On Mon, 16 May 2005, martin f krafft wrote:
Did I miss some development or why exactly does cypherpunks care
about a release candidate of libevent (or Wolfram's New Kind of
Science for that matter)? Was I frozen for that long?
Well, lets see. I suppose I could answer either way: Yes, we
On Mon, 2005-05-16 at 15:07 +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
This is the sixth release candidate for the 0.1.0.x series. This is an
Did I miss some development or why exactly does cypherpunks care
about a release candidate of libevent (or Wolfram's New Kind of
Science for that matter)? Was I
also sprach martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.05.16.1924 +0200]:
Interesting... this is not how I remembered it.
... I had been subscribed to the moderated minder.net list in the
past... this explains :)
Again, sorry, also for the noise.
--
martin; (greetings from the heart
My view - as controversial as ever - is that the problem
is unfixable, and mail will eventually fade away. That
which will take its place is p2p / IM / chat / SMS based.
Which are easier to spam and less secure than smtp.
SMTP is p2p by definition, though you can use servers if you want.
SMS
-line readers) is precisely
that it can be automated. I don't have to see mail I don't want.
You don't have to see IMs you don't want, either. You can refuse them
from people not on your buddy list.
A fate for email is that as spam grows to take over more
of the share of the shrinking pie
to prevent this.
My view - as controversial as ever - is that the problem
is unfixable, and mail will eventually fade away. That
which will take its place is p2p / IM / chat / SMS based.
In that world, it is still reasonable to build ones own IM
system for the needs of ones own community
Thus spake Peter Gutmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [16/02/05 01:04]:
: Hmmm, and maybe *that* will finally motivate software companies, end users,
: ISPs, etc etc, to fix up software, systems, and usage habits to prevent this.
Doubt it'll motivate the ISPs. They'll be the ones making the 15c/msg. If
At 8:12 PM -0500 2/16/05, Barry Shein wrote:
And how do you fund all this, make it attain an economic life of its
own?
I can send you a business plan, if you like. Post-Clinton-Bubble talent's
still cheap, I bet...
;-)
Still estivating, here, in Roslindale,
RAH
--
-
R. A.
PROTECTED]
CC: cryptography@metzdowd.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: How to Stop Junk E-Mail: Charge for the Stamp
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:29:05 -0500
Oh no, the idiotic penny black idea rides again.
Like the movie War Games when a young Matthew Broderick saves the
world by causing the WOPR
Well, basically it's pretty simple. Someone will eventually recognize that
the idea has a lot of economic potential and they'll go to Sand Hill and get
some venture funds. 6 months later you'll be able to sign up for Spam
Mail. Eventually the idea will spread and Spammers, who are already
Bingo, that's the whole point, spam doesn't get fixed until there's
a robust economics available to fix it. So long as it's treated merely
an annoyance or security flaw there won't be enough economic
backpressure.
On February 16, 2005 at 18:38 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Gutmann) wrote:
Barry
Oh no, the idiotic penny black idea rides again.
Like the movie War Games when a young Matthew Broderick saves the
world by causing the WOPR computer to be distracted into playing
itself tic-tac-toe rather than launching a pre-emptive nuclear strike.
It was a MOVIE, made in 1983 nonetheless,
Barry Shein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Eventually email will just collapse (as it's doing) and the RBOCs et al will
inherit it and we'll all be paying 15c per message like their SMS services.
And the spammers will be using everyone else's PC's to send out their spam, so
the spam problem will
Kahn's is a quite interesting and entertaining book. Among other
tales about Yardley and his admirable battles with the USG, Kahn
tells how through hilarious Gonzales-grade legal shenanigans
the only time a US law has been by enacted against revealing
cryptological information, in 1933, to
My wife was channel-surfing and ran across David Kahn talking about his
recent book
The Reader of Gentlemen's Mail: Herbert O. Yardley and the Birth of
American Codebreaking.
ISBN 0300098464 , Yale University Press, March 2004
Amazon's page has a couple of good detailed reviews
http
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bill Stewart writ
es:
My wife was channel-surfing and ran across David Kahn talking about his
recent book
The Reader of Gentlemen's Mail: Herbert O. Yardley and the Birth of
American Codebreaking.
ISBN 0300098464 , Yale University Press, March 2004
Amazon's page
Anyone surprised that the US spooks are admitting to wiretapping
UN people? If they really had info they'd state it but refuse to answer
how they got it.
Somehow I doubt that UN officials and the people they might
chat with will get the secure phones they need.
I seem to have not received a few of the emails in the PROMIS thread.
What is the best approach if one really wants to receive all emails?
I'm currently only on minder and it seems from time to time mail
doesn't get through?
Should one simply subscribe to several nodes (and receive some
Nomen Nescio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I seem to have not received a few of the emails in the PROMIS thread.
What is the best approach if one really wants to receive all emails?
Subscribe to multiple feeds, filter identical message-ids? You'll get
lots of spam, but you're already doing that if
on to
insecure client machines. The proper route to control spam is to
involve users in prioritizing their email, so that their friend's
email comes first, followed by anybody they've sent mail to, followed
by people they've gotten email from before, followed by mailing list
mail, followed by email
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 9:15 PM -0500 11/18/04, Russell Nelson wrote:
The proper route to control spam is to
involve users in prioritizing their email, so that their friend's
email comes first, followed by anybody they've sent mail to, followed
by people they've gotten
Thus spake R.A. Hettinga ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [11/11/04 16:29]:
: Several executives and academics speaking at a forum sponsored by the
: Federal Trade Commission said criminals are already steps ahead of a major
: initiative by e-mail providers to counter those problems by creating a
: system
At 10:50 AM 7/2/2004, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:
Call me cynical (no... go ahead), but if VOIP is found to have no 4th
Amendment protection, Congress would first have to agree that this *is* a
problem before thay could fix it.
While Peter Swire is a much better judge of court behavior than I am
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 09:23:08PM -0700, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
Amongst the earliers RAMs were tubes of mercury with a pulse-generator
at one end and a microphone at the other. The speed of sound provided
the delay, the system required regeneration, like modern DRAMs.
At GBit WAN stores
On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 10:06:01PM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 09:23:08PM -0700, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
Amongst the earliers RAMs were tubes of mercury with a pulse-generator
at one end and a microphone at the other. The speed of sound provided
the delay, the
of smokescreen...Don't bother
encrypting because we have this super-technology called tempest that can
read your mind anyway.
-TD
From: Sunder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Roy M. Silvernail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IP] more on more on E-mail intercept ruling - good
for this) spam follows:
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:
(But
your honor, it's stored for 1/60th of a second in the phosphor! It's a
storage medium!), etc.
Amongst the earliers RAMs were tubes of mercury with a pulse-generator
at one end and a microphone at the other. The speed of sound provided
the delay,
- Forwarded message from David Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: David Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 09:07:14 -0400
To: Ip [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [IP] more on more on E-mail intercept ruling - good grief!!
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.618)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:
Call me cynical (no... go ahead), but if VOIP is found to have no 4th
Amendment protection, Congress would first have to agree that this *is*
a problem before thay could fix it. Given the recent track record of
legislators vs. privacy, I'm not
The Tempest argument is a stretch, only because you're not actually
recovering the information from the phosphor itself. But the Pandora
argument is well taken.
Actually there is optical tempest now that works by watching the flicker
of a CRT. Point is actually even more moot since most
Sunder wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:
Call me cynical (no... go ahead), but if VOIP is found to have no 4th
Amendment protection, Congress would first have to agree that this *is*
a problem before thay could fix it. Given the recent track record of
legislators vs.
Eugen Leitl forwarded:
The constitutional question is whether users have a reasonable
expectation of privacy in VOIP phone calls. Since the 1960's, the
Supreme Court has found a 4th Amendment protection for voice phone
calls. Meanwhile, it has found no constitutional protection for stored
- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 30 Jun 2004 22:26:03 -
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Appeals Circuit Ruling: ISPs Can Read E-Mail
User-Agent: SlashdotNewsScooper/0.0.3
Link: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/30/2014242
Posted
Palladium to arrange that it was impossible
to send mail from your computer except via human interaction with your
authorized email program. You'd have to set your outgoing mail server
to require a password (such auth systems are already in widespread use)
and you'd use Pd to lock up the password so
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 09:19:23AM +, Ben Laurie wrote:
And it doesn't even work in theory - once your PC is hacked, the
passphrase would be known the first time you used it.
True, but in the current threat model passphrase snarfing is yet negligible
(keyloggers look for credit card info,
shipping an MUA where the user has to enter a password
just to send mail are approximately... zero.
And it doesn't even work in theory - once your PC is hacked, the
passphrase would be known the first time you used it.
Cheers,
Ben.
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http
At 2:21 PM +0100 3/6/04, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Facultative strong authentication doesn't nuke anonynimity.
Perfect pseudonymity is functional anonymity, in my book...
Cheers,
RAH
--
-
R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation
the user has to enter a password
just to send mail are approximately... zero.
Filtering for signed/vs. unsigned mail doesn't make sense, authenticating and
whitelisting known senders by digital signature makes very good sense.
In that case you can just filter by sender IP address or something
The chances of any vendor
No, that was a definition. I made no statement about how users take to
passphrases, and vendors implementing this unwelcome feature.
Works well for me, though.
of mass-market software shipping an MUA where the user has to enter a password
just to send mail
At 1:14 PM +0100 3/6/04, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Filtering for signed/vs. unsigned mail doesn't make sense, authenticating
and whitelisting known senders by digital signature makes very good sense.
Right. A whitelist for my friends.
Of course, this doesn't help with people you don't yet know.
All
R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If we really do get cryptographic signatures on email in a way that works,
expect 80% of all spam to be blown away as a matter of course.
I think you mean:
If we really do get cryptographic signatures on email in a way that works,
expect 80% of all
At 8:56 AM -0800 3/7/04, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
Sure you will, if the groceries are in front of you, and the purchase or
possession of some of them you don't want associated with anything.
In this case the reputation of the grocer and/or your ability to assay
the
groceries (in meatspace)
At 10:56 AM 3/6/04 -0500, Steve Furlong wrote:
No, pseudonymity lets others identify messages on, say c-punks, as
coming from a particular sender. Reputation can work here, even with no
meat-space identity attached. Anonymity means reputation can't work, so
each message has to be taken on its
On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 10:32, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
At 2:21 PM +0100 3/6/04, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Facultative strong authentication doesn't nuke anonynimity.
Perfect pseudonymity is functional anonymity, in my book...
No, pseudonymity lets others identify messages on, say c-punks, as
coming
/resource/printable/article/0,aid,115094,00.asp
PCWorld.com
Earthlink to Test Caller ID for E-Mail
New systems could fight spam and Internet scams, company says.
Paul Roberts, IDG News Service
Friday, March 05, 2004
ISP Earthlink will soon begin testing new e-mail security technology
sunder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It attaches a zip file with a password containing an executable. (No
worries, I've not run it, and only extracted it on a SPARC machine, so it
can't use buffer overflows designed for intel in unzip -- if any exist.)
I believe it's called Bagle.J.
Lots of
Interesting virus - anyone know what this one is called and what it's
payload does? Haven't seen this one before today...
It attaches a zip file with a password containing an executable. (No
worries, I've not run it, and only extracted it on a SPARC machine, so it
can't use buffer overflows
a truck'
-TD
From: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: sunder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Gentlemen reading mail part II
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 22:11:42 -0800
At 07:42 AM 3/1/2004, sunder wrote:
Interesting.
I guess my basic question is, is there a subset of counter
to the situation, no? Now, only the determined will be
going after you, not someone merely fishing for levers to be used against
you. Now, they have to send a truck'
Indeed.
steve
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version
At 10:01 AM -0800 3/1/04, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
(What was that Brit town sacrificed so the Germans wouldn't know
the codes were broken? Starts with C...)
Coventry...
Ancient cathedral, etc...
Cheers,
RAH
--
-
R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Internet Bearer
Justin says:
If they know you're trying to shake them, that alerts them and
eliminates any opportunity you might have otherwise had to feed them
misinformation in the future.
That's when you strap on the C-4 vest.
Zombie Monger
]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Gentlemen don't read each others' mail
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:39:22 -0800
Britain Accused of Spying on U.N.'s Annan
LONDON (AP) - Britain spied on U.N.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan in the
build up to the Iraq war, a former Cabinet minister
said Thursday
At 09:41 AM 2/27/04 -0500, Tyler Durden wrote:
Looks like the UN's going to need some encrypted VoIP...
-TD
Silly lad, the walls have ears. And the ceilings, trimwork, light
fixtures,
heating ducts, etc.
Think outside the (secure) box, dude.
Looks like the UN's going to need some encrypted VoIP...
-TD
From: Major Variola (ret.) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Gentlemen don't read each others' mail
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 13:39:22 -0800
Britain Accused of Spying on U.N.'s
Sorry about the mail storm. Someone at monash.edu.au has
apparently set up a mail loop that was resubmitting cpunks mails.
Eric
Behold, a copy of the defaced main page of cryptome.org. [*]
Which appears to offer a link to cryptome.org's mail. Would Cryptome's
proprietor like to comment on what mail he was keeping on his web server?
Strangely no mention of the specific defacement now appears on Cryptome
Which defacement? Cryptome offers nothing else. Caveat emptor.
Beware stings, spoofing, double spoofing, and the honest to god truth
about logs and mail and ... disinfo agents provocateur.
Here are a couple of messages from the spoofed or spoofing
hacker(s):
http://cryptome.org/cryptome
So is the list up or what? Havn't gotten any mail from it for awhile, although
zoneedit's dns servers were hosed yesterday, but I'm getting mail now. Also see
the cpunks archives are not there for the last week. And trying to send a test
post to cpunks gives me this:
- The following
:
Mail-Followup-To: Bill Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED], Harmon Seaver
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your mutt parses that properly.
But it's been a few years since I configured mutt, and this is just
a guess. Others might have more intelligent speculation.
-Declan
to politech, so I haven't had any
weirdness when replying.
Yep. I use Eudora and mutt and haven't changed my mail setup in quite
a while. (For Politech, I use majordomo and have had FC: prepended
since 1996 or so.) Suspect, self-defensively, that I'm not the source
of any weirdness
don't
need to be copied on replies to all! That could explain this header:
Mail-Followup-To: Bill Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED], Harmon Seaver
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your mutt parses that properly.
But it's been a few years since I configured mutt, and this is just
a guess
At 01:41 PM 02/03/2003 -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 10:23:58AM -0800, Bill Stewart wrote:
Do you mean that Steve's posts always do this to you?
I've only seen one like that, and I assumed that Steve had simply
Bcc:d the Cypherpunks list and some other lists on that
At 8:53 AM -0800 on 2/4/03, Bill Stewart wrote:
as opposed to Bob Hettinga's practice of copying everything to
his usual sets of lists, most of which don't allow replies from
non-subscribers.
Most of which I forward your answers on to, if that's any consolation.
Yes, Tim, I know, I'm an
use Eudora and mutt and haven't changed my mail setup in quite
a while. (For Politech, I use majordomo and have had FC: prepended
since 1996 or so.) Suspect, self-defensively, that I'm not the source
of any weirdness. :)
-Declan
list and some other lists on that posting.
Declan's recent mail has been sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
so it's possible that if you're reading it on minder.net,
there's something in there that looks weird to you.
But it all looks normal here.
it or not.
Declan's recent mail has been sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
so it's possible that if you're reading it on minder.net,
there's something in there that looks weird to you.
But it all looks normal here.
Nope, I'm subbed to lne.com. Did you try doing a group reply on Declan's? And
if he isn't
Are there any dynamic DNS services currently out there that provide mail relaying
capability?
DHIS used to do it, at least for their original users, but has recently broken their
relaying
system and don't seem too eager to fix it.
At 11:50 AM 12/13/2002 -0500, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
...It had to happen sooner or later, I suppose...
--- begin forwarded text
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [e-gold-list] Announcing Seagold.net: E-mail Privacy, Secure,
Encrypted, accepts e-gold
...
Introducing Seagold.net, a secure web-based
]
Subject: [e-gold-list] Announcing Seagold.net: E-mail Privacy, Secure,
Encrypted, accepts e-gold
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:37:03 + (UTC)
CONCERNED ABOUT EMAIL PRIVACY?
...It had to happen sooner or later, I suppose...
Cheers,
RAH
--
--- begin forwarded text
Status: RO
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: e-gold Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [e-gold-list] Announcing Seagold.net: E-mail Privacy, Secure,
Encrypted, accepts e-gold
Date
At 11:17 PM 11/3/02 +0100, Thoenen, Peter Mr. EPS wrote:
Tried emailing direct but bounced so apologize to the list for the OT
content :)
You don't happen to have the url do you? Think it would make an
amusing
read.
Sorry, no. BTW, my nym is for humor value, and spam-avoidance, not
replies.
I think this is what you're looking for:
http://www.improb.com/airchives/paperair/volume6/v6i4/postal-6-4.html
At 11:17 PM 11/3/02 +0100, Thoenen, Peter Mr. EPS wrote:
Tried emailing direct but bounced so apologize to the list for the OT
content :)
You don't happen to have the url do you?
by the suitable weight of
bricks.)
There exists a website by someone who enjoyed sending unusual things
through the US mail. He once sent a brick, with proper postage,
no envelope.
The brick *eventually* arrived at its destination, sort of, but had been
broken
by the DEA according to the PO's
At 09:36 AM 11/3/2002 -0800, Major Variola (ret) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There exists a website by someone who enjoyed sending unusual things
through the US mail. He once sent a brick, with proper postage,
no envelope.
Some friends used to wrap up bricks and returned them to companies
James wrote:
On 5 Sep 2002 at 16:48, Steve Schear wrote:
3. After September 11, 2001, the FBI learned that Moussaoui
had used a
computer at Kinko s, in Eagan, Minnesota, to connect to the
internet.
When the FBI learned that Moussaoui had used a computer at Kinko s,
the FBI
On Thu, 30 May 2002, Natalia wrote:
QUIT
More specific please? Quit diddling my data? Quit typing so loud after
10:00pm? Quit my job???
--
Yours,
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they
should give serious
Pawe3 Krawczyk wrote:
In this paper we study the security of such ciphers under an
additional hypothesis: the S-box can be described by an overdefined
system of algebraic equations (true with probability 1). We show that
this hypothesis is true for both Serpent (due to a small size of
78 matches
Mail list logo
