Re: News: House votes life sentences for hackers (fwd)
You only need to send it to the list, I'll get it ;) I don't really like getting private email from total strangers. For obvious reasons. -- We don't see things as they are, [EMAIL PROTECTED] we see them as we are. www.ssz.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anais Nin www.open-forge.org On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Tyler Durden wrote: > Holy Shit! > > Does that mean that some 18-year-old script kiddie could get LIFE? > > If this wasn't such an immense pile of stupidity, I'd get angry over the > obvious invasions of privacy, etc... > > Having worked in many a company, I KNOW how most management systems work. > Let's say there's something as simple as a DoS attack that could take down > Company A. Programmer Joe Shmo recognizes this and tells his boss, who wants > to cover his own ass and tells HIS boss about the problem. This boss will > then think about the issue for 3 seconds, and reply "well, hackers get life > in prison now so no one will ever try it". Meanwhile, guys who don't care > about getting life (Osama's posse, who probably won't even live in the US > for this) will say: "Shit these guys are stupid! We just found a way to take > down the whole US economy with 20 lines of code!" > > Send script kiddies away for life? How about sending the CTOs of publically > traded companies away for life if something as simple as a DoS attack robs > little old ladies of their retirement $? > > > > > > > > > >From: Jim Choate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: News: House votes life sentences for hackers (fwd) > >Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 07:31:38 -0600 (CST) > > > >http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-965750.html > > > > > > -- > > > > > > We don't see things as they are, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > we see them as we are. www.ssz.com > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Anais Nin www.open-forge.org > > > > > > > _ > MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: News: House votes life sentences for hackers (fwd)
At 11:59 PM 11/15/2002 -0500, Dave Emery wrote: On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 08:01:08PM -0800, Tim May wrote: Whilst hardly (understatement of the year) a Washington insider, I would speculate that perhaps someone in the DOJ has gotten concerned about recent white hat hacker projects like gru-radio and takes the potential threat from bright hackers with IQs 40-60 or more points over the scanner crowd far more seriously than some truck driver with a modified Radio Shack scanner. And I am on record as advising some of the folks doing gnu-radio that in my personal opinion it was rather unlikely that a user programmable open source software radio would ever get FCC approval or be legally sold in the USA under current regulations on scanning radio receivers. No FCC approval should be required. GNURadio is not a RADIO but an extensible toolkit of signal processing software for building test instruments. Test instruments are essentially unregulated by the FCC. See for yourself by checking out the regulatory compliance section a spectrum analyzer or signal generator from HP or Tektronix. steve
Re: News: House votes life sentences for hackers (fwd)
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 08:01:08PM -0800, Tim May wrote: > > And software-defined radios, which are now coming from at least two > sources, will make this even easier. Indeed, "trespassing" into the Big > Brother-owned frequencies will be even easier. > > We may even see SDRs outlawed from the outset as "terrorist tools." > > (Inasmuch as tuning an SDR is nothing more than entering numbers, or > running simple programs, we may also see "coding as speech" arguments > resurrected. All for naught, though, as Camp Liberty in Guantanamo Bay > has room for 12,000 more Thought Criminals.) > Rumor has it that the ECPA hobby listening penalty increase in the CSEA was, surprisingly, not originated by the House Republicans burned by the intercept of the Newt call or by cellphone lobbyists tying to save money on encryption but by the Bush Justice Department. The DOJ is supposed to have asked for the added penalties as an addition to the original CSEA. This is an interesting turnabout from their attitude back in 1985 when the ECPA was being crafted when they described such restrictions as unenforcable and something they didn't want to deal with. Whilst hardly (understatement of the year) a Washington insider, I would speculate that perhaps someone in the DOJ has gotten concerned about recent white hat hacker projects like gru-radio and takes the potential threat from bright hackers with IQs 40-60 or more points over the scanner crowd far more seriously than some truck driver with a modified Radio Shack scanner. And I am on record as advising some of the folks doing gnu-radio that in my personal opinion it was rather unlikely that a user programmable open source software radio would ever get FCC approval or be legally sold in the USA under current regulations on scanning radio receivers. So I share Tim's assessment about the likelyhood of such being banned or tightly restricted, though it seems hard to see how they can be kept out of the hands of hams for use on ham bands (and more such ham projects appear every day). -- Dave Emery N1PRE, [EMAIL PROTECTED] DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass. PGP fingerprint = 2047/4D7B08D1 DE 6E E1 CC 1F 1D 96 E2 5D 27 BD B0 24 88 C3 18
Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 09:22:48PM -0500, Mike Diehl wrote: > On Thursday 14 November 2002 11:29 pm, Harmon Seaver wrote: > >How wonderful for you. Many of us sincerely wish we could practice > > our religion freely as well. > > And just who is stopping you? And what religion is it? The Christers. And the gov't, of course. The Christers began this as soon as they hit the shores of this hemisphere, including inquisitions, torture, destruction of temples, etc. It was formalized by the US gov't in the 1880's with a law forbidding Native American religous ceremonies - you might have heard of Wounded Knee? Where hundreds of peaceful, unarmed people were murdered as they were involved in religious ceremonies. Many of these laws are still in effect today. Many religions are persecuted in the US today. If you were paying attention, you would have heard, during the debates, Dubbya being asked what he would do to alleviate the US military's rules against Wiccan ceremonies by soldiers. He replied that Wicca wasn't a religion and wouldn't be allowed. Wicca not a relgion --sheesh, it's a much older religion than the Christers have. The list of persecutions and prosectutions of various religions in the US is voluminous -- NY pigs are especially fond of raiding Santeria and Vodun ceremonies. The WOSD is really religous persecution. Many world religions use cannabis in their worship -- Hinduism, Rastafarianism, Shinto (where even the Emperor of Japan partakes in cannabis during the biggest Shinto ceremony) -- and shamanism invariably uses entheobotanicals all across the globe. Shamans using traditional sacrements such as ayahuasca, psilocybic mushrooms, or peyote risk prison in the US. So much for 1st Amendment relgious freedoms, eh? All because of the Christers, especially Christer politicians. I like the Rasta chant -- "Burn de church, burn de priest, burn de Pope, burn Babylon." > > > > I can criticize my government and stay out of > > > prison. > >Can you? As long as you do it at home or in your local bar, I > > suppose. Try taking it out on the street and getting in their face. > > H. What do you mean by "getting in their face?" You apparantly don't watch the news. Ever see any coverage of the WTO protests? > > > > I don't have soldiers living with/watching me. > >Plenty of pigs watching a lot of us. The fedzis are everywhere > > these days. Perhaps you've heard about them infiltrating church > > groups, demanding the reading lists from libraries, etc. How do you > > know they haven't bugged your house? Your computer? Got Carnivore at > > your ISP? > > Well, between gpg, cryptofs, and IPSec, I doubt that they have my computer > bugged, and I don't worry about Carnivore. I can and do encrypt anything I > don't wish to share. > Lot of good that does you when the keyboard snaggers send your passwds to the pigs, or the hidden cameras in your room record your keystrokes. I notice you ignored the above about cointelpro and libraries, etc. We live in a police state. (rest of this boring discussion snipped, what's the point of talking to sleep-walking quislings) -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com "War is just a racket ... something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small group knows what its about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses." --- Major General Smedley Butler, 1933 "Our overriding purpose, from the beginning through to the present day, has been world domination - that is, to build and maintain the capacity to coerce everybody else on the planet: nonviolently, if possible, and violently, if necessary. But the purpose of US foreign policy of domination is not just to make the rest of the world jump through hoops; the purpose is to faciliate our exploitation of resources." - Ramsey Clark, former US Attorney General http://www.thesunmagazine.org/bully.html
Re: Fwd: [fc] list of papers accepted to FC'03
> What ever happened to Financial Cryptography? The > organisers did say they were going to look at wider > accessibility for the coming year, but I see only > these papers that are, from the titles at least, > anything that speaks to non-cryptographers: ... > > How Much Security is Enough to Stop a Thief? > > Stuart E. Schechter and Michael D. Smith ... > Even they're a stretch. All are specialised, and > none are of interest to the non-deep-techies. I don't think you'll find our paper to be overly technical - at least not from a computer science or cryptographic perspective. We wrote this paper because we believe that determining the level of security necessary to deter an adversary is a problem of more general interest. Best regards Stuart Schechter
Does the app exist...
I'm looking for an application that sits on a webserver and receives encrypted images and audio, de-encrypts them, and auto-posts the images. This application will have a public key which on-the-ground videographers (or uploaders) can use. But it's private key no human being knows. The application here is that an uploader doesn't want to get caught with an intercepted message as "proof" that they were illegally transmitting images. AND, the authorities won't be able to beat the key out of the uploader so as to use it to ever determine what was actually sent... TD "Thunderbirds are go!" _ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: News: House votes life sentences for hackers (fwd)
On Friday, November 15, 2002, at 07:48 PM, Dave Emery wrote: I might hasten to add that as I am sure Declan knows, this addition to the Homeland Defense Act also includes the CSEA provisions that turn hobby listening to certain easy to receive but off limit radio signals from an offense with a maximum penalty of a $500 fine to a federal felony with 5 years in prison as penalty. When this legislation is signed into law ANY violation of the radio listening bans in the ECPA will be a serious felony, no lesser penalty for the first offense or because the intercept was done out of curiosity or the desire to experiment with radio gear. And no lesser penalty because the offense was not for private financial gain or commercial advantage or in furtherance of a crime as the current law allows. What this means is that while one would have been hard pressed to do more than commit a federal offense with a $500 fine by purchasing a scanner or receiver from Radio Shack and tuning around just to see what one hears, one can now commit a serious felony by doing this extremely easily. And software-defined radios, which are now coming from at least two sources, will make this even easier. Indeed, "trespassing" into the Big Brother-owned frequencies will be even easier. We may even see SDRs outlawed from the outset as "terrorist tools." (Inasmuch as tuning an SDR is nothing more than entering numbers, or running simple programs, we may also see "coding as speech" arguments resurrected. All for naught, though, as Camp Liberty in Guantanamo Bay has room for 12,000 more Thought Criminals.) "All your frequencies are belong to us." Welcome to the Total State. Clinton and Bush have succeeded where pikers like Adolf failed. --Tim May
Re: [>Htech] Lying With Pixels (fwd)
At 04:37 PM 11/16/2002 +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 09:28:46 -0600 (CST) From: Premise Checker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [>Htech] Lying With Pixels Jul/Aug 00: Lying With Pixels http://www2.bc.edu/~okeefew/349/rfppixels.htm Request for Proposal MT 349 Fall 2002 _ July/August 2000 Lying With Pixels Seeing is no longer believing. The image you see on the evening news could well be a fake -a fabrication of fast new video-manipulation technology. International distributors in Hollywood will love this, for a time. Combined Video Rewrite with VoxWorks' ReelVoice ^ oops http://www.forbes.com/2002/08/14/0814tentech.html and the problem of international films making it in the U.S. or vice versa abroad my be solved. steve
Re: [fc] list of papers accepted to FC'03
Tim May wrote: On Friday, November 15, 2002, at 07:55 AM, IanG wrote: -- I see pretty much a standard list of crypto papers here, albeit crypto with a waving of finance salt. What ever happened to Financial Cryptography? The organisers did say they were going to look at wider accessibility for the coming year, but I see only these papers that are, from the titles at least, anything that speaks to non-cryptographers: ...list of a few slightly interesting-sounding papers elided... Even they're a stretch. All are specialised, and none are of interest to the non-deep-techies. On a related front, how much interest is there in running EFCE this coming June? Is the conference still being held on an expensive Caribbean island? I've never been to an FC Conference, for various reasons. Certainly one of them is that I have things I'd rather buy with the $3000 I'd have to spend if I attended. My speculation, not having attended but having talked to people who have, is that the conference is a junket, a reason to go to Caribbean during the winter. Fine, if IBM or Citicorp is paying. A nice, untaxable fringe benefit. Not so fine for hackers and people like us. For that, there's the Codecon in SF which Bram and Len and others are involved in. EFCE is pretty much CodeCon for FC (though it might be fairer to but it the other way round, since EFCE came first). Cheers, Ben. -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html Available for contract work.
Re: Yet another attempt to defraud egold!
I got one of the scam emails. I haven't been a member of the Cypherpunks mailing list for years. But, I have posted to the list. I suspect the scammer harvested the addresses from http://www.inet-one.com/cypherpunks/.
Re: News: House votes life sentences for hackers (fwd)
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 12:11:35PM -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 10:09:37AM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: > > Holy Shit! > > > > Does that mean that some 18-year-old script kiddie could get LIFE? > > Yes, that's what the law says. Has to be a malicious attack, etc. I linked > to the text of the bill -- you may want to read the gory details for yourself. > > -Declan I might hasten to add that as I am sure Declan knows, this addition to the Homeland Defense Act also includes the CSEA provisions that turn hobby listening to certain easy to receive but off limit radio signals from an offense with a maximum penalty of a $500 fine to a federal felony with 5 years in prison as penalty. When this legislation is signed into law ANY violation of the radio listening bans in the ECPA will be a serious felony, no lesser penalty for the first offense or because the intercept was done out of curiosity or the desire to experiment with radio gear. And no lesser penalty because the offense was not for private financial gain or commercial advantage or in furtherance of a crime as the current law allows. What this means is that while one would have been hard pressed to do more than commit a federal offense with a $500 fine by purchasing a scanner or receiver from Radio Shack and tuning around just to see what one hears, one can now commit a serious felony by doing this extremely easily. The radio spectrum allocations in use at the moment are arcane and complex, and making sure that everything one listens to is legal requires a great deal more FCC and ECPA knowlage that most of the public possesses. An example of this is that the ECPA currently includes an obscure ban on listening to broadcast remote pickup signals used to relay audio back to the studio from remote sites like traffic helos. So tuning in the traffic helo feeds to find out about the traffic jam ahead will be technically a serious federal felony. And many of these signals are intermixed cheek to jowl with legal to listen to police and other public safety and business communications, so it is not that easy to be sure which is which. And certainly anyone reading my words here must realize that such draconian and essentially unenforcable laws will only be used in selective prosecutions to squash those the government doesn't approve of... they certainly won't increase communications privacy or security and may in fact decrease it if they allow the draconian penalties to be used as an excuse for not spending the money to implement secure and effective encryption of anything sensitive flowing over a radio link. -- Dave Emery N1PRE, [EMAIL PROTECTED] DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass. PGP fingerprint = 2047/4D7B08D1 DE 6E E1 CC 1F 1D 96 E2 5D 27 BD B0 24 88 C3 18
OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's next?
My Fellow Cypherpunks, Sunder says: >In the end, that will produce far more terrorists than we have seen todate, more of our freedoms > will be taken away unil an equilibrium ofrights will exist between t>he USA and dictatorships like Iraq.Luckily there's only two more years before the next >election... About "...produce far more terrorists...". The truth is much more horrible. 9/11 appears to have been done by the centralized power ruling elites. 9/11 was no attempt at freedom by desperate oppressed people. It was another "Reischteg fire" - done to centralize power. The OK bombing also was a ruling elite operation. I suspect the Bali bombing was too. These too were done to centralize power. About "...Only two more years before the next election" . You are joking, right? THE RACHET EFFECT - Mostly, when we lose ability to express rights, we don't get them back. Also, I thought Clinton was the worst. I thought Bush would be a breath of fresh air. Wrong! Clinton only wanted to take as much as he could get. Bush wants to take everything we have! Another vehicle must be made to enforce rights. - just voting doesn't work. Possibly a grass roots movement with a great creed. Note: Libertarinism failed and socialism is no good either. Something else must be invented. Yours Truly, Gary Jeffers BEAT STATE!!! AND THE RULING ELITES!
