date:20010915


On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Howie Goodell wrote:

> Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:
>
> > Assume that you could nearly guarantee a profit of $5mil or more by
> > shorting your stocks before a terrorist attack on the World Trade Center.
> >
> > Would you perpetrate such a crime, and frame the "sand-niggers"?
>
> The plot sickens.  I assume you saw the news reports today
> that bin Ladin's associates did exactly that with the German
> reinsurer who will bear the brunt of the WTC claims?
> Persuade Ahmed to incinerate himself and 10,000 bystanders,
> and then -- cha ching!

No, I didn't see this report. Is it online?


-MW-

Re: 3 questions...

2001-09-15 Thread Eric Cordian


Dave writes:

> 3. Who stood the most to gain?

The Zionist entity, which can now launch any military operation they wish
against the Palestinians, without being criticized.

Sharon has committed mass murder before, right?

-- 
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

3 questions...

2001-09-15 Thread Dave




1. Any restrictions on Stego exports as compared to 
regualar crypto, if so can i cheat and break it into modules, and give half of 
it away and allow them to define there own cypher, give out a template and such 
for, not really sure the easiest way to do that thought to see if was legal 
first...2. Now an American business purposely destroying its own 
corperate headquaters is an intresting theory, but given the current state of 
the US, and Bush's current support, what are the odds who ever knew that 
information would be able to tell us3. Who stood the most to gain? 
Islamic Terrorists, with a new Vietnam?  Corperation, possibly, but whats 
$5, $10 mil, when you gotta retrain your whole staff that makes 4-5 times that, 
and it would take a few years? lol, Guess it makes you wonder if anybody sent 
all the "genious"(yeah i know) childern home... Then on the other hand, we have 
what a 91% approval rating, and bunch bills that wouldn't have passed a week 
going threw, and bet yah dollars to donuts, that wonderful new tech in tampa, is 
comming up north, pretty soon., with hell of lot less bitching then 
otherwise-Dave

Re: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

2001-09-15 Thread Howie Goodell

Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> Assume that you could nearly guarantee a profit of $5mil or more by
> shorting your stocks before a terrorist attack on the World Trade Center.
> 
> Would you perpetrate such a crime, and frame the "sand-niggers"?

The plot sickens.  I assume you saw the news reports today
that bin Ladin's associates did exactly that with the German
reinsurer who will bear the brunt of the WTC claims? 
Persuade Ahmed to incinerate himself and 10,000 bystanders,
and then -- cha ching!

Take care!
Howie Goodell
-- 
Howie Goodell  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Pr SW Eng, WearLogic
Sc.D. Cand  HCI Res Grp  CS Dept  U Massachussets Lowell
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/goodell/howie
Dying is s 20th-century!   http://www.cryonics.org

Re: CDR: Re: Technology Review - Also in the News - US weighs new forms of electronic surveillance following attacks

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Howie Goodell wrote:

> Jim Choate wrote:
> > 
> > ...privacy sillyness...
> > 
> > http://www.techreview.com/screaming/article.asp?SMContentIndex=3&SMContentSet=0
> 
> I think what is silly is not proposing alternatives, and
> then being shocked, SHOCKED when frightened "sheeple" make a
> choice that is rational according to the information they
> have.

My alternative is neither of them.

More importantly, my 'comment' was really a quote from one of the rep's
about how bad he fealt by being sensitive to all that 'privacy sillyness'.

Witht that kind of attitude 'none' is the only answer. 1984 just waiting
to happen.

 --

 Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

George Santyana

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

[psychohistory] FW: [msal-politics] Background info on Osama bin Laden (fwd)

-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 10:49:31 +0800
From: "Chen Yixiong, Eric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Extropians <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [psychohistory] FW: [msal-politics] Background info on Osama bin Laden

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 7:49 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [msal-politics] Background info on Osama bin Laden

Special Report
Osama Bin Laden: How the U.S.
Helped Midwife a Terrorist 

Ahmed Rashid of Pakistan is a member of the International Consortium of Investigative 
Journalists, a project of the Center for Public Integrity. He is the Pakistan, 
Afghanistan and Central Asia correspondent for the Far Eastern Economic Review and The 
Daily Telegraph of London. This is an excerpt from his book "Taliban: Militant Islam, 
Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia" (Yale University Press).

By Ahmed Rashid

In 1986, CIA chief William Casey had stepped up the war against the Soviet Union by 
taking three significant, but at that time highly secret, measures.
He had persuaded the US Congress to provide the Mujaheddin with American-made Stinger 
anti-aircraft missiles to shoot down Soviet planes and provide US advisers to train 
the guerrillas. Until then, no US-made weapons or personnel had been used directly in 
the war effort.

 The CIA, Britain's MI6 and the ISI [Pakistans Inter-Services Intelligence] also 
agreed on a provocative plan to launch guerrilla attacks into the Soviet Socialist 
Republics of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, the soft Muslim underbelly of the Soviet state 
from where Soviet troops in Afghanistan received their supplies. The task was given to 
the ISI's favourite Mujaheddin leader, Gulbuddin Hikmetyar. In March 1987, small units 
crossed the Amu Darya river from bases in northern Afghanistan and launched their 
first rocket attacks against villages in Tajikistan. Casey was delighted with the 
news, and on his next secret trip to Pakistan he crossed the border into Afghanistan 
with [the late Pakistani] President Zia [ul-Haq] to review the Mujaheddin groups. 

Thirdly, Casey committed CIA support to a long-standing ISI initiative to recruit 
radical Muslims from around the world to come to Pakistan and fight with the Afghan 
Mujaheddin. The ISI had encouraged this since 1982, and by now all the other players 
had their reasons for supporting the idea. 

President Zia aimed to cement Islamic unity, turn Pakistan into the leader of the 
Muslim world and foster an Islamic opposition in Central Asia. Washington wanted to 
demonstrate that the entire Muslim world was fighting the Soviet Union alongside the 
Afghans and their American benefactors. And the Saudis saw an opportunity both to 
promote Wahabbism [their strict and austere Wahabbi creed] and to get rid of its 
disgruntled radicals. None of the players reckoned on these volunteers having their 
own agendas, which would eventually turn their hatred against the Soviets on their own 
regimes and the Americans. 

Thousands of radicals come to study 

 . . Between 1982 and 1992, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 43 Islamic countries in 
the Middle East, North and East Africa, Central Asia and the Far East would pass their 
baptism under fire with the Afghan Mujaheddin. Tens of thousands more foreign Muslim 
radicals came to study in the hundreds of new madrassas that Zia's military government 
began to fund in Pakistan and along the Afghan border. Eventually more than 100,000 
Muslim radicals were to have direct contact with Pakistan and Afghanistan and be 
influenced by the jihad. 

 In camps near Peshawar and in Afghanistan, these radicals met each other for the 
first time and studied, trained and fought together. It was the first opportunity for 
most of them to learn about Islamic movements in other countries, and they forged 
tactical and ideological links that would serve them well in the future. The camps 
became virtual universities for future Islamic radicalism. None of the intelligence 
agencies involved wanted to consider the consequences of bringing together thousands 
of Islamic radicals from all over the world. "What was more important in the world 
view of history? The Taliban or the fall of the Soviet Empire? A few stirred-up 
Muslims or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?" said 
Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former US National Security Adviser. American citizens woke up 
to the consequences only when Afghanistan-trained Islamic militants blew up the World 
Trade Center in New York in 1993, killing six people and injuring 1,000. 

"The war," wrote Samuel Huntington, "left behind an uneasy coalition of Islamist 
organizations intent on promoting Islam against all non-Muslim forces. It also left a 
legacy of expert and experienced fighters, training camps and logistical facilities, 
elab

Re: Technology Review - Also in the News - US weighs new forms of electronic surveillance following attacks

2001-09-15 Thread Howie Goodell

Jim Choate wrote:
> 
> ...privacy sillyness...
> 
> http://www.techreview.com/screaming/article.asp?SMContentIndex=3&SMContentSet=0

I think what is silly is not proposing alternatives, and
then being shocked, SHOCKED when frightened "sheeple" make a
choice that is rational according to the information they
have.  A smartcard that contains my biometrics and the
signature of American Airlines, "This person is one of our
pilots" gives the same assurance as a system that sends them
to a central site to look up and add to my voluminous
dossier.  If we don't make the case now, the second system
will be adopted and it will be our fault.

Howie Goodell
-- 
Howie Goodell  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Pr SW Eng, WearLogic
Sc.D. Cand  HCI Res Grp  CS Dept  U Massachussets Lowell
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/goodell/howie
Dying is s 20th-century!   http://www.cryonics.org

RE: SYMBOL no....ICON

2001-09-15 Thread Aimee Farr


Pst, C'mere

Let's build a BIIIG terrorist icon on the eve of a possibly long
engagement, and put lots of little people in it.

Don't present targets when civilian lives go in them.

And, you can't fight fires in those things.

~Aimee

Re: SYMBOL

On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 07:28 PM, Eric Cordian wrote:

>> I agree with this.  The Twin Towers should be built bigger than before
>> (twice as big if it's feasible).  I know some people would be scared
>> to have office space in there, but that's fine, because people who are
>> not scared will take space there, and everyone will know it.  I would
>> take an office on the 200th floor if I could.
>
> Are you aware that India is going to open a 224 story  foot tower
> for business in 2008?
>
> It's the Center of India Tower, in Katangi, India.  I believe it has a
> webpage somewhere.
>

A Schelling point target for the Pakistanis, the Sikhs, the Tamil 
Tigers, and the Bovine Liberation Army. (Says India, "We are not cowed 
by the BLA!")

People can work in anthills if they want to...I'm glad I don't have to 
go _near_ these places.

They can rebuild the Towering Infernos if they wish to, with insurance 
money, but the taxpayer should not pay a single dime for the Heights of 
Hubris to be rebuilt. Let them stand or fall, so to speak, on their own 
merits.

I predict they'll be economic disasters if rebuilt: firms are scrambling 
to find the 10 million square feet of lost office space, 15 million 
counting nearby buildings damaged or collapsed. Those firms will likely 
have either left Manhattan or will have settled in to other new office 
buildings. Decentralization, a la NASDAQ and Napster-like trading 
systems will further cause a diaspora. Rebuilt towers would come on the 
market after all of this. Granted, this happened in 1970-74, when the 
two towers were opened, but developers had known about it for a decade 
and so it was part of the plans. And in any case, a real estate 
recession hit Manhattan in the mid-70s, possibly made worse by all that 
square footage added. Unlikely that a free market investor would choose 
to build 10 million square feet of space in one project.

Notice that there was no evidence of plucking people off the rooftops 
with helicopters, no signs of aerial fire-fighting? These buildings are 
deathtraps.

--Tim May

Re: CDR: Re: SYMBOL

2001-09-15 Thread Eric Cordian



> I agree with this.  The Twin Towers should be built bigger than before
> (twice as big if it's feasible).  I know some people would be scared
> to have office space in there, but that's fine, because people who are
> not scared will take space there, and everyone will know it.  I would
> take an office on the 200th floor if I could.

Are you aware that India is going to open a 224 story  foot tower
for business in 2008?

It's the Center of India Tower, in Katangi, India.  I believe it has a
webpage somewhere.  

-- 
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

Re: Readers Digest poll - vote now

On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 04:03 PM, Steve Schear wrote:
>> The sheeple are being asked in online polls, in man-on-the-street 
>> surveys
>> by news crews, just how many civil liberties we should give up.
>
> Unsurprisingly, here are the current results after about 4500 votes:
>
> No carry-on luggage, except for small purses, briefcases or diaper bags
> Yes 73%  No 26%

I don't count this as a civil liberties violation. However, it's 
idiotic. After the worries about _bombs_ on planes, the call  was for an 
end to _checked_ baggage, that all baggage would be _carry-on_. Now it 
swings in the other direction.

I have long accepted that air travel may someday involve people changing 
into travel smocks and carrying essentially nothing with them. (One idea 
I heard years ago made some sense: airlines could save a fair amount of 
costs by eliminating luggage completely and having cargo planes carry 
any necessary luggage. Passengers could ship a bag ahead of time and 
have it at their destination.)

Naturally, I'd like to see more "rules competition": airlines that have 
El Al levels of security competing with "All Smoking, All Guns" airlines 
competing with "No forks and knives" airlines.

> Passport inspection, even on domestic flights
> Yes 75%  No 24%

Since internal passports cannot be required, this is problematic. 
However, I support the notion of Tim's Airline demanding any kind of 
papers it wishes to.

> Searches of all passengers using metal-detection wands
> Yes 94%  No 5%

Already done, already ineffective. Catches _some_ guns, not others. 
Doesn't catch Zytel knives, sharp pieces out of laptops, aerosol 
cyanide, etc..

(The woman whose office was immediately next to mine was killed when an 
airport employee carried a gun on board her flight, forced his way into 
the cockpit, and (apparently) shot the pilots and/or the control 
electronics. Her plane fell from 35,000 feet into the hills near San 
Luis Obispo. A PSA flight, circa 1987-88.)

The real violations of civil rights are the many proposals, some likely 
to pass unanimously in Congress, to outlaw strong cryptography, to 
require key escrow, to suspend Fourth Amendment protections (even more 
so than they have already been ignored), to ban certain organizations 
(so much for freedom of assembly), and to dramatically increase wiretaps.

--Tim May

Re: MARTIAL LAW Cypherpunks and terrorism

2001-09-15 Thread baptista

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> > Don't forget James - if in fact Bin Landen is involved in
> > this then the facts remain that the US Government sponsored
> > and assisted him during the Russian occupation of
> > afganistan.
> 
> No the US government did not, though it surely would have had
> he showed any concern about Afghanistan earlier.  Bin Laden
> was entirely untroubled by godless communists conquering,
> ruling, and terrorizing a muslim country.   Bin Laden and the
> Taliban showed their faces long after the real holy warriors,
> people who do not make holy war on women and children, had
> sent the commies packing.

It seems you have alot to say - unfortunately no knowledge of what you are
talking about.

As I made clear to Declan - I was there from the beginning of the Soviet
invasion.  I was there when the americans began active sponsorship of the
various mujahadin - including our evacuation of children maimed by the
soviets.  An evacuation which was mainly supported by the US military.

Ben Laden was in fact there at the begining and he was actively supported
by the US Military.  They were the best of friends at the time.  The
support was in weapons and included strategic assistance against the
soviet red army.

> Bin Laden hates freedom, the freedom which leads to the US
> culturally dominating the middle east.  He does not worry
> much about foreign military domination.  The Soviet Union was
> a mere military threat, which did not endanger the souls of
> muslims, only their freedom and property. 

Laden does not hate freedom - he was a "freedom fighter" and has an
excellent reputation in the arab world as being a freedom fighter.

Your military analysis of the Soviets is also out to lunch.  The soviets
expended a considerable number of military resources and were rewarded
with lots of body bags in return for their efforts.

Nikolai Kovalyov, the former head of the Russian FSB security service, has
just warned the US that an attack on Afghanistan would fail to capture
Osama bin Laden, and would backfire on the US. "In Afghanistan's 
mountainous terrain it takes a trainload of explosives to destroy three 
militants," he said. "The chance of hitting bin Laden is zero."

So in short James - if the U.S. invades - get the body bags ready.

I find it insulting James that you would argue from an ignorant position
and just say things off the top of your head without any idea of the
consequences involved.  As I have said before, the only way to win a war
in afganistan is to nuke it.  And I predict that will bring the nukes to
american soil - if they are not there already.

This is a serious situation james.  Alot of boys are going to die as a
result of this invasion and it's ignorant people like yourself who fuel
the fires of victory which some day like vietnam will end up bringing
shame to the american public.  This is not a game james - this is
reality.  A harsh reality that if ignored will result in more pain and
suffering in america.

regards
joe

-- 
The dot.GOD Registry, Limited

http://www.dot-god.com/

Re: MARTIAL LAW Cypherpunks and terrorism

2001-09-15 Thread baptista

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> --
> On 14 Sep 2001, at 10:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Many have lost a great deal.  And this is fueling a
> > potential war which will make vietnam look like a broadway
> > comedy. many american boys are going to die over this one
> > and i find that an even greater tragedy.
> 
> The Taliban is not the Soviet Union.  They are roughly on par 
> with a Somali clan.  I predict casualties somewhat higher 
> than Somalia, but not much higher.  

predict casualties significantly higher then vietnam and expect to run for
the hills much like america did in vietnam.  afganistan was a nightmare
for the soviets during their occupation and the exact same will apply to
any american action there.

US military advisors have already made this clear.

regards
joe

-- 
The dot.GOD Registry, Limited

http://www.dot-god.com/

Re: Readers Digest poll - vote now

2001-09-15 Thread Steve Schear


At 08:25 AM 9/15/2001 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 07:01 AM, Derek Balling wrote:
>
>>Readers Digest and Yahoo are sponsoring a poll that asks various 
>>questions about what freedoms people are willing to sacrifice...
>>
>>http://ypolls.yahoo.com/rd1/
>>
>>Hitting up public opinion for bad policies in a time of sorrow is wrong, 
>>in my opinion, and its important that all sides get their voices heard on 
>>this topic.
>
>The sheeple are being asked in online polls, in man-on-the-street surveys 
>by news crews, just how many civil liberties we should give up.

At 08:25 AM 9/15/2001 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 07:01 AM, Derek Balling wrote:
>
>>Readers Digest and Yahoo are sponsoring a poll that asks various 
>>questions about what freedoms people are willing to sacrifice...
>>
>>http://ypolls.yahoo.com/rd1/
>>
>>Hitting up public opinion for bad policies in a time of sorrow is wrong, 
>>in my opinion, and its important that all sides get their voices heard on 
>>this topic.
>
>The sheeple are being asked in online polls, in man-on-the-street surveys 
>by news crews, just how many civil liberties we should give up.

Unsurprisingly, here are the current results after about 4500 votes:

No carry-on luggage, except for small purses, briefcases or diaper bags
Yes 73%  No 26%

Passport inspection, even on domestic flights
Yes 75%  No 24%

Searches of all passengers using metal-detection wands
Yes 94%  No 5%

Searches of all passengers using metal-detection wands
Yes 95%  No 4%

Hand searches of all carry-on bags
Yes 86%  No 13%

[Fwd: [FYI] (Fwd) Please make stable NON-US homes for strong crypto projects (fwd)]

2001-09-15 Thread Harmon Seaver

 Original Message 
Subject: [FYI] (Fwd) Please make stable NON-US homes for
strong crypto   projects (fwd)
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 00:31:56 +0200 (CEST)
From: Hauke Johannknecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

offtopic (or not) like the rest of the current discussion.

i hereby offer mirroring service for projects on servers operated
by different legal entities in different european cities on
different backbones.

projects interested in getting mirrored or people interested in
offering additional mirror capacity, just send me a mail.
please consider using PGP.

Gruss,
  Hauke

- -- 
Hauke JohannknechtBerlin / GermanyHJ422-RIPE
Use PGP ! -> lynx -dump http://www.ash.de/ash.asc | pgp -kaf

- --- Forwarded message follows ---
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Please make stable NON-US homes for strong
crypto projects
Date sent:  Sat, 15 Sep 2001 00:32:12 -0700
From:   John Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

It's clear that the US administration is putting out feelers to
again ban publication of strong encryption.  See:
  http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html

The evil gnomes who keep advancing unconstitutional US anti-crypto
policies know that the current hysteria in Congress and the
Administration will not last forever.  So they will probably
move very
quickly -- within a week is my guess -- to re-control encryption,
either by a unilateral action of the Administration (by
amending the
Export Administration Regulations), or by stuffing a rider
onto some
so-called "emergency" bill in Congress.

They maneuvered very carefully in the Bernstein case such
that there
is no outstanding injunction against violating the
Constitution this
way -- and even no binding 9th-Circuit precedent that tells
them it's
unconstitutional to do so.  They know in their hearts that numerous
judges have found it unconstitutional, but they have proven throughout
the seven-year history of the case that they don't give a
damn about
the Constitution.  Which means it may take weeks, months or
years for
civil liberties workers to get a judge to roll back any such action.
Not just days.  We won the case, but they squirmed out of any
permanent restrictions -- so far.

The US government has a new mania for wiretapping everyone
in case
they might be a terrorist.  There's already two bills in
Congress to
make it trivial for them to wiretap anybody on flimsy
excuses, and to
retroactively justify their precipitous act of rolling
Carnivore boxes
into major ISPs this week and demanding, without legal
authority, that
they be put at the heart of the networks.  See:
  http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cta.091401.html

Even more than before, we will need good encryption tools,
merely to
maintain privacy for law-abiding citizens, political
activists, and
human rights workers.  (In the current hysteria, mere messages
advocating peace or Constitutional rights might best be encrypted.)
The European Parliament also recently recommended that European
communications be routinely encrypted to protect them from pervasive
US Echelon wiretaps.

Some US developers, who thought such a reversal would never happen,
have built or maintained a number of good open source
encryption tools
in the United States, and may not have lined up solid foreign
maintainers or home sites.

LET'S FIX THAT!  We need volunteers in many countries to mirror
current distributions, CVS trees, etc.  We need volunteers
to also act
as maintainers, accepting patches and integrating them into solid
releases.

(Note that too many countries have pledged to stand
toe-to-toe with
the US while they march off to make war on somebody they
can't figure
out who it is yet.  If you live in one of those countries,
you may
suddenly find that your own crypto regs have been sneakily altered.
Take care that each useful package has maintainers and distribution
points in diverse countries.)

I haven't kept close track of which packages are in danger.  I
suggest that people nominate packages on this mailing list,
and that
others immediately grab mirror copies of them as they are nominated.
And that some of those who mirror them keep quiet, in case hysterical
governments make a concerted effort to stamp out all copies
and/or all
major distribution sites.  If you aren't the quiet type,
then *AFTER*
IMMEDIATELY PULLING A COPY OF THE CODE OUTSIDE US JURISDICTION,
announce your mirror on this mailing list.

We freedom-loving US citizens have had to rely on the freedom-loving
citizens of saner countries, to do the work of making strong
encryption, for many years.  We had a brief respite, which
we will
eventually resume for good.  In the meantime, please let me apologize
for my countrymen and for my government, for asking you to shoulder
most of the burden again.  Thank you so much.

 John Gilmore

PS: Companies with proprietary encryption packages

[Fwd: RFC: increased interest for cryptographic software?]

2001-09-15 Thread Harmon Seaver

I'll try again, not as an attachment.

 Original Message 
Subject: RFC: increased interest for cryptographic software?
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 21:55:55 +0200 (CEST)
From: Herbert Valerio Riedel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

...hope this is not too off-topic...

...this maybe just coincidence and/or caused by other
reasons (maybe some
well read web referee?)... but it seems that after the
US-event of
09/11/2001 the accesses went up for 2 prominent
cryptographic linux
packages; are we getting more paranoid?

see

loop-aes
https://sourceforge.net/project/stats/?group_id=28891

cryptoapi
https://sourceforge.net/project/stats/?group_id=30957

..any ideas?

regards,
-- 
Herbert Valerio Riedel   /Phone: (EUROPE) +43-1-58801-18840
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   /Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for
GnuPG Public Key
GnuPG Key Fingerprint: 7BB9 2D6C D485 CE64 4748  5F65 4981
E064 883F 4142

Linux-crypto:  cryptography in and on the Linux system
Archive:   http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-crypto/

Re: SYMBOL

2001-09-15 Thread Dr. Evil


> I'd love to see the WTC replaced with a building over twice as tall as the
> twin towers, the irrefutable tallest building in the world.  Something like
> Trump's kilometer tower would be a great symbol of recovery and
> transcendence.

I agree with this.  The Twin Towers should be built bigger than before
(twice as big if it's feasible).  I know some people would be scared
to have office space in there, but that's fine, because people who are
not scared will take space there, and everyone will know it.  I would
take an office on the 200th floor if I could.

Harry Browne and Why America Needs to be Broken Up

On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 02:07 PM, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> I fail to see any truly effective measures that can be taken to prevent
> determined attackers from committing acts of terrorism. The only course 
> of
> action, I believe, is to eliminate their desire to commit these attacks.
>
> Harry Browne's essay[1] points out things we could have done to remove 
> the
> (suspected) motivation for this (and other possible) political 
> terroristic
> attacks. Tim May has made similar points.
> [1] http://www.antiwar.com/orig/browne2.html
>

Thanks very much for the reference to the Harry Browne essay...I endorse 
every bit of it. (I first encountered Harry Browne in 1973 when I read 
his book "How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World." I had just voted for 
John Hospers, the first Libertarian Party candidate the year earllier, 
the first year the new LP ran a slate of candidates. This was back, 
almost 30 years ago, when I still had a little bit of faith in the 
process of voting and democracy.)

Not much I can add to Browne's essay except to point out that these 
united states are made up of people trading, inventing, building, and 
interacting. We refer to the "states," but even this gives too much 
emphasis to the role of government. The "state" I have lived in for 35 
years is the sixth or seventh largest economy in the world.

I ask you this: If California and New York and Texas and a dozen other 
regions were independent, libertarian trading  regions, with no gunboats 
sent to rescue ZOG occupiers in Palestine and no armies sent to Europe 
to fight their war for them, and no police forces in Somalia, Bosnia, 
Macedonia, Croatia, Korea, and a dozen other hellholes, WOULD THE ATTACK 
HAVE OCCURRED?

It's time to decentralize. Since peaceful attempts have failed, maybe 
other approaches need to be used.

--Tim May

RE: Freedom of speech is for "Cypherpunk critics" too


"Nomen Nescio" wrote:

> Tim May writes:
> > Funny, I notice how many of the critics of Cypherpunks and 
> supporters of 
> > this express train approach to repealing the Bill of Rights are 
> > themselves hiding behind Cypherpunks remailers, Hushmail aliases, and 
> > Ziplip nyms.
> 
> If you're upset that "critics of the Cypherpunks" are able to speak
> freely then you shouldn't have supported the technologies that enable
> them to do so.  Free speech is for everyone, not just those who toe your
> line of violence and blood revenge.

Yeah, isn't that what Tim just wrote?


 S a n d y

DCSB: Jean Camp; Trust and Risk in Digital Commerce (fwd)

-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 12:31:07 -0400
From: "R. A. Hettinga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], e$@vmeng.com,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: DCSB: Jean Camp; Trust and Risk in Digital Commerce

--- begin forwarded text

Status:  U
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 12:16:57 -0400
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: "R. A. Hettinga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: DCSB: Jean Camp; Trust and Risk in Digital Commerce
Cc: Jean Camp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: "R. A. Hettinga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

[The Harvard Club is now "business casual". No more jackets and ties,
but see below for details. While it lasts, anyway. Since last year's
dot-bomb, the suit-ratio in the main dining room has been
asymptotically approaching unity. :-). --RAH]

 The Digital Commerce Society of Boston

  Presents

 Jean Camp,
Kennedy School of Government

  Trust and Risk in Digital Commerce

 Tuesday, October 2nd, 2001
 12 - 2 PM
 The Downtown Harvard Club of Boston
One Federal Street, Boston, MA

Trust is the critical variable in Internet Commerce. Trust
requirements differentiate Internet from other forms of commerce.
Trust has three primary components: reliability, security, and
privacy.

There is trust in routing, trust in encryption, and trust in
applications. The layers of trust, the areas of risk, the power of
cryptography, and the limits to security are all explained for the
general audience in this text.

When a business obtains customer data, the customer trusts that the
data are used to improve service for her, and not used in a manner
that harms her. The business is not necessarily violating privacy but
is certainly requiring some extension of trust from the customer.
This talk examines that trust relationship and examines the types of
data that are most immediately useful but the least used.

This talk contains explanations of fault tolerance and the components
of reliability. Most transactions today are not fault tolerant. If a
transaction is not reliable (in the sense of being fault tolerant)
someone is at risk when the transaction fails. It is therefore
important to be able to read a transaction-based Internet commerce
standard and understand from that the risks involved in using the
standard.

Jean Camp is an Assistant Professor at the Kennedy School of
Government, a Senior Member of the IEEE, and an elected Director of
CPSR. Prof. Camp's core interest is in the interaction of technology,
society, and the economy. Her interest usually fits within the design
for values rubric or under the electronic civil liberties umbrella.
It was this interest that led Prof. Camp from graduate electrical
engineering research in North Carolina to the Department of
Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon, and it remained her
core research interest at Sandia National Laboratories, and continues
at the Kennedy School. Prof. Camp's expertise are in Internet
commerce and design for values. She is the author of "Trust and Risk
in Internet Commerce" (2000, MIT Press). She is the author of more
than thirty peer-reviewed publications on technical issues of social
importance (e.g., privacy, reliability) and social issues with
critical technical elements (e.g., content selection).

This meeting of the Digital Commerce Society of Boston will be held
on Tuesday, October 2nd, 2001, from 12pm - 2pm at the Downtown
Branch of the Harvard Club of Boston, on One Federal Street. The
price for lunch is $37.50. This price includes lunch, room rental,
A/V hardware if necessary, and the speakers' lunch. The Harvard Club
has relaxed its dress code, which is now "business casual", meaning
no sneakers or jeans. Fair warning: since we purchase these luncheons
in advance, we will be unable to refund the price of your meal if the
Club finds you in violation of what's left of its dress code.

We need to receive a company check, or money order, (or, if we
*really* know you, a personal check) payable to "The Harvard Club of
Boston", by Saturday, September 29th, or you won't be on the list for
lunch. Checks payable to anyone else but The Harvard Club of Boston
will be returned.

Checks should be sent to Robert Hettinga, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston,
Massachusetts, 02131. Again, they *must* be made payable to "The
Harvard Club of Boston", in the amount of $37.50. Please include your
e-mail address so that we can send you a confirmation

If anyone has questions, or has a problem with these arrangements
(we've had to work with glacial A/P departments more than once, for
instance), please let us know via e-mail, and we'll see if we can
work something out.

Upcoming speakers for DCSB are:

November TBA
December TBA
January  TBA

As you can

SYMBOL


C'punks,

I haven't had much luck in researching something.  Several years back,
Donald Trump proposed a high-rise complex for New York City that would
feature a kilometer-high skyscraper.  Does anyone have a URL about that
plan?

I'd love to see the WTC replaced with a building over twice as tall as the
twin towers, the irrefutable tallest building in the world.  Something like
Trump's kilometer tower would be a great symbol of recovery and
transcendence.


 S a n d y

All Western Mailer

2001-09-15 Thread Cole Shores

Title: Thank You for viewing our mailer









  
  

   
  
  
  

  

  
  



  
  
 
  
  


Thank
  You for viewing our mailer.  We are based out of
Phoenix, AZ
  and are one
  of the only alarm brokers here in the Phoenix valley. 
  That is, we can put you
  with virtually any dealer program available.
  

  
  
  

  Monitoring
As Low As $19.95/mo. x 36/mo.
  



The Lowdown On Dealer Programs




  
  

  
  
  

Not all dealer programs are
created equal. Some are lease
returns. We allow you to keep the equipment at the end of your term. 
Some dealers in the alarm industry try to stick the customer.  We are
very well priced on our equipment.  For example, many dealers will
sell
a 4 Camera B/W Mini Dome Camera Real Time CCTV; .01 Lux for over
$4,000!  We offer the same setup for only $2499.  Unlike most
alarm dealers in the industry, we are under non-exclusive dealer
agreements.
This permit us to offer multiple dealer programs at very affordable rates
as
well as match you with the program that best suits you.  Please, allow
us setup an appointment to allow you to review each of the
  packages available.

  
  

  














  


  


It's Your Choice!!!

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  

  
  All
  Western Security Mourns The Loss Of Human Life Caused From
  Cowardly Terrorism
  
  


  All Western
  Security
  
  

 
  702 W.
  Melinda Lane, Phoenix, AZ
  

  

  
			
Office: (623)
  580-1313

  | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
  

  
  Cell: (602)
  487-8616
  


  |
Fax:
  (623) 580-1414
  

  

  
  

  

  

*Email bill section 301. Under Bill
S.1618 TITLE III
This message is sent in compliance
with the new email bill section 301. Under Bill S.1618 TITLE III passed by
the 105th US Congress, this message cannot be considered SPAM as long as we
include the way to be removed, Paragraph (a)(c) of S.1618, further
transmissions to you by the sender of this email may be stopped at no cost to
you by sending a
Reply email with the words "Remove" written in the Subject
line.

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> Apples and oranges.  There is a world of difference between targeting
> innocents (the focus of my post) and targeting military targets with
> resultant innocent casualties. 

That's a convenient, and arbitrary, distinction.

It's wrong for me to kill you directly, but if I'm trying to kill somebody
else and you die, oh well...

Sour succor indeed.

 --

 Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

George Santyana

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

[Fwd: RFC: increased interest for cryptographic software?]

2001-09-15 Thread Harmon Seaver


--
Harmon Seaver, MLIS
CyberShamanix
Work 920-203-9633   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home 920-233-5820 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.cybershamanix.com/resume.html

[demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type message/rfc822]

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

[This is becoming a rat-hole, and I'm not interested getting too far into
it. I think most of you understand my point.]

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Jim Choate wrote:

> > Different societies have different definitions of evil; some evils are
> > hard to justify by any means, however.
>
> They people engaging in them certainly felt justified. Whether you agree
> or not is really a different question. It also demonstrates the
> relativity of 'good' and 'evil'.

Of course.

> If we were for a moment to accept the concept of 'universal evil' then we
> are faced with a simple litmus test. If it is really universal than a
> rock, rabbit, or person will find it equally offensive.
>
> Or are you perhaps suggesting that people are somehow 'universal' (ie
> anthropocentric)...

I am not stating that there is any act of "evil" necessarily offensive to
all societies, past, present, and future. However, I am stating that there
*are* acts of "evil" that are not tolerated by any society currently in
existence. Such boundaries on what actions are permissible is necessary
for the existence of society.

This is not to imply a fixed condition.

-MW-

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> My point is that such an attack could occur
> with nothing more than economic factors as
> motivation.

Of course, but I don't see how that advances any discussion of what ACTUALLY
happened on the 11th.  I don't think there is any reason to engage in a
theoretical discussion when we have such a concrete event to examine.  I'll
certainly concede your point that evil can be done for pecuniary profit as
well as ideology.  So may we dispense with this irrelevant thread now?

 S a n d y

100 million dead this past century through actions of states



On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Tim May wrote:

> Amerika is not a free country. Hasn't been since Lincoln.

'Since' or 'because'...


 --


 Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

George Santyana

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

Re: Crypto Access

2001-09-15 Thread amp


It might be beneficial for those who vacuum and mirror to post
a note here. A magic mirror list on JYA would spread the load.



On Saturday 15 September 2001 12:51 pm, John Young wrote:
> Blocks and limitations on downloads have been removed
> on Cryptome and JYA. We ask that bots and spiders be
> configured and monitored to avoid repetitiveness, looping,
> recycling and checking for previous downloads. Bandwidth
> trashing programs will be seen as attacks and blocked to
> assure access by others.
>
> If and when we get a compressed package of the collection
> ready for download we'll request email for the URL to grab
> the wad. Otherwise the rampaging idiot bots will shut us down
> before the Warmongering Idiot Bot -- which may masquerade
> as a loose cannon viggie.

-- 
TANSTAAFL,

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.zeugma.nu/

Never be afraid to try something new. 
Remember, amateurs built the ark. 
Professionals built the Titanic.

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

Incognito Innominatus wrote:

> Sandy Sandfort wrote:
> > Nonsense.  Targeting innocents is evil according to EVERY human culture.
> > The fact that people do it, does not make it "relative."  It
> just makes them
> > evil.  Period.
>
> Not according to Tim May.  He was the one who wrote that he was becoming
> convinced that Tim McVeigh had done the right thing.  "Some innocents
> died, but hey, war is hell.  Broken eggs and all that."  Those are his
> exact words, May 9, 1997.  He's also the one that has called for the
> burning of millions of innocents by nuclear fire.
>
> If targeting innocents is evil, what can we say about those who applaud
> such actions?  Doesn't Tim May, by his own words, show himself to be
> evil by the standards of every civilized human culture?

Apples and oranges.  There is a world of difference between targeting
innocents (the focus of my post) and targeting military targets with
resultant innocent casualties.  If a gunman grabs a human shield and starts
shooting at me, I will (regrettably) return fire.  Hopefully, I'll hit the
bad guy and not the innocent human shield, but if I do hit the hostage, the
moral responsibility is on bad guy, not me.

 S a n d y

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:
>
> > Have there ever been any large-scale
> > terroristic attacks where profit was
> > the only motive?
>
> Who said anything about profit?

I did.

> The point under discussion was cost/benefit analysis.  Don't engage in
> Inchoate over-simplification.  Neither cost nor benefit is limited to
> monetary profit or loss.

[snip example]

Yes, Sandy, I realize that neiter cost nor benefit necessarily have
anything to do with pecuniary profit.

My point is that such an attack could occur with nothing more than
economic factors as motivation.

-MW-

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:
>
> > Have there ever been any large-scale
> > terroristic attacks where profit was
> > the only motive?
>
> Who said anything about profit?

I did.

> The point under discussion was cost/benefit analysis.  Don't engage in
> Inchoate over-simplification.  Neither cost nor benefit is limited to
> monetary profit or loss.

[snip example]

Yes, Sandy, I realize that neiter cost nor benefit necessarily have
anything to do with pecuniary profit.

My point is that such an attack could occur with nothing more than
economic factors as motivation.

-MW-

C-SPAN on Pentagon Renovation

2001-09-15 Thread Anonymous Coredump


Plans for the renovation of the Pentagon are being discussed on C-Span 
right now. Interesting sound-bites. Costs of replacing the Pentagon vs. 
rebuilding are the current topic.

The URL for the project reports a 500 error currently:
http://renovation.pentagon.mil/

"The Pentagon is not compliant with fire safety codes; the Pentagon is not 
compliant with *any* codes." 

--Lee Evey, Pentagon Renovation Program Manager

100 million dead this past century through actions of states

On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 01:04 PM, Incognito Innominatus 
wrote:

> Sandy Sandfort wrote:
>> Nonsense.  Targeting innocents is evil according to EVERY human 
>> culture.
>> The fact that people do it, does not make it "relative."  It just 
>> makes them
>> evil.  Period.
>
> Not according to Tim May.  He was the one who wrote that he was becoming
> convinced that Tim McVeigh had done the right thing.  "Some innocents
> died, but hey, war is hell.  Broken eggs and all that."  Those are his
> exact words, May 9, 1997.  He's also the one that has called for the
> burning of millions of innocents by nuclear fire.
>
> If targeting innocents is evil, what can we say about those who applaud
> such actions?  Doesn't Tim May, by his own words, show himself to be
> evil by the standards of every civilized human culture?

100 million or more persons have died in the last 100 years through the 
actions of statists like Mao, Stalin, Roosevelt, Hitler, Pol Pot, Amin, 
and a dozen others like them.

If D.C is someday incinerated in an act of thermonuclear purification, I 
will cheer.

In a free country, I am entitled to cheer.

However, Amerika is not a free country. Several Arabs were arrested a 
few days ago in New Jersey for cheering the  WTC action. Others are 
being detained nationwide. And the U.S.G. is calling on other countries 
to "stop" (suppress) any show of joy over the events. So much for free 
expression.

Amerika is not a free country. Hasn't been since Lincoln.

--Tim May

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows



On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> [This is becoming a rat-hole, and I'm not interested getting too far into
> it. I think most of you understand my point.]

Yeah, you're fast running out of points that aren't dull.

> On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Jim Choate wrote:
> 
> > > Different societies have different definitions of evil; some evils are
> > > hard to justify by any means, however.
> >
> > They people engaging in them certainly felt justified. Whether you agree
> > or not is really a different question. It also demonstrates the
> > relativity of 'good' and 'evil'.
> 
> Of course.

Then you admit the primary failure in your assertion.

> > If we were for a moment to accept the concept of 'universal evil' then we
> > are faced with a simple litmus test. If it is really universal than a
> > rock, rabbit, or person will find it equally offensive.
> >
> > Or are you perhaps suggesting that people are somehow 'universal' (ie
> > anthropocentric)...
> 
> I am not stating that there is any act of "evil" necessarily offensive to
> all societies, past, present, and future. However, I am stating that there
> *are* acts of "evil" that are not tolerated by any society currently in
> existence.

Now you're changing the rules in the middle of the game.

Naughty on you...

The assertion was there are concepts of 'good'/'evil' which are accepted
by ALL human societies.


 --


 Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

George Santyana

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

2001-09-15 Thread Incognito Innominatus

Sandy Sandfort wrote:
> Nonsense.  Targeting innocents is evil according to EVERY human culture.
> The fact that people do it, does not make it "relative."  It just makes them
> evil.  Period.

Not according to Tim May.  He was the one who wrote that he was becoming
convinced that Tim McVeigh had done the right thing.  "Some innocents
died, but hey, war is hell.  Broken eggs and all that."  Those are his
exact words, May 9, 1997.  He's also the one that has called for the
burning of millions of innocents by nuclear fire.

If targeting innocents is evil, what can we say about those who applaud
such actions?  Doesn't Tim May, by his own words, show himself to be
evil by the standards of every civilized human culture?

Re: Freedom of speech is for "Cypherpunk critics" too

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Tim May wrote:

> No, I'm not "upset." I said it was "funny," as in "ironic."

Bull, your implication was they were hypocrites and cowards. Don't white
wash it.

> The main critics of anonymity are the main users here.
> 
> Hilarious.

Actually it isn't. It's a perfect example of why annonymity tools are
needed. Not all violent people are against anonymity.

 --

 Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

George Santyana

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Jim Choate wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:
> >
> > > Have there ever been any large-scale terroristic attacks where profit was
> > > the only motive?
> >
> > terrorism <> economics. Economics as a direct goal isn't the issue in
> > terrorism. You're 'mixing your metaphors'...
> 
> No, Jim, I am not.
> 
> If one were to commit an act of destruction, in order to manipulate
> economic markets with the ensuing public fear or outrage, that would be
> terrorism with economics as a direct goal.
> 
> You're thinking too narrowly.

Not at all, That's only one example. Unfortunately it isn't sufficient for
your point, the economics weren't the PRIMARY goal as your stipulation
requires. Primary mechanism <> primary goal.

Further, to be absolutely accurate, your commentary 'begs the question'.

A bank robber is not a terrorist.

A terrorist may be a bank robber (as many have been, eg. SLA).

It's not I who is not thinking broadly enough.

 --

 Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

George Santyana

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

Re: Freedom of speech is for "Cypherpunk critics" too


On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 12:40 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:

> Tim May writes:
>> Funny, I notice how many of the critics of Cypherpunks and supporters 
>> of
>> this express train approach to repealing the Bill of Rights are
>> themselves hiding behind Cypherpunks remailers, Hushmail aliases, and
>> Ziplip nyms.
>
> If you're upset that "critics of the Cypherpunks" are able to speak
> freely then you shouldn't have supported the technologies that enable
> them to do so.  Free speech is for everyone, not just those who toe your
> line of violence and blood revenge.
>


No, I'm not "upset." I said it was "funny," as in "ironic."

The main critics of anonymity are the main users here.

Hilarious.

--Tim May

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Jim Choate wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:
>
> > Have there ever been any large-scale terroristic attacks where profit was
> > the only motive?
>
> terrorism <> economics. Economics as a direct goal isn't the issue in
> terrorism. You're 'mixing your metaphors'...

No, Jim, I am not.

If one were to commit an act of destruction, in order to manipulate
economic markets with the ensuing public fear or outrage, that would be
terrorism with economics as a direct goal.

You're thinking too narrowly.

-MW-

Freedom of speech is for "Cypherpunk critics" too

2001-09-15 Thread Nomen Nescio

Tim May writes:
> Funny, I notice how many of the critics of Cypherpunks and supporters of 
> this express train approach to repealing the Bill of Rights are 
> themselves hiding behind Cypherpunks remailers, Hushmail aliases, and 
> Ziplip nyms.

If you're upset that "critics of the Cypherpunks" are able to speak
freely then you shouldn't have supported the technologies that enable
them to do so.  Free speech is for everyone, not just those who toe your
line of violence and blood revenge.

Lists of those to be arrested in a state of national emergency

On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 11:37 AM, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:
>
> Now is a perfect time for the Government to round up and arrest those
> people whose imprisonment might otherwise inspire protests or public
> outrage, whether or not these arrests are related to terrorism.

I'm watching an ABC special on Gen. Groves, the builder of the Pentagon 
and manager/commander of the Manhattan Project.  (One of the first 
breaks from WTC-specific news, and even this is of course related to the 
events.)

Anyway, they just showed the papers that had J. Robert Oppenheimer on a 
list in May 1941 of those who were to be arrested by the FBI in the 
event that a "national emergency" was declared. As it happened, 
Oppenheimer was _not_ arrested, nor placed in concentration camps the 
way most Japanese- and (some) German-ancestry Americans were.

(They actually showed the papers authorizing the arrest, should an 
emergency be declared.)

But this shows that such lists have in fact existed. And that mere 
academic scientists were on such lists. Thought criminals, as they had 
no involvement in government agencies or the military.

We are now in a state of national emergency, declared by Bush yesterday.

Draw your own conclusions.

--Tim May

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> Have there ever been any large-scale terroristic attacks where profit was
> the only motive?

terrorism <> economics. Economics as a direct goal isn't the issue in
terrorism. You're 'mixing your metaphors'...

 --

 Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

George Santyana

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> See my second to last post, Jim. I cannot think of any massive terrorist
> attack in which personal gain was the only motive. If there are any, the
> number is extremely small.
> 
> Different societies have different definitions of evil; some evils are
> hard to justify by any means, however.

They people engaging in them certainly felt justified. Whether you agree
or not is really a different question. It also demonstrates the
relativity of 'good' and 'evil'.

If we were for a moment to accept the concept of 'universal evil' then we
are faced with a simple litmus test. If it is really universal than a
rock, rabbit, or person will find it equally offensive.

Or are you perhaps suggesting that people are somehow 'universal' (ie
anthropocentric)...

 --

 Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

George Santyana

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

Re: Senate votes to permit warrantless Net-wiretaps, Carn ivoreus e (fwd)

2001-09-15 Thread Aimee Farr


> >From: "Baker, Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "'Declan McCullagh'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >cc: "Albertazzie, Sally" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >"Baker, Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >Declan,
> >
> >I ignored the first two points because I don't think they're
> that important.
> >These "warrantless searches" are emergency orders that have to
> be followed
> >by a court order in 48 hours.  Sometimes courts are closed and
> the cops need
> >data right away.  Tuesday evening would be a good example.  This
> is not some
> >out-of-control police authority.
> >
> >The people who can ask for emergency orders have to be
> designated by one of
> >several officials at Main Justice.  That's to make sure someone
> responsible
> >ends up with the authority to declare an emergency.  So an assistant US
> >attorney could be designated by Main Justice in each district right now.
> >What's the big deal with letting the US Attorney for the district do the
> >designating instead of Main Justice? Seems to me that the US Attorney
> >probably knows more about staff changeovers than Main Justice,
> so it makes
> >sense for the US Attorney to do the designating locally.
> >
> >Stewart
>

See the following portion of a recent TX bill, proposed in June.

Offered for comparative purposes against the "new and improved" 3125.

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlo/billsrch/subject/77r/S1087.HTM
Sec. 8A.  EMERGENCY INSTALLATION AND USE OF INTERCEPTING
 4-6 DEVICE.  (a)  The prosecutor in a county in which an electronic,
 4-7 mechanical, or other device is to be installed or used to intercept
 4-8 wire, oral, or electronic communications shall designate in writing
 4-9 each peace officer in the county, other than a commissioned officer
4-10 of the Department of Public Safety, who:
4-11 (1)  is a member of a law enforcement unit specially
4-12 trained to respond to and deal with life-threatening situations;
4-13 and
4-14 (2)  is authorized to possess such a device and
4-15 responsible for the installation, operation, and monitoring of the
4-16 device in an immediate life-threatening situation.
4-17   (b)  A peace officer designated under  Subsection (a)  or
4-18 under Section 5(b) may possess, install, operate, or monitor an
4-19 electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept wire, oral, or
4-20 electronic communications if the officer:
4-21 (1)  reasonably believes an immediate life-threatening
4-22 situation exists that:
4-23   (A)  is within the territorial jurisdiction of
4-24 the officer or another officer the officer is assisting; and
4-25   (B)  requires interception of communications
4-26 before an order authorizing the interception can, with due
 5-1 diligence, be obtained under this section;
 5-2 (2)  reasonably believes there are sufficient grounds
 5-3 under this section on which to obtain an order authorizing the
 5-4 interception; and
 5-5 (3)  obtains from a magistrate oral or written consent
 5-6 to the interception before beginning the interception.
 5-7   (c)  A magistrate may give oral or written consent to the
 5-8 interception of communications under this section.
 5-9   (d)  If an officer installs or uses a device under Subsection
5-10 (b), the officer shall:
5-11 (1)  promptly report the installation or use to the
5-12 prosecutor in the county in which the device is installed or used;
5-13 and
5-14 (2)  within 48 hours after the installation is complete
5-15 or the interception begins, whichever occurs first, obtain a
5-16 written order from a judge of competent jurisdiction authorizing
5-17 the interception.
5-18   (e)  A judge may issue an order authorizing interception of
5-19 communications under this section during the 48-hour period
5-20 prescribed by Subsection (d)(2).  If an order is denied or is not
5-21 issued within the 48-hour period, the officer shall terminate use
5-22 of and remove the device promptly on the earlier of the denial or
5-23 the expiration of 48 hours.

5-24   (f)  The state may not use as evidence in a criminal
5-25 proceeding any information gained through the use of a device
5-26 installed under this section if authorization for the device is not
 6-1 sought or is sought but not obtained.


~Aimee

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Jim Choate wrote:

> Yeah, you're fast running out of points that aren't dull.

Perhaps, but that's not my reason. I simply find you to be dull.

> > > They people engaging in them certainly felt justified. Whether you agree
> > > or not is really a different question. It also demonstrates the
> > > relativity of 'good' and 'evil'.
> >
> > Of course.
>
> Then you admit the primary failure in your assertion.

What, exactly, do you think my assertion is?

> Now you're changing the rules in the middle of the game.
>
> Naughty on you...

I am? Please explain these rules to me, so that I may follow them.

> The assertion was there are concepts of 'good'/'evil' which are accepted
> by ALL human societies.

"Are currently accepted" and "must always be inherently accepted" are two
entirely different statements. I am claiming the former. This is not
irreconcilable with your [rather obvious, and dull] points.

-MW-

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

Nomen Nescio wrote:

> Sandfort:
>
> > I have NO IDEA what this strange post has to do with the
> original question.
> > I'm a libertarian.  As such, I see no problem in doing well by
> doing good.
> > Just because I would jump at $5 million (plus Witness
> Relocation) to finger
> > Bin Laden does not mean I would do something evil for that
> amount or more.
>
> And fingering bin Laden wouldn't be just as evil?
> It would be for one of his followers, now wouldn't it?
> Evil is relative.

Nonsense.  Targeting innocents is evil according to EVERY human culture.
The fact that people do it, does not make it "relative."  It just makes them
evil.  Period.

When generals close to Hitler saw the writing on the wall, their basic
humanity drove them to try to blow him up.  Had they succeeded they would
have ended a great evil and prevented ALL the evil excesses of the
WWII--from the holocaust to Dresden to Hiroshima.  What they did was not
evil, but moral.  Unfortunately, they failed.

> Would you become Judas Iscariot --
> for how many shekels? And if you say
> that as someone close to bin Laden,
> you would rat on him for money, how
> about us, how about your friends and
> family here in the US? What's the price
> for them?

Did you even read what I wrote?  Please do so before asking such asinine
questions.

 S a n d y

Re: "bespectacled, nerdly remailer operators"

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> On 14 Sep 2001, at 23:30, Anonymous wrote:
> > Pictures of three of these bespectacled, nerdly remailer operators:
> >
> > http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/DC8_Lucky_BDU_4.jpg
> > http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/rabbiGoneNuts.jpeg
> > http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/DC8_noise_and_Lucky_hauling_hardware.jpg
>
> By and large, ninja style raids on remailer operators might be a poor
> idea.  I suggest that Aimee's friends should try to obtain and present
> a search warrant first.

Obtaining a search warrant will be easy. If you're creative, you can
imagine a ninja style raid as a method of presentation.

What happens when the remailer operators, if asked to cooperate, attempt
to explain that they're unable to provide any information that could help
in an investigation? They'll rot in jail, at best.

Now is a perfect time for the Government to round up and arrest those
people whose imprisonment might otherwise inspire protests or public
outrage, whether or not these arrests are related to terrorism.

If Dmitry Sklyarov had been arrested today, would there be protests in the
street? Would it get an ounce of press coverage? Would significant numbers
appear to care, in light of these other events?

If you read the Salon article that was posted here earlier, John Perry
Barlow's concerns about the future of privacy rights are referred to as
"callous" and in "poor taste.[1]"

As for Jon Callas's point on the second page, the fact that the Reichstag
fire was started by the Nazis, and the WTC attacks were (ostensibly)
perpetrated by foreign terrorists, matters little if this century's Nazi
analogue seizes the opportunities that the terrorists have handed to it.

Anyone expressing anything but war-hoc statements today or dissenting with
the government's anti-terrorism measures risks being labeled as an enemy of
the state.

-MW-

[1] http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/09/14/privacy/index.html

RE: On Internet and social responsibility

2001-09-15 Thread measl

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Roeland Meyer wrote:

> Personally, I have no problems with
> US State telling me I can't do business with terrorists. Do you? 

Absolutely I do.  I would have no problem with the USG placing
people/countries/whatever on lists that I could use as a reference to make
a *volutary* decision as to whether I wanted to do business with them, but
to proscribe it is wrong.

First of all, I may not necessarily agree with the USG on all of these
"entries", secondly, the lists are obviously not compiled in a manner
designed solely to cut of the "bad guys".  For example, we have China as a
"most favored nation".  Right there the whole idea of an impartial list
falls apart...

Aside from the impartiality issue, I do not believe that the USG has a
constitutional right to forbid me from engaging any person/place/thing in
an otherwise lawful transaction.

> --
> R O E L A N D  M J  M E Y E R
> Managing Director
> Morgan Hill Software Company
> tel: +1 925 373 3954
> cel: +1 925 352 3615
> fax: +1 925 373 9781 
> http://www.mhsc.com
> 

-- 
Yours, 
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they
should give serious consideration towards setting a better example:
Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of
unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in
the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and 
elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire
populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate...
This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States
as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers,
associates, or others.  Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of
those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the
first place...

Crypto Access

2001-09-15 Thread John Young


The cpunk archives, Cryptome and a host of other crypto
resources are likely to be shutdown if the war panic continues. 

What methods could be used to assure continued access to
crypto even if possession and/or usage is outlawed?

That is to do what NSA and its global sisters do to keep crypto 
data available in perpetuity.

Post that info here, too, maybe, after thinking about the
consequences.

A while back a list of global sites for accessing crypto was
set up at:

   http://jya.com/crypto-free.htm

To supplement whatever is posted here, we would appreciate 
hearing by encrypted mail what others have done  or could do 
to stockpile and distribute privacy tools? We've sent out a
few hundred CDs of the Cryptome collection, and are considering
offering a ~100MB compressed package of the ~8000 files.

There are only a few crypto programs in the files, mostly PGP
since 2.62. We might grab more for inclusion unless others are 
doing that. To comply with law we'd have to notify BXA of any 
new offerings.

-

John Young PK:

-BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use 
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=0rDn
-END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-

Re: Crypto Access

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, John Young wrote:

> What methods could be used to assure continued access to
> crypto even if possession and/or usage is outlawed?

Well, if you wouldn't be so coy about mirroring, I would love to push
anything cypherpunkly to Mojo Nation and Freenet. It is going to be very
difficult to block next generation of Freenet.

However, if you block at IP level after pulling more than 100
documents/day it becomes too dificult for me to so. The difference is
picking a spider off the shelf, or heavily customize one to throttle it.

So, consider burning a few CDs (the site is currently what? 200 MBytes,
300?), and mail them to whoever asks you. If you publish diffs in
identifyable directories and opens them in robots.txt it would really
reduce the load on your site, too.

-- Eugen* Leitl http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204/";>leitl
__
ICBMTO  : N48 10'07'' E011 33'53'' http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204
57F9CFD3: ED90 0433 EB74 E4A9 537F CFF5 86E7 629B 57F9 CFD3

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Jim Choate wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:
>
> > Have there ever been any large-scale terroristic attacks where profit was
> > the only motive?
>
> terrorism <> economics. Economics as a direct goal isn't the issue in
> terrorism. You're 'mixing your metaphors'...

No, Jim, I am not.

If one were to commit an act of destruction, in order to manipulate
economic markets with the ensuing public fear or outrage, that would be
terrorism with economics as a direct goal.

You're thinking too narrowly.

-MW-

Apfn

2001-09-15 Thread Lance Tomlyn

Title: APFN



 

  


  David 
  Ickepass this onFri Sep 14 10:29:49 2001ALICE IN 
  WONDERLAND AND THE WTC DISASTERIF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR THE FORCE BEHIND 
  THE U.S. ATROCITIES JUST ASK: WHO BENEFITS?"Nothing would be what it 
  is, Because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary-wise -what it is, 
  it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?" - Alice in 
  Wonderland.By David Icke The force that seeks to control this 
  world and introduce its global fascist state, the network I call the 
  Illuminati, is nothing if not predictable.The unbelievable horror 
  perpetrated on the cities of New York and Washington is a 
  problem-reaction-solution sting on the collective mind of all humanity and I 
  have been expecting an event of this magnitude for some years. I thought it 
  could be a war or a nuclear "terrorist" device, but something fantastic was 
  always going to happen during the years of the Bush presidency when, as I 
  wrote on inauguration day, the agenda would be pressed forward with a 
  gathering pace.Fast as the world was being moved towards global 
  centralised fascism, it was still not fast enough to match the timescale 
  demanded by the Illuminati agenda. And the opposition to their globalisation 
  plans and their assaults on freedom, was gathering by the day. It was clear 
  that something of enormous magnitude was being orchestrated that would so 
  devastate the collective human mind with fear, horror, and insecurity, that 
  "solutions" could be offered that would advance the agenda in a colossal leap 
  almost overnight. This is what we saw in America on the ritually-significant 
  eleventh day of the ninth month - 911 is the number for emergencies in the 
  United States. Ritual and esoteric codes are at the heart of everything the 
  Illuminati undertakes.And, mind-numbing as these atrocities are, this 
  is the start, not the end, of the next cycle of the Illuminati agenda for the 
  mental, emotional, spiritual, and physical imprisonment of humankind. More and 
  more death and destruction will unfold as the "Free World" unites as an (in 
  affect) world army and world government to use the threat of "terrorism" 
  (their own) to justify a war against the people and countries they choose to 
  take the rap for what the very forces WITHIN the "free world" are themselves 
  responsible for. Even war with the Islamic peoples is not the end, but the 
  means to an end - a conflict with the remaining forces of communism, which 
  they also control. Remember that the Illuminati operate through every country 
  and within "terrorist" organisations and those agencies which "oppose" such 
  terrorism. Only by having agents within all "sides" can they be sure of 
  controlling the game and knowing the outcome before it starts. The Illuminati 
  have operatives within the Islamic world, just as they have them in the 
  so-called "free world", as we shall see in the months to come. Saddam Hussein 
  is every bit as much a knowing Illuminati pawn as Father George and Boy George 
  Bush in America, for example (seeAnd The Truth Shall Set You 
  Free).The predictability of the ritualistic, emotionless, reptilian 
  mind can be seen in the news management that has followed this U.S. disaster. 
  Look at what always happens in these circumstances and you will see that the 
  blueprint is the same in almost every case. Before the event happens the 
  fall-guy or "patsy" is already set up to take the blame, thus steering the 
  public mind away from dangerous speculation and onto a pre-ordained target. 
  After the Kennedy assassination it was Lee Harvey Oswald; after Oklahoma it 
  was Timothy McVeigh; now it is Osama Bin Laden.Bin Laden, deeply 
  misguided as he may be, is no more responsible for what happened this week 
  than I am. His name was introduced with the most obvious co-ordination 
  immediately after the disaster unfolded in the same way that the background to 
  Lee Harvey Oswald was being circulated BEFORE President Kennedy was even 
  dead.The idea that this guy from the mountains of Afghanistan with far 
  more mouth than substance could be the "Mr. Big" of this enormous operation is 
  utterly insulting to anyone of even basic intelligence (see the article by 
  journalist Robert Fisk, who has met him). We are not talking a parcel bomb 
  here, nor even some mind-controlled fanatic driving a car bomb into a 
  restaurant in Jerusalem. Four commercial airliners had to be simultaneously 
  hi-jacked in American air space via American airports and flown into highly 
  specific targets within 45 minutes of each other. How was this possible? 
  Because it was an inside job, that's how, orchestrated by forces WITHIN the 
  United States and planned by the highest levels of U.S. "Intelligence" in 
  co-ordination with other strands of the Illuminati spider's web 
  worldwide.With an army now of mind-controlled assets at their 
  disposal, it is possible

Re: Freedom of speech is for "Cypherpunk critics" too

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Nomen Nescio wrote:

> If you're upset that "critics of the Cypherpunks" are able to speak
> freely then you shouldn't have supported the technologies that enable
> them to do so.  Free speech is for everyone, not just those who toe your
> line of violence and blood revenge.

Ninny. That's exactly the point. I understand Tim to be merely pointing
out the irony that "critics of the Cypherpunks" are enjoying the fruits of
the Cypherpunks' labor while simultaneously calling for their demise.

Somewhat hypocritical of them, if you ask me.

-MW-

Appointment schedule revised

2001-09-15 Thread higher1672

Title: ANALYST BUY RECOMMENDATION
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
URGENT  RBRUNER   BUYING INFORMATION



  
  

  

  


  
  

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE!

ANALYST BUY RECOMMENDATION: 
  


   
  Cal-Bay International Inc. 
(Symbol: CBYI)
  A 
  REGISTERED INVESTMENT ADVISOR just released an investment opinion 
  RECOMMENDING Cal-Bay (CBYI): ...as a Speculative Long-Term BUY. 
  ...will hit a price target of $2.00 by 2002 and $5.00 by 2003! 
  ...achieve earnings growth of 200 to 250% in the next 2 years. 
  ...achieve earnings of approximately 25¢ per share by 2003.
  Click HERE for QUOTE, News & full Investment Report! 

  QUOTES FROM THE INVESTMENT ADVISORS: 
  "A positive long-term investment opportunity exists with CBYI." 
  "We anticipate that liquidity will increase as well as coverage by 
  additional analysts." 
  "The company has developed a network of strategic alliances that are 
  designed to assist the company in obtaining a DOMINANT MARKET SHARE." 
  The current market in which Cal-Bay operates is currently estimated to 
  exceed $900 million. Estimates calling for $25 Billion in sales by the 
  year 2003." 
  "We expect the company to achieve it's current goal of Nasdaq OTCBB 
  listing by the 4th quarter of 2001. Once on the larger exchange, we 
  anticipate that liquidity will increase." 
  "We anticipate earnings will grow at a more rapid pace than revenues 
  as a result of expanding net margins as well as the reduction of certain 
  overhead costs that can be eliminated as a result of the expected 
  acquisitions." 
  Click HERE for QUOTE, News & full Investment Report! 
  
  OTHER REASONS TO OWN THE STOCK: 
  CBYI IS GROWING AT A RAPID RATE. EARNINGS PER SHARE IS INCREASING! 
  CBYI is one of the FASTEST growing companies in distributing 
  environmental and safety equipment instruments. 
  CBYI is a profitable company, has NO DEBT and is on track to beat ALL 
  earnings estimates. 
  CBYI has increased revenue of 50% annually! 
  CBYI is a fully reporting SEC compliant company that has been in 
  business since 1976. 
  CBYI has an excellent management team with several EXCLUSIVE contracts 
  and an IMPRESSIVE client list including: Anheuser-Busch, Chevron Refining, 
  Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, GE-Energy & Environmental Research and 
  the U.S. Air Force. 
  CBYI share price keeps going UP, UP, and UP! 
  Click HERE for QUOTE, News & full Investment Report! 
  
  RAPIDLY GROWING INDUSTRY. Hold on tight for the largest Oil 
  and Natural Gas expansion in U.S. History. Demand for Energy is at its 
  highest level putting tremendous pressure on Scientific & Technical 
  Instrumentation companies like CBYI. There is rapid expansion in the 
  energy industry with the need for more power plants and cheaper fuel. CBYI 
  is a major benefactor of this growing need because it supplies specialized 
  "Smell Technology" analyzers for industrial applications in Natural Gas 
  production and transmission.
  
  Note: Quotes are not available on every Financial Websites. This 
  will be corrected with the recent 10-SB filing. 
  Click HERE to be PERMANENTLY 
  REMOVED! * NOTE: ALL removes honored. ALL IP addresses 
  are LOGGED! 

Certain statements contained in this news release may be 
forward-looking statements within the meaning of  The Private Securities 
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements may be identified by such terms 
as "expect", "believe", "may", "will", and "intend" or similar terms. We are NOT 
a registered investment advisor or a broker dealer. This is NOT an offer to buy 
or sell securities. No recommendation that the securities of the companies 
profiled should be purchased, sold or held by individuals or entities that learn 
of the profiled companies. This is an independent electronic publication that 
was paid $27,000 in cash by a non-affiliated, third party consultant for the 
electronic dissemination of this company information. Be advised that 
investments in companies profiled are considered to be high-risk and use of the 
information provided is for reading purposes only. If anyone decides to act as 
an investor they are advised not to invest without the proper advisement from an 
attorney or a registered financial broker, if any party decides to participate 
as an investor then it will be that investor's sole risk. Be advised that the 
purchase of such high-risk securities may result in the loss of some or all of 
the investment. The profiled companies make no warranties or guarantees as to 
the accuracy or the completeness of the disclosure. Investors should not rely 
solely on the information presented. Rather, inve

Re: "bespectacled, nerdly remailer operators"

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> On 14 Sep 2001, at 23:30, Anonymous wrote:
> > Pictures of three of these bespectacled, nerdly remailer operators:
> >
> > http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/DC8_Lucky_BDU_4.jpg
> > http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/rabbiGoneNuts.jpeg
> > http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/DC8_noise_and_Lucky_hauling_hardware.jpg
>
> By and large, ninja style raids on remailer operators might be a poor
> idea.  I suggest that Aimee's friends should try to obtain and present
> a search warrant first.

Obtaining a search warrant will be easy. If you're creative, you can
imagine a ninja style raid as a method of presentation.

What happens when the remailer operators, if asked to cooperate, attempt
to explain that they're unable to provide any information that could help
in an investigation? They'll rot in jail, at best.

Now is a perfect time for the Government to round up and arrest those
people whose imprisonment might otherwise inspire protests or public
outrage, whether or not these arrests are related to terrorism.

If Dmitry Sklyarov had been arrested today, would there be protests in the
street? Would it get an ounce of press coverage? Would significant numbers
appear to care, in light of these other events?

If you read the Salon article that was posted here earlier, John Perry
Barlow's concerns about the future of privacy rights are referred to as
"callous" and in "poor taste.[1]"

As for Jon Callas's point on the second page, the fact that the Reichstag
fire was started by the Nazis, and the WTC attacks were (ostensibly)
perpetrated by foreign terrorists, matters little if this century's Nazi
analogue seizes the opportunities that the terrorists have handed to it.

Anyone expressing anything but war-hoc statements today or dissenting with
the government's anti-terrorism measures risks being labeled as an enemy of
the state.

-MW-

[1] http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/09/14/privacy/index.html

RE: Freedom of speech is for "Cypherpunk critics" too



On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> "Nomen Nescio" wrote:
> 
> > Tim May writes:
> > > Funny, I notice how many of the critics of Cypherpunks and 
> > supporters of 
> > > this express train approach to repealing the Bill of Rights are 
> > > themselves hiding behind Cypherpunks remailers, Hushmail aliases, and 
> > > Ziplip nyms.
> > 
> > If you're upset that "critics of the Cypherpunks" are able to speak
> > freely then you shouldn't have supported the technologies that enable
> > them to do so.  Free speech is for everyone, not just those who toe your
> > line of violence and blood revenge.
> 
> Yeah, isn't that what Tim just wrote?

No, not at all.


 --


 Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

George Santyana

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

Technology Review - Also in the News - US weighs new forms of electronic surveillance following attacks


...privacy sillyness...

http://www.techreview.com/screaming/article.asp?SMContentIndex=3&SMContentSet=0

-- 

 --


natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato
summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks

Matsuo Basho

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

aimee's anal urges

2001-09-15 Thread mattd


Dearest aimee darling,have they repealed the sodomy statutes in texas yet?I 
sense theres nothing you'd
enjoy more than a long greasy rippled dick sliding in and out...Pucker up 
sweetheart,this wont hurt a bit...

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Jim Choate wrote:

> Yeah, you're fast running out of points that aren't dull.

Perhaps, but that's not my reason. I simply find you to be dull.

> > > They people engaging in them certainly felt justified. Whether you agree
> > > or not is really a different question. It also demonstrates the
> > > relativity of 'good' and 'evil'.
> >
> > Of course.
>
> Then you admit the primary failure in your assertion.

What, exactly, do you think my assertion is?

> Now you're changing the rules in the middle of the game.
>
> Naughty on you...

I am? Please explain these rules to me, so that I may follow them.

> The assertion was there are concepts of 'good'/'evil' which are accepted
> by ALL human societies.

"Are currently accepted" and "must always be inherently accepted" are two
entirely different statements. I am claiming the former. This is not
irreconcilable with your [rather obvious, and dull] points.

-MW-

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows



On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> Nonsense.  Targeting innocents is evil according to EVERY human culture.

That's just plain unmitigated bullshit. All human cultures THRIVE on
targeting 'innocents' (ie those who can't/won't defend themselves).


 --


natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato
summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks

Matsuo Basho

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

Long Distance at $0.00 per minute!

2001-09-15 Thread px7cqtwefb

WELCOME
TO THE FUTURE OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Talk all
you want.

No per minute charges.

No Contracts.

No switching Carriers.

Progressive
Technologies
now offers

UNLIMITED Long Distance Calling
Starting At $49.95 Per Month
Zero Cents Per Minute Calling.
No Hidden Fees - No Contracts
In-State and Out of State Long Distance are Covered
ANYONE can benefit. Travelers, Students, and Business People.
Pay By the Month
No Time Restrictions
Use From Any Phone
Outstanding Quality Service
Receive
More Information About This Plan Here!*
-
The Future Is Now -

*By clicking on any of the above
links, you agree to and are requesting to receive more information
from our company regarding our products and services.
We are an Internet Notification
Company that instantly notifies you in advance of new technologies available
to the public. You've qualified for our notification service through one of
the following: web site registration, search engine registration, or one of
several opt in email campaigns. To be removed from all future mailings from
our company, simply click here and enter
the email address you would like to have removed.

We strongly oppose the use of SPAM email and do not want anyone who does not wish to receive our mailings to receive them. As a result, we have retained the services of an independent 3rd party to administer our list management and remove list.
This is not SPAM. If you do not wish to receive further mailings, please click below and enter your email at the bottom of the page. You may then rest-assured that you will never receive another email from us again. http://www.removeyou.com

The 21st Century Solution. Client I.D. Number 022481

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> Thanks, but I'd go a bit further.  The percentage of humans who would be
> capable of such evil has to be vanishingly small.  Unfortunately, that
> percentage is not zero so this sort of thing continues to happen.

My point precisely.

> > However, if you assume lack of conscience
> > and moral indifference, this does become a
> > cost/benefit situation.
>
> We have to assume it because it demonstrably exists.  The trick then is, to
> make the costs greater or the benefits less.  Easier said then done, but
> those are our only alternatives.

Have there ever been any large-scale terroristic attacks where profit was
the only motive?

Bin Laden's organization has religious reasons. McVeigh had his own moral
justifications. I'm not sure we've ever seen such an action for a pure
profit motive. Can anyone think of examples?

> I think a much strong argument can be made that those who do not believe in
> an afterlife would be more deterred than those who do.

Heh. Perhaps the suggestion that such terrorism could be stopped if
everyone were to be converted to Christianity wasn't such a crazy idea.

Nah. We'd have followers of Jerry Falwell attempting to smite San
Francisco.

> And so far, unsupported by the facts.  Time will tell.  In the mean time,
> Meyer, I'll bet you, or anyone on this list, a C-note that this is the work
> of Bin Laden.  Any takers?

That's a fool's wager. We will never know with total certainty whose work
this was.

I'm certain that our investigators will link these actions to bin Laden,
however. And I suspect they'll most likely be correct.

-MW-

Suspending the Constitution

On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 12:17 AM, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 05:26:52PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Or does innocence depend upon the depth of one's pockets?
>
> Looks like you already know the answer to *that* question...
>
> -Declan
> (who may be becoming overly pessimistic)
>

It's nearly impossible to be overly pessimistic...

-- Bush asks for $20 billion, Congress doubles it to $40 billion

(to be handed out in many cases to defense contractor buddies)

-- Bush asks for restrictions on some civil liberties, Congress proposes 
to repeal the Bill of Rights

The freight train is now an express train. Even online cyber-activists 
are calling for suspending big chunks of the Constitution.

It is everything Franklin, Jefferson, and the Founders warned us about.

The United States does not _deserve_ saving.

Fuck them all.

--Tim May

No Subject

2001-09-15 Thread citizenQ

You missed the irony, I guess I should have put in the irony-smiley.

Given the overall context of the bill, the debate on the floor, and it's conclusion 
your report is shrill and Chicken-littleish, which does nothing for creating credible 
support of resistance to eroding civil liberty. Do your job, support your position, 
and do it clearly.  Right now I have no patience for Wired-generation smugness.

>On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 04:11:53PM -0700, citizenQ wrote: > Please
>indicate the wider circumstances, particularly the warrantless
>>circumstances, that this amendment allows cybertapping under, for
>those of us without your time or acumen in editing the existing Title
>III language.
>
>To achieve enlightement, you must consider how this bill amends existing
>wiretap law. This will take some time, it is true, but it is The Path.
>
>-Declan

IP: RE: Senate votes to permit warrantless Net-wiretaps, Carn ivoreus e (fwd)




-- Eugen* Leitl http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204/";>leitl
__
ICBMTO  : N48 10'07'' E011 33'53'' http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204
57F9CFD3: ED90 0433 EB74 E4A9 537F CFF5 86E7 629B 57F9 CFD3

-- Forwarded message --
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 20:50:31 -0400
From: David Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IP: RE: Senate votes to permit warrantless Net-wiretaps,
 Carn ivore us e


>From: "Baker, Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "'Declan McCullagh'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>cc: "Albertazzie, Sally" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>"Baker, Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>Declan,
>
>I ignored the first two points because I don't think they're that important.
>These "warrantless searches" are emergency orders that have to be followed
>by a court order in 48 hours.  Sometimes courts are closed and the cops need
>data right away.  Tuesday evening would be a good example.  This is not some
>out-of-control police authority.
>
>The people who can ask for emergency orders have to be designated by one of
>several officials at Main Justice.  That's to make sure someone responsible
>ends up with the authority to declare an emergency.  So an assistant US
>attorney could be designated by Main Justice in each district right now.
>What's the big deal with letting the US Attorney for the district do the
>designating instead of Main Justice? Seems to me that the US Attorney
>probably knows more about staff changeovers than Main Justice, so it makes
>sense for the US Attorney to do the designating locally.
>
>Stewart



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/

SIG: Technology Review - It's Time for Clockless Chips


http://www.techreview.com/magazine/oct01/tristramall.asp
-- 

 --


natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato
summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks

Matsuo Basho

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> > What's the cost/benefit here?
> >
> > How much potential profit would be
> > necessary for a crime like this to
> > occur with profit as the only motive?
>
> I have NO IDEA what this strange post has to do with the original question.

It's only tangentally related.

> I'm a libertarian.  As such, I see no problem in doing well by doing good.
> Just because I would jump at $5 million (plus Witness Relocation) to finger
> Bin Laden does not mean I would do something evil for that amount or more.

My apologies; I never meant that as the implication. I highly doubt that
you, or most people, would ever be capable of evil on 1/10th the scale of
this attack.

However, if you assume lack of conscience and moral indifference, this
does become a cost/benefit situation. What if one owned a large amount of
stock in Visage Technology[1]? What if one had embezzed a large sum from
Morgan Stanley, and needed a diversion? Or one simply wanted to manipulate
the stock market?

One of the problems with capital punishment is that it isn't much of a
deterrant, except to the Christians who believe in Hell.

If one could increase his wealth exponentially, and did not care about
other human life, would the potential benefit be worth the risk? You can
only be executed once.

Americans will do everything they can not to believe that this could have
been a domestic action. We want to blame the "sand-niggers" and the
"rag-heads." The fact that this could have been a sociopath with the
ultimate get-rich quick scheme is unthinkable.[2]

-MW-

[1] http://www.techreview.com/screaming/article.asp?SMContentIndex=3

[2] I'm posing this question as an academic exercise. I think that the
attack was most likely exactly what it appeared: an act of terrorism by a
foreign party.

IP: out of time order read this first RE: Senate votes to permitwarrantless Net-wiretaps, Carnivore us e (fwd)




-- Eugen* Leitl http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204/";>leitl
__
ICBMTO  : N48 10'07'' E011 33'53'' http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204
57F9CFD3: ED90 0433 EB74 E4A9 537F CFF5 86E7 629B 57F9 CFD3

-- Forwarded message --
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 20:51:50 -0400
From: David Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IP: out of time order read this first RE: Senate votes to permit
warrantless Net-wiretaps, Carnivore us e


>Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 19:59:39 -0400
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Dave,
>I'm glad to see Stu joining the civil libertarian crowd. He's right, of
>course, that there are reasons to be uneasy about the new "Combating
>Terrorism Act."
>
>Current law permits specific Justice Department officials to authorize
>meatspace telephone pen register and trap and trace devices without a
>court order in two circumstances. Here's an excerpt from the U.S. Code:
>
>http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/3125.html
>>an emergency situation exists that involves immediate danger of death or
>>serious bodily injury to any person [or] conspiratorial activities
>>characteristic of organized crime
>
>This bill does three things of note:
>
>1. It adds "U.S. Attorney" to the list of officials who can authorize
>warantless surveillance.
>
>2. It expands the "emergency situation" rule beyond serious bodily
>injury/organized crime. I described this in my article:
>http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46852,00.html
>>Circumstances that don't require court orders include an "immediate
>>threat to the national security interests of the United States, (an)
>>immediate threat to public health or safety or an attack on the integrity
>>or availability of a protected computer." That covers most computer
>>hacking offenses.
>
>3. It rewrites pen register/trap and trace law and moves it from the
>telephone world to explicitly cover computer networks as well, which would
>permit Carnivore's use under this section (when operated in
>trap-and-trace/pen-register mode). Here are some excerpts from the bill:
>
>http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cta.091401.html
>>The order shall, upon service of the order, apply to any entity providing
>>wire or electronic communication service in the United States...
>>inserting ``, routing, addressing,'' after ``dialing''... by striking
>>``call processing'' and inserting ``the processing and transmitting of
>>wire and electronic communications''...
>
>Now, whether all this is, as Stu blandly suggests, "a bit alarmist," is up
>to IPers to decide. But I think Senator Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the
>Senate Judiciary committee, put it well during the floor debate last
>night. Here's a quote from the Congressional Record.
>
>http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/s091301.html
>>LEAHY: Maybe the Senate wants to just go ahead and adopt new abilities to
>>wiretap our citizens. Maybe they want to adopt new abilities to go into
>>people's computers. Maybe that will make us feel safer. Maybe. And maybe
>>what the terrorists have done made us a little bit less safe. Maybe they
>>have increased Big Brother in this country.
>
>-Declan



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/

Please make stable NON-US homes for strong crypto projects

I'm usually not forwarding messages from cryptography@ here, but this one
is an exception.

-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 00:32:12 -0700
From: John Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Please make stable NON-US homes for strong crypto projects

It's clear that the US administration is putting out feelers to
again ban publication of strong encryption.  See:
  http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46816,00.html

The evil gnomes who keep advancing unconstitutional US anti-crypto
policies know that the current hysteria in Congress and the
Administration will not last forever.  So they will probably move very
quickly -- within a week is my guess -- to re-control encryption,
either by a unilateral action of the Administration (by amending
the Export Administration Regulations), or by stuffing a rider onto
some so-called "emergency" bill in Congress.

They maneuvered very carefully in the Bernstein case such that there
is no outstanding injunction against violating the Constitution this
way -- and even no binding 9th-Circuit precedent that tells them it's
unconstitutional to do so.  They know in their hearts that numerous
judges have found it unconstitutional, but they have proven throughout
the seven-year history of the case that they don't give a damn about
the Constitution.  Which means it may take weeks, months or years for
civil liberties workers to get a judge to roll back any such action.
Not just days.  We won the case, but they squirmed out of any
permanent restrictions -- so far.

The US government has a new mania for wiretapping everyone in case
they might be a terrorist.  There's already two bills in Congress to
make it trivial for them to wiretap anybody on flimsy excuses, and to
retroactively justify their precipitous act of rolling Carnivore boxes
into major ISPs this week and demanding, without legal authority, that
they be put at the heart of the networks.  See:
  http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cta.091401.html

Even more than before, we will need good encryption tools, merely to
maintain privacy for law-abiding citizens, political activists, and
human rights workers.  (In the current hysteria, mere messages
advocating peace or Constitutional rights might best be encrypted.)
The European Parliament also recently recommended that European
communications be routinely encrypted to protect them from pervasive
US Echelon wiretaps.

Some US developers, who thought such a reversal would never happen,
have built or maintained a number of good open source encryption tools
in the United States, and may not have lined up solid foreign
maintainers or home sites.

LET'S FIX THAT!  We need volunteers in many countries to mirror
current distributions, CVS trees, etc.  We need volunteers to also
act as maintainers, accepting patches and integrating them into
solid releases.

(Note that too many countries have pledged to stand toe-to-toe with the
US while they march off to make war on somebody they can't figure out
who it is yet.  If you live in one of those countries, you may
suddenly find that your own crypto regs have been sneakily altered.
Take care that each useful package has maintainers and distribution
points in diverse countries.)

I haven't kept close track of which packages are in danger.  I
suggest that people nominate packages on this mailing list, and that
others immediately grab mirror copies of them as they are nominated.
And that some of those who mirror them keep quiet, in case hysterical
governments make a concerted effort to stamp out all copies and/or all
major distribution sites.  If you aren't the quiet type, then *AFTER*
IMMEDIATELY PULLING A COPY OF THE CODE OUTSIDE US JURISDICTION,
announce your mirror on this mailing list.

We freedom-loving US citizens have had to rely on the freedom-loving
citizens of saner countries, to do the work of making strong
encryption, for many years.  We had a brief respite, which we will
eventually resume for good.  In the meantime, please let me apologize
for my countrymen and for my government, for asking you to shoulder
most of the burden again.  Thank you so much.

John Gilmore

PS: Companies with proprietary encryption packages might consider
immediately open-sourcing and exporting their encryption add-ins, so
their customers can still get them from overseas archives.  Or taking
other actions to safeguard the privacy and integrity of their
customers' data and their society's infrastructure.  I also advise
that they lobby like hell to keep privacy and integrity legal in the US.

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

> Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> > What's the cost/benefit here?
> >
> > How much potential profit would be
> > necessary for a crime like this to
> > occur with profit as the only motive?
>
> I have NO IDEA what this strange post has to do with the original question.

It's only tangentally related.

> I'm a libertarian.  As such, I see no problem in doing well by doing good.
> Just because I would jump at $5 million (plus Witness Relocation) to finger
> Bin Laden does not mean I would do something evil for that amount or more.

My apologies; I never meant that as the implication. I highly doubt that
you, or most people, would ever be capable of evil on 1/10th the scale of
this attack.

However, if you assume lack of conscience and moral indifference, this
does become a cost/benefit situation. What if one owned a large amount of
stock in Visage Technology[1]? What if one had embezzed a large sum from
Morgan Stanley, and needed a diversion? Or one simply wanted to manipulate
the stock market?

One of the problems with capital punishment is that it isn't much of a
deterrant, except to the Christians who believe in Hell.

If one could increase his wealth exponentially, and did not care about
other human life, would the potential benefit be worth the risk? You can
only be executed once.

Americans will do everything they can not to believe that this could have
been a domestic action. We want to blame the "sand-niggers" and the
"rag-heads." The fact that this could have been a sociopath with the
ultimate get-rich quick scheme is unthinkable.[2]

-MW-

[1] http://www.techreview.com/screaming/article.asp?SMContentIndex=3

[2] I'm posing this question as an academic exercise. I think that the
attack was most likely exactly what it appeared: an act of terrorism by a
foreign party.

RE: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

Huh?

Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:

> Assume that you could nearly guarantee a
> profit of $5mil or more by shorting your
> stocks before a terrorist attack on the
> World Trade Center.
>
> Would you perpetrate such a crime, and
> frame the "sand-niggers"?
>
> What's the cost/benefit here?
>
> How much potential profit would be
> necessary for a crime like this to
> occur with profit as the only motive?

I have NO IDEA what this strange post has to do with the original question.
I'm a libertarian.  As such, I see no problem in doing well by doing good.
Just because I would jump at $5 million (plus Witness Relocation) to finger
Bin Laden does not mean I would do something evil for that amount or more.

Remember, the original question was, would a $5 million reward plus a new
identity under the Witness Relocation Program be enticing enough to get
someone to roll over on Bin Laden.  My best guess is 'yes' and I merely used
myself as an example.

Look, I don't CARE about the purity of the motives of someone who would give
up Bin Laden.  The only question in my mind is whether or not there is
somebody who would do it for the stipulated inducement.  That was--and
is--the question.

 S a n d y

Debate over warrantless Carnivore bill with Stu Baker

2001-09-15 Thread Declan McCullagh


- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -

From: Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: FC: Debate over warrantless Carnivore bill with Stu Baker
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 12:05:11 -0400
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/

Stewart Baker is the former general counsel to the National Security Agency 
and now a partner at the Washington law firm of Steptoe and Johnson:
http://www.steptoe.com/WebBio.nsf/biographies/Stewart+A.+Baker?OpenDocument
http://www.mccullagh.org/image/10/stewart-baker.html

Below is a few rounds of a debate we had on Dave Farber's IP list in 
response to my article ("Senate votes to permit warrantless Net-wiretaps, 
Carnivore use"):
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46852,00.html

-Declan

**

>To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>cc: "Albertazzie, Sally" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Senate votes to permit warrantless Net-wiretaps, Carnivore
>  us e
>Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 19:28:17 -0400
>
>This seems a bit alarmist.  The FBI has long had the authority to get the
>phone numbers that are called from or that call to a suspect's phone.  These
>are trap-and-trace and pen-register orders.  The Justice Department has
>generally taken the position that the Internet equivalent of such data is
>the addressing information in emails.  This bill would enshrine the Justice
>Department position in law -- without changing the warrant requirements or
>the predicate for getting such Internet pen register data.  It's not that
>big a change from the status quo.  I would guess that, even without the law,
>Justice would have about a 60-40 or even 70-30 chance of winning its
>argument in court.
>
>In my view there are some reasons to be uneasy about the bill but not
>frothing.
>
>First, the to and from lines on my emails (plus the URLs I visit) are in
>fact more intimate information than the phone numbers I call.  What's more,
>I'm already on notice that the phone numbers aren't all that private --
>they're used to bill me, after all.  Not true for URLs or "to" lines.  Once
>that data is gathered by the police(on a very easy standard, I agree), it
>may never be thrown out, and lots of people can access it.  So extending
>police authority to such data ought to be the occasion for thinking
>creatively about how to discipline the use of that authority.  If I were
>writing the bill, I'd let the police gather such data, but I'd do more to
>audit the people who access it and require prosecutors to notify people
>after the fact that they've been targeted for surveillance (unless that
>would blow an ongoing investigation).  As things stand, the only people who
>find out about such surveillance and thus get a chance to challenge it are
>criminal defendants.  Isn't that just backwards?  I mean, who came up with a
>system in which crooks may go free because their privacy was violated while
>innocent people who've suffered the same violation never have a remedy?
>
>Second, most ISPs would like to see an assurance that Carnivore won't be
>used if they have their own systems that can accomplish the same thing, or
>that they'll be indemnified for any damage Carnivore might do to the system.
>
>In short, we may be missing some opportunities to improve privacy law, but
>it's hard to say that the privacy sky is falling.
>
>Stewart

**

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IP: RE: Senate votes to permit warrantless Net-wiretaps, 
Carnivore us e
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Dave,
I'm glad to see Stu joining the civil libertarian crowd. He's right, of 
course, that there are reasons to be uneasy about the new "Combating 
Terrorism Act."

Current law permits specific Justice Department officials to authorize 
meatspace telephone pen register and trap and trace devices without a court 
order in two circumstances. Here's an excerpt from the U.S. Code:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/3125.html
>an emergency situation exists that involves immediate danger of death or 
>serious bodily injury to any person [or] conspiratorial activities 
>characteristic of organized crime

This bill does three things of note:

1. It adds "U.S. Attorney" to the list of officials who can authorize 
warantless surveillance.

2. It expands the "emergency situation" rule beyond serious bodily 
injury/organized crime. I described this in my article:
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46852,00.html
>Circumstances that don't require court orders include an "immediate threat 
>to the national security interests of the United States, (an) immediate 
>threat to public health or safety or an attack on the integrity or 
>availability of a protected computer." That covers most computer hacking 
>offenses.

3. It rewrites pen register/trap and trace law and moves it from the 
telephone world to explicitly cover computer networks as well, which would 
permit Carnivore'

winds of war

2001-09-15 Thread mattd


Dear tim,no real anarchist craps on like you about a 'fruit ot the poison 
tree'constitution.FUCK uncle sams racist con job.Mason wouldnt sign that 
shit and neither would any real anarchist.
Im going to save a lot of your stuff like the cyphernomicon and Im sure 
your influence led to AP but dont play with the word anarchy unless you 
mean it man.sayonara,matt.

Re: "bespectacled, nerdly remailer operators"


--
On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > Right, ninja troops carrying away bespectacled, nerdly remailer
> > operators. Here's a better fantasy.  They'll hire $1000/night
> > superhookers and seduce the remailer operators into giving up their
> > keys.  Both have about equal chances of reality.

On 14 Sep 2001, at 23:30, Anonymous wrote:
> Pictures of three of these bespectacled, nerdly remailer operators:
>
> http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/DC8_Lucky_BDU_4.jpg
> http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/rabbiGoneNuts.jpeg
> http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/DC8_noise_and_Lucky_hauling_hardware.jpg

By and large, ninja style raids on remailer operators might be a poor idea.  I suggest 
that Aimee's friends should try to obtain and present a search warrant first.


--digsig
 James A. Donald
 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
 PFUrCv6evJRB7Gk3g2/972Wz8AZcF3BMKb7tdg1T
 4wV/6yDKveRPljJJ39kP5pXMViuQnbLvuZmP2hQvx

Re: Imagining the Next War: Infrastructural Warfare and the Conditions of Democracy

--
On 14 Sep 2001, at 20:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> War is the health of the State.

Terrorism is a good pretext for taking away our rights.

A war to destroy terrorist regimes is a less good pretext, 
and if it succeeds, will remove one pretext.   The end of the 
war will also spark a demand for a return to normality, 
similar to the anti socialist wave we saw in many english 
speaking countries at the end of World War II.  Socialism, 
introduced under the pretext of war, was discredited by its 
association with the privation and authoritarianism of war.

> War in the old conception was temporary: the idea was 
> explicitly that the state of war would end, and that the 
> normal rules of democracy would resume once their 
> conditions had been reestablished.

What George Bush is promising, truthfully or untruthfully, is 
just such a war.  A war where the good guys storm into the 
bad guy's presidential palace, and then come home to a 
victory parade, where upon everything returns to normal.

All wars are bad for freedom, but the war that George Bush 
promises is far less bad for freedom than unending terrorism.

Of course the previous Bush promised "read my lips, no new
taxes." 

--digsig
 James A. Donald
 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
 1jV9etU3Tx6MJ9qdy97PFd24d9cqTlSgfWko3Xfz
 4RSLKINEhK51FoPxlzP2C784tzxRjBqICVKcorKjR

Re: A Brevital Moment (was..Ignore Aimee Farr)

On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 08:45 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> --
> On 14 Sep 2001, at 16:25, Trei, Peter wrote:
>> I haven't paid enough attention to AF to be able to form an
>> opinion as to whether she's threatened anyone.
>
> She did not say "I am going to kill a judge".  She did
> however say that somone else was going to kill a judge.   She
> and Nomen are trying to bring about a RICO conversation.
>
> Whether they are doing this out of a sinister government
> plot, or because they are stupid assholes, I do not know.  Of
> course the internet has a considerably larger supply of
> stupid assholes than government agents.
>

AF and NN have also claimed that we, as a list,  are complicit in making 
bombs because we "tolerate" the clueless bombz d00dz who are probably 
cops.

AF talks about how close he/she lives to the Bush ranch in Texas, he/she 
talks about bombs and judge killings...he/she is clearly attempting some 
sort of incitement or entrapment.

--Tim May

Re: Crypto Access

2001-09-15 Thread John Young


Blocks and limitations on downloads have been removed
on Cryptome and JYA. We ask that bots and spiders be 
configured and monitored to avoid repetitiveness, looping, 
recycling and checking for previous downloads. Bandwidth
trashing programs will be seen as attacks and blocked to 
assure access by others.

If and when we get a compressed package of the collection
ready for download we'll request email for the URL to grab 
the wad. Otherwise the rampaging idiot bots will shut us down 
before the Warmongering Idiot Bot -- which may masquerade 
as a loose cannon viggie.

Re: Compiling Mixmaster 2.9 beta under FreeBSD

2001-09-15 Thread Scott Renfro


On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 03:17:42PM -0700, Greg Broiles wrote:
> 
> I suspect that the OpenBSD fix will be similar, but it may take some
> time to track it all down.

The following seems to work on OpenBSD-2.8; 2.9 shouldn't be terribly
different.

  cd /usr/src/lib/libssl/src/crypto/objects
  perl obj_dat.pl objects.h obj_dat.h
  cd /usr/src/lib/libssl/crypto
  patch < ~/libcrypto-makefile.diff
  make
  make install
  cd
  tar -zxvf mix-2.9b23.tar.gz
  patch < ~/mix-openssl-2.8.diff
  cd Mix-2.9beta23
  ./Install

The patch files are included below.

cheers,
--Scott

-- 
Scott Renfro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Here's libcrypto-makefile.diff:

--- Makefile.orig   Fri Sep 14 17:35:34 2001
+++ MakefileFri Sep 14 17:35:44 2001
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@
 .endif
 .endif 
 
-CFLAGS+= -DNO_IDEA -DTERMIOS -DANSI_SOURCE -DNO_ERR -DNO_WINDOWS_BRAINDEATH
+CFLAGS+= -DTERMIOS -DANSI_SOURCE -DNO_ERR -DNO_WINDOWS_BRAINDEATH
 CFLAGS+= -DNO_RC5
 CFLAGS+= -I${.CURDIR}/../${SSLEAYDIST}
 CFLAGS+= -I${LCRYPTO_SRC}
@@ -58,9 +58,9 @@
 #CFLAGS+= -I${LCRYPTO_SRC}/rc5
 #SRCS+=rc5_skey.c rc5_ecb.c rc5cfb64.c rc5cfb64.c  
 #SRCS+=rc5ofb64.c rc5_enc.c
-#CFLAGS+= -I${LCRYPTO_SRC}/idea
-#SRCS+=i_cbc.c i_cfb64.c i_ofb64.c i_ecb.c 
-#SRCS+=i_skey.c
+CFLAGS+= -I${LCRYPTO_SRC}/idea
+SRCS+= i_cbc.c i_cfb64.c i_ofb64.c i_ecb.c 
+SRCS+= i_skey.c
 CFLAGS+= -I${LCRYPTO_SRC}/bf
 SRCS+= bf_skey.c bf_ecb.c bf_cfb64.c bf_ofb64.c bf_enc.c   
 CFLAGS+= -I${LCRYPTO_SRC}/cast

And here's mix-openssl-2.8.diff:

diff -ru Mix-2.9beta23/Install Mix-2.9beta23.sgr/Install
--- Mix-2.9beta23/Install   Thu Mar 16 08:34:02 2000
+++ Mix-2.9beta23.sgr/Install   Fri Sep 14 18:20:41 2001
@@ -382,8 +382,8 @@
  fi
 
  opensslinfo="Please get OpenSSL 0.9.4 from http://www.openssl.org/";
- LIBDIR=/usr/local/ssl/lib
- INCDIR="/usr/include /usr/include/ssl /usr/lib/ssl/include /usr/local/ssl/include"
+ LIBDIR=/usr/lib
+ INCDIR="/usr/include"
  SRCDIR="openssl*"
 
  if [ "$system" = win32 ]

RE: A Brevital Moment (was..Ignore Aimee Farr)

--
On 14 Sep 2001, at 16:25, Trei, Peter wrote:
> I haven't paid enough attention to AF to be able to form an
> opinion as to whether she's threatened anyone.

She did not say "I am going to kill a judge".  She did
however say that somone else was going to kill a judge.   She
and Nomen are trying to bring about a RICO conversation.

Whether they are doing this out of a sinister government
plot, or because they are stupid assholes, I do not know.  Of
course the internet has a considerably larger supply of
stupid assholes than government agents.

--digsig
 James A. Donald
 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
 vMcE3M5nkj3Kodqq2CoA0LrPYjh2Yyfv2M4bNL0V
 4bV0p9xh+C/5ye5W8o+8379e3hdd1F6bbXo/MK/Iq

Re: Compiling Mixmaster 2.9 beta under FreeBSD

2001-09-15 Thread Ng Pheng Siong

On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 03:17:42PM -0700, Greg Broiles wrote:
> Specifically, the OpenSSL that's integrated into FreeBSD doesn't include 
> IDEA, by default, because of patent concerns. To remedy that, one needs to 
> change the line in /etc/defaults/make.conf so that it reads "MAKE_IDEA=YES".
> 
> Then - this is the part I missed before - it's necessary to recompile the 
> system libraries, so that they're rebuilt with IDEA support included. It 
> sounds simple in retrospect . . . go to /usr/src and run "make buildworld; 
> make installworld", which may take 12 hours or so on a slow PC. There's got 
> to be a better way to just rebuild the crypto parts, but I didn't stumble 
> across it yet.

The OpenSSL bundled with FreeBSD is installed in /usr.

The simplest way to get a different OpenSSL (with IDEA, RC5, etc.) is to
build from source and install into /usr/local. Then, when configuring
Mixmaster or whatever software, specify that OpenSSL lives in /usr/local.

I last built Mix when it was still using rsaref, but I've used the above
method to build any number of OpenSSL-using software, including my own
M2Crypto. No need to remake the world.

Cheers.
-- 
Ng Pheng Siong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * http://www.post1.com/home/ngps

Re: IP: RE: Senate votes to permit warrantless Net-wiretaps,Carn ivoreus e (fwd)

2001-09-15 Thread measl



> > >Declan,
> > >
> > >I ignored the first two points because I don't think they're that important.
> > >These "warrantless searches" are emergency orders that have to be followed
> > >by a court order in 48 hours.  Sometimes courts are closed and the cops need
> > >data right away.  Tuesday evening would be a good example.  This is not some
> > >out-of-control police authority.

This is TOTALLY and example of out-of-control police authority.  Courts
are open 24 jours a day for the purposes of abtaining warrants, or for
other emergencies - in EVERY court in the United States.  Doubt it?  Go
to any courthouse where there is a real judge (not a local "magistrate" or
equiv), and ask for a copy of the "Local Rules of Court".

-- 
Yours, 
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they
should give serious consideration towards setting a better example:
Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of
unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in
the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and 
elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire
populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate...
This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States
as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers,
associates, or others.  Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of
those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the
first place...

BBC News | SOUTH ASIA | Who is Osama Bin Laden?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_155000/155236.stm
-- 

 --


natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato
summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks

Matsuo Basho

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

Re: MARTIAL LAW Cypherpunks and terrorism

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> The Taliban is not the Soviet Union.  They are roughly on par 
> with a Somali clan.  I predict casualties somewhat higher 
> than Somalia, but not much higher.  

If we put soldiers on the ground expect cacualites. Lots of them.

The Somali were a bunch of rabble. Afghanistan is a cohesive culture with
a much longer history of (succesfull in many cases) military action.
They've also had a lot more practive over the last 20 years than the
Somali.

 --

natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato
summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks

Matsuo Basho

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

Re: MARTIAL LAW Cypherpunks and terrorism

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> --
> On 14 Sep 2001, at 10:57, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
> > James - I find your statements incredible.  America is
> > being attacked for being rich and free?  I don't think so
> >
> > If these people are arabs - and i still don't have any
> > proof of that - then we can assume they blew up the WTC in
> > protest of americas support of terror and antidemocratic
> > institutions - i.e. the palestinian israel problems.
> 
> Those terrorists origins that have been reported so far come
> from parts of the arab world that are very far away from
> Israel -- and also far away from the oil.

Which is an irrelevant point for both of your positions. The conflict is
one of fundamental belief and past actions. It crosses national
boundaries. To say (as James is implying) that Pakistani's don't talk to
both Afghani's and say Syria is simply irresponsible, as well as wrong.

> > Don't forget James - if in fact Bin Landen is involved in
> > this then the facts remain that the US Government sponsored
> > and assisted him during the Russian occupation of
> > afganistan.
> 
> No the US government did not, though it surely would have had
> he showed any concern about Afghanistan earlier. 

He did, he fought during the Russian invasion (I've sent a URL to a
reference seperately). It's almost certain he at some point used US
supplied arms.

> Bin Laden hates freedom,

No, he just uses a different incompatible definition than you. For example
one of his complaints is that he is not given the freedom to move the
godless (eg US forces) out of the holy lands of Syria (eg Mecca and
Medina).

One solution, only send Muslim US service men. You got any idea how much
good will something like that would buy?...Priceless

 --

natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato
summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks

Matsuo Basho

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

FT.com | TotalSearch | Global Archive | Article - Putin won't support US invasion of Afghanistan


http://globalarchive.ft.com/globalarchive/article.html?id=010915001404
-- 

 --


natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato
summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks

Matsuo Basho

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

Re: Readers Digest poll - vote now

On Saturday, September 15, 2001, at 07:01 AM, Derek Balling wrote:

> Readers Digest and Yahoo are sponsoring a poll that asks various 
> questions about what freedoms people are willing to sacrifice...
>
> http://ypolls.yahoo.com/rd1/
>
> Hitting up public opinion for bad policies in a time of sorrow is 
> wrong, in my opinion, and its important that all sides get their voices 
> heard on this topic.
>

The sheeple are being asked in online polls, in man-on-the-street 
surveys by news crews, just how many civil liberties we should give up.

Tim's Alternative Poll:

Q: What do you think should be done to those who violate the Bill of 
Rights, for example, by suspending various of our civil liberties?:

a) arrest, trial, and, if convicted, lengthy imprisonment for tens of 
thousands of cops, judges, bureaucrats, and others complicit in any way 
whatsoever with this suspension of civil liberties

b) victims should fight back with all resources, and, if possible, kill 
their attackers

c) all government employees involved in such a suspension should be 
herded together and then doused with aviation fuel and lit...

d) we should demand to know why the CIA, er, the Taliban, altered its 
plans to hit the Capitol and instead diverted at the last minute into a 
nearly empty section of the Pentagon

Ananova - Gunmen shoot boy as warning to India not to help US against Taliban


http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_399225.html?menu=news.latestheadlines
-- 

 --


natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato
summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks

Matsuo Basho

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

Infowar: Muslim Student News list Tampering

2001-09-15 Thread Matthew Gaylor

[Note from Matthew Gaylor:  I've been getting the Muslim Student 
Association News mailing list (MSANEWS) for many years (it was 
created in 1991).  One of their editors used to subscribe to my 
mailing list and he lived nearby.  They went dead for about four 
hours this afternoon from about 2pm onward-  The message below 
details their view that their servers are being tampered with.  I 
tried to send a posting this afternoon titled "Anonymous Tip Web Link 
Now Available Worldwide to Report Information to U.S. Authorities" 
which came back with an error message.  They appear to be up and 
running again. MSANEWS Home Page:   , 
Comments to the Editors: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Submissions 
for MSANEWS:  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Problems with 
subscription:   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ]

At 9:07 PM -0500 9/14/01, MSANEWS wrote:
>  many Arab and Islamic networks are having a lot of troubles distributing
>information during these tragic times. We do not know if we're
>being jammed, if the internet is slow (it almost came to a halt on
>the day of the tragedy, as detailed in the news; Aljazeera.net
>said the slowdown was worse than the day the virus 'red code'
>hit).
>
>Your service, MSANEWS, has been receiving multiples copies of the
>same message, empty copies of message, still receiving multiples
>copies of the infamous worm from two months ago, etc.
>
>Your list, as well as others of well-known national organizations
>have experienced a lot of technical problems for the last 10 days
>or so. We have no clue about the processing problems or their
>origins.
>
>It pains our hearts that we cannot distribute what you share in a
>timely fashion. The horror of the second airplane still haunts one
>of our editors, and it disgusts him as he writes these words. We
>are extremely depressed reporting depressing news of killing and
>mayhem for the last year since the start of the intifada, and more
>now. We are losing our sanity reporting the ugliness of the world
>(torture, imprisonment, destruction and mayhem). By Allah, we are.
>And by Allah, we are just sick, sick, sick of all of this. When
>will this all end?

**
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, (614) 313-5722  ICQ: 106212065   Archived at 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/
**

Re: "bespectacled, nerdly remailer operators"

2001-09-15 Thread Incognito Innominatus


> > Right, ninja troops carrying away bespectacled, nerdly remailer 
> > operators. Here's a better fantasy.  They'll hire $1000/night 
> > superhookers and seduce the remailer operators into giving up their 
> > keys.  Both have about equal chances of reality.
>
> Pictures of three of these bespectacled, nerdly remailer operators:
>
> http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/DC8_Lucky_BDU_4.jpg
> http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/rabbiGoneNuts.jpeg
> http://www.melontraffickers.com/pics/DC8_noise_and_Lucky_hauling_hardware.jpg

Well, there are some spectacles in evidence... but the guns don't exactly
fit the nerd image, do they.  About the hot babe... would that be one
of those $1000/night hookers?  Maybe Plan B is operational after all.

> Clearly individuals are enemies of the state. Expect the pictures above to
> be broadcast and rebroadcast on the evening news after the SWAT teams
> eliminate this threat to the sheeple. Expect similar photos of other 
> remailer operators, Photoshop touch-ups used liberally if required.

Just post them to remops, Declan will take care of the distribution...

SIG: Linux Today - GNU-Darwin authentication and encryption position paper


http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-09-15-004-20-OP-CY-SW
-- 

 --


natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato
summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks

Matsuo Basho

   The Armadillo Group   ,::;::-.  James Choate
   Austin, Tx   /:'/ ``::>/|/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   www.ssz.com.',  `/( e\  512-451-7087
   -~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-

Re: Crypto-anonymity greases HUMINT intelligence flows

--
On 14 Sep 2001, at 11:10, Aimee Farr wrote:
> I don't know why Tim makes me out to be such a bitch. I'm
> pro-crypto and pro-privacy.

You are pretending, not very well, to be someone you are not.

As to whether the real you is a government provocateur, I
have no idea.  But the real you is not this persona "Aimee",
nor does it have the beliefs to which "Aimee" pretends.  You
are also making an effort to conceal your writing style, or
writing in a style that is not natural to you.

--digsig
 James A. Donald
 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
 OP7S7J6E/jPn1WNvSzb+pA2z+0VVj2WJhEkTFaGv
 4y+qb8a++xiuG+5UBFqkOYx9bshRdN4uBnBUvsork

Noam on WTC Collapse

2001-09-15 Thread Eric Cordian



   On the Bombings
 
Noam Chomsky
  
 
 The terrorist attacks were major atrocities. In scale they may not
 reach the level of many others, for example, Clinton's bombing of
 the Sudan with no credible pretext, destroying half its
 pharmaceutical supplies and killing unknown numbers of people (no
 one knows, because the US blocked an inquiry at the UN and no one
 cares to pursue it). Not to speak of much worse cases, which easily
 come to mind. But that this was a horrendous crime is not in doubt.
 The primary victims, as usual, were working people: janitors,
 secretaries, firemen, etc. It is likely to prove to be a crushing
 blow to Palestinians and other poor and oppressed people. It is
 also likely to lead to harsh security controls, with many possible
 ramifications for undermining civil liberties and internal freedom.
 
 
 The events reveal, dramatically, the foolishness of the project of
 "missile defense." As has been obvious all along, and pointed out
 repeatedly by strategic analysts, if anyone wants to cause immense
 damage in the US, including weapons of mass destruction, they are
 highly unlikely to launch a missile attack, thus guaranteeing their
 immediate destruction. There are innumerable easier ways that are
 basically unstoppable. But today's events will, very likely, be
 exploited to increase the pressure to develop these systems and put
 them into place. "Defense" is a thin cover for plans for
 militarization of space, and with good PR, even the flimsiest
 arguments will carry some weight among a frightened public.
 
 
 In short, the crime is a gift to the hard jingoist right, those who
 hope to use force to control their domains. That is even putting
 aside the likely US actions, and what they will trigger -- possibly
 more attacks like this one, or worse. The prospects ahead are even
 more ominous than they appeared to be before the latest atrocities.
 
 
 As to how to react, we have a choice. We can express justified
 horror; we can seek to understand what may have led to the crimes,
 which means making an effort to enter the minds of the likely
 perpetrators. If we choose the latter course, we can do no better,
 I think, than to listen to the words of Robert Fisk, whose direct
 knowledge and insight into affairs of the region is unmatched after
 many years of distinguished reporting. Describing "The wickedness
 and awesome cruelty of a crushed and humiliated people," he writes
 that "this is not the war of democracy versus terror that the world
 will be asked to believe in the coming days. It is also about
 American missiles smashing into Palestinian homes and US
 helicopters firing missiles into a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 and
 American shells crashing into a village called Qana and about a
 Lebanese militia  paid and uniformed by America's Israeli ally
 hacking and raping and murdering their way through refugee camps."
 And much more. Again, we have a choice: we may try to understand,
 or refuse to do so, contributing to the likelihood that much worse
 lies ahead.
 
 
 Noam Chomsky


-- 
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

Re: MARTIAL LAW Cypherpunks and terrorism

--
On 14 Sep 2001, at 10:57, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
> James - I find your statements incredible.  America is
> being attacked for being rich and free?  I don't think so
>
> If these people are arabs - and i still don't have any
> proof of that - then we can assume they blew up the WTC in
> protest of americas support of terror and antidemocratic
> institutions - i.e. the palestinian israel problems.

Those terrorists origins that have been reported so far come
from parts of the arab world that are very far away from
Israel -- and also far away from the oil.

> Don't forget James - if in fact Bin Landen is involved in
> this then the facts remain that the US Government sponsored
> and assisted him during the Russian occupation of
> afganistan.

No the US government did not, though it surely would have had
he showed any concern about Afghanistan earlier.  Bin Laden
was entirely untroubled by godless communists conquering,
ruling, and terrorizing a muslim country.   Bin Laden and the
Taliban showed their faces long after the real holy warriors,
people who do not make holy war on women and children, had
sent the commies packing.

Bin Laden hates freedom, the freedom which leads to the US
culturally dominating the middle east.  He does not worry
much about foreign military domination.  The Soviet Union was
a mere military threat, which did not endanger the souls of
muslims, only their freedom and property. 

--digsig
 James A. Donald
 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
 DEJ5rgW8IcZ8JDlNeH+IgJOaekLOQXfOGH3rPjN8
 4Na1wToW+otgrI6/UiTJjECa2nTf2XyUK425cXn5q

Re: The Enemies List