Re: 1st amendment
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 08:46:21PM -0800, Major Variola (ret) wrote: At 10:56 PM 11/16/04 -0500, R.A. Hettinga wrote: http://cbs11tv.com/localnews/local_story_317193815.html/resources_storyPrintableView DALLAS SERVER COMPANY CARRIES ZARQAWI DEATH VIDEOS, TERRORIST WEBSITES Any State employee who attempts to oppress free speech, including video, deserves killing. Read the Bill of Rights. The next day, Zarqawi's spokesman announced the proof and provided a link to the video of the exploding car bomb, on The Planet.com. Asked how he would like The Plant to respond, ... ^^^ And any news editor who so grossly fails to copy edit also deserves killing. Telling little slip, tho'. -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpLfOs6L8axx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 1st amendment
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 08:46:21PM -0800, Major Variola (ret) wrote: At 10:56 PM 11/16/04 -0500, R.A. Hettinga wrote: http://cbs11tv.com/localnews/local_story_317193815.html/resources_storyPrintableView DALLAS SERVER COMPANY CARRIES ZARQAWI DEATH VIDEOS, TERRORIST WEBSITES Any State employee who attempts to oppress free speech, including video, deserves killing. Read the Bill of Rights. The next day, Zarqawi's spokesman announced the proof and provided a link to the video of the exploding car bomb, on The Planet.com. Asked how he would like The Plant to respond, ... ^^^ And any news editor who so grossly fails to copy edit also deserves killing. Telling little slip, tho'. -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp56CumofW8K.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Novell-SUSE Sponsors Openswan (fwd from brian-slashdotnews@hyperreal.org)
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 10:17:54AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 20 Jun 2004 04:26:01 -
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Novell-SUSE Sponsors Openswan
User-Agent: SlashdotNewsScooper/0.0.3
Link: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/20/0124214
Posted by: timothy, on 2004-06-20 03:03:00
Topic: security, 37 comments
from the they're-building-a-behemoth dept.
[1]hsjones writes Concerned about the demise of FreeS/WAN? Well,
looks like Openswan is going to be a good, strong open source IPsec
project going forward.
What, precisely, is broken about KAME?
What is it about the Linux crowd that, if it's two years old, it's
apparently time to reimplement it. (Firewall code, software RAID,
libc, you know, whatever. Bonus points if it means a kernel A{B,P}I
modification...)
How 'bout just importing the reference implementation which Works,
something FreeS/WAN was never actualy able to say?
Oh well.
--
gabriel rosenkoetter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpIBOXBGjr4L.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Novell-SUSE Sponsors Openswan (fwd from brian-slashdotnews@hyperreal.org)
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 10:17:54AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 20 Jun 2004 04:26:01 -
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Novell-SUSE Sponsors Openswan
User-Agent: SlashdotNewsScooper/0.0.3
Link: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/20/0124214
Posted by: timothy, on 2004-06-20 03:03:00
Topic: security, 37 comments
from the they're-building-a-behemoth dept.
[1]hsjones writes Concerned about the demise of FreeS/WAN? Well,
looks like Openswan is going to be a good, strong open source IPsec
project going forward.
What, precisely, is broken about KAME?
What is it about the Linux crowd that, if it's two years old, it's
apparently time to reimplement it. (Firewall code, software RAID,
libc, you know, whatever. Bonus points if it means a kernel A{B,P}I
modification...)
How 'bout just importing the reference implementation which Works,
something FreeS/WAN was never actualy able to say?
Oh well.
--
gabriel rosenkoetter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp63FhAAYZRb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: 1st amend, thoughtcrime, schools as pipelines to jail
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Major Variola (ret.) wrote: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-threat18jun18001434,1,6789200.story?c oll=la-headlines-california On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 04:36:14PM -0400, Sunder wrote: Anyone got a cypherpunks/cypherpunks like login for the turd of a login? cpunks/cpunks works. -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]
Re: Destroying government computers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 08:16:57PM -0700, Tim May wrote: If Orrin Hatch proposes such a thing, we can propose technologies which identify those from .gov or .mil or other Congress/Gov't. domains and send lethal viruses and suchlike back to them to destroy their machines if they illegally connect to our machines. I've said this before, but I'll say it again: Spooks don't get AOL CDs too? If you were going to go about blowing up someone's computer, would you *really* do it in a traceable way? Wouldn't IP spoofing and throwaway connections just be SOP at that point? Do you expect a government so obviously disinterested in its citizens' privacy to openly disclose their source IP address? C'mon. Or do you just think that they'll be stupid enough not to know to bother? Certainly, your first retaliation would get their attention, and they have plenty of clout to hire smart people to deal with this correctly. - -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (NetBSD) iD8DBQE+8dXp9ehacAz5CRoRAsN/AJ9k4qR3SWwrmKqfQXKsiRp2TOJJVACghJao s0JIR1ud+zuSeUqFN8LbFZ0= =ztKl -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: I for one am glad that...
On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 01:39:59PM -0600, Keith Ray wrote: The UN authorized force in resolution 678 to uphold current and future resolutions. The UN voted unanimously to declare Iraq in violation of previous UN resolutions in 1441. The UN weapons inspector's reports detailed many omissions in Iraq's weapons declaration and failures to fully cooperate with inspectors. This entirely disregards the UN stating a position against immediate action on the US's part, which President Bush chose to flatly ignore in his address Monday evening. The UN Security Council is allowed to change its mind. Just because they said the use of force could be justified doesn't mean that the Security Council approves of the US's current actions; that's completely twisting their words (and quite obviously not the case). So-called terrorists hate not our freedom, but our meddling. This is no excuse for use of unconventional warfare against the US nor does it delegitimize the US's use of force to defend themselves. I think it was intended as a suggestion that bombing Iraq won't make the use of unconventional warfare against the US any less likely. And get enough of the EU pissed off and it could lead to the use of conventional warfare against the US. Fun! As far as dragging the nation to war, 70% of the American people are behind him. Oh? Really? You asked them yourself? Because you sure didn't provide a reference or a statistical error distribution... Damn those free elections! Why can't we just agree to let you pick the world's leaders? Oh, you mean the free elections like the one that got fixed by President Bush's brother in Florida in 2002? Or maybe you mean the kind of election in which a candidate can win the popular vote but still not be elected, like in 2002 when the current Bush was elected? Right then. (No, it doesn't matter whether there's proof; the fact that there's reasonable doubt is damning.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]
Re: Orwell's Victory goods come home
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 08:54:13PM -0600, J.A. Terranson wrote: WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The cafeteria menus in the three House office buildings changed the name of french fries to freedom fries, in a culinary rebuke of France stemming from anger over the country's refusal to support the U.S. position on Iraq. Ditto for french toast, which will be known as freedom toast. ::sigh:: So, my two thoughts: 1. Yeah, the French will be really insulted by our removing their name from a Belgian dish. Oh yeah. They're quakin'. 2. We're trying to out-petty the French? The French are the pettiest fuckers you ever will meet![1] They still want the national dateline moved to Paris! They have a government bureaucracy devoted to keeping foreign words out of common usage in Proper French! C'mon... [1] Nothing personal against French subscribers. I'm sure at least 30% of you are mostly reasonable people. More than that and you're beating out the US subscribers. -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [USPTO-IS-109-SA@USPTO.GOV: ScanMail Message: To Sender, sensitive content found and action t aken.]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 11:22:19AM -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote: h -- wonder what those dirty words were? Did you use one of the FCC seven? In any case, I was at first a bit irritated to get these. Okay, I'm still irritated, but it's interesting, because it means that whoever at the patent office has decided s/he needs to monitor cypherpunks is self-censoring their input. Which means if you don't want them to see your cypherpunks post, you've got a decent chance at it by just saying fuck in it somewhere. Seems like poor planning to me. As for the unsolicited responses to list posting... accusing the US gov't of bad netiquette is sort of like accusing a three-year-old of bad table manners. It's true, but it isn't going to get you anywhere till the accused grows up a bit. - -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (NetBSD) iD8DBQE+Z4Y+9ehacAz5CRoRAokEAJwJpsqnVX30InQPzaIo3PDPP3OFkACgmmTh FRxkMDiNdtZV61+oeml0yHA= =duRK -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [USPTO-IS-109-SA@USPTO.GOV: ScanMail Message: To Sender, sensitive content found and action t aken.]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 11:22:19AM -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote: h -- wonder what those dirty words were? Did you use one of the FCC seven? In any case, I was at first a bit irritated to get these. Okay, I'm still irritated, but it's interesting, because it means that whoever at the patent office has decided s/he needs to monitor cypherpunks is self-censoring their input. Which means if you don't want them to see your cypherpunks post, you've got a decent chance at it by just saying fuck in it somewhere. Seems like poor planning to me. As for the unsolicited responses to list posting... accusing the US gov't of bad netiquette is sort of like accusing a three-year-old of bad table manners. It's true, but it isn't going to get you anywhere till the accused grows up a bit. - -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (NetBSD) iD8DBQE+Z4Y+9ehacAz5CRoRAokEAJwJpsqnVX30InQPzaIo3PDPP3OFkACgmmTh FRxkMDiNdtZV61+oeml0yHA= =duRK -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Anarchy, and confusion
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 01:08:29PM -0800, Tim May wrote: anarchy (without a top authority -- an arch). We pick our [...] Anarchy means an arch means free choice means responsibility for I confess I haven't a clue what you mean by an arch, though your first quote jives. Anarchy comes from the Greek anarchos (that ch is a chi... but the Italians mudered that particular character for a diphthong along the way; a pity: it'd make fuck a three letter word). an- is a negative prefix, and archos means rule. So what's an arch? Like in St. Louis? Like in Noah? Or do you think all the illiterates who can't be bothered to read Rand spent that time reading Classical Greek instead (I mean, *I* did, but...), but they just can't get it unless you break it into particles for them? - -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (NetBSD) iD8DBQE+ZUcw9ehacAz5CRoRAhLOAJ9/JhE619ho6yf4JpPI6xHjxKYhpACdFGGU B5mTSJQZI86HbTmK0h/L/jA= =/0Ee -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Anarchy, and confusion
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 01:08:29PM -0800, Tim May wrote: anarchy (without a top authority -- an arch). We pick our [...] Anarchy means an arch means free choice means responsibility for I confess I haven't a clue what you mean by an arch, though your first quote jives. Anarchy comes from the Greek anarchos (that ch is a chi... but the Italians mudered that particular character for a diphthong along the way; a pity: it'd make fuck a three letter word). an- is a negative prefix, and archos means rule. So what's an arch? Like in St. Louis? Like in Noah? Or do you think all the illiterates who can't be bothered to read Rand spent that time reading Classical Greek instead (I mean, *I* did, but...), but they just can't get it unless you break it into particles for them? - -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (NetBSD) iD8DBQE+ZUcw9ehacAz5CRoRAhLOAJ9/JhE619ho6yf4JpPI6xHjxKYhpACdFGGU B5mTSJQZI86HbTmK0h/L/jA= =/0Ee -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Trivial OTP generation method? (makernd.c)
On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 03:11:57AM +0100, Thomas Shaddack wrote: At this moment, I am pondering to design a small analog noise generator for the microphone input of a sound card (as most of my servers which could need this toy have an onboard soundcard). What's wrong with the old trick of cranking the gain all the way up, plugging no microphone at all in, and getting thermal noise? -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Wash the key, don't clear it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 01:49:34AM -0500, Patrick Chkoreff wrote: Now see, I've known about volatile since about 1985. It's just that all these cryptography books make such a big show and hoopla about zeroing out memory. Even the GnuPG code does the 'burn_stack' thing, which was shown on the DBS list to be vulnerable. So I figured the volatile feature must be horribly unreliable. I guess I'll just have to check the assembler output from gcc to make sure. volatile must, by definition work correctly, and it really does mean don't touch this code you bastard optimizer. As Perry Metzger pointed out over on his cryptography list when this came up several months ago, the basic device drivers running your computer wouldn't work if volatile wouldn't work because there are situations where you MUST read something from a hardware address and discard the output in order to trigger the device to take some certain action. That device's specs are completely outside the ken of the compiler, which is why we have volatile. If it doesn't work in your compiler, your compiler is broken by design. - -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (NetBSD) iD8DBQE+X23D9ehacAz5CRoRAnI4AJ9PtTpOxRXyN2MvJgnrj+MoSmMYKwCfXWhf fSB9Kqh1hjBiCUC6euQOz9U= =QgBZ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Trivial OPT generation method?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 03:37:10PM -, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote: 1) Get 8 bytes from /dev/urandom. (Just for sure.) Put them into the You probably know this if you use it, but /dev/random is the most random one, as it always uses system entropy, rather than falling back on an algorithm to generate more bits than are available in the pool. He only needs a pseudo-random seed, though. The real random comes from the radio white-noise. I'd say it'd be better to not waste the system's random bytes on this at all, but just to gen your own pseudo-random bytes using /dev/urandom's out-of-entropy function from your OS of choice (audit, I guess, but it's mostly just to blank the memory of anything useful). After that, you actually want to feed the entropy you're getting from the radio tuner *into* /dev/[u]random. - -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (NetBSD) iD8DBQE+XONt9ehacAz5CRoRAl9yAJ40RRX2GqexHdYa76owwab8sjd+bQCfRn6s pv5PaYjQB4fkCE8QefC+u8g= =3OKq -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: AP Al Qaeda
I'm inserting attributions and reformatting cited text, since you seem incapable of quoting in a legible manner. I'm also only replying to the parts of this that particularly amuse me. You should be aware that I'm not taking you seriously. Ordinarily, I wouldn't feed the trolls, but I'm bored. On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 10:36:41PM +1100, mattd wrote: [gr wrote:] One can (and often does) find him because he makes a mistake in the act of commiting the crime. Which, if I'm reading my history right, is what's hampered the noisy proponents of AP up to this point already. Crime? Wot crime,guvnor? Jim and CJ were not 'noisy'.imo. Im a bit noisy cos Im pushing the 'let it all hang out' version. Jim Bell was arrested for, charged with, and convicted of crossing US state lines with the intent to threaten a federal official, a felony in this country. Felony == crime. Carl Johnson was similarly convicted of threatening a federal official, still a felony in the US. Regardless of what you think of the laws involved, these two broke them according to the legal system under which they chose to operate, which is, by definition, crime. Bully for you that you live (or claim to live) in Australia under a different legal system. The point here is that Bell, Johnson, and you have all made yourselves prime suspects if any public official (especially one in the US) is killed in a way that can be linked to assassination politics, and the still-rather-powerful executive branch of the US government is likely to come looking for you (and Bell and Johnson, if they're not incarcerated at that point) if someone should be, and likely to charge you with incitement to murder. It doesn't matter whether or not this is Right (I'm willing to stipulate that it's Wrong), it is the reality of the situation. The crypto and electronic currency ideas used in assassination politics are kind of neat as a thought experiment, but the execution (no pun intended) has, thus far, fallen extremely short. Unless you know something I don't and would care to share it. Mmm,where do we start,lets get some firebrands and go up to the proffrs? Look at sites with no logs for quad anon 'predictors' who may be overseas briefly visiting cybercafes,Good luck china. My point is that knowing who was paid to kill someone is not the only way to find out that the assassin performed the assassination. The assassin can easily be (and often is) caught in the act. The assassin can fail (and, for bonus points, also be caught). There are plenty of examples of assassination attempts for which there is no monetary paper trail in which the assassin has been caught. (Let's see, in US history off the top of my head: John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, and John W. Hinckley Jr.) The issue of getting caught is totally orthogonal to the monetary paper trail; they intersect if a LEA uses the monetary paper trail to catch the assassin, but that's not the only way to catch him. Getting caught, though, must be a concern equal to, if not greater than, compensation to an assassin interested in getting paid for assassination (since he can't get paid if he gets caught or, at least, it won't do him much good in prison). (you just contradicted yrself btw.) How so? The one person killed will have had to have done a lot of evil shit to get enough pooled (presumably) to tempt a seasoned pro. I think you've watched Grosse Pointe Blank five too many times. How many seasoned professional killers do you really imagine are running around in the US these days? No, really, I want to know what you think. Unless some professional killer turns all altruistic,stranger things have happened.The killer could be suicidal.another possibility.Lots of scenarios possible here,movie scripts,even. Hrm. That kind of counteracts the utility of Bell's system of remuneration for assassination, doesn't it? If the assassin would have done it for free (or, at least, cheap) and is willing to die trying, why would he bother with all the crypto flim-flam? Sure, maybe having a list of recommended targets would be helpful for all those civil-liberty-loving suicidal assassins out there just searching for a suitably morally devoid victim, but there's not much need for an organization to hold predictions in escrow then, now is there? KILL THE PRESIDENT! Id buy that for a dollar! Really, I don't see what you've got against W. He's actually just a harmless twit, another Ronald Reagan. You really ought to be more interested in his cabinet, starting with (my former governor, who managed to lose an election to a dead man) Ashcroft. They're the real assholes. But you'd have a hard time knowing that considering you don't even live in the country whose public figures you're so interested in having assassinated. Cheers mattd, apologies to the unamused on cypherpunks... -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 From: gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL
Re: AP Al Qaeda
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 09:50:24PM +0100, Nomen Nescio wrote: Just keep in mind that AP is a joke among knowledgeable technologists for its unworkability, but a wonderful joke on those who believe it's anything more than a taunt. Total bullshit again. Sure, AP requires anonymous digital cash, but so do most other elements of the cypherpunk vision. No, no. AP is funny because it's impracticeable. One does not find an assassin exclusively by tracing who paid him to kill. One can (and often does) find him because he makes a mistake in the act of commiting the crime. Which, if I'm reading my history right, is what's hampered the noisy proponents of AP up to this point already. The point is that Bell's theory does a really good job of sorting out the business end of assassination, but it does nothing for actually teaching people how to kill. More importantly, it doesn't teach people how to avoid getting caught. Killing one person, especially a public official, pisses a whole bunch of people off. Those people have a tendency to come find their buddy's killer. No kind of real or threatened assassination can weaken a government in which a majority of the governed people believe. It can only make it seem more righteous and be more strong. -- gabriel rosenkoetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]
