Re: US Finally Kills The 2nd Ammendment

2004-01-12 Thread Nostradumbass
At 03:20 PM 1/11/2004, Jamie Lawrence wrote:
A client/friend recently spent 9 hours in jail for failure to carry a
wallet. He was doing something mildly suspicious, but not illegal. NYC
has a very entrenched industry dealing with processing people the cops
pick up. This has only gotten worse since Bloomberg and his quality of
life racket. Breathing Without ID is essentially a crime that costs a
day of your life, not less than ~$200, and a lot of humiliation. I
thought the San Francisco cops were bad, before I moved here. (My
friend was even told by the cops what to expect, and how best to optimize 
for getting out quickly. Kafka would have trouble doing better.)

There was a mildly publicized incident in another part of Brooklyn
recently where someone was ticketed after their child's balloon popped
in public. A noise infraction. Quality of live, indeed.  There are no 
quotas, but if you don't meet them, you're on report.

This is one of the 'applications' for Zombie Patriots.  Set up those practicing 
tyranny under color of the law for a quick trip to the coroner.  Bring the fun of 
Hammas to New York.

How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if 
every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been 
uncertain whether he would return alive? --Alexander Solzhenitzyn, Gulag Archipelago



Re: US Finally Kills The 2nd Ammendment

2004-01-11 Thread Nostradumbass
At 03:20 PM 1/11/2004, Jamie Lawrence wrote:
A client/friend recently spent 9 hours in jail for failure to carry a
wallet. He was doing something mildly suspicious, but not illegal. NYC
has a very entrenched industry dealing with processing people the cops
pick up. This has only gotten worse since Bloomberg and his quality of
life racket. Breathing Without ID is essentially a crime that costs a
day of your life, not less than ~$200, and a lot of humiliation. I
thought the San Francisco cops were bad, before I moved here. (My
friend was even told by the cops what to expect, and how best to optimize 
for getting out quickly. Kafka would have trouble doing better.)

There was a mildly publicized incident in another part of Brooklyn
recently where someone was ticketed after their child's balloon popped
in public. A noise infraction. Quality of live, indeed.  There are no 
quotas, but if you don't meet them, you're on report.

This is one of the 'applications' for Zombie Patriots.  Set up those practicing 
tyranny under color of the law for a quick trip to the coroner.  Bring the fun of 
Hammas to New York.

How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if 
every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been 
uncertain whether he would return alive? --Alexander Solzhenitzyn, Gulag Archipelago



US Finally Kills The 2nd Ammendment

2004-01-08 Thread Nostradumbass
The great American experiment finally fizzled on December 1, 2003, when the US Supreme 
Court declined to hear an appeal from a 9th Federal Circuit decision which gutted the 
Second Amendment. It was a nice run - over two hundred years.

As of December 1, 2003, the US Supreme Court issued its ruling, refusing to hear an 
appeal in the case of Silveira vs. Lockyer. That made Silveira the law of the land, 
you see.

You might think that the Silveria case was about the definition of an “assault 
weapon” but you’d be mistaken. In Silveira, the 9th Circuit Court made the 
following pronouncement: there is no individual right to bear arms contained within 
the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.

That means that no American citizen, since December 1, 2003, has a fundamental right 
to possess a firearm.

http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/arms.htm
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Mancus/silveira.asp

Gun enthusiasts (especially those who are members of the National Rifle Association 
http://www.nra.org and Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership 
http://www.jpfo.org) may have now reached a crossroads. They have spent years and 
hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying politicians and the public to support their 
view that in the US the right to own firearms is granted to individuals and not state 
militias (a view I completely support). But now, with the Supreme Court refusing to 
hear their appeal of the 9th Circuit decision in Silveira v. Lockyer, they are faced 
with the likelihood that Congress and state leglislatures will feel free to further 
restrict gun ownership, perhaps even eliminate it over time, as has happened in other 
countries.

Further appeals to Congress and the states are no longer a sure bet. The soap box and 
the ballot box have been throughly tried, is it now time to get out the ammo box?



Re: Sources and Sinks

2004-01-04 Thread Nostradumbass
From: bgt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 On Sat, 2004-01-03 at 07:09, Michael Kalus wrote:
 
   Where there is no governmental police force, their is demand for
   private enforcement. And you know what? They regularly do their jobs
   better than the police.
  
  Of course there is no oversight body, so if they use excessive force 
  well, It's all part of doing business and after all they didn't smash 
  YOUR skull so what do you care, right?
 
 The only necessary oversight body is the courts. Both public and
 private police (should) operate under the Rule of Law just like everyone
 else.  As with the public police, if private police have public
 perception problems related to excessive force, abuse of power, or
 whatever, they may opt to use a third-party interest to do
 self-policing by fining, firing, etc (much like pro sports
 organizations do... contractually).  This is strictly a business
 management decision however, the only legal oversight should be 
 the court.  Police (public or private) should be judged and punished 
 (in the legal sense) in the same way any other citizen is.  

http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/cops.htm


Seton Hall Constitutional L.J. 2001, 685
ARE COPS CONSTITUTIONAL?
Roger Roots*


ABSTRACT


Police work is often lionized by jurists and scholars who claim to employ textualist 
and originalist methods of constitutional interpretation. Yet professional police 
were unknown to the United States in 1789, and first appeared in America almost a 
half-century after the Constitution's ratification. The Framers contemplated law 
enforcement as the duty of mostly private citizens, along with a few constables and 
sheriffs who could be called upon when necessary. This article marshals extensive 
historical and legal evidence to show that modern policing is in many ways 
inconsistent with the original intent of America's founding documents. The author 
argues that the growth of modern policing has substantially empowered the state in a 
way the Framers would regard as abhorrent to their foremost principles.



Re: Singers jailed for lyrics

2004-01-04 Thread Nostradumbass
At 05:19 PM 12/31/2003, John Kelsey wrote:
 
 In the most morally neutral case, this is like one criminal gang attacking 
 another.  If the Sopprano family invades the Bozini family's turf, takes 
 over their protection rackets, and hunts down their godfather, it could be 
 messy, and it really will be an initiation of force in the most literal 
 sense.  But is this the same kind of initiation of force that we normally 
 talk about when, say, a mugger knocks me over the head and takes my laptop 
 and wallet? (And of course, it's not that morally neutral.  It's more like 
 a bunch of vigilantes from the neighborhood next door getting rid of the 
 gang running your neighborhood, for reasons of their own, but probably to 
 your benefit.)

Although I disagree with the personal benefit aspect, this is the way I view the two 
major US poltical parties: two mob organizations fighting over turf and tax spoils.  I 
think its time to clean up the D.C. (Augean) Stables.

ND



Re: Patriot Ants (was: Re: Zombie Patriots and other musings)

2003-12-14 Thread Nostradumbass
From: Thomas Shaddack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, John Kelsey wrote:
 
  Of course, there's a more fundamental problem with surrendering to the lone
  warriors.  Imagine that there's such a wave of pro-life terrorism that we
  finally agree to ban abortion.  You're a fanatically committed pro-choice
  activist.  What's your next move?
 
 Two moves possible.
 
 The violent, far less effective and possibly somehow counterproductive
 one: attacking the ones who enforce the measurement, by letal or nonlethal
 means, to act as deterrent.

I think  you should the word possibly when referring to effectiveness of outcomes.  
One can never knows until one tries.  Every monment in history is unique and the 
effectiveness of the use of a particular strategy can never be ascertained beforehand. 
 Mine is based on at least two inspirations...

How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if 
every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been 
uncertain whether he would return alive? --Alexander Solzhenitzyn, Gulag Archipelago
 and

Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes 
the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto 
himself; it invites anarchy. -- Louis D. Brandeis 

As Americans I'm sure we have been tutored by some of the best.  Time to put into 
practice what we have learned.

 
 The nonviolent one: developing and deploying the technology necessary for
 underground clinics to provide higher quality service, and for their
 clients to find, order and pay for the services without being likely to
 trace down by the Whateveriscurrentlythelaw Enforcement. Causing bad press
 for them, keeping public awareness that alternatives to the law-compliance
 exist. Learning from countries with similar bans in action, both from the
 present and from history, how the alternatives developed there, and
 building on this knowledge.
 
 Direct attack is not always the best route, however tempting. A house can
 be brought down from the outside by a bomb, or from the inside by white
 ants.

The trouble with this method is that is generally requires a large percentage of the 
population to actively or passively support a position.  This almost always occurs 
after a situation has become intolerable to the masses.  I have no intention in 
placing my ability to enjoy what I consider my basic rights into the hands of a 
million Joe Sixpacks and await their enlightenment.


The only freedom which counts is the freedom to do what some other people
think to be wrong. There is no point in demanding freedom to do that which
all will applaud. All the so-called liberties or rights are things which
have to be asserted against others who claim that if such things are to be
allowed their own rights are infringed or their own liberties threatened.
This is always true, even when we speak of the freedom to worship, of the
right of free speech or association, or of public assembly. If we are to
allow freedoms at all there will constantly be complaints that either the
liberty itself or the way in which it is exercised is being abused, and, if
it is a genuine freedom, these complaints will often be justified. There is
no way of having a free society in which there is not abuse. Abuse is the
very hallmark of liberty.
 -- Quintin H. Hailsham, The Dilemma of Democracy

Get ready for a lot of abuse...



PhoneBook: Making your PC 'Police-Ready'

2003-12-12 Thread Nostradumbass
[Wherein the author of Freemail reveals his latest project idea.  Comments to the 
author are appreciated.]

PhoneBook is a suite of Linux software that allows you to protect your privacy by 
creating encrypted filesystems, in such a way as to defend you from both technical and 
legal attacks.

http://www.freenet.org.nz/phonebook/



Re: Zombie Patriots and other musings

2003-12-12 Thread Nostradumbass
From: An Metet   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 The devil is in details.
 
 Given small numbers and absence of any other grouping factor there needs to be an 
 obvious place for ZPs to refer to. Any obvious place that becomes even remotely 
 attractive to ZPs will be immediately raided.

If you mean a physical location you're probably right.  
 Because ZPs have potential to be actually dangerous to the gang in power, as opposed 
 to everything else I've seen so far.
 
 So we're back to square one - effective anonymous publishing is prerequisite for the 
 regime change and executing post-natal abortions. And it has been for centuries.

Not at.  All that is required is for a few early adopters to point the way and then 
make their statments through the popular press.  Look at what havoc two Joe Sixpacks 
caused D.C. operating out of the back of a slightly modified sedan.  Imagine if they 
had the home addersses of lots of federal agents instead of randomly picking other 
Joes filling up their gas tanks.

I've heard a project has been underway for some time to create and publish dossiers 
for federal officers.

 
 When I say effective I don't mean posting a message to Usenet via WiFI-ing into 
 some sucker's open AP. No one gives a fuck for Usenet postings, blacknet etc. - and 
 ZPs are unlikely to educate themselves and search for them. Effective means 
 untouchable web site with untouchable DNS entry. Effective means something doable by 
 average determined person. Like tuning to Radio London from occupied Europe in WW2.

Create dossiers on a broad variety the hoster management.  If sites are terminated or 
their DNS is disabled so will managemnt and/or their familes.  Like a force of nature, 
no explanation warning or threat.

I2P is coming.  With six months it should offer a stable and fairly bullet proof 
platform for lots of nice apps.  It should be easy to install and operate in most 
consumer net situations.

 
 Like I said, we're back to square one - all effective means are firmly shut down.

Waaa!!! Waaa!!! What a cry baby.  Pick you target, go out and shake things up.



Re: Zombie Patriots and other musings

2003-12-12 Thread Nostradumbass
 Original Message 
From: Anonymous [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apparently from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Zombie Patriots and other musings
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 05:32:48 +0100 (CET)

 The devil is in details.
 
 Given small numbers and absence of any other grouping factor there needs to be an 
 obvious place for ZPs to refer to. Any obvious place that becomes even remotely 
 attractive to ZPs will be immediately raided. Because ZPs have potential to be 
 actually dangerous to the gang in power, as opposed to everything else I've seen so 
 far.

 Like I said, we're back to square one - all effective means are firmly shut down. 
 Most cpunk talk about secret/stego messaging is mental masturbation that does not 
 relate to the real thing. We want sex.


I think this is a new use for SPAM.  Because its a political message it may even be 
protected under the new Congressional legislation.  :-)



RE: Zombie Patriots and other musings [was: Re: (No Subject)]

2003-12-12 Thread Nostradumbass
From: John Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 At 02:07 PM 12/11/03 -0500, Trei, Peter wrote:
 It's worth noting that despite over a decade of this rhetoric,
 not a single terminally ill American has done this, so far as I
 am aware.
 
 Well, I think for most terminal illnesses, by the time it's obvious you're 
 really not going to live much longer, you're pretty damned sick.  

About half of my friends who died of a terminal illness were apparently quite healthy 
when told they had joined the nearly departed.

And until 
 then, you'd probably like to make some personal use of what days or weeks 
 you have left doing something like talking to your kids, praying, composing 
 that last piece of music, etc., rather than blowing random strangers up to 
 make some political point.  

Isn't it depressing than some have been living their lives in a way that such an 11th 
hour changes of heart are necessary or desired?

(Wouldn't it be a hell of a depressing 
 statement about yourself, if you really believed that the most valuable use 
 of the last hours of your life of which you were capable would involve 
 strapping some dynamite to yourself and taking out a busload of random 
 strangers?)

Who mentioned random?  Who mentioned dynamite?

What I'm suggesting is no more random than soldiers killing other soldiers in war. 
The purpose is to get the other poor dumb bastard to die for their ideology.  
Besides, there is no need for these operations to be a suicide.  The lack of fear 
gives one a decided edge in dangerous situations which may actually increase survival 
rates.

 
 Along with that, most people care about either the afterlife form of 
 immortality, or at least the reputation/legacy form of immortality.  Even 
 if you don't worry about lakes of fire and red guys with pitchforks, you 
 might prefer not to have your family and friends humiliated and ashamed at 
 the mention of your name.  (Oh my God!  That was *your* son?  How do you 
 live with that?)

That's their problem.  From my prespective its like Hollywood: as long as you still 
being talked about you're 'alive'.  It doen't matter what they are saying.  Better to 
be infamous down through history than unknown.

ND



Re: Anti-globalization

2003-12-12 Thread Nostradumbass
From: Neil Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 What I object to are corporations who utilize their power (money) to influence 
 governments to make laws that benefit them at the expense of others.
 
 - The DMCA
 - Tariffs AND Free Trade Agreements
 - H1-B visas
 
 Even Ayn Rand weaves this into Atlas Shrugged where the competitors of 
 Reardon Steel get the government to try and force him to give them his 
 formula for his high-strength steel because it's putting them out business 
 and unfair.

Corporations shall not be considered to be 'persons' protected by the Constitution of 
the United States or the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania within the 
Second Class Township of Porter, Clarion County, Pennsylvania.

Only a small handful of very large corporations abuse these rights to deceive people, 
hide crimes, or make politicians violate the will of their own voters. The millions of 
ethical corporations will thus be freed from the tyranny of the few while democratic 
government will be returned to its citizens.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1219-06.htm



Two interesting communication privacy tools

2003-12-11 Thread Nostradumbass
1. Invisiblog http://invisiblog.com/ lets you publish a weblog using GPG and the 
Mixmaster anonymous remailer network. You don't ever have to reveal your identity - 
not even to us. You don't have to trust us, because we'll never know who you are. 

2. File-Exchange https://www.meshmx.com/fe/ allows you to exchanging files with other 
people without giving away your identity or harming your privacy.
Furthermore it is so simple that you need nothing else but a web browser. No need for 
special software, hardware, resources etc. 

How to use it? 
You simply upload a file through the front end and get back an access-key. This key 
can be send to any other person
by email, instant-messaging or IIP. Anyone who has that key can download the file 
again by entering the key into the front end
By default the file will render unaccessible one hour after it had been uploaded.



Zombie Patriots and other musings [was: Re: (No Subject)]

2003-12-11 Thread Nostradumbass
From: J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Anatoly Vorobey wrote:
 
  On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 12:47:27AM +0100, edo wrote:
   With the USA
   becoming the world's most totalitarian state in disguise... 
  
  That's a pretty silly thing to say.
  Sure you don't want to educate yourself on those other states in the
  world?
 
 It's not silly at all: look again.  He said becoming.  And it is.  Fast.
 It's *long* past time for the inhabitants here to have taken up arms and
 blown holes in a *lot* of Federal heads.
 
 Just a few hundred dead federal goons, spread over a relatively short period
 (~6 months), where the attacks were obviously coordinated, made against
 officers enforcing particularly rancid unconstitutional laws (say the federal
 tax code), and without discoverable perpetrators, would result in an almost
 instantaneous shortage of officers available to enforce such uncontitutional
 laws - the survivors would simply refuse.
 
 Long fucking overdue.

At first it seems that there isn't much one person or even a few can do 
about this, but I'm no longer so sure.  The politics and power of government is, in 
the end, always dispensed from the end of a gun.  For this reason very few citizens 
even consider contending with the government for political purposes until they fell 
there is little choice.


Nothing less than a guerilla war seems necessary to restore something akin to the 
original constitutional balance in the U.S.  But where to recruit these people?  My 
suggestion: the terminally ill.  

Many TI come to the table with a 'gift', the certainty of impending death and for some 
the possibility of fearlessness for physical harm or imprisonment. While the majority 
of the TI will not see any reason to buck the system in their final days (ideological 
disagreement, fear for the effect on their families, lack the health, resources, 
skills or mentality for such a ' final adventure ') I did some back of the envelope 
calculations that show that more than 100 people die in the U.S. every day who could 
fill the bill.

I've coined the term Zombie Patriots to signify the TI who volunteer to give their 
last full measure to the American Restoration.  Operating alone or in small groups 
they could form the backbone of an American Civil Liberties Army.

ZPs need an education in how to create a personal plan of action and acquire the 
needed skills and resources (Paladin Press where are you when we need you).  A 
Domestic American Patriot Family Fund may also be desired.



Re: ALTA/DMT privacy [was: Re: (No Subject)]

2003-12-11 Thread Nostradumbass
 Original Message 
From: Bill Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 On 10 Dec 2003 at 15:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   E-gold and other DGCs do not do much if any due diligence in
   checking account holder identification
 
 Unfortunately, they also don't due much if any due diligence in
 identifying themselves in messages to real or potential customers,
 so it's extremely difficult to determine if I've gotten any
 administrative messages that really _were_ from them
 as opposed to the N fraudsters sending out mail asking you to
-  log in to e-g0ld.com or whatever fake page lets them steal
 your egold account number and password so they can drain your balance.

Actually they do.  Sort of at http://www.e-gold.com/unsecure/alert.html
- Never click hypertext links in HTML formatted e-mail to access your account. 
- Confirm that you are on the e-gold website before entering your e-gold passphrase 
into either a logon form or a payment authorization form (see note below about e-gold 
shopping cart interface): 
- Verify the address/location/URL starts with: https://www.e-gold.com/ 
- Verify that the site certificate is issued by VeriSign to www.e-gold.com 

 
 A policy of PGP-signing all their messages using a key
 that's published on their web pages would be a good start,
 though it's still possible to trick some fraction of people
 into accepting the wrong keys.  

Too few customers would know what to do with such a key.

For now, my basic assumption
 is that any communications I receive that purport to be from them
 are a fraud, and it's frustrating that there's no good mechanism
 for reporting that to e-gold.

They know about most of the fraudulent emails circulating. They don't want to hear 
about them from customers because it would exhaust what customer service resources 
they have.  

I have never received an email from e-gold following my account creation confirmation 
and I beleive its their policy not to send emails for just this reason.



Re: alt.anonymous.messages

2003-12-11 Thread Nostradumbass
 Original Message 
From: Anatoly Vorobey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  You do not need to use remailers to take advantage of
  alt.anonymous.messages.  If someone posts directly to
  alt.anonymous. messages, still the adversary cannot tell who he
  is posting to.  (Assuming his recipient sets his newsagent to
  always download all new messages) 
 
 Oh, that's true of course; but the adversary would be able to know
 that you posted something (given that he's monitoring your traffic). 
 That's already something, and frequently more than you'd want to
 give away. 

Use your laptop and random open Wi-Fi hotspots (esp. a consumer's) for such sensitive 
communication.



Re: alt.anonymous.messages

2003-12-11 Thread Nostradumbass
From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 You do not need to use remailers to take advantage of
 alt.anonymous.messages.  If someone posts directly to
 alt.anonymous. messages, still the adversary cannot tell who he
 is posting to.  (Assuming his recipient sets his newsagent to
 always download all new messages) 

Or access Usenet via a satellite feed.



Re: ALTA/DMT privacy [was: Re: (No Subject)]

2003-12-11 Thread Nostradumbass
 Original Message 
From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apparently from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ALTA/DMT privacy [was: Re: (No Subject)]
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:13:59 -0800

 --
 On 10 Dec 2003 at 15:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  If you
  fund you accounts using money orders, you may be safe
  (depending on whether you've employed others to purchase the
  money orders or your physical identity is being captured at
  the money order agent during the transaction).
 
 Some people offer a cash to e-gold service.

Though this is mostly discovered through direct communications, for obvious reasons.
 
 Deposit a bundle of notes in their account, they will sell you
 e-gold.   You use the low order bits of the amount as an ID.

Others have used the serial number of one of the bills submitted (e.g., the one 
highlighted with a yellow marker).

 
  ALTA/DMT does have a certain degree of un-linkability in that
  once accounts are deleted all db references in the system to
  that account are also deleted from all ALTA/DMT dbs.
 
 Trust us.  Would we lie to you? 

This info was obtained from discussions with the developers, experiments with the 
system and examination of the code.



Dangerous Proxies to Avoid

2003-12-11 Thread Nostradumbass
If you use anonymous proxies it would be wise to save the list below and compare the 
IP's to make sure you are not surfing in shark-infested waters.

I often use tools to scan for and test 'public' proxies, and other tools to chain or 
rotate through the best. I'm sure others of us do the same.

This just underscores the need for trustworthy mixes. Single proxies (eg 
anonymizer.com) only hide IPs from web servers, not from 3rd party observers. They are 
vulnerable to black bag and legal attacks. Aparently we can safely(?) use JAP again if 
careful about cascade selection. But this is very slow, and slow discourages one from 
consistent use

As for JAP, I used it before Privatesea came up, and i'm back down to it now that 
privatesea dissapeared. By using cascades that don't end at the Dresden mix, and 
inserting a single pseudo-public SSL proxy between JAP and the first mix, you're 
pretty safe. But the performance sucks.

There are no other mix cascades or meshes that I know of. Lots of single proxies, but 
that's not safe at all. And you are often having to find and setup another when they 
get hammered down or start blocking the public.


  An updated list, current as of 5 October:


  6.*.*.* : Army Information Systems Center
  21.*.*.* : US Defense Information Systems Agency
  6.*.*.* : Army Information Systems Center
  21.*.*.* : US Defense Information Systems Agency
  22.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
  26.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
  29.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
  30.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
  49.*.*.* : Joint Tactical Command
  50.*.*.* : Joint Tactical Command
  55.*.*.* : Army National Guard Bureau
  22.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
  26.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
  29.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
  30.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
  49.*.*.* : Joint Tactical Command
  50.*.*.* : Joint Tactical Command
  55.*.*.* : Army National Guard Bureau
  62.0-30.*.* :
  64.224.*.* :
  64.225.*.* :
  64.226.*.* :
  195.10.* :
  199.121.4.* - 199.121.253.* Naval Air Systems Command, VA 
(NETBLK-NALC-P3)
  204.34.*.* - 204.34.254.0 Navy Environmental Preventive Medicine 
(NET-NEPMU6-BUMED)
  205.96-103.* :
  207.30-120.* :
  207.60-61.* : FBI Linux server used to trap scanners
  209.35.*.* :
  210.124*.* - Korean
  212.143 * Israeli government ISP -- dont try those ranges!!
  212.149.* Israeli government ISP -- dont try those ranges!!
  212.179.* Israeli government ISP -- dont try those ranges!!
  212.199 012.* Israeli government ISP -- dont try those ranges!!
  213.8.*.* Israeli government ISP -- dont try those ranges!!
  216.248.*.* VERY DANGEROUS
  216.25.* VERY DANGEROUS
  216.94.*.*
  216.25.* : VERY DANGEROUS
  216.247.* : VERY DANGEROUS
  217.6.*.* : VERY DANGEROUS
  155.7.*.* : American Forces Information (NET-AFISHQ-NET1)
  155.8.*.* : U.S. ArmyFort Gordon (NET-GORDON-NET5)
  155.9.*.* : United States Army Information Systems Command 
(NET-LWOOD-NET2)
  155.74.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP2)
  155.75.*.* : US Army Corps of Engineers (NET-CEAP3)
  155.76.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP4)
  155.77.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP5)
  155.78.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP6)
  155.79.*.* : US Army Corps of Engineers (NET-CEAP7)
  155.80.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP
  155.81.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP9)
  155.82.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP10)
  155.83.*.* : US Army Corps of Enginers (NET-CEAP11)
  155.84.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP12)
  155.85.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP13)
  155.86.*.* : US Army Corps of Engineers (NET-CEAP14)
  155.87.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP15)
  155.88.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP16)
  155.178.*.* : Federal Aviation Administration (NET-FAA)
  155.213.*.* : USAISC Fort Benning (NET-FTBENNNET3
  155.214.*.* : Director of Information Management (NET-CARSON-TCACC )
  155.215.*.* : USAISC-FT DRUM (NET-DRUM-TCACCIS)
  155.216.*.* : TCACCIS Project Management Office 

ALTA/DMT privacy [was: Re: (No Subject)]

2003-12-10 Thread Nostradumbass
At 10:37 AM 12/10/2003, James A. Donald wrote:
--
On 9 Dec 2003 at 0:47, edo wrote:
 What I'm curious about is digital currencies. Can anyone
 speak about the Digital Monetary Trust or DMT? I'm sorry I
 have not read the last upteen years of mail archives, but I'm
 interested in what people think NOW about Orlin Grabbe, DMT,
 e-gold etc.

..snip..

None of these accounts provide Chaumian anonymity, which means
they can track identity, which means they must track identity,
which costs them.

However one can withdraw, and deposit, physical gold, which
actually is anonymous, and provides a physical mix, since one
gold atom looks very like another. 

E-gold and other DGCs do not do much if any due diligence in checking account holder 
identification, so if you use an effective proxying means (e.g., an open Wi-Fi 
hotspot) to create and access your accounts you are pretty safe.  If you fund you 
accounts using money orders, you may be safe (depending on whether you've employed 
others to purchase the money orders or your physical identity is being captured at the 
money order agent during the transaction).

Although ALTA/DMT doesn't support blinded tokens, it does support tokens. 
http://www.orlingrabbe.com/dmt_bearercert.htm

ALTA/DMT does have a certain degree of un-linkability in that once accounts are 
deleted all db references in the system to that account are also deleted from all 
ALTA/DMT dbs.  This means if value is transferred from account A to Account B and 
subsequently Account A is deleted all traces of the transaction should be unlinked 
from Account B.  It also means if you delete an account with a balance, accidently or 
otherwise, the money is gone.

Two e-gold exchange agents have announced either formally or informally that they will 
now transact with ALTA/DMT.  I beleive thay both accept money orders for fuding.  
Money can be withdrawn using e-gold and/or ATM cards either directly supporting 
ALTA/DMT (https://www.liquidprivacy.net/) or e-gold.



[cdr] The Eighth Pillar of Wisdom? (edited)

2003-09-22 Thread Nostradumbass
That Iraq would become a troublesome source of guerrilla tactics should come as no 
surprise to any student of T.E. Lawrence, better known as Lawrence of Arabia. Lawrence 
is considered by many strategists to be the father of guerrilla warfare. He 
articulated a powerful treatise on the topic in his classic book, The Seven Pillars 
of Wisdom.

Lawrence's thesis was that a successful rebellion required three elements. First, the 
rebels must have an unassailable base, not merely a physical base of operations but 
also a psychological fortress in the mind of every soldier willing to die for his 
convictions.

Second, in what he called the doctrine of acreage (what strategists now call the 
force-to-space ratio), Lawrence stated that an insurgent victory required that the 
size of the occupying force must be insufficient to pacify the contested area.

Finally, the guerrillas must have a friendly population. Although the population need 
not be actively friendly, it must not be hostile to the point of betraying the 
insurgents. This support can be generated either from fear of retaliation or sympathy 
for the guerrilla cause or both.

The application of Lawrence's theory to the current military situation in Iraq is 
comforting. First, the rebels seem to possess an unassailable base in both physical 
and psychological terms.

Within Iraq, hostile forces have demonstrated an ongoing ability to launch numerous 
daily attacks. The continuing inability to capture Saddam Hussein is the most 
significant evidence of this. Externally, there is a base of bordering states like 
Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iran that are failing to stop volunteers from infiltrating 
Iraq. American troops have found foreign passports on the bodies of enemy forces 
killed. Perhaps more significant, however, is the psychological base — the mind of 
the enemy. When religious extremism is mixed with nationalistic fervor, it cements to 
form the bricks of unshakeable conviction. As Lawrence himself noted, An opinion can 
be argued with; a conviction is best shot.

Then there is the force-to-space ratio of coalition forces, which is clearly 
inadequate. The Americans have only about 130,000 soldiers in Iraq. To match the 
number of soldiers per inhabitant as the United States has in Kosovo would require 
526,000 troops in Iraq.

Finally, guerrilla victories can work to slowly undermine U.S. credibility while 
simultaneously building support and gaining recruits for the insurgents. Over time, 
guerrilla tactics tend to frustrate conventional troops, which are increasingly likely 
to overreact by humiliating men and offending women and thereby alienating the local 
population. Though Iraqi guerrillas lack the necessary firepower and manpower to 
forcibly remove the Americans, Lawrence would argue that should not be their proper 
objective. Even while suffering tactical defeats, the guerrillas could erode the will 
of the Americans and thereby achieve a strategic victory. As Henry Kissinger 
succinctly stated: The guerrilla wins by not losing. The army loses by not winning.

After liberating the region from the Turks in World War I, Britain ruled the newly 
formed country of Iraq under a mandate from the League of Nations. The population's 
gratitude for having been freed from 400 years of Ottoman oppression was short-lived. 
There were uprisings and assassinations of British soldiers and civilian 
administrators.

Lawrence was sent back to Baghdad to report on conditions there. He wrote these 
haunting words: The people of England have been led in Mesopotamia into a trap from 
which it will be hard to escape with dignity and honor. They have been tricked into it 
by a steady withholding of information Things have been far worse than we have been 
told, our administration more bloody and inefficient than the public knows. We are 
today not far from a disaster.

Michael Keane, a lecturer on strategy at the USC's Marshall School of Business, is 
also a fellow of the U.S. Department of Defense's National Security Education Program. 



[cdr] Dangerous Proxies to Avoid

2003-09-22 Thread Nostradumbass
If you use anonymous proxies it would be wise to save the list below and compare the 
IP's to make sure you are not surfing in shark-infested waters.


207.60-61.*.* : FBI Linux servers used to trap scanners
6.*.*.* : Army Information Systems Center
21.*.*.* : US Defense Information Systems Agency
6.*.*.* : Army Information Systems Center
21.*.*.* : US Defense Information Systems Agency
22.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
26.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
29.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
30.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
49.*.*.* : Joint Tactical Command
50.*.*.* : Joint Tactical Command
55.*.*.* : Army National Guard Bureau
22.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
26.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
29.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
30.*.*.* : Defense Information Systems Agency
49.*.*.* : Joint Tactical Command
50.*.*.* : Joint Tactical Command
55.*.*.* : Army National Guard Bureau
62.0-30.*.* :
64.224.*.* :
64.225.*.* :
64.226.*.* :
195.10.* :
205.96-103.* :
207.30-120.* :
207.60-61.* :
209.35.*.* :
216.25.* : REAL DANGEROUS
216.247.* : REAL DANGEROUS
217.6.*.* :
155.7.*.* : American Forces Information (NET-AFISHQ-NET1)
155.8.*.* : U.S. ArmyFort Gordon (NET-GORDON-NET5)
155.9.*.* : United States Army Information Systems Command (NET-LWOOD-NET2)
155.74.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP2)
155.75.*.* : US Army Corps of Engineers (NET-CEAP3)
155.76.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP4)
155.77.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP5)
155.78.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP6)
155.79.*.* : US Army Corps of Engineers (NET-CEAP7)
155.80.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP
155.81.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP9)
155.82.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP10)
155.83.*.* : US Army Corps of Enginers (NET-CEAP11)
155.84.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP12)
155.85.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP13)
155.86.*.* : US Army Corps of Engineers (NET-CEAP14)
155.87.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP15)
155.88.*.* : PEO STAMIS (NET-CEAP16)
155.178.*.* : Federal Aviation Administration (NET-FAA)
155.213.*.* : USAISC Fort Benning (NET-FTBENNNET3
155.214.*.* : Director of Information Management (NET-CARSON-TCACC )
155.215.*.* : USAISC-FT DRUM (NET-DRUM-TCACCIS)
155.216.*.* : TCACCIS Project Management Office (NET-FTDIX-TCACCI)
155.217.*.* : Directorate of Information Management (NET- EUSTIS-EMH1)
155.218.*.* : USAISC (NET-WVA-EMH2)
155.219.*.* : DOIM/USAISC Fort Sill (NET-SILL-TCACCIS)
155.220.*.* : USAISC-DOIM (NET-FTKNOX-NET4)
155.221.*.* : USAISC-Ft Ord (NET-FTORD-NET2)
128.47.*.* : Army Communications Electronics Command (NET-TACTNET)
128.50.*.* : Department of Defense (NET-COINS)
128.51.*.* : Department of Defense (NET-COINSTNET)
128.56.*.* : U.S. Naval Academy (NET-USNA-NET)
128.63.*.* : Army Ballistics Research Laboratory (NET-BRL-SUBNET)
128.80.*.* : Army Communications Electronics Command (CECOM) (NET-CECOMNET)
128.98.*.* : Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (NET-DERA-UK)
128.154.*.* : NASA Wallops Flight Facility (NET-WFF-NET)
128.155.*.* : NASA Langley Research Center (NET-LARC-NET)
128.156.*.* : NASA Lewis Network Control Center (NET- LERC)
128.157.*.* : NASA Johnson Space Center (NET-JSC-NET)
128.158.*.* : NASA Ames Research Center (NET-MSFC-NET)
128.159.*.* : NASA Ames Research Center (NET-KSC-NET)
128.160.*.* : Naval Research Laboratory (NET- SSCNET)
128.161.*.* : NASA Ames Research Center (NET-NSN-NET)
128.183.*.* : NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (NET-GSFC)
128.216.*.* : MacDill Air Force Base (NET-CC-PRNET)
128.217.*.* : NASA Kennedy Space Center (NET-NASA-KSC-OIS)
128.236.*.* : U.S. Air Force Academy (NET-USAFA-NET


FBI's honeypot

HoneyNet Project
http://project.honeynet.org/
Know your Ennemy : HoneyNets
http://project.honeynet.org/papers/honeynet/
SANS IDS FAQ : What is Honeypot ?
http://www.sans.org/newlook/resourc...Q/honeypot3.htm
Honey Pots and Intrusion Detection
http://www.sans.org/infosecFAQ/intrusion/honeypots.htm
The Deception Toolkit
http://www.all.net/dtk/index.html
An Explanation of Computer Forensic
http://www.computerforensics.net/forensics.htm
Computer Forensics – An Overview
http://www.sans.org/infosecFAQ/incident/forensics.htm
The Forensic Challenge
http://project.honeynet.org/challenge/
Forensic Computer Analysis - An Introduction
http://www.ddj.com/articles/2000/0009/0009f/0009f.htm
The Coroner Toolkit
http://www.fish.com/tct/


207.60.*.* : (FBI's honeypot) The Internet Access Company (NETBLK-TIAC-BLK)
207.60.2.128 - 207.60.2.255 Abacus Technology (NETBLK-TIAC-ABACUSTC)
64.224.* : (FBI's honeypot)
64.225.* : (FBI's honeypot)
64.226.* : (FBI's honeypot)
195.10.* : (FBI's honeypot)
205.96-103.* : (FBI's honeypot)
207.30-120.* : (FBI's honeypot)
207.60-61.* : (FBI's honeypot)
209.35.* : (FBI's honeypot)
216.25.* : (FBI's honeypot)
216.247.* : (FBI's honeypot)
212.159.40.211 : (FBI's honeypot)
212.159.41.173 : (FBI's honeypot)
212.159.0.2 : (FBI's honeypot)
212.159.1.1 : (FBI's honeypot)
212.159.1.4 : (FBI's honeypot)
212.159.1.5 : (FBI's honeypot)
212.56.107.22 : (FBI's honeypot)