them to spend huge amounts of money on trivial tasks, by raising aware of
and plugging any holes that become evident. That assymetry is exactly what
crypto is, in a nutshell.
-TD
From: sunder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PRO
Tyler Durden wrote:
And in case it's not clear, I'm suggesting that it may be useful for
them to deliberately create a "fake" virus that is easily detectable,
and so cull the bounce messages.
Right, why should they do something passive that doesn't tip their hand and
allows them to collect the
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 05:23:02PM -0800, Bill Stewart wrote:
> Five or ten years ago, when the Feds were still pretending to be in
> control of crypto, crypto enthusiasts were still a threat - these days you
> can pick up VPN boxes at the grocery store, and if they still care about
> us, they're
Can a TLA please give some sign here, any sign - just ack that you know the
list exists, otherwise the legitimacy of cpunks is definitely going down the
drain.
Looks like a Berlin wall syndrome.
=
end
(of original message)
Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows:
Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And then, is it possible to create some kind of filter that stops these
> replies?
If it's the type of virus that delivers its payload as soon as it's
viewed (relying on bugs in MSOE or whatever), then it's possible that
such a thing could go undetected,
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 04:27:04PM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote:
> Well, I'm still wondering...
>
> Could a TLA or other group, wanting to know who was lurking or otherwise
> subscribed to a list (such as cypherpunks) deliberately craft a virus that
> was easy to detect, for the purposes of having
