Re: Taxes on hard drives
At 10:25 PM 2/14/01 -0800, Alan Olsen wrote: The things I find most interesting in the way of the non-traditional music distribution channels are the things I *cannot* buy. Using the search mechanisms, you can find groups in a genre you are interested in. For instance, 'industrial' will find files whose names include that label. An interesting problem for Napster et al: if they have to control the indexing of files that are claimed by Content Corporations, they can't just use the name of a band. Because you can label your own, public-domain music with their "proprietary" labels, e.g., "Joe's Band ---better than Metallica" (Also many files are 'covers' of other songs.) And watermarking the files won't work. So implementing the control that the courts will require, without being heavy-handed, is not nearly as easy as the courts might imagine.
Re: Taxes on hard drives
At 08:09 PM 2/14/01 -0800, Tim May wrote: Why should someone who is not downloading music or images (or whatever it is the tax is allegedly meant to support) be taxed thusly? Yep. This is terrifically offensive. (But some of us had the last laugh. The "Home Recording Act" tax came with the proviso that unlimited "non-commercial" copying was now unprosecutable. A friend of mine copied more than 4500 CDs onto about a thousand DAT tapes. The DAT tapes were purchased in bulk from a guy in Nashville for about $2 per 4-hour (highest quality) tape. Now, of course, CD-Rs can be purchased in bulk for about $0.28 per 80-minute blank, so my friend is now making mostly CD-Rs. He makes extras for me, for the cost of the materials, so I have about 500 CDs "for free" that are perfectly legal under the Home Recording Act. Of the 28 cents per blank CD-R, how much is going to Limp Biskit?) I'm not convinced this is legal[1], but if it is: then Napster tools that work only for "buddy lists" would also be untouchable. With what constitutes a "buddy" decided by some judge, eventually. I realize this is just a historical spur; the fate of copyright in the era of crypto-equipt networked pcs etc etc... [1] Not familiar with the HRA in detail... yes you can make personal backup or other-media copies for yourself, but distributing them while you retain copies yourself?
Re: FAQ? how to set up a cross-platform encrypted mailing list/forum
At 01:34 PM 2/19/01 +, Rachel Willmer wrote: How can I set up a mailing list or online forum with encrypted traffic? Simplest way: forward only pgp encrypted email. All correspondents must have picked up the public keys of any poster. ... "What company did you say you were from, Mr. Hewlett?" ---Walt Disney to Bill Hewlett eetimes 22.01.01 p 32
Re: CDR: Secure Erasing is actually harder than that...
At 11:38 AM 2/19/01 -0800, Ray Dillinger wrote: The problem is that data that's been written over once, or even twice or ten times, can often still be read if someone actually takes the platters out and uses electromagnetic microscopy on them. Really? You think the fed specs on secure wiping are disinfo? ... "What company did you say you were from, Mr. Hewlett?" ---Walt Disney to Bill Hewlett eetimes 22.01.01 p 32
Re: CDR: Re: [Sovereignty v. global justice [was... Mohammed gets Miranda]]
At 06:32 PM 2/19/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: On 19 Feb 2001, LUIS VILDOSOLA wrote: Before you can judge an act to be a crime against humanity. I'd like to know what acts can be identified as crime, where is humanity and how are both these ideas brought together. A crime is any act, or in some cases failure to act, which causes physical damage to a person or their property, makes use of said property, or breaks a public trust without prior permission by all involved. A crime is a violation of the responce 'No'. No Jim, you don't handle masochism at all. Crime is any *nonconsensual* interaction. ... "What company did you say you were from, Mr. Hewlett?" ---Walt Disney to Bill Hewlett eetimes 22.01.01 p 32
Re: FAQ? how to set up a cross-platform encrypted mailing list/forum
At 12:11 AM 2/21/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Joseph Ashwood wrote: So you write it so that unencrypted e-mail simply will be bounced. Simple enough to do. Really? Provide a reference to such an algorithm? Determining if a 1. look for appropriate headers and/or 2. convert to binary and measure the entropy of the sample. Nothing written by human hand comes close to pure noise. This counters trivial spam and would prevent unintentional cleartext transmissions. Are we assuming that participants have some interest in keeping the threads confidential? Or some of them malicious?
Re: CDR: Testing for encryption. (fwd)
At 05:54 PM 2/21/01 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: There is NO algorithm which will determine if an arbitrary piece of text is encrypted by an arbitrary algorithm. You can tell, at least statistically if a particular piece of arbitrary text ISN'T a particular algorithm or language either. Again, not the same problem. The problem is to find a reasonable way for a relay to refuse to forward unencrypted messages. So that participants don't accidentally reveal the discussion. *Not* to identify the language or cipher algorithm. *Where* do you get that idea? (Rhetorical, I realize who I'm replying to..) A general and reliable heuristic is to measure entropy. This will of course pass unencrypted compressed files (including possibly jpeg, mpeg, etc.). A more reliable 'cheat' is to look for headers. This can also enforce an additional (and perhaps unwanted) requirement that a certain tool is used. But again, malicious posters will be able to spoof this. ... "What company did you say you were from, Mr. Hewlett?" ---Walt Disney to Bill Hewlett eetimes 22.01.01 p 32
bring on the clones
Next week: the RIAA tries to make portscanners as criminal piracy tools, and activity on port 6699 as 'probable cause' SINCE MONDAY, the Recording Industry Association of America, the main trade group representing record labels, has sent about 60 legal notices to the Internet-service companies that provide Web connections for Open Napster servers. These are computers that run Napster-like software, but arent associated with the Redwood City, Calif., companys service. Numerous free programs, such as one called Napigator, can be downloaded from the Internet and used to locate Open Napster servers. Napigator author http://www.msnbc.com/news/535001.asp Chad Boyda said there are about 350 such machines operating, though the number varies daily. ... Unbeknown to the latter, Marks had already cracked General de Gaulle's private cypher in a spare moment on the lavatory.
Re: CDR: Re: Re: Another Wiretap Criminal Exposed
At 10:47 AM 3/1/01 +, Ken Brown wrote: Though I bet that if you asked a late mediaeval lawyer about the philosophy they'd tell you that it is because a crime is something that threatens society. Murder, theft, rape, arson, treason all those things are threats to us all and should be pursued by the courts even if victims don't wish to follow them up. FWIW: Here in the states, it is becoming a trend for prosecutors to file domestic-violence charges even if the battered spouse declines to file.
Re: DeCSS-ed mice
At 12:27 PM 2/24/01 +0100, Predrag wrote: well, they could well be Actually there was an IP battle fought over mice. See, some mice cost $150 a pop, and at the same time, mice are easy to copy. And the community of mouse-users (aka biologists) likes to share. In the end, the NIH (the largest buyer of these specialty mice) used its leverage to allow biologists to share without legal hassles while also protecting the interests of the mouse manufacturers who were asserting their IP. ...
Re: CDR: Re: Shooting down 'Bandit Satellites'
At 12:33 PM 3/10/01 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: At 06:16 PM 03/01/2001 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: Technology wise, I'm real keen on the Hydrogen Peroxide Catalyst engines, especially Platinum catalyst. Platinum is problematic, rare expensive. Say 1 out of 1,000 potential hobbyist can afford it. Hydrogen Peroxide can at least theoretically be done in a garage lab, so we'll leave this 1-1 for now. Platinum costs vary, but I've never seen it above $500/oz, Yeah, the problem is the fire marshall/BATF when they learn you're storing 70% H202 in your garage :-) And the neighbors when they ask why their cat is a bleached blonde now.. ...
Re: Toy gun ban: This is pleasantly insane
FWIW: even in Kalifornia, you can walk into a store and walk out with a black powder revolver, powder, caps, balls and patches. At 01:58 PM 3/12/01 -0500, Matthew Gaylor wrote: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/low/english/uk_politics/newsid_1207000/1207355.stm Some toy guns could be made illegal if the government goes ahead with its intention to ban replica firearms. Home Office minister Charles Clarke revealed that such a move was possible when he spoke at an exhibition of seized fake weapons, which included imitation Uzi machine pistols and an SA-80 assault rifle. Such replicas can be bought in shops or by mail order and are frequently used by criminals. The minister said replicas posed a "real threat" to society. The British can own single and double barrel shotguns, but only if they're licensed and registered and they can only use birdshot. If you take a look at British gun magazines, you'll see advertisements for really good replica firearms- They're kind of expensive though. An unintended consequence to all of this prohibitionist activity, and a not altogether harmful one IMHO, is that the average citizen is losing more and more respect for the government. And the ultimate unintended consequence is the logical choice between violating the law by owning an illegal fake firearm or by violating the law owning a real one. Most people will choose owning a real one- Regards, Matt- ** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, 2175 Bayfield Drive, Columbus, OH 43229 (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **
Re: CDR: RE: My .sig
At 08:45 PM 3/12/01 -0500, Trei, Peter wrote: Not many people use fixed width fonts to read mail, so I'll let the They deserve to die, along with HTML posters.
Re: Consensus? We don't need no stinkin' consensus...
At 05:51 PM 3/12/01 -0800, Eric Cordian wrote: Can't we do without Victimologist prattle on a cryptography and privacy list? Shrinks should be next after all the lawyers are fed to the lions. "Medicalizing" your opponent's argument, instead of responding to it, is a tactic of police states, religious nuts, controlling relatives, and idiots. Which one are you? Do you deny that there are clusters of mental symptoms which seem empirically to have organic causes? Even syndromes with mere software (talk-talk solvable) causes? Don't throw out the baby with the gulag. dh
Re: using tech during a crime
At 10:41 AM 3/15/01 -0600, Blank Frank wrote: If you are caught using a radio in the commission of a crime your charges can be enhanced with Federal statutes based on the Communications Act of 1934 as amended. http://www.gmrsweb.com/gmrsfrswhat.html Interesting. How long before they figure out that cell phones are radios? And that GSM's A5/1 or /2 might count as encryption in more gullible places. "...The use of metal or electricity during a crime shall enhance penalties..."
Re: raves
At 06:39 PM 3/15/01 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i want to request rave flyers.. you kno where i can get some..old/new? We used to do a lot of ranting and raving, now we just look forward to bleating and babbling into the dream..
RE: PGP flaw found by Czech firm allows dig sig to be forged
At 08:38 PM 3/23/01 -0800, Ray Dillinger wrote: And finally, it would have to have some kind of tamperproof keyboard -- noplace to install hardware key loggers. What the world needs now is a membrane keyboard, used only for entering keys, which can be folded into a credit card and stored in your wallet. If not hung around your neck. Or an iButton ring... Or implant... ...
Re: Ninth Circuit ruling re webpage threats
At 08:46 AM 3/29/01 -0800, Ray Dillinger wrote: On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think Judge Kozinski's ruling can also be easily read in support of free speech by operator and participants in anonymous betting pools with political interests. I think you are wrong. The neuremberg files website didn't *create* a motive for killing. Assassination Politics would. That is a key difference. Bear Well the celebrity deathwatch site provides material rewards for the best 'guesses', and has been running unchallenged for some time. The site itself pays you IIRC ---whereas an AP machine is more an EBay, merely supporting its clients' content. I think the deathwatch site also requires that winners had nothing to do with the deaths they predicted ---though they have no such investigatory capacities. Creating motives? The politicians do that themselves. And financial reward for guessing is hardly illegal ---in fact, the State runs the gambling around here. But monopoly is unnatural, no? .. "Advocacy and belief go hand in hand. For there can be no true freedom of mind if thoughts are secure only when they are pent up." -- US Justice William O. Douglas
Re: Face Recognition Technolgy Is Next - Big Brother Arrives
At 07:30 PM 3/29/01 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: At 09:09 PM 3/29/01 -0600, you wrote: http://www.sightings.com/politics6/dwbb.htm There have been a few discussions on this list of possible means for defeating such systems operating in public places. I recall suggesting a new religion, whose worshipers are encouraged to appear with veils and masks, might make an interesting legal challenge to anti-mask laws in effect. I've pointed this out before, but many randoms (esp females) wear false hair and facial camo. Add some Jackie-O accoutrements and you've got your 'religious worshippers' (and some *are* religious about wearing this, tithing significant fractions of their income) on the streets already. . The red-light-camera folks don't send a ticket if they can't make out your face (judges demand it); one of their staff commented that they toss out pictures with low baseball caps (etc.) obscuring the faces, but they didn't think people do that *intentionally* to beat traffic cameras. (LA Times story last week or so) . Personally I like Subcommander Marcos's Subgenius/Terrorist look... pipe and ski mask..
Re: CDR: Pleading the 5th
At 10:29 PM 4/4/01 +0200, Anonymous wrote: In light of recent "situations" involving cpunks and the courts, I've been thinking about the 5th Amendment. I pose two questions: If called to testify in a criminal case, and asked the question "Are you known by any other names" (or a derivative of that question), could one plead the fifth in order to prevent the disclosure of a pseudonym? If asked the question "have you ever communicated with [third party]", could one plead the fifth if that communication was made through a pseudonym, and tying that pseudonym to oneself could potentially be incriminating? Indeed the 5th is up to you to decide ---after all, only you know what you've done. You can only be forced to talk to a GJ if given immunity for anything you say, by arrangement beforehand; I think this came up during Monicagate. JY or DM could easily take the 5th if they so chose. How would anyone (including themselves or their council) prove to them that any answer associating them with JB would not be incriminating in the next wave? An interesting twist against compelled key disclosure is making your passphrase something incriminating.
Re: Jim Bell Trial: First Day
At 09:11 AM 4/4/01 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tanner then told Leen: "He [Bell] doesn't trust you." Leen: "He has great personal animosity." Tanner then told Leen that he had responded Bell well. Responded [to] Bell well or Represented Bell well ?? likely the latter..
Re: CDR: Re: Pleading the 5th
At 06:02 PM 4/5/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: I don't do interviews. I also own the copyright on everything I post to Cypherpunks. If it gets printed without my permission (and I won't give it) in a newspaper or other COMMERCIAL venture it is copyright infringement. You're free to post excerpts. I believe ~200 lines is the maximum allowed under current copyright law. Jim, how do you feel about on-line collections, e.g., the venona and inet-one.com archives? [IMHO they are technically infringing our copyrights, but I personally think they perform a service ---slightly more for historians than for spammers.]
Re: CDR: Re: Pleading the 5th
At 02:21 PM 4/12/01 -0400, Sunder wrote: While he can't really enforce what people do with the emails that they receive from him, if he sees his posts printed in full in the next issue of WIRED, he could sue. Quite salient coming after Tim's post about the vulnerability of centralized, publicized spaces/assets. Its precisely this that would make it practical to sue a copyright infringing entity. Except when the centralized entity its a state selling your DMV records, of course.
Re: John Walsh broadcasts Most Wanted sans underwear! (horrors!)
At 05:34 PM 4/13/01 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Something I've never bought before - "Globe" 4/17/2001 - has compromising photos of John Walsh and another babe. "Caught! America's most perverted host" Is this the same COPS producer busted for DUI while filming in Atlanta?
Re: hello, I would like to learn how to hack a bit
At 10:39 AM 4/16/01 -0800, Daniel J. Boone wrote: Hack away -- it's that simple! Disclaimer: In many states, if you hack at decorative trees or shrubs that do not belong to you, you may be liable for a sum in damages equal to thrice the actual value of the vegetation destroyed. -- Daniel In the US, if you hack certain plants that grow on your property, numerous federal agencies will be very very angry. Destruction of wetlands, destruction of endangered species, etc. Jailtime possible. Careful with that axe, Eugene.
RE: Making the Agora Vanish | OSINT distributed haven (Intellagora)
At 08:59 PM 4/16/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: On Mon, 16 Apr 2001, David Honig wrote: At 02:06 PM 4/15/01 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: regard to contract enforcement. There has to be a hook where someone who does a ripoff can be punished, or else there is no deal. In infospace, there is only reputation, not meat and bones, that can be damaged. Tell that to the insulin pump or the aircraft auto-pilot... What a naive view of 'bits'. We're not talking about life-critical apps.
RE: Making the Agora Vanish | OSINT distributed haven (Intellagora)
At 09:12 PM 4/16/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: If the party were truly anonymous there would be no way to identify them to a third party in order to pass the 'reputation capital' along. There would have to be a 'persistent nym', not an anonymous one. Persistent, untraceable nym. Both. Untraceables without persistance are useful mostly for email. Persistent untraceable, that's part of the Realization.
RE: Making the Agora Vanish | OSINT distributed haven (Intellagora)
At 08:45 PM 4/17/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, David Honig wrote: Persistent, untraceable nym. Both. Untraceables without persistance are useful mostly for email. Persistent untraceable, that's part of the Realization. Well, part of it, probably. The point being there are many 'kinds' of 'anonymity'. They are not(!) all equivalent. Yes that is one of the things you can actually learn from this group if your receiver can handle the S/N ratio. If there is no 'persistance' the requirement that it be 'untraceable' is moot, unless you plan on coming back (very bad idea to ever visit the same place twice, or stay in the same place more than 24 hours). If you have a non-persistant but traceable nym, what's the point? Suppose you use a one-time email account to threaten the president, but the message is traceable to your carcass (e.g., the internet cafe had surveillance cameras). You may as well use your Meat Name; its gonna hit the papers anyway. On the other hand, a non-persistant and untraceable nym is good for threatening the president, but not useful for reputation building. A persistant but untraceable nym is good for commerce. All are possible. All are useful. Ergo, all will come about, whether you like it or not.
Re: making the agora vanish
At 09:05 PM 4/17/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: Isn't the anonymizing agent itself a 'reputation service' in that it's reputation capital is 'anonymity'? Completely orthogonal to the reputations (or lack thereof) of its clients, yes, a so-called anonymizer has a reputation, actually, several (e.g., uptime; resistance to subpeonae; mean time to handle user gripes; etc). And the point is?
Re: Amtrak The War On Drugs
At 11:02 AM 4/24/01 +0100, Ken Brown wrote: and burn a million cows on pyres of used tyres and railway sleepers (they are thinking of using napalm to save money) The chemicals in the materials you're using for your pyres are poisoning the locals with dioxins... napalm is a lot cleaner and faster than dioxin-generating old tires and railroad ties, supposedly. We have the Burning Man festival; y'all have your Burning Cow festival. Whatever melts your cheese.
Re: Recording conversations and the laws of men
At 03:23 PM 4/24/01 -0500, Jon Beets wrote: Here in the state of Oklahoma, recording conversations is legal as long as one of the individuals in the conversation knows its being recorded. So a third party wanting to listen in without the other two knowing is still required to follow the standard legal proceedings... Jon Beets And if you record a chat with someone in Maryland, where both parties have to agree A federal crime, perhaps?
Re: Recording conversations and the laws of men
At 08:57 PM 4/24/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, David Honig wrote: At 11:05 AM 4/24/01 -0700, Tim May wrote: (Even contractual issues are amenable to this analysis. If Alice doesn't want to be taped in her interactions with Bob, she can negotiate an arrangement that he turns off his tape recorders in her presence. If he violates this contract, perhaps she can collect. Some day this will likely be done via polycentric law, a la Snow Crash.) Nice. So we instead force everyone to reveal that they are recording, in all cases then. That's the only way a 'mutual contract' can work, take away the 'right not to speak'. No Jim, what's *nice* about this is that it makes recording-restrictions a *Private Contractual* matter, not a *State Violence* matter. Surely you agree that one can enter into private contracts that constrain your freedom in ways beyond what the State can do. If entered into without duress, and while mentally and legally competent, this is moral as no coercion is involved.
Re: CATO Institute Flop What If We Had A Party And Nobody Came?
At 11:55 AM 4/25/01 -0400, Matthew Gaylor wrote: private efforts to create private networks, I don't think Mr. Crew has thought through the technical and political ramifications of his proposal. Personally, while it requires great effort to stay and fight to keep the Internet free Agreed. If you choose to use DNS, that is your choice. You can run your own root DNS server and have all your friends include you in their list of nameservers to try. If you know others who do this, you can create a 'root' index. Heck, you can even call it .com, and depending on your position in others' nameserver-list, you may be the resolver for that famous TLD for some. No 'privatization' necessary. Just organization, and motivation. Cf. a recent post by An Metet on Things That Need Doing re private spaces. State-enforced or state-backed private control of content is either censorship or editing, and if editing, the bit traffickers lose common-carrier innocence.
Re: CDR: Re: Recording conversations and the laws of men
At 06:48 PM 4/25/01 -0400, Sunder wrote: David Honig wrote: Personally I plan to teach Jr. how to do covert recording; otherwise it might be his word vs. a schoolyard bully or state-employed bully. [FWIW, I think some girl was recently acquitted of wiretap charges for taping or imaging a teacher's lecture (for review later) because there was no expectation of privacy. Teachers are after all your employees.] A few months ago a guy was jailed because he audiotaped an abusive cop in MA. MA is an all-party state. So YMMV. The cop of course had no expectation of privacy since he stopped the guy on the highway. Google is your friend for details. I'd *love* to use a what have you got to hide argument with a state employee. On the other hand: Just read about a Sheriff's Deputy who was suspended for trying to erase 2 videotapes showing him abusing two different citizens. http://www.latimes.com/editions/orange/20010426/t35233.html Deputy Is Accused of Trying to Erase Tapes Sheriff's Department veteran is charged with attempted destruction of evidence in two encounters caught on patrol car video. A decorated Orange County sheriff's deputy was suspended and criminally charged with trying to destroy videotapes of two on-duty confrontations, including one in which he reportedly accosted and cursed at a man. ...snip...
Re: BSE
At 05:15 PM 4/26/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a question for you Tim, I'm sure you've read about BSE, scrapie, kuru, Creutzfeld-Jakob et al. Generally they seem to be species-specific but there is some crossover. Let's assume that feeding ground up livestock to livestock is a risky behavior. It goes on here in the U.S. Pet food. I hear some apes eat cows, pigs, chickens, fish, etc. What is your problem with Domestic Carnivorae doing same? Dog food doesn't have dogs in it. OTOH, Fish food does have fish in it. In reply to M.M., I don't think it does go on in the US.
Re: The issue of logs is a 1A issue
If your web server runs off a CDROM, and has no disk, that machine at least can't keep logs. Also hard to vandalize in an unrecoverable way.
Re: RF Weapons
At 01:35 AM 5/3/01 -0400, An Metet wrote: [I wonder if our more unpopular Federal agencies house their mainframes in facilities that are shielded from this sort of attack] Simple RF Weapon Can Fry PC Circuits Ê Scientists show device that could make the electromagnetic spectrum the terrorist weapon of choice. Old news. One thing I haven't heard of being used in herfgun design is the new commercial 'ultracapacitors' which have multi-FARAD capacitances in very small sizes, and some have very low ESR (ie, you can drain them fast).
Re: Fwd: Re: Simple RF Weapon Can Fry PC Circuits
At 10:04 PM 5/6/01 -1000, Reese wrote: At 07:05 PM 5/6/01, Steve Schear wrote: For a one-stop shopping site see http://www.rfterrorism.com One of the links towards the top of that page, Demonstration of RF weapon on a car. Watch an electronic nervous breakdown occur. (1836 K) A car is a hardened target ---largely shielded, built to coexist with impulsive EMI from the ignition system, etc. When they go to fiber optic busses instead of copper cables, they'll get more resistant (modulo the resistance of the i/f modules). Something like a bunch of personal radios or a TV van would be more vulnerable. And of course kompyuters..
RE: Fwd: Re: Simple RF Weapon Can Fry PC Circuits
At 10:19 AM 5/7/01 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote: David Honig wrote: A car is a hardened target ---largely shielded...Something like a bunch of personal radios or a TV van would be more vulnerable. What I'm waiting for is the portable, concealable boom box killer. It's time to take back the streets. I should think a magnetron would take out the device, though you might need a waveguide to toast the perp. By personal radio I meant cell phone or police radio, though a ghetto blaster also has a sensitive input stage.
Re: Fwd: Re: Simple RF Weapon Can Fry PC Circuits
At 12:15 AM 5/8/01 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote: So probably a magnatron out of a 1500watt microwave (1-2ghz) in an aluminum tube (barrel) to focus the [see notes at bottom] microwaves would be sufficiceint? Or do we need to boost power more than this? Can magnatrons be run in series? 8-) It seems a horn is used to couple the oscillator to the aether for broadcast, and a waveguide (a rectangular box with certain dimensions) used to move the beam. A horn-fed dish could be used for beam shaping, including focussing the beam at some fixed distance. 'Glubco Labs' used to have a section on waveguides, magnetrons, and melting plastic, but that isn't there any more; the fellow probably graduated. I've seen 3000 watt 12VDC-110VAC inverters for cars being sold. Couple that with 500 watt tubes from some $50 ovens, you can outfit each corner of your car. Label the power settings: toast phone, toast engine, headache, cataract, exploding head ... 1. Cooking microwaves are 2.45 Ghz because the FCC lets you go crazy there. 2. Look up WG16 for waveguide info.
Re: Shared-Secret similar algorithm
At 02:28 PM 5/14/01 -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
What the _hell_ is the point of a shared secret scheme where you can
reconstruct the secret with only one key??
Interesting question. There have been times when I've sent
email and not encrypted it to myself, and later wanted to
read it, but not wanted to bother the recipient.
If such a beast were possible then it would be useful.
Its not clear to me that its impossible
Cipher=PK(pub,priv,Plaintext)
Plaintext=PK^{-1}(pub,priv,Cipher)
and
Plaintext=Foo(priv,Cipher)
but I don't see how it would work (which means nothing.)
Is there an obvious proof that it couldn't exist?
RE: Shared-Secret similar algorithm
At 10:01 PM 5/14/01 -0700, Jonathan Wienke wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 One of the features of PGP is that when you encrypt a message, you can specify any number of recipients (unique public keys) who can read the message. The message is encrypted with a random session key using a symmetric algorithm such as CAST or IDEA. The message header contains the session key encrypted with each public key specified, and any matching private key can be used to decrypt the session key from the header, and thus the entire message. The Outlook/Eudora plugins automatically attempt to match the addresses of recipients of outgoing messages to email addresses on keys in your keyring file. One of the keys specified can be your own; PGP 6.x can default to encrypting all messages with your key. Jonathan Wienke I didn't know about that feature, thanks. Especially useful as there are none of the symmetric+PK algorithms postulated. Humbly, dh
Re: Label releases copy-protected CD
At 03:37 PM 5/15/01 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: On Tue, 15 May 2001, Blank Frank wrote: Label releases copy-protected CD with Pride More power to him. Let this guy copy-protect his songs if he can; Well sure... Sooner or later the artists who intentionally release free music will bury him. Meanwhile an analog recording will appear on Napster and GAME OVER. To say nothing of reverse engineers picking up the challenge...
Choate's BoR (was Re: CDR: SITE ARTICLE UPDATE 5/16/01 (J))
At 06:09 PM 5/16/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: 11.Recognize that ultimately the only person fit to decide with respect to abortion is the mother and her doctor. This should be a new Amendment. What are you talking about? A doctor is a mechanic, they can give you advice, but you have to decide if the car is worth it. Abortion is up to the parasitised, no one else. A doctor can pass your medical records onto another medical corporation if they sell their practice. You probably gave them permission at some point. Mechanics, not priests.
Re: Label releases copy-protected CD
At 06:44 PM 5/16/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: Actually, it's possible to make digital speakers, at least there is no 'analog' section per se. There is a class of audio amplifiers which sends pulse-code-modulated pure square waves (ca. 1 Mhz) to the speakers, which integrate the pulses to produce hi-fi sound. These are currently being sold by e.g., TI. Pretty sweet specs and easily possible with commercial CMOS. Of course, an attacker would simply integrate with the appropriate inductance and convert at that point, so the 'digitalness' is moot. You might do better digitizing the actual signal and using computational methods. FWIW
Re: SITE ARTICLE UPDATE 5/16/01 (J)
At 10:19 PM 5/16/01 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: But even if I have permission, it also has to be newsworthy. -Declan That's censorship! (Not :-)
Re: Label releases copy-protected CD
At 05:34 PM 5/16/01 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: The way I see it, record labels are totally redundant right now and copy protection, especially if it works, will drive them right out of business by driving people to discover this fact. I'm all for disintermediation, but realize that editors *do* provide a service to consumers. Similarly, a 'record label' could mutate into an editing service; Robert Fripp, for instance, has his own production these days, and promotes folks who have worked with him (equiv. to editing).
Re: Entire ISP Forced to Close
At 09:03 PM 5/16/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: On Wed, 16 May 2001, Tim May wrote: Bank of America is perfectly free to choose its customers as it wishes, just as an ISP is perfectly free not to have as its customers those who run websites catering to homosexual pedophiles. Which is only another reason that classic 'free market' economics (or a significant portion of C-A-C-L philosopy) don't work. In such a system business in fact doesn't have that option. It *is* working ---free agents are exercising their choice, without any ballistic inducement one way or another. Surely you don't have a problem with folks exercising choice?
H2K on napster
If you fire up Napster and search for h2k you will be able to download some (freely propogatable) recordings of that conference. FWIW
Re: Choate's BoR (was Re: CDR: SITE ARTICLE UPDATE 5/16/01 (J))
At 08:24 PM 5/17/01 -0700, Morlock Elloi wrote: Abortion is up to the parasitised, no one else. It's up to whoever can exert means of controlling it. Check the history books. Oh, you meant in the abstract, libertrarian sense ? Yes its well known that that is my vice. Pardon the intrusion of ideals into the world of guns. Cheers,
the next stage of virii
The next stage of virii will forward recently-modified documents from the sender to the receiver. That will be an interesting bit of shotgun social engineering. Shudder.
fbi hacking foreign computers
Intelligence, N. 384, 14 May 2001, p. 13 USA FBI TRIES TO LEGALIZE ITS HACKING ABROAD During the last week of April, in Seattle, two Russian hackers were indicted on charges of breaking into the networks of banks, Internet service providers and other companies. The somewhat routine charges contrast with the unprecedented methods the FBI used to nab the pair: breaking into their two Russian-based servers remotely and downloading data from them. Some high-tech lawyers are concerned that the precedent may be used to justify indiscriminate, cross-border hacking ... in the name of the law. According to court documents filed in the case, the FBI and the Department of Justice lured two suspected Russian hackers to Seattle with job offers at a fictitious security company. After monitoring the duo's connection to two servers in Russia, the FBI used the suspects' passwords to download incriminating data from those servers before arresting the pair on 10 November. The tactic is likely to be challenged in court; if it is deemed lawful, the precedent could allow domestic and foreign law enforcement and intelligence services free rein to hack computers abroad. ...(cut)... ---
Re: SS numbers and salaries of Kirkland cops readily available
At 09:26 AM 5/20/01 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: Tim correctly found the SSNs of the Kirkland officials at a google cache of justicefiles.org. The employees that Kirkland screwed can simply change their SSNs and bill Kirkland for the inconvenience[1]. It will be interesting when geneology web sites are used to obtain mother's maiden name info, too. [1] From http://www.mind-trek.com/practicl/tl17b.htm However, one of the laws provision is not so well known or publicized. According to the department of Health Education and Welfare's publication, Records, Computers and the Rights of Citizens, the regulation provided that: Any employee may have his/her account number changed at any time by applying to the Social Security Board and showing good reason for a change. With that exception, only one account number will be assigned to an employee.
Re: SS numbers and salaries of Kirkland cops readily available
At 03:49 PM 5/21/01 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: So what's this Dept of HEW, and where's a real cite? -Declan On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 09:53:12AM -0700, David Honig wrote: [1] From http://www.mind-trek.com/practicl/tl17b.htm However, one of the laws provision is not so well known or publicized. According to the department of Health Education and Welfare's publication, Records, Computers and the Rights of Citizens, the regulation provided that: Any employee may have his/her account number changed at any time by applying to the Social Security Board and showing good reason for a change. With that exception, only one account number will be assigned to an employee. In http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10064.html I found this: Can I Get A New Social Security Number? If you can prove that you're being disadvantaged because someone used your Social Security number, visit your local Social Security office to request a new one. If you've done all you can to fix the problem and someone is still using your number, under certain circumstances, we may assign you a new number. We can't guarantee, however, that a new number will solve your problem. A new Social Security number will NOT be assigned if you -- intend to avoid the law or your legal responsibility; commit fraud or criminal action; intend to avoid disclosing a poor credit or criminal record; filed for bankruptcy; or have lost your Social Security card or it was stolen, but there is no evidence that your number is being used by someone and you are being disadvantaged by that use. .. Interesting that justicefiles.org started broadcasting when a cop did intend to avoid the law or your legal responsibility, according to the former. ... I should think the Supremes ruling today (that publishing others' ill-gotten info is legal) should exonerate folks like you (DMcC), and 'Emmanual Goldstein' considerably. Probably optimistic of me. BTW, a SSN expresses a government's belief about a persons place of birth, since it encodes that.
Got Trees? unconstitutional taking in Virginia
The following article suggests that, counter to a point made months ago, the statists (in this case a VA county) can and will force things on your personal property *even when you're not selling it* This guy got 3 months jail and now the judge is allowing bulldozers onto his property, against his will. All because County govt decided they want more trees on his property. At his expense, of course. Some county. Some judge. Virginia, figures. http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/20010526/t44016.html Driving Range Owner Freed, Must Pay for Trees John Thoburn, a Fairfax, Va., golf driving range owner who spent more than three months in jail after refusing to comply with a judge's order to plant trees, was released. Judge Michael P. McWeeny authorized Fairfax County to come onto Thoburn's property and do the landscaping work itself. The county had ordered Thoburn to plant more trees and he had refused. The judge also levied a $48,500 fine against Thoburn and ordered that he reimburse the county. What's been before me is simply a question of obeying the law, McWeeny said. Before I incarcerated him [Feb. 16], I gave him the option to comply or close the facility. He chose to do neither.
Re: Austin, Tx: An invitation to a shin-dig - Build Your Own Box!
At 06:46 PM 6/2/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: Oye! Oye! Oye! Build Your Own Box! But Don't Do It Alone! Jim that's a postive thing to do, but the chant is 'oyez' which is some 'plural y'all' tense of the french verb to hear, ie, listen, listen, or listen youze, listen youze perhaps for Brooklyn. Not representing the Acadamie Francaise (and probably not spelling it correctly either), dh
Re: Ed Felten and researchers sue RIAA, DOJ over right to publish
At 09:05 AM 6/6/01 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is important that Felton win his case. What I wonder is even if he does will the courts create only a very narrow exception for credentialed scientists working at recognized institutions? I think TM has a phrase re journalists, or publishers, which I will paraphrase as: We are all scientists. And really, we are: even children apply the scientific method. Its not rocket science. Sad that we might have to explain that to a haughty, dangerous dude in robes.
Re: Cypherpunk List?
At 10:37 AM 6/6/01 +0100, Ken Brown wrote: better idea. lne.com filters some potential spam I believe. LNE is a fucking godsend.
Re: The Credentialling of America
At 11:56 AM 6/10/01 -0400, Paul H. Merrill wrote: of types available is included. IOW the classic fight between programmers and software engineers goes on. Conjugate: I architect systems You engineer software They program
Re: This Is Your Brain On Cow
At 02:09 PM 6/10/01 -0400, Greg Newby wrote: This is because there are strict US FDA regulations concerning the use of infected beef in restaraunts, but they have little to say about what individuals in private homes eat. Indeed there's been a few cases of something like BSE in Americans who've eaten elk and / or deer. But since the infected aren't fed back into the population, there's no way for it to spread. (E.g., if it arises spontaneously now and then.) Grass-eaters are not carnivores, much less cannibals, in the wild. By definition.
RE: Automatic's
At 04:56 PM 6/10/01 -0700, petro wrote: A .300 Win Mag or .338 Laupa will do 1000 to 1500 yard hits just as well, in a smaller, cheaper, easier to handle package. In unknown wind? Ok. Anything past 800 to 1000 yards is luck and voodoo anyway. Not me, but others, could contradict this by example.
snow crash really exists
In _Science_ Vol 292 1 June 01 p 1637 there's a brief reference to musicogenic epilepsy, a rare conditionin which seizures are triggered by music And a note that Che Guevara had congenital amusica, ie, he couldn't understand music.
Re: This Is Your Brain On Cow
At 05:14 PM 6/10/01 -1000, Reese wrote: At 03:59 PM 6/10/01, David Honig wrote: At 02:09 PM 6/10/01 -0400, Greg Newby wrote: This is because there are strict US FDA regulations concerning the use of infected beef in restaraunts, but they have little to say about what individuals in private homes eat. Indeed there's been a few cases of something like BSE in Americans who've eaten elk and / or deer. But since the infected aren't fed back into the population, there's no way for it to spread. (E.g., if it arises spontaneously now and then.) I'm on the Pro-Med list and if there were any positive link between eating BSE-infected deer or elk, they'd be talking about it there. They aren't. Currently, there is only a recommendation that hunters not eat brains or spinal cords. What is it you know or think you know, that they do not? I know how to read, and I read _Science_. A sidebar called American's own prion disease describing Chronic Wasting Disease belonging to the transmissable spongiform encephalopathies (like Creutzfeld-Jakob and BSE). Vol 292 1 June 01 p 1641 Part of a larger article, Is the US doing enough to prevent mad cow disease p 1639-1641
RE: Automatic's
At 08:19 PM 6/10/01 -0700, petro wrote: Heart/lung shots and brain shots tend to be your best bet with a pistol. The brain moves too much. The farther you are from the CG the more the parts move.
RE: Automatic's
At 10:32 PM 6/10/01 -0700, petro wrote: it's not that difficult to get a CCW in California if you are willing to go to the effort required. Give me a call if you want more info. It varies *greatly* with the attitude of the Chief. In my Calif county the CCWs have tripled in the last few years since a Sheriff who trusts citizens was elected. You may not need to be a lawyer, carry lots of cash, or have been threatened, if he's reasonable. (If he were unreasonable those 'elite' reasons may not have sufficed.)
Re: ORBS
At 04:01 PM 6/12/01 -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: Or, I'll even go further. It was an example of private law, where the law merchant publishes a list of people who break the laws they sell and then lets the market punish or not as they choose. However flawed the list, and however obnoxious the merchant was about the testing to create it, isn't that exactly what many of you have been arguing for the right to do? Bear Goodness, you just invented the concept of reputation, in the non-govt-maintained sense.
Re: SCOTUS rulz!
At 11:25 AM 6/11/01 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # #``Where, as here, the government uses a device that is not in #general public use to explore details of the home that would #previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the #surveillance is a 'search' and is presumptively unreasonable #without a warrant,'' Scalia wrote. It will be interesting if they include airport u-wave scans of bodies too. . I don't care what a magnetometer thinks of my body, almost all of my iron is bound to proteins.
Re: This Is Your Brain On Cow
At 09:30 AM 6/12/01 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: At 08:01 AM 06/12/2001 -0700, David Honig wrote: I know how to read, and I read _Science_. A sidebar called American's own prion disease describing Chronic Wasting Disease belonging to the transmissable spongiform encephalopathies (like Creutzfeld-Jakob and BSE). Vol 292 1 June 01 p 1641 Is this from feeding Soylent Green to prisoners, or is this from unsanitary feeding of meat animals at prisons farms? It may well be from an otherwise useful peptide sequence which has a slight, spontaneous, contagious potential for turning bad. Sometimes, your illness is because your grandfather adsorbed a cosmic ray. Myself, I prefer Slurm (tm)
Re: Analog thoughts
At 02:49 PM 6/15/01 -0700, Morlock Elloi wrote: What I am interested in is how could this be prevented ? What would be the most effective way to disable analog audio recording and subsequent digitizing ? What are the signs to look for ? Is there open-source software for digitizing ? Look for A/D converters which recognize watermarks on chip.
Re: eBay: Burn DVD movies onto CD?
At 03:37 AM 6/16/01 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone figure this out? It's a link from the ebay splash page, so it's high profile. Is it DeCSS? Why would it be? You don't need DeCSS to copy the files on DVDs.
Re: eBay: Burn DVD movies onto CD?
At 03:02 PM 6/20/01 -0400, Riad S. Wahby wrote: David Honig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would it be? You don't need DeCSS to copy the files on DVDs. No, but you do need to authenticate with the DVD-ROM drive. To do this, at least under Linux, you have to invoke the proper ioctls, and Linux is a well known anti-american operating system. :-P do a cryptographic authentication procedure with the drive. Code to do this is covered under circumvention device in the DMCA according to the 2600-MPAA case. Not if you have lawfully paid for the content. If you don't do this authentication, the drives I have worked with will just spit out zeros instead of the real data. If a cartridge doesn't have (C) SEGA in it, it won't play... ergo, (C) SEGA is not protected. GAME OVER. Cheers, dh
Re: eBay: Burn DVD movies onto CD?
At 02:36 PM 6/21/01 +0200, Lars Gaarden wrote: The DVDCCA license requires that DVD equipment never allow access to the raw digital data. http://www.dvdcca.org/data/css/css_proc_spec11.pdf If you buy the media (and more importantly, the license to play the content) you can use any hardware/software you like. Period. [1] That some folks (usually synthetic, ie, corps) pay a fee for IP from whoever is irrelevent. The record-pressers can't tell you whose needle to buy. Well they can, but you can ignore them. If you've cleanroom rev-eng'ed what you need to interop. E.g., DeCSS. This ties in nicely with the content manufacturers' dream of a tamed digital environment where neither piracy nor fair use is possible, and everything is pay-per-view, controlled and metered. Where a remotely-readable meter logs all licensed entertainment that's entered your brainstem each month. Tilting at windmills made of sand, DH All the normalities of the social contract are abandoned in warJack Valenti MPAA pres, in LATimes on Kerry's war crimes .. [1] That remote-music storage dotcom which required you to have a meatspace CD before letting you play the content should have needed *no* license, permit, or blessing from the producers.
Re: eBay: Burn DVD movies onto CD?
At 01:48 PM 6/21/01 +0200, Lars Gaarden wrote: David Honig wrote: Not if you have lawfully paid for the content. As read by the MPAA, the DMCA enable them to sell you a locked house and then drag you to court if you try to pick the lock. Look everyone, I know the judge at the current level of the legal system needs a lobe job. Why should I take him seriously? If a cartridge doesn't have (C) SEGA in it, it won't play... ergo, (C) SEGA is not protected. Didn't the original IBM BIOS use this trick. e.g, look for a 'copyright ibm' string in the BIOS image? Dunno. (PS: Note that the (C) SEGA string may be my gisting.)
Re: eBay: Burn DVD movies onto CD?
At 11:15 AM 6/21/01 -0400, Riad S. Wahby wrote: The EBay advert could have been selling cp because there was nothing about playback implied. Presumably you would copy your DVD files from CDs onto a hard drive and then play them back. As the ad said, perfectly legal. You don't need to decrypt to copy. That's true. However, in order to read data from a DVD, you must first authenticate to the DVD player. This is before any decryption takes place. This is a cryptographic handshake mechanism using a key. If you do not perform this handshake, it is not possible to read the data. Yep. But that's not implied by the (probably totally exploitive, BTW) ad. You are correct that this does not involve decryption. It does, however, involve circumventing a part of the DVD protection mechanism---the one that protects the raw bits from being read off the disk. My argument, to any judges reading, is that its *not* circumvention if you've bought the damn thing, no matter how you decode it. If you paid for satellite TV but you build your own descrambler, its *not* illegal circumvention, even though your gizmo (legally) circumvents access controls. Get it? [Rhetorically; Riad is not the problem :-] Hint: its only illegal if its fraud. DeCSS has nothing to do with fraud. cp does. Actually, only humans do, cp is not a moral entity.
Re: eBay: Burn DVD movies onto CD?
At 06:15 PM 6/21/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote: On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, David Honig wrote: My argument, to any judges reading, is that its *not* circumvention if you've bought the damn thing, no matter how you decode it. If you paid for satellite TV but you build your own descrambler, its *not* illegal circumvention, even though your gizmo (legally) circumvents access controls. Get it? [Rhetorically; Riad is not the problem :-] Hint: its only illegal if its fraud. DeCSS has nothing to do with fraud. cp does. Actually, only humans do, cp is not a moral entity. Actually that won't hold up. There is a distinction that you are missing. What is that distinction? Do you legally purchase service from that cable vendor? If so then even building your own cable descrambling box may be illegal if the contract says so (you're depriving the cable company of contractual income, fraud?). 1. yes, contract law always holds; however govt-backed (eminent-domain, spectral allocation) based monopolies should be as open as possible (cf ATT cable in SF) 2. no one has a 'right to income' only the terms of contracts The only(!!!) way that I can see building your own descrambler and getting away with it is if you have no(!) connection to the vendor, hence they have no claim to a 'loss' since you're not buying any service in the first place. Generally a bit provider requires that you have some equiptment to make use of their bits, however you have no obligation to use their equiptment. Bit provider = ISP | DVD producer. Equiptment = cable modem | DVD-licensed player
Re: Pleading to Washington for broadband
At 03:00 AM 6/26/01 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excerpt: #Likening the task to the 1960s effort to put a man on the moon, #John Chambers, chief executive of Cisco Systems Inc., is asking #that the federal government commit to making broadband connections #available to every home by 2010. And in related news, Janet Panopticon, CEO of a webcam manufacturer, suggested that the federal government commit to providing free internet enabled digital cameras sufficient for each room of a residence...
