They never learn: Omniva Policy Systems
I ran across a reference to this company, which says it has raised $20 M in VC financing and which claims it has a system which implements the digital equivalent of disappearing ink. (Perhaps distilled from snake oil?) The URL is still called disappearing.com, but the company is now called Omniva Policy Systems. A URL is: http://www.disappearing.com/ I guarantee that anything a human eye can read can be captured for later use, whether by bypassing the probably-weak program, by using other tools to read the mail spool, by capturing the screen buffer, or, if worst comes to worst, simply photographing the screen with an inexpensive digital camera and then either using the captured image as is or by running it through an OCR. It happens that I have met the founder of this company at a couple of parties at my house, so I have no idea what got into him with this late-90s-founded company. Maybe he was just exploiting the suckers. Their system, which makes varius references to being Outlook-compatible, may deter the nitwits from easily saving and printing, but it is not the nitwits one wants to deal with. Even the corporate whistleblowers (played by Julia Roberts in that movie Erin Brockovitch) can very easily learn enough to open their mail with another program, or grep the spool directly, or use the other tools. Again, photographing the screen works perfectly well. And reliance on Outlook, if this is what their scheme relies on, seems horribly limiting. What of those using Entourage, or Mail, or any of the dozens of platforms and news readers in existence. The site mentions that they are now Blackberry-compliant. Well, does this mean employees of the companies using Omniva Policy Manager cannot read their mail on their Palms, or their laptops running other mail programs, and so on? Seems like a fatally-flawed basis for a company. --Tim May As my father told me long ago, the objective is not to convince someone with your arguments but to provide the arguments with which he later convinces himself. -- David Friedman
Re: [eff-austin] Antispam Bills: Worse Than Spam?
On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * John Kozubik [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-08-02 19:27]: That is incorrect. AOL owns their network, and they can respond to your arbitrary communications on their network in any way they see fit. Unfortunately, you're correct. Maybe they will deliver your email to your AOL subscribing friend. Maybe they will block that email. Maybe they will translate the email into French and reverse the word-order and then send it to your friend. Maybe they will print it out and mail it back to you for no reason. All of these responses are perfectly legitimate, and represent a private entity using their property in whatever way they see fit, Yes, this is the problem I'm trying to address. Normally when Alice tries to transmit information to Bob, if Mallory decides to sabotage the communication, this is a denial of service attack, forbidden by criminal law. However, if the communication passes through Mallory's back yard, we can let the attack happen because it's on Mallory's property. At the same time, if I sabotage the city water line that passes through my property, I can be held accountable. And rightly so. Mallory should also be held accountable for blocking communications. This is what needs to change. This comparison is invalid. You are correct that your private property is .. well ... your private property, but if you look closely you will find that you have a contract (of some kind, be it an agreement, etc.) with your city - most likely in the form of an easement. So, by interrupting their water line, you would be breaking your contract. Make no mistake, if you hold a contract that AOL entered in with you that stipulates that they must send your email that you place onto their property to your friend, then by all means prosecute them to your fullest ability. Further, if the AUP/TOS (contract) that your friend, as a subscriber, has with AOL stipulates something similar, then again, go forward with my best wishes. We all know, however, that AOL has no such contract with you, and that their contract with your friend most likely boils down to we will do as we see fit and you will like it, and further, that even the peering agreements that AOL has with other service providers, common carrier laws, etc. most likely do not come anywhere near to stipulating this. As well they shouldn't. So once again, we are back to: AOL can do whatever they want with the bits you place on their private property. It amazes me how many people on this list only respect private property when it is convenient for them to do so. (For reference, see the Tim May argues (correctly) that people can't protest in his house and, more recently, the Gilmore thinks airlines can't refuse him travel for any reason they see fit threads) There's a balance of rights, and obviously private property rights aren't going to always get priority. While they're high on my list in *some* cases, they don't top human rights. Some rights are a little more fundamental and important than private property rights. And when someone abuses their property to damage someone else, I have zero respect for their private property rights. So I'm not at all surprized that someone would perceive an inconsistency on this issue, because there are so many more important rights that have a greater bearing on peoples happiness. AOL isn't even a human, so to put the private property rights of AOL above the well-being of any human is a silly mistake. In my particular case, AOL is blocking me from talking to friends and family. I suppose I could argue that the packets I create and send are created with my private property and resources, so those packets are my property, and AOL is vandalizing my property by destroying these packets. You can argue that how you want, but the bottom line is that AOL is using their property to gain power to control who may talk to who. This is clearly an abusive use of property, and I have no tolarance for it. They need to be removed from power, and the consumers who contributed to the purchasing of their property need to be given some rights. This will be my last response to this thread. Your comments boil down to: a) You have forgotten that communication existed before the Internet, and further, that Internet communication exists just fine without AOL. The obvious conclusion that using AOL is an act of terminal stupidity is left as an exercise for the reader. b) You invoke the tired, meaningless appeal to the big bad corporation stomping on the little guy. In reality, AOL can do whatever it pleases with your bits when you place them on their property, barring any prior contract to the contrary. Any legislation that stipulates otherwise is misguided. And I think both of those are absurd. - John Kozubik - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.kozubik.com
RE: Year in Jail for Web Links
Mac Norton wrote: There was a weapons charge as well, which will always complicate matters considerably. There was a weapons charge -- Molotov cocktail -- in the first indictment which was dropped. The second indictment was for the single charge of distribution of information, to wit: 18:842(p)(2)(A) Distribution of Information Relating to Explosives, Destructive Devices and Weapons of Mass Destruction http://cryptome.org/usa-v-sma-dkt2.htm Mac's right that this kind of information is idiot cousin of controlled substances. Law is an prejudiced ass. That is why Sherman, a minority youngster, took a hit in cracker Southern California while two old honkies on the Left Coast addicted to 1A who offer the same information get no re-education sentence at all -- well, as the Boston youngster wrote yet.
Re: [eff-austin] Antispam Bills: Worse Than Spam?
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I'm talking about is AOL committing a DoS attack on me, which is actionable regardless of Bob's contract. Dear honorable Mr. Mindfuq, I am from this point forward blocking all mail traffic from you to the networks I control. None of your carefully constructed communicative, copyrighted packets will be delivered on to my networks. I promise. I choose not to expend my resources forwarding your data beyond my router. I assume you consider this a DoS, through some muffinhead logic that you've devised. If that logic is well formed, I assume it also explains the presence of fluoride in our water rather well. It is unclear to me what service I am legally obligated to be providing you, and what exactly I'm denying you. I'm also sure you'd love to explain it, however, you can't. You also can't explain it to any of the people to whom I provide internet related services, at least via email from your present address. Similarly, I deny you the privilege of retransmitting your voice over my loudspeakers. I have no automated method for enforcing that, but I'll do my best. You also may not speak your mind on my couch. Bye bye. -j -- Jamie Lawrence[EMAIL PROTECTED] For every fatal shooting, there were roughly three non-fatal shootings. And folks, this is unacceptable in America. It's just unacceptable. And we're going to do something about it. - George W. Bush
Re: What happened to the Cryptography list...?
Bob - Perry's cryptography list moved from wasabisystems to [EMAIL PROTECTED] a few months ago. [EMAIL PROTECTED] says: - lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] serves the following lists: bsd-api-announceThe BSD APIs Announcement Mailing List bsd-api-discuss The BSD APIs Discussion Mailing List cryptographyThe Cryptography and Cryptography Policy Mailing List spkiThe Simple PKI Mailing List Use the 'info list' command to get more information about a specific list. info cryptography Cryptography is a low-noise moderated mailing list devoted to cryptographic technology and its political impact. Occasionally, the moderator allows the topic to veer more generally into security and privacy technology and its impact, but this is rare. WHAT TOPICS ARE APPROPRIATE: On topic discussion includes technical aspects of cryptosystems, social repercussions of cryptosystems, and the politics of cryptography such as export controls or laws restricting cryptography. Discussions unrelated to cryptography are considered off topic. Please try to keep your postings on topic. MODERATION POLICY: In order to keep the signal to noise ratio high, the mailing list is moderated. The moderator does not forward off topic messages, messages that have substantially the same content as earlier messages, etc. Please not that the moderator does not always have the time to send an explanation of why a message was not forwarded. TO POST: send mail with your message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line unsubscribe cryptography in the body of your mail. info spki No info available for spki. end END OF COMMANDS --
Colored people and cripples
On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 10:59 AM, Tyler Durden wrote: Tim May wrote... Where did this of color nonsense get started? Like a lot of PC terms...from guilt-ridden white liberals. Black folks never use this term, as far as I've ever heard. I hear them using this _frequently_. Just about any time I see a fat negro chick on one of the talk shows (CNN, MSNBC, etc.) I can count on her using the phrase blahblah of color several times. Likewise with physically challenged. My black karate Sensei used to periodically laugh at the shame and embarassment associated with any speech coloration...to the point where some people won't even mention skin color when describing another person. Again, I hear the cripples using the phrases physically challenged _frequently_. It's not enough that cripples always get the best parking places, by law, but they want all Handicapped signs replaced with more PC terms. (I may start pulling cores on their tires after seeing so many apparently-fully-mobile persons getting out of their cars and vans with the Handicapped placards. Here in California, an entire industry of scammers and willing doctors has emerged to get more and more people declared Disabled and thus eligible for the special placards and, of course, taxpayer-paid-for free stuff.) --Tim May
Re: Colored people and cripples
once again, we can count on Tim May to contribute the least productive comment to this thread. On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 12:01:48PM -0700, Tim May wrote: On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 10:59 AM, Tyler Durden wrote: Tim May wrote... Where did this of color nonsense get started? Like a lot of PC terms...from guilt-ridden white liberals. Black folks never use this term, as far as I've ever heard. I hear them using this _frequently_. Just about any time I see a fat negro chick on one of the talk shows (CNN, MSNBC, etc.) I can count on her using the phrase blahblah of color several times. Likewise with physically challenged. My black karate Sensei used to periodically laugh at the shame and embarassment associated with any speech coloration...to the point where some people won't even mention skin color when describing another person. Again, I hear the cripples using the phrases physically challenged _frequently_. It's not enough that cripples always get the best parking places, by law, but they want all Handicapped signs replaced with more PC terms. (I may start pulling cores on their tires after seeing so many apparently-fully-mobile persons getting out of their cars and vans with the Handicapped placards. Here in California, an entire industry of scammers and willing doctors has emerged to get more and more people declared Disabled and thus eligible for the special placards and, of course, taxpayer-paid-for free stuff.) -- http://www.sdtjmobilization.org The World Says No to the WTO
Re: What if all things computable are computable in polynomial time?
At 02:16 PM 8/6/03 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: What if all things computable are computable in polynomial time? We wouldn't have to go back to OTP, just symmetric-key keyservers which people used before public-key became well-known. While the public-key algorithms are based on math problems like factoring or discrete log, most of the symmetric-key algorithms are based on intractable ugliness, and on doing enough analysis to find out which kinds of ugliness and bit-twiddling are really intractable and which can be cracked. Yes, but the cryptanalysis of symmetric ciphers involves exponentially-expanding back trees. That is the whole point of avalanche. If, somehow, for any NP algorithm there were an equivalent P algorithm, then the block-cipher backtracking would be solvable in poly time. You could find the plaintext ASCII needle in the haystack of possibilities in poly time, no? ... Rambling Aside: RSA encryption is equivalent to spinning a marker on a modulus-sized wheel until it wraps, and decryption is equivalent to spinning the marker more until it points to the original message. Spinning is actually exponentiating, ie, advancing the marker some number of positions which depends on its current value. Beautiful stuff, only glimpses visible to this knave. Like IDEA, multiplication is avalanche. -- The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance. -Robert R. Coveyou ORNL mathematician
Colored people
On Tuesday, August 5, 2003, at 08:39 PM, Mac Norton wrote: There was a weapons charge as well, which will always complicate matters considerably. The unconventional life is a more or less fine thing until it gets perpendicular to the conventional life, usually in the form of law enforcement agents. When that happens, and it almost surely will, what is necessary is a relatively big bunch of money, or a plea bargain. What happened here is happening to young men (yes, usually men, and as in this case, of color) Where did this of color nonsense get started? I thought colored people wanted to be called by other names, now they and their whiteliberal supporters are routinely using the silly name people of color. (Of course, we live in an age where homosexuals call themselves queers and propagate the name--Queer Nation, Queers of Color, Queer Eye for the Pervert Guy, etc.--and yet file lawsuits when others call them queers. And we live in an age where negroes call themselves and other negroes niggers and name their minstrel acts Niggaz with Attitude but then insist that persons of whiteness call them NWA so as not to use the offensive N-word.) If the coloreds want to be called that, fine with me. --Tim May
