market in action. A better approach
than trying to get the name and the charter changed."


--


ps: messages from the great philosopher Stephen D. Williams? 77 in
total, stopped posting in 1995 - messages are either content free or
nerdy, useless, technical stuff.

Re: Fwd: Re: [Cryptography] "Flip Feng Shui: Hammering a Needle in the Software Stack"

[Georgi Guninski]

On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 07:52:26PM -0400, John wrote:
> I need to upgrade to an actual 1U instead of my current VPS solution, heh ;)
> 
> Then again... I wonder who I'm sharing a hypervisor with...
> 
>

The software is buggy, the RAM is buggy, the CPU is buggy, 
the operator is buggy.

AND IT WORKS!

Just a partial violation of GIGO ;)

Re: Playing with overlay networks

[Georgi Guninski]

I think tor should not be used for anything of importance.

What if tor allows code execution by design and it is heavily
obfuscated?

On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 07:56:33PM -0600, Mirimir wrote:
> So let's say that a bunch of us have Tor onion servers. They're linked
> to each other via OnionCat with ip4ip6 tunnels. With IPv4 routing so
> each can hit the others. And with iptables rules (IPv4 and IPv6) to drop
> packets to/from everyone else running OnionCat. Maybe even
> HiddenServiceAuthorizeClient/HidServAuth to lock down access.
> 
> What might we do with that? We might create an overlay Internet, I
> suppose. Given how long OnionCat has been around, there are probably a
> few of those. I doubt that OnionScan[0,1] would see the connections,
> given that there are no hyperlinks, and better, no unauthorized access.
> 
> But more specifically, what? BitTorrent, for sure ;) LizardFS works, so
> we could have private and shared cloud storage, backed by globally
> redundant, erasure-coded storage.
> 
> What about VPN services? Say, with two VPS linked via OnionCat. You hit
> VPN server as an onion service, and exit through one of many redundant
> VPS. We already have . So maybe chain that with VPNs
> via onion services. What do y'all think?
> 
> And what about Freenet or I2P on an OnionCat network? Or one of the P2P
> messaging apps? Or even old-school Mixmaster?
> 
> Back to basics, would any of that help against global adversaries? It's
> very hard to evade observation of network edges. You can have lots of
> chaff, but then that itself can be a signature.
> 
> [0] https://github.com/s-rah/onionscan
> [1]
> https://motherboard.vice.com/read/these-maps-show-what-the-dark-web-looks-like