RFID driver's licenses?
A friend of mine is expressing concern over the recently passed REAL ID act which will supposedly require RFID-readable driver's licenses (which it doesn't say in the text of the bill which just makes a vague reference to machine-readable technology.) My questions are: 1. Have any states already implemented RFID-readable IDs/licenses? 2. If not, which states plan to?
Re: SIGINT and COMSEC Discussion Group
On 2 Jan 2005 at 15:43, John Young wrote: A. writes: I have just launched a new discussion group related to hardware discussion for signal analysis and communications security systems: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/sigint/ Why would we use a groups beta at google's when there's a big and proven yahoogroups that's been around for ages (under various names)?
Re: punkly current events
-BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE- Message-type: plaintext On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, J.A. Terranson wrote: Take away complexity, and Mix *could* flourish - in spite of the fedz. What about mixminion? Setting up a node is about five minutes of work on a somewhat current Linux system. -END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-
Cypherpunks archives online
There were some talk about archives here recently. I found two here: http://www.mail-archive.com/index.php?hunt=cypherpunks And this does indeed seem to be an active archive of the list: http://www.mail-archive.com/cypherpunks%40minder.net/
loosing mail..
I seem to have not received a few of the emails in the PROMIS thread. What is the best approach if one really wants to receive all emails? I'm currently only on minder and it seems from time to time mail doesn't get through? Should one simply subscribe to several nodes (and receive some redundant traffic)? I sent test messages (help command) to several of the listed mail servers a whort while back but only these responded: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] I did not receive an answer at all from minder even though I'm receiving my list mail through minder, so it cannot be all dead. Is there (still) an online archive somewhere being saved of the cypherpunks messages? Comments?
RE: Word Of the Subgenius...
Peter Trei: Where is Tim May when when you need him? :-) Try scruz.general. or misc.survivalism
Re: Word Of the Subgenius...
Steve Furlong: Random racist ranting is also required. There are some racist assholes currently posting on cpunks, but none have quite the May flavor. LOL You can say that again. Here are a few examples of what this once renowned cypherpunk usually writes nowadays. First five quick quotes from Tim May, more further down. No wonder the white person wants the brown person sent up the chimneys, along with their Jew facillitators. I'm chortling. The burn-off of one hundred million useless eaters is going to be glorious. Me, I spend my years devoloping tools to fight the Zionist Entity, including the popular anonymous remailers and steganography to allow freedom fighters to fight Amerika and ZOG without detection, to send the last evil Jew to the ovens. I cheered when this nigger was shot, in 1968, a very good year. We need to find ways to help Al Qaeda nuke Washington, D.C. Killing a quarter of a million government employee leeches and three quarters of a million negro welfare leeches sounds like a good deal. Q: What do you call the death of a billion people from AIDS? A: A good start. Negroes in Africa believe that having sex with women and children expells the virus from their body. (No, I did not just make this up. Read the interviews with aid (no pun intended) workers.) Basically, between AIDS, cannibalism, butchering of other tribes, bad economic practices, corrupt liberal governments, the Dark Continent is burning off its negroes. The non-negro areas, in the extreme south and extreme north, are doing OK. In 30 years the negro regions will have been cleansed, naturally, and whites can colonize and make the entire continent prosperous. --Tim May Bush finally has admittted to mistakes in the planning of the war. And now the search is on for which Jewish spy for ZOG bore the most blame. It's been clear for more than 16 months that ZOG viewed the war with Iraq with delight, a chance to bloody one of their enemies without themselves having to go to war. Feeding the DOD false information was part of this disinformation campaign. And as the war with Iraq was seen to be winding down (though it has not, of course, as freedom fighters in Iraq continue to kill Americans working for the ZOG state), the Zionist Entity floated stories that _Syria_ was the _REAL_ enemy, or maybe _Iran_, as the Ultimate Enemy. We need to cut off funds to the ZOG state and let three million ZOGster figure out how to swim the Mediterranean, REAL FAST. The burn-off of 3 million ZOGsters would be glorious to behold. The implicated ZOG spies should be given fair trials, and, if found guilty, executed. None of the kid glove treatment that the ZOG spy Pollard has been receiving. Then we need to look very seriously at the Jews in our own midst. Many are not ZOGster, just Jews who fled oppressive regimes (which many of their fellow Jews helped create, by the way, as the history of Lenin and Marx and the early Jewish role in the formation of the Soviet shows). But the many ZOGsters now feeding information to the ZOG state need to be rounded up, given fair trials, and liquidated. Entire departments in the Pentagon will be decimated when this happens. Good riddance. As for the war in Iraq, we need to withdraw immediately, in 30 days. This was ZOG's war, not ours. Let Ari Fleischer and Dov Zackheim and Paul Wolfowith and Doug Feight become soldiers in the ZOG Army if they wish, and if they are not hung as spies, but get these united states out of the business of fighting ZOG's wars. --Tim May You'll get the Trifecta with John Kerry: a Communist, a Jew (recently acknowledged), and a Papist. Me, I'd rather we find the ZOG-employed traitors in the Pentagon, try them, hang them, and then pull out of all such foreign adventures or entanglements, which our first and most honest President warned us about. Let the Shiites and Sunnis fight it out in Iraq, let three million ZOG invaders swim for their lives, and let the entire Dark Continent deal with its own savagery, AIDS, cannibalism, killings of Hutus, killings of Tutsis, HIV, malaria, child rape, and voodoo in its own way. In 30 years the Dark Continent should be ready for white people, the last Jew in the ZOG state will have been nailed to a cross, and the world can get on with things without U.S. Big Brother interference. --Tim May I retired more than 18 years ago, in 1986. Near the beach, too. However, I don't believe active minds actually retire. Rather, they do what is important to them, whether or not K-Mart or Lockheed or Apple or Intel is employing them. Me, I spend my years devoloping tools to fight the Zionist Entity, including the popular anonymous remailers and steganography to allow freedom fighters to fight Amerika and ZOG without detection, to send the last evil Jew to the ovens. And category theory, topos theory, Haskell, functional programmng, and crypto, so long as no Zionist criminals need to be dealt with.
Re: Michael Riconosciuto, PROMIS
Bill Stewart shrieb: There are several different issues related to PROMIS Thanks for your comments. But what about the person Michael Riconosciuto? I did some searches online and I got the feeling that a lot people see him as an extremely intelligent person, a one-in-a-million type of person, being involved and on the front line with such diverse areas as human intelligence, weapons, electronics, computers, cryptography, bio-warfare etc. It's stated online that he has warned US about several terrorist attacks before they ocurred, including but not limited to the al-qaeda attacks. Is this somewhat related to him being jailed? Can he verify that US didn't act on alerts in ways so sensitive that the government simply cannot afford to let him speak up? Does he know things relating to US wanting some wars that the public simply cannot be told? I think I read somewhere that people from NSA or CIA thought of him as simply put a genius. Is it likely that he as such a genius is simply too dangerous for his own good when he decided to speak the truth and that the government is actively trying to shut him down and indirectly speed up his death by denying him medical care for his illness? Why did he come clean and sign the affidavit? He himself stated that he though he risked being killed or harmed in various ways if he went through with it. And indeed, just a week or two afterwards he got arrested! Smells like a government retaliation, set-up and cover-up if I ever saw one! This is almost to good for even Hollywood! There are many interesting questions here. Keep in mind that not all of us were around and active with intelligence/computers/cryptography 10-20 years ago. John Young: Does Cryptome hold any interesting documents involving this case?
Michael Riconosciuto, PROMIS
I read a few old email messages I had and stumbled over some interesting material relating to NSA, CIA and one Michael Riconosciuto among other things. I followed up on the info and did some surfing on the subject and got quite interested. I also did some searches in my cypherpunk mail folder and got no hits. Surely this must have been up in the list? Can someone give me some links please? There were also some talk about some PROMIS software somewhere and modifications being made to illegally obtained copies of proprietary software. This software was then sold by the US gov to be able to spy on Canadian authoritites. Is this also true? I found the below text saved here locally, if I'm correctly informed Mr. Michael Riconosciuto went to jail for this affidavit. Can someone verify if this really is true. (It sounds bizarre but maybe this can happen in Amerika?) I am told that Michael Riconosciuto has been diagnosed with prostate cancer and many delays in diagnosis and treatment have occurred and people say it's becaus the US gov wants him dead because he knows too much. It's also rumoured that he never received a fair trial and that two of his lawyers were murdered. Because the US government does not admit anything about PROMIS he has been relegated as a nut and serious efforts to isolate him have been going on for more than a decade. A friend of mine sent me this info on the case: Michael Riconosciuto was asked by Bill Hamilton, the proprietor of Promis, to sign an affidavit about his alterations to the software. A week before he signed, Michael was threatened. There had already been deaths around him and Michael informed his family that he was about to be murdered or jailed and that whatever the family was going to be told about him, it wasn't true, he was being framed for telling the truth. A week after signing the affidavit, Michael ended up in jail on fraudulent charges of running a drug lab. Can someone give me some more info on this? Thank you AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL J. RICONOSCIUTO The INSLAW CASE: AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL J. RICONOSCIUTO UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA In Re: INSLAW, INC., Debtor. CASE NO. 85-00070 (Chapter 11) INSLAW, INC., Plaintiff v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendants. CASE NO. 85-00070 Adversary Proceeding NO. 86-0069 AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL J. RICONOSCIUTO STATE OF WASHINGTON) I, MICHAEL J. RICONOSCIUTO, being duly sworn, do hereby state as follows: 1. During the early 1980's, I served as the Director of Research for a joint venture between the Wackenhut Corporation of Coral Gables, Florida, and the Cabazon Band of Indians in Indio, California. The joint venture was located on the Cabazon reservation. 2. The Wackenhut-Cabazon joint venture sought to develop and/or manufacture certain materials that are used in military and national security operations, including night vision goggles, machine guns, fuel-air explosives, and biological and chemical warfare weapons. EXHIBIT 1 3. The Cabazon Band of Indians are a sovereign nation. The sovereign immunity that is accorded the Cabazons as a consequence of this fact made it feasible to pursue on the reservation the development and/or manufacture of materials whose development or manufacture would be subject to stringent controls off the reservation. As a minority group, the Cabazon Indians also provided the Wackenhut Corporation with an enhanced ability to obtain federal contracts through the 8A Set Aside Program, and in connection with Government-owned contractor-operated (GOCO) facilities. 4. The Wackenhut-Cabazon joint venture was intended to support the needs of a number of foreign governments and forces, including forces and governments in Central America and the Middle East. The Contras in Nicaragua represented one of the most important priorities for the joint venture. 5. The Wackenhut-Cabazon joint venture maintained close liaison with certain elements of the United States Government, including representatives of intelligence, military and law enforcement agencies. 6. Among the frequent visitors to the Wackenhut-Cabazon joint venture were Peter Videnieks of the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., and a close associate of Videnieks by the name of Earl W. Brian. Brian is a private businessman who lives in Maryland and who has maintained close business ties with the U.S. intelligence community for many years. 7. In connection with my work for Wackenhut, I engaged in some software development and modification work in 1983 and 1984 on the proprietary PROMIS computer software product. The copy of PROMIS on which I worked came from the Department of Justice. Earl W. Brian made it available to me through Wackenhut after acquiring it from Peter Videnieks, who was then a Department of Justice contracting official with responsibility for
Jewish wholy words..
Is it true that the jews have these texts in their scriptures? #1. Sanhedrin 59a: Murdering Goyim (Gentiles) is like killing a wild animal. #2. Aboda Sarah 37a: A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated. #3. Yebamoth 11b: Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age. #4. Abodah Zara 26b: Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed. #5. Yebamoth 98a: All gentile children are animals. #6. Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122: A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean. #7. Baba Necia 114, 6: The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts.
Swedish military feared linked to Estonia ferry disaster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 For those interested in intelligence, munitions smuggling by authorities and so on - a few words concerning military smuggling of munitions on the Estonia, feared to have played a part in the sinking and killings of 852 people on Sept 28, 1994, when the ferry M/S Estonia sinked during a journey from Estonia to Sweden. It has been rumoured for a long time that there were some kind of smuggling of sensitive material taking place on Estonia and that Russian authorities did not like this, needless to say. The very stressed and hasty investigation performed by the involved nations also raised suspicions amongst a lot of people. On top of all this the Swedish social democratic government did all they could to hinder future investigations of the wreckage by trying to cover it with stones and concrete. First some other related info. The reader should know that the Swedish social democratic party is notorious for acting in undemocratic and deceitful manners against the Swedish people. Two of the most infamous affairs being the IB affair and the Catalina affair. In the IB affair it was shown that the social democratic party had founded a secret and unlawful military intelligence bureau as the party's own private spy organization to spy on other politcal adversaries, a Swedish version of Watergate if you will, but it went far beyond that. Hundreds of thousands of people were targeted during a number of years. Even Olof Palme himself knew about break-ins that the intelligence officers performed in other countries embassies in Stockholm, one of them was Egypt's embassy. One major characteristic is that the Swedish way of doing things means sweeping things under the carpet and not letting the public know the truths, this is shown in every affair known in resent years, including the Estonia disaster. In all of these affairs it's the social democrats that has been the most responsible party and the party almost in constant power in Sweden historically speaking. The magazine breaking the news in 1973 today has a web site about the affair, http://www.fib.se/IB/ In the Catalina affair it was very recently shown actually, after the planes was discovered east of the island Gotland in the Baltic Sea, that they were both indeed gunned down, as had been suspected for decades. On June 13 1952 the DC3 plane Hugin disappeared and the only thing found was a trashed rescue raft. Three days later the rescure plane of type Catalina was also gunned down and forced to emergency landing. It's today also known however that the Swedish (social democratic) governments have all been maliciously and intentionally lying all along about the Hugin's purpose to both the Swedish people as well as the families. Hugin was in fact gathering intelligence very close (some say on the wrong side even) of the Russian border and was relaying all this signal intelligence directly to the Americans. USA was amongst other things interested in Russias capacity to fight the B-47. This was well known for the Russians and this was the direct cause of the attacks in 1952. It is believed that the Swedish FRA, standing for Försvarets RadioAnstalt, translating to The Defence's Radio Institution, which is Swedens NSA, signed secret treaties with the US some three years prior to the assult on these planes. The FRA had 5 employees on the Hugin when it was gunned down. It wasn't until 1991 that the families knew what happened, that was when the Russians admitted a Mig-15 gunned them down. When the recon plane was found in June 2004 it was situated far east of the earlier officially declared crash site which further fules the speculation that Hugin was indeed flying where it shouldn't have been, conducting its sigint operations and that the Swedish governments knew this all along. The Hugin was found June 10, 2003. I'm not sure how much of these affairs is known outside Sweden, but it's interesting read that's for sure and I just may get back to these things and others like them later on. Back to other things now. This was published today in Sweden, along with a tv show of one hour: INRIKES Publicerad 30 november Krigsmateriel fraktades på Estonia Estonia hade veckorna före förlisning- en vid två tillfällen krigsmateriel från Baltikum i lasten. Enligt kväll- ens Uppdrag granskning i SVT rörde det sig om rysk elektronik som svenska försvaret tog in för att studera. Lars Borgnäs som gjort programmet säger att avslöjandet belyser hur svenska myndigheter hanterat kata- strofen. -Man har t.ex. inte undersökt bildäck, säger han till SVT Text. Den pensionerade tullintendenten Lennart Henriksson uppger att han fått order om att släppa igenom bilarna på begäran av försvarsmakten. Läs mer på svt.se/nyheter Which translates into something like this: DOMESTIC Published
Re: The Values-Vote Myth
J.A. Terranson schrieb: This election *proves* that at least half the electorate, about 60 million people, are just Useless Eaters, who should be eagerly awaiting their Trip Up The Chimneys. Wow! A Tim May copycat! (Both the 'useless eaters' and the 'chimney'!)
Re: Why Americans Hate Democrats-A Dialogue
John Young: Tyler, Commie is the term used here like is nazi used elsewhere as the most fearsome if thoughtless epithet. Nazi here is a term of endearment, and also admirable role model by some. Calling someone both is not allowed, check the FAQ under impurity. Tim May, praise Allah, always claimed cypherpunks was a fair and balanced forum thanks to the one person of the left here who was fingered affectionately like a house rodent, an easy target for errant shooters. CJ is not to be recalled, ever. Jim Bell still sends very important legal papers, the latest yesterday, which describe the way things should be understood. But who can believe an MIT chemist political prisoner. CJ and Jim jailed by the Democratic freedom-fighters. CJ is CJ Parker, who posted a few emails to this list back in early 2003? I guess I haven't been around long enough to know all famous cpunks who have been posting to the list. Maybe someone could tell in short who those were, I guess there are one or two on the list who weren't around and would appreciate the stories. I think I remember having read about Bell, something about him having threatened FBI agents or something? Does Jim Bell post emails somewhere today?
Re: This Memorable Day
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 R.A. Hettinga: Are you high, junior? Or is it just your politics that sound so... sophomoric? Communism, Fuck Yeah!!! States are People Too Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish. (Euripides) You too. Sad it is. Howcome the Americans became so egocentrical and cynical that anyone who dares to speak up and support compassion for his fellow man automatically is a communist? It's a sincere question, no doubt in my mind that we won't get a sincere answer though. Reading your email actually reminds me of those of Tim May, he also seemed to be full of bigotry and hatred and deeply disliked anyone who were unfortunate enough to be poor. Our culture -- yours, too, bunky, since I bet you don't shit into a hole in the floor and pray 5 times a day for, as Hanson appropriately No I don't shit into a hole, but I can still try to be unbiased and extend a though or two to other people who are not so fortunate as we are to be born in the rich part of the world. Ah. That's right. I'm not nuanced enough. It's too *complicated* for anyone who didn't take your sophomore (cryptomarxist) History Studies class, or whatever. Please. To me it's enough to at least try to understand and try live by the spirit of the Bible. It's also quite ironical that all those right wing voters actually read communist propaganda in church, since that is the logical conclusion of your arguments made here. There we go. Wisdom from a thug. How about this thug, instead, kid, quoted just about as much out of context as you have yours: When the hares made speeches in the assembly and demanded that all should have equality, the lions replied, Where are your claws and teeth? -- attributed to Antisthenes in Aristotle, 'Politics', 3.7.2 Oh. That's right. One shouldn't read Aristotle. He was a White Male Oppressor... You like quotes, ok here I have a small collection for you, maybe one or two of them qualifies as white oppressors too, I don't know. Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. (Nietzsche) An honest man can feel no pleasure in the exercise of power over his fellow citizens. (Thomas Jefferson) I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crises. The great point is to bring them the real facts. (Abraham Lincoln) It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets. (Voltaire) What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy? (Mahatma Gandhi) Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. (Martin Luther King) Sheesh. When will September ever end? In my calendar it's November already, I don't know about yours. Johnny Doelittle -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: Tom Ridge Special v1.01 iQA/AwUBQYoOvDVaKWz2Ji/mEQLUvgCfZJiR4Nmtvpe00RHmsfJujf1opfYAn289 PIgwc3xyE+/RolLAFBqAc6Ks =cwYX -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: This Memorable Day
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 James A. Donald: You are quite right, it is unjust that people like Bin Laden are so immensely rich with oil wealth. To remedy this problem, Bush should confiscate the Middle Eastern oil reserves. You are using stale old communist rhetoric - but today's terrorists no longer not even pretend to fight on behalf of the poor and oppressed. This was quite lame and doesn't really deserve a response. To label any argument that points out the obvious circumstance that injustice feeds hatred as communist propaganda, is really only ridiculous, even if it's also dangerously incompetent and as such no real laughing matter. Why do you mention Bin Laden anyway? There are thousands of bigger and smaller groups around the world (they exists in every country more or less) that we'd label as terrorists in the western part of the world. You think every one of these hundreds of thousands or perhaps millions of recruits and followers are millionaires? Fantastically lame comment to a real and important issue. Should we take you seriously when you write these childish rants? I don't know what to fear the most, the dangerous ignorance of those of your kind or what dictatorial rulers may accomplish using your ignorant kind as followers who do not question the truths from the authorities. Hitler did it in the 30's election where some 37% voted for the nazis, in a democratic multi-party election I might add. Some of the ingrediences present then in Hitler's rhetoric are also present today in Bush's rhetoric, even though I don't mean to make the comparison . We just cannot afford to be this naive. I can't help thinking about the fact that we usually portray Americans as a religious and church going people. Perhaps some 25% attend church on a somewhat regular basis. To make matters worse those people seem to vote for Bush(?). One can't help wonder if they're literate and if they actually read the bible and it's message of love, understanding, forgiveness and compassion for their fellow man. May god bless the world, we may need it. Johnny Doelittle Men willingly believe what they wish. (Julius Caesar) There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity. (von Goethe) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: Tom Ridge Special v1.01 iQA/AwUBQYoO4jVaKWz2Ji/mEQKzWACfTEUN6ENT9/kbzMEOQVuvM4txtpIAnRI2 pU5RbBMeBggUCWf2ZW4rBQYG =EiIW -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: This Memorable Day
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 R.A. Hettinga: You're gonna love this one: You can't have terrorism without state sponsors. Nonsense! Are you in junior high? We take out (by whatever means at hand...) state sponsors of terrorism, and, hey, presto, no terrorism. Iraq. Syria. Iran. Libya. Doesn't look so hard to me. Oh. That's right. Libya rolled over. Americans -- actually westerners in general -- may win ugly, Peter, but, so far, they win. This post gave me a big laugh. So naive. There are a few basic forces feeding extremism and terrorism around the world and those are inequalities and injustice anywhere. As long as the most powerful nations of the world continues to exploit the earth's resources without taking appropriate considerations to other nations the wrath and dismay of people elsewhere will always persist. Not understanding this or simply neglecting it will further add to the negative feelings and opinions and fuel extremism. The only way to move towards a more friendly world is to make people feel they are able to share the wealth and prosperity of the world. As long as there is one single person anywhere in the world hungering to death there is still a basis for fundamentalism and all the problem that leads to. Continuing being arrogant and policing the world without listening to the oppressed people in the middle east and elsewhere will never ever eradicate terrorism. You may may or may not be able to reasonable confidently hinder most terror deeds (but only after having turned also the western civilization into police states) but you cannot stop the oppressed man from growing the hatred i his mind. If you do not understand this you are not only unintelligent IMNSHO but also part of the problem itself. You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it. (Malcolm X) Johnny Doelittle -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: Tom Ridge Special v1.01 iQA/AwUBQYicHzVaKWz2Ji/mEQJ/KgCeJaL0A7KEtXrdg6DmER5yGHwhJWEAoNA/ 96lJo2JRLf4zWoOTjELrPQB4 =Uq+t -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Poor privacy protection in the states
Why don't Americans honour security and privacy higher? Look at this page http://www.ci.stpaul.mn.us/depts/police/prostitution_photos_current.ht ml Which is from a police department! http://www.ci.stpaul.mn.us/depts/police/ If we look at the spirit of this quote I don't see how it is ok to behave in this abusive manner by the authorities. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated... (from the fourth amendment, US constitution) It is one thing if we're talking about very dangerous individuals who are being sought after by the police and who the public needs to be aware of but here we have a completely different situation. Why is the integrity and security of the simple man on the street not honoured in the US society today? It's a big difference between the protection of personal privacy in Europe and in the US and all Americans should really ask themselves why this has to be.
Money Laundering for the Nazis by President Bush's family
The subject says it all. Read more here: http://www.debatecomics.org/BushFamilyFortune/ We must retire this criminal from office now! Link to the full 89 MB pdf below http://www.debatecomics.org/assets/Sources/US_Fascism/ A-2%20FascistFriendly%20Power%20Brokers/ Roaming%20Ghost%20Case/Whole/full.pdf (Concat above rows to one URL)
Implant replaces ID cards for access to restricted areas.
Mexican Attorney General, Staff Get Chip Implants Implant replaces ID cards for access to restricted areas. The Attorney General of Mexico, Rafael Macedo de la Concha, recently announced at the opening of Mexico's National Information Center that he and some of his staff had been implanted with VeriChips to replace their ID tags for access to restricted areas, and to access the country's crime database. http://www.govtech.net/magazine/channel_story.php?channel=24id=90885
Re: BrinCity 2.0: Mayor outlines elaborate camera network for city
-BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE- Message-type: plaintext R. A. Hettinga ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 2004-09-10: Critics say the cameras ought not be regarded as a panacea in crime fighting. They say the more there are, the greater the potential for abuse. So, since this is titled BrinCity, it surely means that the image streams will be available from a web site and that we the people get cameras in the emergency response center and the mayor's office? -END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-
Re: Remailers an unsolveable paradox?
We want to be able to provide the means for whistleblowers and others to communicate in a secure and anonymous fashion. Yet we need to make sure we're not abused too much since sooner or later laws will catch up with the remailers should abuse sky-rocket. The ratio of remailer use to abuse is painfully low because there's no way to actually communicate. You can broadcast but not recieve, because no system exists to receive mail psuedononymously. This is not communication. Remailer use is restricted to when senders don't care about listener, which means rants, death threats, and the abuse of spam. The only systems for receiving mail are at best some college student's unimplemented thesis. Let's take our shining example of truth and freedom, the whistle-blower. When they send out mail to the media or whomever, one of two things happens: they see the story published or they don't. If not, there's no idea why: was it received? Did the media want more information? Did they need more support? Do they want to verify it? Do they want to help the whistle-blower? Even if the story is published, whistle-blowing is kneecapped: it can't be supported, or expanded on, or debated in any but the most rudimentary fashion. It doesn't matter if remailers disappear, they've already failed.
Remailers an unsolveable paradox?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Are remailers an unsolveable paradox? We want to be able to provide the means for whistleblowers and others to communicate in a secure and anonymous fashion. Yet we need to make sure we're not abused too much since sooner or later laws will catch up with the remailers should abuse sky-rocket. Once upon a time all email servers were open relays. This was a friendly time and spam wasn't invented. As time changed the focus turned on securing the relaying procedures and has continued until this day. Yet as we know the flow of spam (most of it coming directly or indirectly from US) continued to increase, despite even existing legislation today. What are the possible solutions for the remailers? Make all remailers middleman only and adding the ability to opt-in for delivery outside the network? Having a network of middleman remailers and some nymservers that only delivers to other nymserver or opted-in servers will at least provide some means for people to communicate between themselves. It would in practise destroy the ability to contact anyone outside the network though, making the network an isolated place for a few. Using techniques like Hashcash should be more or less mandatory even today to make it harder to mailbomb or send large amounts spam? Why is it not? Regardless of what any hardcore cypherpunk or old-timers in the remailer community may think about any ideas imposing restrains on the useability of remailers something just have to be made about the abuse of the system. I also predict that the abuse will increase so time is ticking in a sense. Making sure we have robust remailing services in one shape or another and at the same time have some kind of at least indirect acceptance from legislators and also a low degree of spam flowing through are essential goals. The average naive and ignorant redneck will never ever understand the principal arguments for free speech that makes remailers useful. The average american do not think and analyze what is told to him. You will probably today find millions of americans who believe that Saddam and Al-Qaeda did business just because Bush and the administration lied about that initially, even though it's more or less confirmed today that those links were not there. The rednecks also vote however (to some extent) and that's why it will be a piece of cake to strike against the remailers if the politicians would like to. And they will, if and when serious abuse were to happen more often utilizing remailers. What would happen if it was found (or simply suspected or claimed) that some terror deed was planned using remailers? How long time would it take for us to see new laws being proposed? Not long. And don't forget that anyone (like Tom Ridge himself) could send bogues messages through the system trying to Since providing a true non-censoring remailing service and at the same time safeguard against spam and abuse are therotically incompatible I guess remailers are indeed a paradox waiting to be shut down sooner or later by politicians if we're not open to at least discuss some aspects of how these services are operated. Johnny Doelittle -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: Tom Ridge Special v1.01 iQA/AwUBQTWdszVaKWz2Ji/mEQJlUwCfT/jWnw/p2ydTJTKMYKA5/hs+Dm8AoNoE r9bl2EtJ3CQpZPgfkSPfGBWB =B8dt -END PGP SIGNATURE- Effective today, Lemuria will be going middlemen. Sometime around the middle of the month, Lemuria will go away. This is final. The main reasons are that I've lost my faith in the usefulness of the remailer network. I have indications that the remailer network is being massively abused, on the scale where the legitimate mails are a tiny fraction that would be better served using other means. There are two main reasons for my thoughts. One is I have looked at the bounces I receive, and compared their numbers to my statistics. According to that data, without having run a statistically significant analysis, the major traffic coming through Lemuria is Spam, with threats and harrassment a second. I realize that in the no-bounces, the fraction of legitimate mails will be higher, but even assuming a factor of 10, it is still a negligable part. Second, I've the mail attached below yesterday. In case you can't read german, it is essentially spam advertising the mixmaster software and some book and/or software I haven't tested, might be a mixmaster client, might be a trojan. This is a sign for me that the anonymous remailer network is being used systematically for abuse, on a large scale. I don't want to be a part of that. As mixmaster has no features whatsoever to prevent this crap, and the encrypted only switch doesn't do what it should do, and legitimate traffic is close to zero anyways, I'll be taking Lemuria down and leaving the remailer community. It was an interesting time, and between frog, the SciTol fanatics
CDR nodes listing
Can someone post a listing of all active CDR nodes please? Information from pages like this one lists some inactive nodes I'm sure http://www.al-qaeda.net/cpunk/
Michael Moore in Cambridge (download speech)
Very interesting speech by Michael Moore in Cambridge July 27, 10 MB http://hem.bredband.net/b114631/tillf/Michael_Moore_in_Cambridge_04072 7.rm The file will be available for download a short period of time. Michael shows us what the upcoming election is all about.
Type III Anonymous message
-BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE- Message-type: plaintext From: a.melon@ To: Major Variola (ret) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Bcc: Subject: Re: For Liars and Loafers, Cellphones Offer an Alibi Reply-To: In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, Major Variola (ret) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 2004-06-27: At 11:53 PM 6/26/04 -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote: not to overpower the wanted signals on something like this. Even if this is doable, it is out of reach of Jane Citizen. Any signal you put out is trackable to you geographically, whether its a cell or GPS frequency. A GPS receiver doesn't broadcast its location. GPS works purely by analyzing the signals received from satellites. This is probably a design goal for military use, as well as a consequence of power requirements. There is no such thing as a GPS frequency. It seems that for CDMA or WCDMA phones the location service is defined in terms of messages on the normal network layer, see a Google search for position determination service order. -END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-
Re: [Politech] John Gilmore on the homeless, RFID tags, and kittens
At 05:39 PM 4/1/04 -0500, Steve Furlong wrote: On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 16:21, R. A. Hettinga wrote: Tastes just like chicken? Can we change the subject? My girlfriend is Chinese, Does she have a chip implant? I've already eaten things that I wouldn't have considered to be food Ask her to shower first she doesn't like my cat Get a new girlfriend
Re: Gentlemen reading mail part II (opsec review)
Justin says: If they know you're trying to shake them, that alerts them and eliminates any opportunity you might have otherwise had to feed them misinformation in the future. That's when you strap on the C-4 vest. Zombie Monger
the Kuwait issue is not associated with America
Thanks Steve, I don't think I have heard this before. I googled on the text you quoted and found this url http://wais.stanford.edu/Iraq/iraq_andambassaprilglaspie22303.html and a few more http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ARTICLE5/april.html http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html I don't know what to say. This makes me sick to my stomach. I guess one way of lookin at this is that U.S. played dirty and deceiving. U.S. is more or less the reason Iraq invaded Kuwait. I guess this is not told on Fox news.
Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
After WWI the winners humiliated the loosers badly. This is one of the main reasons Hitler came to power and got support from the Germans for the aggressions that started the war. He managed to use these feelings of being treated as dogs and paying to heavy for the first war. Also they were very humiliated by the fact that France then occupied part of western Germany. After WWII the winners had learned their lesson from WWI pretty well. Now they did not humilate the people of Germany like after the first war. We got the Marshal plan and so on. Let's face it: not even the Nazi war criminals were treated in the way Saddam has been treated. Is this something U.S. should feel comfortable with then? Some people on this list seem to have these disturbing thoughts. It will backfire sooner or later I'm afraid. And then it may be our kids who pay the price.
Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
Ken, Eh what? Yes I've heard a lot of the Soviet union, however I don't see what you meant by that comment here. What I was referring to was the winning powers' treatment of the Nazi war criminals after WWII, Nurnburg trials and so on. (Note the word trials here) I don't think I've ever heard that the Nazi prisoners where drugged, abused or otherwice tortured or mistreated and humiliated. Feel free to enlighten me on this.
President of Flies
US is currently run by thugs supported by the cheering consumer crowds that have been bred and conditioned to be infantile. So the situation is best evaluated in the Lord of Flies context. As long as masters are winning and have stronger army than anyone else, nothing will change. You will notice that they never engage army unless they have several orders of magnitude strength advantage. Which means that only small countries are in danger. There are two consequences of this: (a) there is no likely grouping of bigger entities to strike back - and that is the only response that will change US behavior. Until US is beaten and have suffered occupation and complete military defeat nothing much will change. This will eventually happen as history demonstrates that empires are not capable of sustained supremacy (due to the negative selection within among other factors - incidentally, the brain drain in the last 3-4 years have changed direction - this is the most significant metric.) But not any time soon. (b) smaller countries will strive to arm themselves with effective weaponry. The window for this is closing and in few years there will be two clearly defined clubs: untouchables and fair game. It looks that most of the arab world is heading for the fair game status and they are understandably unhappy with it. The main question is - will the income from newly and soon to be acquired colonies be sufficient to prevent confrontation between US and the rest of developed and armed world?
Re: U.S. in violation of Geneva convention?
Tim, sorry it was unclear from my post whom I was referring to. It was James A. Donald. I did put his message id in a reply-to header. Jim Dixon wrote: Hitler, you mean? Or did you have Milosevic in mind? No what I meant was what IF somehow Bush or Blaire or some other high ranking coalition politician were captured by Iraq during the war and was treated in the same way. I can only presume you would support Saddam's soldiers checking Bush for lice then. You are also utterly missing the point and you are one pretty good example of how the mob are thinking. EVERYONE, including Saddam, Pol Pot or whattever should be treated in accordance with the laws by us who call ourselves the free democratic part of the world. Then they shall stand trial. A fair trial and being represented by lawyers. What would be more satisfying for the critics of U.S. than to see U.S. not being able to get its act together and instead conducting itself in a manner inconsistent with international law during this rather criticl phase of the Iraqi campaign. Mark my words, U.S. will be in regret later. Jim Dixon, you also wrote some half trouths on the subject of Palestinians and the support they received. You should read up on this subject. Saddam also has a history of building up edicational institutions and so on. He recived awards by U.N. earlier on for his wellfare programs and the development Iraq was gaining. Anyone can check this up, just call U.N. in NY and you'll receive a few references I'm sure. What I mean by this is not to defend him in any way but I feel that this rewriting of history and propaganda is serving noone in the long run. If you believe that 100% of the arab world in their harts and minds hate Saddam you're wring. Very wrong. Steve Schear: thanks for your interesting post! Some people need to learn more of that. I also noticed on the news that CIA was conducting the questioning of Saddam. (Did anyone expect anything else?!) I guess this also means that U.S. now will join all dicatators and awful beasts in performing various forms of abuse and torture on him. Iraq formally removed the death penalty just a few weeks ago. Regardless of what you feel about that in general, I think it's embarrasing once again to see U.S. almost lobbying against the Iraqis to have them not honouring their own laws to satisfy Bush on this specific issue! Remember there's only one reason for Bush wanting to see Saddam dead and that he does. And that is the fact that Saddam tried to kill my papa as Bush put it, I've seen it in interviews myself. Jim Dixon, going through your post again I see yet another half trough, you write The people on this list are less.. public humiliation and hanging of Americans.. And you seem to forget that U.S. was in bed with Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war era and that there was a friendly tone then. U.S. officials met with Iraqi, I think that Tareq Azis met with Reagan even? Your whole post is based on the feeling that we're gonna do what they did to us. In doing so you have manifested what has been written here about gasing into the abyss and so on. You have become what you hunt. Be ware. It is my opinion that we shall distinguish ourselves from these bastards by not committing their deeds ourselves. You seem not to agree on that. And that is a major mistake.
Remailers and TLAs
Even though I agree this issue is important I wouldn't be surprised if NONE were run by TLAs today and NONE has ever been run by TLAs. We will never get any such answer and therefore these speculations will continue. Personally I think it sounds really stupid when I read comments like you can only trust remailers from pre 9/11 (these kinds of silly/stupid/dumb-paranoid comments are often seen on A.P.A-S). The reason being really that I think they are too stupid and perhaps doesn't really understand what good it would do them to actually operate a few. I may be wrong I guess. When thinking of these things I also remeber having read several comments by remops that actually have been visited by police. Both in U.S. and abroad. The feeling I got from reading their comments is that the police (in case of U.S. I think it was FBI who was inviolved) actually didn't even know what a remailer was. If (and this is a bif if) that is true in general amongst FBI agents I don't think th ere's a major risk of beeing flooded by TLA operated remailers any time soon. But who knows.
Re: U.S. in violaton of Geneva convention?
This makes me a bit curious. Tell me, is your opinion then that the U.S. has done nothing questionable here? You don't feel that treating a former head of state (regardless of what you happen to think of that person) in this manner and videorecording it AND transmitting it to the entire globe violates the spirit of the convention? You feel this was the right thing to do? You would have no problem seing a U.S. or European leader being treated the same way? I think we do have to take into consideration too that a lot of people (I'm not saying it's the majority or anything but still a lot of people) in some arab countries like Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Saudi Arabia do have some sympathy with Saddam. This has nothing to do with supporting his crimes like the chemical warfare but more general the fact that he was a leader in the region who stood up against U.S. and Israel. Also the Palestinians received a lot of finansial help from Saddam. I don't know, but I have this feeling that just maybe this wasn't the most appropriate way to behave all things considered. This is a tense and volatile region as it is. I think we all should exercise caution and careful considerations and try to not humiliate the pride of the people in this region. Remember that in many cases this is almost all they have left. Just my 2c.
self adjusting dummy traffic generation?
Would it be possible to have a self adjusting dummy traffic generator feature in remailers? Operator decides that he wants to process x number of incoming and y number of outgoing messages each time period t. Then the software adjusts the number of dummy messages to this value using some statistical calculations of past t2 hours. If incoming traffic increases then the amount of dummy messages are decreasing and so on. Does this feature exist today?
Fuck Them All Dead
Off All the Pigs!
Fuck em to death
Death to the Oinks!
Re: Zombie Patriots and other musings
Another excellent group of potential recruits are prisoners. Especially if you can create a new religious movement teaching them to stop the interracial, intergang fighting and concentrate on their true enemy, the Man. Teach that killing cops, soldiers, any type of government agent, is a holy act. Robbing banks is a holy act. Killing the guards in the prisons, killing the excutives of polluting industries -- all holy acts. Leaflets could be dropped from radio controlled balloons during yard time preaching the Word.
Re: Zombie Patriots and other musings
Anonymous wrote: Nomen pondered: Why robbing banks? Aside from allowing the government to regulate them, what have they done to deserve being robbed Why not? Revolutionaries need money, and the financial sector has always been asshole buddies with the police, politicians, and other pigs. Retarded. Someone trying to frame Mr. Seaver by adopting his three-space paragraph lead-ins.
Re: cypherpunks discussions
I find it strange that some people here so often wants to intimidate those that dares to ask some questions. Eric put it very well in his post about dicksizewar. Very true indeed. I find it very *l*a*m*e* to all the time tell people to RTFM when something comes up that happened to be have been dealt with like five years ago.
Re: e voting (receipts, votebuying, brinworld)
Cameras in the voting booth? Jesus Christ, you guys are morons. If you want to sell your vote, just vote absentee. The ward guy will even stamp and mail it for you. Happens every election.
polygonal sequences
Hello I was trying to find some old references I used to have concerning an idea men tioned in sci.crypt way back. It was Phil Zimmermann I think who mentioned something about a possibly new idea for a new public key scheme. He called it The cryptographic uses of polygonal sequences and is found here I think: http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=12044%40ncar.ucar.eduoe=UTF-8output=gplain thanks
Re: EFF Report on Trusted Computing
Just thought someone should take the trouble to rebut the anonymous pro-treacherous-computing rantings... I have heavily trimmed our anonymous ranters verbose writing style to keep just the bits I'm responding to (inline...) The EFF tries to distinguish between good and bad aspects of TC, but it does not draw the line in quite the right place, even given its somewhat questionable assumptions. Unsubstantiated claim: what incorrect assumptions did Schoen make? I did not see any. It fails to sufficiently emphasize the many positive uses of the full version of TC (and hence the costs of blocking its implementation), Schoen points out that TC can be broken out into desirable and undesirable features. If you omit the undesirable features, as he describes, you get the remaining desirable features. There is no loss from blocking the undesirable features. And the recommended fix to TC is not clearly described and as written appears to be somewhat contradictory. I see no contradition. More unsubstantiated claims. But let us begin with some positive elements of the EFF report. This is perhaps the first public, critical analysis of TC which fails to include two of the worst lies about the technology, lies promulgated primarily by Ross Anderson and Lucky Green: that only authorized programs can run trusted, and that unauthorized or illegal programs and data will be deleted from computers or prevented from running. They are not lying and you do your credibility no favors by making such unsubstantiated claims. You are just misconstruing the obvious meaning of their warnings: the features they describe (and plenty more and worse) are technically feasible with the TC hardware enforcement, and given microsoft's history of repeated dirty tricks campaigns in the areas of document format wars, reporting private information back home to microsoft, browser wars, interface wars, restrictive business practices regarding licensing it would be fool hardy in the extreme to not expect more of the same in the area of platform control based on Palladium. Of course _you_ are not wishing to admit or emphasize these points, but you can hardly get away with impugning the integrity of high reputation individuals like Prof Ross Anderson with such paltry mischaracterisation. Your arguments are crass and of the form: but the current microsoft PR documents don't admit that it could do that, nor of course that microsoft are planning to do that, so it's not fair for you to point that out and caution people about the kinds of things microsoft may be planning. Technology is criticized and discussed based on the potential and most likely inferred directions given microsoft's history and prior demonstration of interest to control various aspects of the software platform. The report also forthrightly rejects the claim that TC technology is some kind of trick to defeat Linux or lock-in computers to Microsoft operating systems, It's far from obvious that TC will have no part to play in the next few decades of open warfare against linux from microsoft. There are any number of ways to extend the existing dirty tricks regarding formats, protocols, licensing etc using the TC hardware enforcement. The EFF attempts to distinguish one feature of TC, remote attestation, as a source of problems. This is the ability of a computer user to convince other systems about what software he is running. The EFF is convinced that this feature will cause users to be compelled to use software not of their choice; harm interoperability and encourage lock-in; and support DRM and various restrictive kinds of licensing. Yes indeed and they are quite right. That is exactly the problem with remote attestation. But when we break these down in detail, many of the problems either go away or are not due to attestation. More unsubstantiated claims. This statement is both false and not backed up by any of your following text. Software choice limitation may occur if a remote system provides some service conditional on the software being used to access it. But that's not really a limitation of choice, because the user could always elect not to receive the offered service. This is really strange logic: you have a choice not to use a client because you don't have to use the service?!!? Of course it detracts from choice. Absent remote attestation things would be as they are today and users could modify existing clients, write their own clients, or obtain third party clients for any service. Removing _that_ choice is the problem. And it is a big and significant detraction from the current open nature of the internet. One that favors large companies such as microsoft with an interest to stifle innovation and competition. The implicit assumption here seems to be that if TC did not exist, the service would be offered without any limitations. Yes it would. It either wouldn't be offered or it would be offered without
Re: Dan Geer Fired (was re: Technology Firm With Ties to Microsoft Fir
The company I work for forbids its employees to discuss crypto issues in public forums like this one. That's why I only post anonymously. They have several concerns. One is the still-existent crypto export regulations which could be construed to forbid technical discussions of cryptography in public forums accessible to foreigners. Another is the danger that the employee might say something which could embarrass the company, such as admitting problems in the company's products. Employees may also find themselves talking to customers of the company and say things different from what the sales representatives are telling them, which leads to huge problems. There are actually many valid reasons to keep employees from talking publicly about technical issues in any field related to their employment. Add to this the many political and legal issues that are specific to cryptography and it is unsurprising that so many companies restrict what their employees can say, as a condition of employment. One thing I haven't heard in the Geer case is whether his employment contract did have such limitations. If not, he might conceivably have grounds for a wrongful termination suit, although even then the company could make a pretty good case that bad-mouthing one of the company's biggest customers is valid grounds for dismissal. It's also interesting that Geer claims in an interview [1] that he approached nine differrent academic researchers who refused to sign on to the report even though they agreed with its recommendations, because they were afraid of losing funding. I find this somewhat hard to believe, first because I don't agree with the conclusions of the report (although my analysis has been censored), and second because I don't think that Microsoft controls that much academic research funding. It's possible that Geer is exaggerating or that the researchers were not completely honest about the reasons for their lack of interest. [1] http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1304620,00.asp
Cryptome: Torch Concepts threatening Cypherpunks
http://cryptome.org/jetblue-spy.htm The attorney for Torch Concepts has sent cease and desist letters to Bill Scannell and Len Sassaman for offering the Torch Concepts file, the smoking gun in the Jet Blue privacy violation scandal. The file is currently still available on Len Sassaman's website, as well as Cryptome.
Re: Orwell's Victory goods come home
On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 18:12:19 -0600, you wrote: On Saturday 15 March 2003 12:55 pm, Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer wrote: On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 14:25:51 +, you wrote: So which American on the list is going to write to Congress to demand that the Statue of Liberty be sent back to France? Ken It really should go back to France, as the US seems to care less about liberty than when it received that gift, and France now has quite a profile of opposing foreign domination (from the US) over its policies and interests. So far as I can tell tell, the US approach to other nations is essentially shut up and do what we tell you to do if you love freedom. Americans tend to also forget that the French provided a lot of support for the colonies during the American Revolution. Without the fleet of Admiral Comte de Grasse at Yorktown, and the assistance of the Marquis de Lafayette, the revolution would have surely been lost and Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, Madison and the rest would have hanged at London Tower. Maybe we would be more accurate to consider our role for the French in WW1 and 2 to be in compensation for our freedom from the British.
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: 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: Yes, I really did zeroize that key (but I didn't check my code!)
For starters your signature is bad, at least here.
On Thu, 27 Feb 2003 23:18:35 -0500, Patrick Chkoreff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have devised what I believe to be a foolproof and completely
portable way of setting an array of bytes to all zeroes, a common
security operation in cryptography programs.
I have a really hard time trusting your code. Read on.
Here is a simple example of how we can generate this undecidable
zero and pass it into the routine.
int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
char array[32];
char magic = (argc 1 ? 0 : 255);
clear_bytes(magic, array, sizeof(array));
return 0;
}
If you call this program with no command line arguments, the value of
magic will be 0 and the clear_bytes is guaranteed to zero out the
array.
Wrong. Even with no arguments to this sample program, argc will still
be 1. Try it if you don't believe me. Or re-read your KR.
cryptome log downloads
These IPs downloaded access log from cryptome during hacked state. pcp259331pcs.howard01.md.comcast.net 212.54.205.184 host.159-142-70-179.gsa.gov c-889471d5.021-3-73746f50.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se 217.167.197.20 193.128.179.38 217.167.197.20 host.21.88.68.195.rev.coltfrance.com 216.155.104.95 204.249.177.229 c-889471d5.021-3-73746f50.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se 206.180.129.0.dial-ip.hal-pc.org mchesnik.resnet.bucknell.edu logos.relcom.ru pcp03280952pcs.nrockv01.md.comcast.net pool-138-88-125-69.res.east.verizon.net adsl441.estpak.ee 194.90.22.83 h219-110-056-001.catv01.itscom.jp host33-206.pool80181.interbusiness.it 213-140-14-139.fastres.net pcp03280952pcs.nrockv01.md.comcast.net server2.gescenter.com c-889471d5.021-3-73746f50.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se user142.intonet.co.uk p50902fb5.dip.t-dialin.net 217.19.80.197 adsl441.estpak.ee bragi.fh-brandenburg.de esprx02x.nokia.com 62.92.119.47 washdc3-ar2-4-64-017-068.washdc3.elnk.dsl.genuity.net bragi.fh-brandenburg.de mail.emainc.com cf2.andrews.af.mil cachix1.tele.net stop.justice.gc.ca 218.1.37.179 212.137.60.106 m206-5.dsl.tsoft.com 195.243.47.34 host91-189.pool80181.interbusiness.it 130.94.106.228 folsom.officedepot.com 63.171.232.247 gateway1.scottish-southern.co.uk 19.203.252.64.snet.net 156.54.249.179 esprx02x.nokia.com 156.54.249.179 ip68-108-169-227.lv.lv.cox.net ip-192.landsend.com 212.54.205.184 dssback.smsu.edu adsl441.estpak.ee nycmny1-ar5-4-41-204-222.nycmny1.elnk.dsl.genuity.net ip68-12-36-71.ok.ok.cox.net spock.ti.telenor.net h00e018b87996.ne.client2.attbi.com 146.7.100.197 194.102.45.134 ppp011.datacom.bg paginiaurii.rdsnet.ro 12.146.66.131 segfault.net host18-121.pool8021.interbusiness.it 212.54.205.184 server.olgastift.s.bw.schule.de adsl441.estpak.ee anancy-104-1-2-19.abo.wanadoo.fr 12-238-233-6.client.attbi.com ppp011.datacom.bg adsl-154-201-4.clt.bellsouth.net 193.1.100.103 section.eu.org adsl-65-69-105-82.dsl.tulsok.swbell.net 65.123.207.130 www-cache.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de interlock.doeal.gov pcp01686411pcs.wchstr01.pa.comcast.net px2o.wpafb.af.mil adsl441.estpak.ee 1cust113.tnt14.stk3.swe.da.uu.net js.bitnux.com dsl081-198-094.nyc2.dsl.speakeasy.net gussie.cs.queensu.ca 62.173.76.47 65.213.245.17 netcache-2002.public.lawson.webtv.net 65.213.245.17 mail.targettv.com paginiaurii.rdsnet.ro grossetto.cinetic.de 212.185.163.2 grossetto.cinetic.de rnet.riss.net adsl-208-190-44-194.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net 199.195.109.4 user-0ccskj1.cable.mindspring.com webcacheh02a.cache.pol.co.uk 202.166.126.229 supercache.qualitynet.net 210.187.2.163 170.red-80-58-4.pooles.rima-tde.net adsl441.estpak.ee 207.140.171.115 mail.targettv.com 62.118.206.245 gozer.adams.edu h36n1fls23o1073.telia.com webcacheh02a.cache.pol.co.uk mix-poitiers-106-4-203.abo.wanadoo.fr valis.net.pl 210.187.2.163 200.60.244.210 paginiaurii.rdsnet.ro user31.net518.tx.sprint-hsd.net rd.centennialrd.com grossetto.cinetic.de doc.atstake.com paginiaurii.rdsnet.ro user-2ivfj0h.dialup.mindspring.com dyn325.win.tue.nl doc.atstake.com us1.pharmacia.com 199.67.140.75 198.65.201.34 pf.epsa.pl cache4.ihug.com.au 24-90-126-37.nyc.rr.com 217.206.228.15 adsl441.estpak.ee sigsegv.us 199.195.109.4 www.japet.si el8.net acb4aa08.ipt.aol.com ocw-fl6.mit.edu cache-da03.proxy.aol.com radio-15.cvairnet.com ocw-fl6.mit.edu eric.mvc.mcc.ac.uk 65.213.245.17 host70-246.pool8173.interbusiness.it adsl-216-102-104-158.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net host18-121.pool8021.interbusiness.it 65.213.245.17 india.dsnethosting.com 12.146.66.131 adsl-66-140-35-4.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net cc37206-b.ensch1.ov.home.nl hiryu.st.ryukoku.ac.jp cc37206-b.ensch1.ov.home.nl 0x50a1be60.abnxx5.adsl.tele.dk 62.13.170.12 130.156.3.254 dhcp80ffaf1a.residence-rooms.uiowa.edu 193.122.21.42 dpc6682075068.direcpc.com mke-65-29-141-70.wi.rr.com 12-246-108-182.client.attbi.com 209-102-194-133.ipv4.intur.net unknown1.ne.client2.attbi.com adsl-66-140-96-228.dsl.lbcktx.swbell.net makkai1.mfa.kfki.hu 63-216-250-91.sdsl.cais.net 198.143.25.22 63-216-250-91.sdsl.cais.net pool-138-88-125-69.res.east.verizon.net adsl-67-37-28-9.dsl.mdsnwi.ameritech.net 200-147-88-242.tlm.dialuol.com.br d-ip-129-15-111-167.lab.ou.edu 216-39-176-101.ip.theriver.com ip68-98-187-120.nv.nv.cox.net 170.135.241.45 ip68-98-15-128.ph.ph.cox.net unwg01a008.customs.gov stargazer-o.stars-smi.com stargazer-o.stars-smi.com rrcs-west-24-106-45-5.biz.rr.com rrcs-west-24-106-45-5.biz.rr.com 200-147-88-242.tlm.dialuol.com.br sycamore-226-190.tbcnet.com 218.145.25.13 mankey-76.dynamic.rpi.edu multilink.deva.rdsnet.ro wsp000466wss.nebraska.edu 65.213.245.17 cs6669249-49.austin.rr.com 156.80.89.71 212.42.228.2 cache219.156ce.scvmaxonline.com.sg p0033-121.customer.soneraliving.fi sycamore-226-190.tbcnet.com 208.247.107.169 ool-18ba0937.dyn.optonline.net pd958f774.dip.t-dialin.net ns1.amgen.com lns-p19-18-81-57-233-23.adsl.proxad.net host.145.83.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com ca-westla-cuda5-c7a-48.stmnca.adelphia.net fwmoc06.fw.gannett.com adsl441.estpak.ee gw.forbes.net ppp-216-7.25-151.libero.it
Re: The practical reason the U.S. is starting a war
On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 13:37:33 -0800 (PST), John Young wrote: Jefferson's reputation has been taking on water at an alarming rate, from the twin leaks of Sally Hemings and the larger question of slavery. If, when you speak of Martin Luther King, Jr., you speak of him in bed with a white woman, you are a racist. If, when you speak of Thomas Jefferson, you speak of him NOT in bed with a black woman, you are a racist. Whenever Jefferson is mentioned, at least one of the first three points made is his alleged sexual relationship with Ms. Hemings. Whenever King is mentioned, there is silence on his rampant, documented promiscuity, and those who transgress this unwritten rule are branded racist. Most people seem to buy the tacit, racist line of political correctness, without question or objection.
Re: The practical reason the U.S. is starting a war
On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 10:45:37 -0800 (PST), you wrote: America's founding crackers set up a slave-owning nation, after 300 years of murdering natives, following the still alive and well European/Asiatic/African tradition of stealing from others while being doped by witchdoctors and astrologists (today's intelligence industry). The British set up slave-owning colonies, and along with other European powers murdered natives for 250 years. It didn't take blessings or exhortations from priests or astrologist. It was the traditional way to power and wealth for the stratified class structures of Europe. The founding crackers as you call them, destroyed the stratified class structure. Politics and economics and higher education, and their tools of dissimulation, the pantheon of heroes and enemies, were invented to camouflage this brutal depradation, in the nation's beginning as now mimicking the civilized practitioners of mayhem (no pun on Tim May). Invented to camouflage? Didn't work, huh? The depradation's beneficiaries see nothing wrong with it, even argue that's the way of predestination, god's will for spoils to belong to the victor, sloganeering Might makes right. Some say that. It's at least as accurate as Weakness makes right, the current socialist mantra. Some understand that right is right, whether anyone knows it or cares about it. When victims adopt the means and methods of the righteous victors, they are called terrorists, enemies of the state, uncivilized, inferior, kill-worthy by weapons of mass destruction, collateral damage of hidden hand market forces and bare-faced moralism in service to privilege. Yes they are. By definition, intimidation and violence by governments is not terrorism. The fact that the recipient is feeling terror is irrelevant. Take back the language. Yeah, yeah, all ideological tripe is the same: mine is right, yours is wrong. However, ideologues are a tribe on the prowl for victims, so beware media-addiction. Like this distortion mirror. What you fail to see incoming can splatter your guts. That brings a smile to the face and a song to the heart. Tim calls what he sees. A horror movie. He needs more than one screen.
RIAA turns against Hollings bill
The New York Times is reporting at http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/14/technology/14CND-PIRACY.html that the Recording Industry Association of America, along with two computer and technology industry trade groups, has agreed not to seek new government regulations to mandate technological controls for copyright protection. This appears to refer primarily to the Hollings bill, the CBDTPA, which had already been struck a blow when Hollings lost his committee chairmanship due to the Democrats losing Senate leadership. Most observers see this latest step as being the last nail in the coffin for the CBDTPA. Some months ago there were those who were predicting that Trusted Computing technology, as embodied in the TCPA and Palladium proposals, would be mandated by the Hollings bill. They said that all this talk of voluntary implementations was just a smoke screen while the players worked behind the scenes to pass laws that would mandate TCPA and Palladium in their most restrictive forms. It was said that Linux would be banned, that computers would no longer be able to run software that we can use today. We would cease to be the real owners of our computers, others would be root on them. A whole host of calamaties were forecast. How does this latest development change the picture? If there is no Hollings bill, does this mean that Trusted Computing will be voluntary, as its proponents have always claimed? And if we no longer have such a threat of a mandated Trusted Computing technology, how bad is it for the system to be offered in a free market? Let technology companies decide whether to offer Palladium technology on their computers or not. Let content producers decide whether to use Palladium to protect their content or not. Let consumers decide whether to purchase and enable Palladium on their systems or not. Why is it so bad for people to freely make their own decisions about how best to live their lives? Cypherpunks of all people should be the last to advocate limiting the choices of others. Thankfully, it looks like freedom may win this round, despite the efforts of cypherpunks and online freedom advocates to eliminate this new technology option.
Re: Television
## ##
## ##
## ##
#
#
#
#
#
## ## ##
## ## ##
## ##
## ##
## ##
## ##
### ##
## ##
## ##
##
##
##
#
#
Does anyone have a pointer to software that will create messages
like this? Could be a great opportunity for stego - just replace the
# characters with random ones. Then let there be an option to either
use a crypto RNG for the random char choice, or to load in a stealthed
version of a PGP message.
All we need is a nice ascii-font-based program like this and the rest
would be easy. Anyone?
Re: Television
A trivial point, barely worth making time for, but folks ought not to
think that brainwashing via t.v. has _anything_ substantively causal to
do with the sad state we are in today.
It's amusing that Mr. May thinks that anyone gives a fuck if he (Mr. May) filters
him/her out for whatever reason and considers worthwhile/effective effort to explain
that reason at length every time, and yet doesn't consider that similar and far more
intensive efforts by the state-directed mass media are as well effective.
(more at the bottom)
## ##
## ##
## ##
#
#
#
#
#
## ## ##
## ## ##
## ##
## ##
## ##
## ##
### ##
## ##
## ##
##
##
##
#
#
##
##
#
#
#
#
###
## ##
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
###
###
###
### ###
#####
## ##
## ##
## ##
## ##
###
##
## ##
## ##
## ##
#
#
#
#
## ###
#
#
###
## ### ### ##
## #
### ###
## ##
#####
#
###
##
#
#
#
##
##
##
QM, EPR, A/B
Tim May wrote... I don't believe, necessarily, in certain forms of the Copenhagen Interpretation, especially anything about signals propagating instantaneously, just the quantum mechanics is about measurables ground truth of what we see, what has never failed us, what the mathematics tells us and what is experimentally verified. Whether there really are (in the modal realism sense of Lewis) other worlds is neither here nor there. Naturally, I would be thrilled to see evidence, or to conclude myself from deeper principles, that other worlds have more than linguistic existence. Yes, this has been a fashionable set of statements, very smiliar to quantum mechanics is merely a useful tool for calclating the outcome of experiments. I used to chant this too, but the recent (well, over the last 10 years) experimental work in EPR has convinced me that there's really something odd going on here. Many worlds (first proposed in the 50s and recently revived) is one possible explanation for why, for instance, photons in the double slit experiment know about the slit they didn't go through. And while I am not particularly convinced that this is the explanation (there are other basic things about the QM world it doesn't explain, such as why I measure THIS outcome rather than THAT outcome), I'm personally at the point where I think some form of answer is needed, and that the above intellectual dodge is no longer valid. So at least many worlds is one possible attempt to answer why photons are able to know instantaneously about correlated photons far removed (and for me, and the late John Bell it is inescapable that they do indeed find out instantaneously). One way out is to ditch quantum mechanics as being anything near a description of reality as classical theories in essence are. Tim Boyer of CUNY and a batch of Italian researchers have done a pretty convincing job of showing that Ahranov-Bohm can be classically derived in a fairly straightforward manner. But it doesn't explain how AB is able to predict said phenomenon in about 4 lines while they need many pages of fairly difficult EM theory. For me it's clear that A/B and EPR show us that QM is telling us SOMETHING about reality, but we don't yet understand what it is.
A Few Words About Palladium
According to the message below, Palladium will not include a serial number revocation list, document revocation list, or similar mechanism to delete pirated music and other unauthorized content. These claims have been made most vocally by Ross Anderson in his TCPA FAQ, http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html, and by Lucky Green in his DefCon presentation, http://www.cypherpunks.to/. Instead, the point of Palladium is to create a decentralized, trusted computing base... whose integrity can be audited by anyone. This is accomplished, as has been discussed at length here and elsewhere, by hardware which can compute a secure hash of software as it loads, and which can attest to this hash via cryptographic signatures sent to remote systems. This functionality allows software to prove to third parties that it is running unmolested, which is the basic functionality provided by Palladium. Unfortunately, the exaggerated and misleading claims in the links above are accepted as truth by most readers, and a false picture of Palladium is virtually universal on the net. Isn't it time for security experts to take a responsible position on this technology, and to speak out against the spread of these falsehoods? A Few Words About Palladium By John Manferdelli, General Manager, Trusted Platform Technologies, Microsoft Corporation As you may know, I spent some time on the road in the UK in November. During my visit, I had the chance to meet some of you at the Meet the Technologists breakfast at the Microsoft Campus in Reading. Thanks to those of you who were able to attend. It was a great chance to engage in frank discussions about some of the more controversial topics surrounding Palladium. One of the issues we discussed was whether Palladium would include mechanisms that would delete pirated music or other content under remote control or otherwise disable or censor content, files, or programs running on Windows. The truth is, Palladium will not disable any content or file that currently runs. Palladium was designed so that no policy will be imposed that is not approved by the user. Microsoft is firmly opposed to putting policing functions into Palladium and we have no intention of doing so. The machine owners - whether an individual or enterprise - have sole discretion to determine what programs run under Palladium. Programs that run under Palladium, just like programs that run under Windows, will do whatever they are allowed to do, based on the security settings on the user's machine. Palladium not only respects existing user controls, it strengthens them. What Palladium does change is the ability for software to be protected from other software. Palladium will enable and safeguard a decentralized trusted computing base on open systems. These security-oriented capabilities in Windows will be enabled by a relatively small change in hardware, and will help transform the PC into a platform that can perform trusted operations that span multiple computers under a trust policy that can be dynamically created and whose integrity can be authenticated by anyone. In addition, it will preserve the flexibility and extensibility that contributes so much to the entire PC ecosystem. I hope to have an opportunity to meet more of you in the New Year. We'll keep you posted about Palladium-related industry events and other Meet the Technologist opportunities. Happy holidays! - John Manferdelli P.S. While I was in London, I also had the opportunity to speak about Trustworthy Computing and the Palladium initiative at the Trusted Computing Masterclass in London. The event included participants from Hewlett Packard Labs, Red Hat, and Cambridge University, among others. You can read more about the event at www.netproject.com.
Hooray for TIA
For years we cypherpunks have been telling you people that you are responsible for protecting your own privacy. Use cash for purchases, look into offshore accounts, protect your online privacy with cryptography and anonymizing proxies. But did you listen? No. You thought to trust the government. You believed in transparency. You passed laws, for Freedom of Information, and Protection of Privacy, and Insurance Accountability, and Fair Lending Practices. And now the government has turned against you. It's Total Information Awareness program is being set up to collect data from every database possible. Medical records, financial data, favorite web sites and email addresses, all will be brought together into a centralized office where every detail can be studied in order to build a profile about you. All those laws you passed, those government regulations, are being bypassed, ignored, flushed away, all in the name of National Security. Well, we fucking told you so. And don't try blaming the people in charge. You liberals are cursing Bush, and Ashcroft, and Poindexter. These laws were passed by the entire U.S. Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike. Representatives have the full support of the American people; most were re-elected with large margins. It's not Bush and company who are at fault, it's the whole idea that you can trust government to protect your privacy. All that data out there has been begging to be used. It was only a matter of time. And you know what? It's good that this has happened. Not only has it shown the intellectual bankruptcy of trust-the-government privacy advocates, it proves what cypherpunks have been saying all along, that people must protect their own privacy. The only way to keep your privacy safe is to keep the data from getting out there in the first place. Cypherpunks have consistently promoted two seemingly contradictory ideas. The first is that people should protect data about themselves. The second is that they should have full access and usability for data they acquire about others. Cypherpunks have supported ideas like Blacknet, and offshore data havens, places where data could be collected, consolidated and sold irrespective of government regulations. The same encryption technologies which help people protect their privacy can be used to bypass attempts by government to control the flow of data. This two-pronged approach to the problem produces a sort of Darwinian competition between privacy protectors and data collectors. It's not unlike the competition between code makers and code breakers, which has led to amazing enhancements in cryptography technology over the past few decades. There is every reason to expect that a similar level of improvement and innovation can and will eventually develop in privacy protection and data management as these technologies continue to be deployed. But in the mean time, three cheers for TIA. It's too bad that it's the government doing it rather than a shadowy offshore agency with virtual tentacles into the net, but the point is being made all the same. Now more than ever, people need privacy technology. Government is not the answer. It's time to start protecting ourselves, because nobody else is going to do it for us.
Anonymous blogging
I get a lot of compliments on my anonymous posts here. Thanks very much guys, keep those cards and letters coming. But cypherpunks isn't that great a forum for publishing ideas. Take a look at http://www.inet-one.com/cypherpunks/current/maillist.html to see the unfiltered list feed. Sure, no subscriber with half a clue actually sees it like this, but that's how it looks to the outside world. It's tough to find the nuggets of enlightenment buried amongst the crap. I'd like to start publishing a blog. But of course given the sensitivity of my position and the boldness of my arguments, it's important that there be strong anonymity protection. Does anyone have advice on how to get started with anonymous blogging? I have access to Windows, Linux and Mac systems, and I could go through anonymizer.com or some other service if necessary. Ideally I'd like to use one of the turnkey blog clients for ease of setup and use. Thanks for your suggestions.
Blaze, Diffie, et al torpedo eDNA
Markoff writes in the NY Times about a proposal called eDNA which would reconfigure the Internet to forbid anonymous usage of certain parts. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/22/politics/22TRAC.html The scheme was explored by DARPA a few months ago, which gave a contract to SRI to look into it. SRI convened a panel that included Matt Blaze, Whit Diffie, Roger Needham and Marc Rotenberg (of EPIC). These guys hated the idea, but the SRI contact, one Victoria Stavridou, refused to allow Blaze to write up the consensus once it became clear that he was going to shred the proposal. The commmitee members exchanged furious emails, full of personal attacks, complaining that Stavridou was hijacking the report. But she persisted, briefing DARPA orally and refusing to include Blaze and the others in the teleconference as had been planned. Despite Stavridou's attempt to spin the results, DARPA currently says it has no intention of pursuing eDNA. SRI says that it concluded that the costs and risks would outweigh any benefit.
Re: Poker
James Donald writes: In principle it should be possible to create poker playing software where the server cannot cheat, but it is not obvious to me how this can be done. Does anyone know of a cheat proof algorithm? Sure, there are any number of poker algoerithms which prevent the server from cheating. See the many literature references on Mental Poker. One recent protocol is Kurosawa et al, IEICE Transactions on Fundamentals, Vol E00-A, No. 1, January 1997. It is available from citeseer. The problem is that although you can stop the server from cheating, you can't stop players from colluding outside the scope of the game protocols. Two players could communicate by phone, revealing their cards to each other and influencing the betting. This kind of cheating can't be prevented, and it can be significant in an n-player poker game.
Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne
Gary Jeffers writes: The purpose of the coming Iraq war is to steal their oil. After we get Iraq oil, which arab country is next? If U. State can get away with the theft of Iraq, then why not just keep on stealing? The beneficiaries of this war are: 1. United State: 2. Corporations, connected. 3. The ruling elite families. 4. The Zionists. Even if all this were true, so what? All of the groups above would do better things with the oil. The represent the forces of enterprise, initiative and enlightenment in the world today. What is the alternative? Iraq? Saddam Hussein? You think the world is a better place with someone like him controlling Iraqi oil? He's no better than any of the groups above. He took power by force and rules his country with an iron fist. See the recent elections - 100% of the vote was supposedly for Hussein! What a joke. How can anyone claim that the U.S. or Israel or corporations or rich Americans are morally worse than the likes of Hussein? A 21st century where democratic, liberal Western democracies control the world will be far more prosperous, safe and free than one where backwards, repressive, religious ideologies like Islam dominate. The mere fact that you feel free to criticize the U.S., but would never go to Iraq and criticize Hussein just proves the point. Sure, freedom of speech is not absolute in the U.S., and the degree of protection has fluctuated; during WWI people were sent to jail for criticizing the draft, but we're nowhere near that point now. But these freedoms are non-existant in Iraq, China, and other countries which are the real threat to peace and freedom in the coming decades. Look at http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=3235 which describes a case in neighboring Iran where a respected academic was sentenced to DEATH for saying that Muslims should not blindly obey the Imams. These are the forces which are trying to assert their dominance over the world as we move into this new century. We either stand by and let it happen, condemning future generations to lives of suffering, poverty and ignorance, or we take steps to stop it, defending Western culture and its ideals of freedom. That's what's really at stake here. We're fighting over which ideology will control the world. And yes, oil is a potent weapon in this struggle. Leaving those vast oil resources in the hands of conservative Muslims would be a huge mistake from the perspective of this decades-long war. So let's agree with Gary Jeffers: Beat State! But the state we must beat is the state of religious persecution and dictatorship practiced by Hussein. If we hold all states to the same standard instead of heaping criticism only on one, we will see that Iraq is far more deserving of condemnation than most. Their government deserves to be beaten, to be destroyed. It would be the finest gift we could give to the Iraqi people.
Re: Cypherpunks and Irish Travellers
another woman, Rose Ann Carroll, were arrested March 27 at a Kohls department store in Fort Worth on charges of theft $50 to $500. I wasn't follownig the news ... they didn't get Osama, did they ?
Re: Cryptogram: Palladium Only for DRM
Peter Biddle writes: Pd is designed to fail well - failures in SW design shouldn't result in compromised secrets, and compromised secrets shouldn't result in a BORE attack. Could you say something about the sense in which Palladium achieves BORE (break once run everywhere) resistance? It seems that although Palladium is supposed to be able to provide content security (among other things), a broken Palladium implementation would allow extracting the content from the virtual vault where it is kept sealed. In that case the now-decrypted content can indeed run everywhere. This seems to present an inconsistency between the claimed strength of the system and the description of its security behavior. This discrepancy may be why Palladium critics like Ross Anderson charge that Microsoft intends to implement document revocation lists which would let Palladium systems seek out and destroy illicitly shared documents and even programs. Some have claimed that Microsoft is talking out of both sides of its mouth, promising the content industry that it will be protected against BORE attacks, while assuring the security/privacy community that the system is limited in its capabilities. If you could clear up this discrepancy that would be helpful. Thanks...
8pm update
8pm update Corralitos, September 14th, 2002. A group of armed white supremacists, known to support anti-american activities and publicly calling for dismantling of US government, has been in stand off with police for six hours now. The incident started when a guest at Mr. May's party called the police to complain about being threatened with a weapon. Several neighbors also reported supicious gathering. Additional SWAT forces are being called in.
Re: Cryptographic privacy protection in TCPA
It looks like Camenisch Lysyanskaya are patenting their credential system. This is from the online patent applications database: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2Sect2=HITOFFp=1u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.htmlr=1f=Gl=50co1=ANDd=PG01s1=camenischOS=camenischRS=camenisch Non-transferable anonymous credential system with optional anonymity revocation Abstract The present invention relates to a method and system for securely proving ownership of pseudonymous or anonymous electronic credentials. A credential system is described consisting of users and organizations. An organization knows a user only by a pseudonym. The pseudonyms of the same user, established for use with different organizations, cannot be linked. An organization can issue a credential to a pseudonym, and the corresponding user can prove possession of this credential to another organization that knows him under another pseudonym. During the prove of possession of the credential nothing besides the fact that he owns such a credential is revealed. A refinement of the credential system provides credentials for unlimited use, so called multiple-show credentials, and credentials for one-time use, so called one-show credentials. Some of the claims seem a little broad, like this first one: 1. A method for establishing a pseudonym system by having a certificate authority accepting a user as a new participant in said pseudonym system, the method comprising the steps of: receiving a first public key provided by said user; verifying that said user is allowed to join the system; computing a credential by signing the first public key using a secret key owned by said certificate authority; publishing said first public key and said credential. Wouldn't this general description cover most proposed credential systems in the past, such as those by Chaum or Brands? Does anyone know how to contact the PTO regarding proposed patents, perhaps to point out prior art?
Re: Cryptographic privacy protection in TCPA
Carl Ellison suggested an alternate way that TCPA could work to allow for revoking virtualized TPMs without the privacy problems associated with the present systems, and the technical problems of the elaborate cryptographic methods. Consider first the simplest possible method, which is just to put a single signature key in each TPM and allow the TPM to use that to sign its messages on the net. This is reliable and allows TPM keys to be revoked, but it obviously offers no privacy. Every usage of a TPM key can be correlated as coming from a single system. TCPA fixed this by adding a trusted third party, the Identity CA who would be the only one to see the TPM key. But Carl offers a different solution. Instead of burning only one key into the TPM, burn several. Maybe even a hundred. And let these keys be shared with other TPMs. Each TPM has many keys, and each key has copies in many TPMs. Now let the TPMs use their various keys to identify themselves in transactions on the net. Because each key belongs to many different TPMs, and the set of TPMs varies for each key, this protects privacy. Any given usage of a key can be narrowed down only to a large set of TPMs that possess that key. If a key is misused, i.e. scraped out of the TPM and used to create a virtualized, rule-breaking software TPM, it can be revoked. This means that all the TPMs that share that one key lose the use of that key. But it doesn't matter much, because they each have many more they can use. Since it is expected that only a small percentage of TPMs will ever need their keys revoked, most TPMs should always have plenty of keys to use. One problem is that a virtualized TPM which loses one of its keys will still have others that it can use. Eventually those keys will also be recognized as being mis-used and be revoked as well. But it may take quite a while before all the keys on its list are exhausted. To fix this, Carl suggests that the TPM manufacturer keep a list of all the public keys that are in each TPM. Then when a particular TPM has some substantial fraction of its keys revoked, that would be a sign that the TPM itself had been virtualized and all the rest of the keys could be immediately revoked. The precise threshold for this would depend on the details of the system, the number of keys per TPM, the number of TPMs that share a key, the percentage of revoked keys, etc. But it should not be necessary to allow each TPM to go through its entire repertoire of keys, one at a time, before a virtualized TPM can be removed from the system. Carl indicated that he suggested this alternative early in the TCPA planning process, but it was not accepted. It does seem that while the system has advantages, in some ways it shares the problems of the alternatives. It provides privacy, but not complete privacy, not as much as the cryptographic schemes. And it provides security to the TPM issuers, but not complete security, not as much as the Privacy CA method. In this way it can be seen as a compromise. Often, compromise solutions are perceived more in terms of their disadvantages than their benefits.
Chaum's unpatented ecash scheme
David Chaum gave a talk at the Crypto 2002 conference recently in which he briefly presented a number of interesting ideas, including an approach to digital cash which he himself said would avoid the ecash patents. The diagram he showed was as follows: Optimistic Authenticator z = x^s Payer f(m)^a z^b Bank - [f(m)^a z^b]^s - m, f(m)^s - It's hard to figure out what this means, but it bears resemblance to a scheme discussed on the Coderpunks list in 1999, a variant on a blinding method developed by David Wagner. See http://www.mail-archive.com/coderpunks@toad.com/msg02323.html for a description, with a sketch of a proof of blindness at http://www.mail-archive.com/coderpunks@toad.com/msg02387.html and http://www.mail-archive.com/coderpunks@toad.com/msg02388.html. In Chaum's diagram it is not clear which parts of the key are private and which public, although z is presumably public. Since the bank's action is apparently to raise to the s power, s must be secret. That suggests that x is public. However Chaum's system seems to require dividing by (z^b)^s in order to unblind the value, and if s is secret, that doesn't seem possible. In Wagner's scheme everything was like this except that the bank's key would be expressed as x = z^s, again with x and z public and s secret. f(m) would be a one-way function, which gets doubly-blinded by being raised to the a power and multiplied by z^b, where a and b are randomly chosen blinding factors. The bank raises this to its secret power s, and the user unblinds to form f(m)^s. To later deposit the coin he does as in the third step, sending m and f(m)^s to the bank. For the unblinding, the user can divide by (z^b)^s, which equals z^(b*s), which equals (z^s)^b, which equals x^b. Since x is public and the user chose b, he can unblind the value. Maybe the transcription above of the Chaum scheme had a typo and it was actually similar to the Wagner method. Chaum commented that the payer does not receive a signature in this system, and that he doesn't need one because he is protected against misbehavior by the bank. This is apparently where the scheme gets its name.
Re: Other uses of TCPA
James Donald writes: I can only see one application for voluntary TCPA, and that is the application it was designed to perform: Make it possible run software or content which is encrypted so that it will only run on one computer for one time period. You've said this a few times, and while it is a plausible goal of the designers, I don't actually see this specific capability in the TCPA spec, nor is it mentioned in the Palladium white paper. For TCPA, you'd have to have the software as a blob which is encrypted to some key that is locked in the TPM. But the problem is that the endorsement key is never leaked except to the Privacy CA, so the content provider can't encrypt to that key. Then there are Identity keys which are short-term generated keys that get signed by the Privacy CA, but these are primarily used to prove that you are running a TCPA system. I'm not even sure if they are decryption keys. In any case they are supposed to be relatively transient. You get a new one each time you go online so that your web activities are not linkable. So I don't think Identity keys would be very suitable for locking software too, either. I admit that it would be unlikely for Microsoft to go to all the trouble of creating Palladium, without using it to solve its own severe software piracy problems. So I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see some way of achieving what you are talking about. But it is not mentioned in the white paper, and TCPA doesn't seem to support it very well. If it was, as you say, the application it was designed to perform, this fact is far from apparent in the design documents.
Other uses of TCPA
I think that people are beginning to understand that TCPA is not a black and white issue. It is neither the overwhelming threat that some activists are describing, nor the panacea that the vendors are selling. It is a technology with strengths and weaknesses. As an exercise, try thinking of ways you could use TCPA to promote good guy applications. What could you do in a P2P network if you could trust that all participants were running approved software? And if you could prevent third parties, including hostile governments, from seeing the data being used by that software? You may be surprised to find that if you look at it with an open mind, TCPA could be a tremendous boon to freedom-oriented technologies. From file sharing to crypto protocols to digital cash, TCPA lets you expand the trusted computing base to the entire set of participating machines. It's really a tremendously powerful technology. The biggest problem, ironically, is that TCPA may not be secure enough. It's one thing to make video piracy difficult, it's another matter to keep the Chinese government from prying into the sealed storage. But with future generations of TCPA integrated onto CPUs with improved tamper resistance, it will be much more difficult to defeat the protections. It may turn out that TCPA can significantly facilitate cypherpunk goals.
Re: Virtuallizing Palladium
Ben Laurie wrote: Albion Zeglin wrote: Similar to DeCSS, only one Palladium chip needs to be reverse engineered and it's key(s) broken to virtualize the machine. If you break one machine's key: a) You won't need to virtualise it b) It won't be getting any new software licensed to it This is true, if you do like DeCSS and try to publish software with the key in it. The content consortium will put the cert for that key onto a CRL, and the key will stop working. The other possibility is to simply keep the key secret and use it to strip DRM protection from content, then release the now-free data publicly. This will work especially well if the companies offer free downloads of content with some kind of restrictions that you can strip off. If you have to pay for each download before you can release it for free, then you better be a pretty generous guy. Or maybe you can get paid for your efforts. This could be the true killer app for anonymous e-cash.
cypherpunks@einstein.ssz.com
Nomen Nescio wrote: Are you saying that if someone is legally resident in the US for a while, the US IRS will attempt to get his assets all over the world forever? I find this hard to believe. On 10 Jul 2002 at 15:40, F. Marc de Piolenc wrote: Not necessarily get them, but tax them. Believe! So what you are suggesting is that I might as well take out US citizenship, since the IRS behaves just as piratically and imperially to anyone who gets a job in the US?
Tax consequences of becoming a US citizen
On Tue, Jul 09, at 02:02PM, Tim May wrote: Also, a person having extensive offshore (outside the U.S.) assets may well find his assets are now taxable in the U.S. And for those with capital assets not taxed in their home countries (e.g., Germany, Japan), this may be quite a shock. On 9 Jul 2002 at 18:40, Gabriel Rocha wrote: This applies wether he is a US citizen or not, green card holder or not, Sealand citizen or not. Once the IRS sinkstheir claws into you, you're screwed. Are you saying that if someone is legally resident in the US for a while, the US IRS will attempt to get his assets all over the world forever? I find this hard to believe.
Re: on 'evil' as an abbreviation
Evil = bad = counter to our goals. One of our goals is to have general-purpose computers widely available. A DRM layer between us and the hardware is counter to that goal, ergo, undesirable from this perspective. Its like a governor in a car. Do you want one in yours? Are you willing to pay for the decreased driving flexibility and decreased reliability (extra parts, after all) of your car? Sure, I might put a governor in my car if it would lower my insurance rates. And I might use a DRM system if it let me download music and video that I wanted, while remaining compliant with the creators' wishes. What makes you think you can require one in mine? We're talking about voluntary systems here. Ryan said that DRM was evil even if voluntary.
Re: Ross's TCPA paper
Lucky Green writes regarding Ross Anderson's paper at: http://www.ftp.cl.cam.ac.uk/ftp/users/rja14/toulouse.pdf I must confess that after reading the paper I am quite relieved to finally have solid confirmation that at least one other person has realized (outside the authors and proponents of the bill) that the Hollings bill, while failing to mention TCPA anywhere in the text of the bill, was written with the specific technology provided by the TCPA in mind for the purpose of mandating the inclusion of this technology in all future general-purpose computing platforms, now that the technology has been tested, is ready to ship, and the BIOS vendors are on side. It's an interesting claim, but there is only one small problem. Neither Ross Anderson nor Lucky Green offers any evidence that the TCPA (http://www.trustedcomputing.org) is being designed for the support of digital rights management (DRM) applications. In fact if you look at the documents on the TCPA web site you see much discussion of applications such as platform-based ecommerce (so that even if a user's keys get stolen they can't be used on another PC), securing corporate networks (assuring that each workstation is running an IT-approved configuration), detecting viruses, and enhancing the security of VPNs. DRM is not mentioned. Is the claim by Ross and Lucky that the TCPA is a fraud, secretly designed for the purpose of supporting DRM while using the applications above merely as a cover to hide their true purposes? If so, shouldn't we expect to see the media content companies as supporters of this effort? But the membership list at http://www.trustedcomputing.org/tcpaasp4/members.asp shows none of the usual suspects. Disney's not there. Sony's not there. No Viacom, no AOL/Time/Warner, no News Corp. The members are all technology companies, including crypto companies like RSA, Verisign and nCipher. Contrast this for example with the Brodcast Protection Discussion Group whose ongoing efforts are being monitored by the EFF at http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/HDTV/. There you do find the big media companies. That effort is plainly aimed at protecting information and supporting DRM, so it makes sense that the companies most interested in those goals are involved. But with the TCPA, the players are completely different. And unlike with the BPDG, the rationale being offered is not based on DRM but on improving the trustworthiness of software for many applications. Ross and Lucky should justify their claims to the community in general and to the members of the TCPA in particular. If you're going to make accusations, you are obliged to offer evidence. Is the TCPA really, as they claim, a secretive effort to get DRM hardware into consumer PCs? Or is it, as the documents on the web site claim, a general effort to improve the security in systems and to provide new capabilities for improving the trustworthiness of computing platforms?
Re: Safe RSA variant?
Jason Holt writes: Trent generates primes p,q. He publishes n=pq and some random value g. Trent calculates a and a' such that aa' = 1 % (p-1)(q-1) and a' is prime. He sends Alice a' and g^a%n. a' is her secret exponent and g^a%n her public value. Another way to think of g^a is as the a'-th root of g, since (g^a)^a' = g mod n. If we instead use k instead of a', then Alice gets k and the kth root of g. Bob can establish a shared secret with Alice if Alice got a' from Trent. He picks a random r and sends her g^ar%n. She raises it to a' to compute the shared secret g^r%n. In my notion, she publishes her kth root of g, Bob raises it to the rth power, and Alice then raises it to the kth power to recover g^r. So the important questions are: * Given g^a%n and a', can Alice derive (p-1)(q-1)? If so, she'd be able to take over Trent's job. No, given g and the kth root of g, she clearly can't find phi(n), because every RSA signature supplies such a pair. * Given g^k%n and k' for lots of different k, can we derive (p-1)(q-1) or otherwise imitate Trent's ability to give out (g^k%n, k') pairs? I think this is OK too. See the Strong RSA Assumption, for example at http://www.zurich.ibm.com/security/ace/sig.pdf. Basically this says that you can't find kth roots mod an RSA modulus without knowing the factors. You might want to ask this on sci.crypt, they are pretty good with pure math questions like this one.
Re: Laurie's blinding w/cut and choose?
Jason Holt writes: In his paper on Lucre (2nd defence against marking): http://anoncvs.aldigital.co.uk/lucre/ Ben Laurie gives this as a (possibly patent-free) blinding technique, where h is the message, and g is the public generator: r = blind(h) = h^y * g^b (mod p) To sign, s = sign(r) = m^h To unblind, (s/g^k^b)^(1/y) (mod p) (where k is the signer's secret exponent. Of course, nobody but the signer can verify the signature). Unfortunately, this doesn't work with cut and choose where the signer signs the product of unrevealed documents, since the 1/y exponent above would distribute to all the internal terms: Boy, you've got a lot of faith asking this question on cypherpunks. It's not exactly the intellectual center of the crypto freedom movement these days, you know. The average IQ is rapidly descending into double digits, even not counting Choate. But let's see what we can do for you. First, let's fix your notation. r = blind(h) = h^y * g^b OK s = sign(r) = r^k, not m^h. unblind(s) = (s/g^k^b)^(1/y) = h^k = sign(h). That's what you want to end up with, h^k, as the pseudo-signature on h. Now for a credential system, you apparently want to create a bunch of values which have some structure, and get a signature on a product of them. Using cut and choose, the client will prepare blinded forms of all of the values, then the server will ask for half of the blinding factors to be revealed. This exposes the raw values to be signed and the server can make sure they are in the right form. If so, it then signs the product of the remaining values, which the client unblinds to get back a good signature on the product of the unblinded values. The fundamental problem with this is that the blinding factors have to be different for each of the values. If they are all the same, then when they are revealed for some of the values during cut and choose, that will reveal them for all of them, and so none of them will be effectively blinded any more. But if the blinding factors are all different, we can't unblind since we don't have a unique power 1/y to raise to. That's your problem, right? Here are a couple of possible solutions. First, you could do a cut and choose in which all but one of the blinded values are revealed, and only the remaining (unrevealed) one is signed. This has the problem that it has only a 1/n security factor with n values. That is, the client can just guess which one the server won't ask to check, and if it sent say 100 values, it has a 1/100 chance of getting lucky, which might seem too high. However since credential issuing usually occurs in a non-anonymous context, you can afford to penalize people very heavily if they are caught in this manner. (Cutting the connection and refusing to resume with the previous values has to count as cheating.) Another approach is as follows. Go back to the 50-50 cut and choose with signature on the product. However, use the same y blinding factor for all of the values. Now when the client has to reveal during cut and choose, it keeps the y value secret but reveals all of the h and b values. It then proves in zero knowledge that there exists a y such that the h^y equals the required value. This is a standard ZK proof of knowledge of a discrete logarithm. It is similar to the example Ben's paper gives of how the bank can prove it is raising to the right power. Since you don't have to reveal y, you can use the same y for all of them and successfully perform the unblind operation, getting back the signature on the product of the h's as required. But actually another solution is much simpler, which is to do blinding as just h * g^b, without a y factor. That works fine as long as the bank is known not to be misbehaving. Ben's paper shows how the bank can use a ZK proof to show that it is raising to the same power k every time, basically again that same ZK proof regarding discrete logarithms. If the bank uses such a proof then you can use simpler blinding without a y factor, and you can recover the signature on the product of your h values by dividing by g^k^(sum of b's). So there you go. A little technical for cypherpunks, but unfortunately coderpunks, like the little old lady, has fallen and it can't get up.
Re: 2 Challenge Gun Cases, Citing Bush Policy
Is there any other possible interpretation other than that we have no other choice than to take up arms against the police, the FBI, or any other TLA, that seeks to deprive us of our rights? Ask yourselves -- what would Jefferson or Washington do at this moment? Ask yourselves -- what is your personal responsibility? For myself -- I can think of nothing personaly more fulfiliing than to come upon a cop or a SWAT team arresting someone for drug or gun violation, and being able to kill each and every one from behind. Don't expose yourselves -- always shoot from behind. But know this one thing -- you are morally upright, and the more cops you kill, the more holy you are!
Re: FC: Hollywood wants to plug analog hole, regulate A-D converters
Peter Trei writes: My mind has been boggled, my flabbers have been ghasted. In the name of protecting their business model, the MPAA proposes that every analog/digital (A/D) converter - one of the most basic of chips - be required to check for US government mandated copyright flags. Quite aside from increasing the cost and complexity of the devices many, manyfold, it eliminates the ability of the US to compete in the world electronics market. This is absurd. In all the commentary on this issue, no one has made the obvious point that the MPAA has no interest or intention in putting watermark detectors into every ADC chip! They don't care about the ADC chip in a digital thermometer or even a cell phone. All they care about are things like PC video capture cards, which are high fidelty consumer devices capable of digitizing copyright protected content. Their white paper is a brief summary of their goals and intentions and does not go into full technical detail. But let's use a little common sense here, folks. It's pointless to try to shoot down this proposal by raising all these horror stories about ADC chips in industrial and technical devices being crippled by a watermark detector which will never be activated. If you waste time developing this line of argument, you will be left with nothing to say when the actual bill focuses only on the specific devices that the content holders are worried about. And sure, a sufficiently talented electrical engineer can produce a custom board to do non-watermark-aware ADC, and digitize TV shows and music. The MPAA has to accept that such activity will continue to go on at a low level. They just want to make sure that consumer devices are not sold that enable every customer to make easy digital copies of copyrighted data based on an analog source, as they can now with the Replay DVR. Please, let's use some common sense and not go overboard with an obviously mistaken interpretation of the MPAA's intentions. That wastes everyone's time.
Re: Detectable cash notes a fantasy
Tim May writes: I'll go back to lurking, as this thread, so to speak, is not interesting to me. (More interesting is reading Chris Hillman's page with his Categorical Primer on it, http://www.math.washington.edu/~hillman/papers.html. And to BL and JA, I downloaded O'CAML and picked up a couple of ML texts--I Go away.
