WIPO Treaty "URGENT NOTICE FOR THOSE WHO HAVENT READ"

WIPO Treaty "URGENT NOTICE FOR THOSE WHO HAVENT READ"

Post by . » Wed, 01 Jul 1998 04:00:00





Quote:> Dear everyone in the Security world,  This message is going out to
Hackerz
> and Security experts alike. A huge thing called the WIPO Treaty is in
...
> already been passed by the Senate and is now in the hands of the House of
> Reps. This treaty will make pointing of vulnerabilites in software and
other
> things ILLEGAL!!! White papers such as bugtraq and even CERT's exploit
>pages
> will be banned. Rootshell.com and other exploit pages iwll be made

ILLEGAL

In the worst of the cases we'll manage to promote all this LEGAL activities
where they are still legal such as my country in South America. The world
is changing and all this fascist attempts will be destroyed by our union
and
compromise through the Internet.

 
 
 

WIPO Treaty "URGENT NOTICE FOR THOSE WHO HAVENT READ"

Post by M. Maxwel » Fri, 03 Jul 1998 04:00:00



> In the worst of the cases we'll manage to promote all this LEGAL activities
> where they are still legal such as my country in South America. The world
> is changing and all this fascist attempts will be destroyed by our union
> and
> compromise through the Internet.

Consider me a person who feels that the U.S.A. is anything *but* the
most free country in the world anymore.  We have lost a lot of freedom
in this nation in the past 50 years or so (and the past decade or so
has been the worst).  Why?  Because no one does a DAMN thing about
it.

The news/entertainment media in this country are just a controlled as
in any other -- not so much by governments as by government
sympathisers.  People buy into all the propaganda that is fed to them
on a daily basis, and don't even bother to question it.  I guess
because it's just "too much work" to think or try to understand *both*
sides of an issue.  And indeed, in many cases, it can be very
difficult to find the OTHER side of an issue when all opposition is
silenced.  Welcome to what some have labelled the "New World Order".

I've already written letters stating my opposition to WIPO and
friends.  Whether or not my so-called representatives are actually
going to do what their job title requires is another matter entirely.
They are merely working toward more political power, not towards a
more democratic society.  They will represent not the people, but
their own selfish interests.

The only time when the people really get what the people need is when
they SPEAK UP and FORCE themselves to be heard.  And I don't see much
of that happening right now.

Back to your point, you're quite correct in what you say, but we need
some amount of organization -- we have the tools and the methods, just
not the peoples' support when it comes time to actually ACT.  Amazing
how people are so quick to complain, but when they are offered a great
opportunity to DO something to solve the problem, all of a sudden,
they "don't have the time", or "don't want the trouble involved",
etc...

Well, I don't want the trouble either, and I shouldn't have to go
through it, considering that, over 200 years after this country was
founded on the principles of freedom, we are STILL fighting FOR those
freedoms.  Something is wrong.  But if you're not part of the
solution, you're part of the problem.

Stand for something, or fall for anything.

--
                                   _________________________________________
User Support Specialist/BOFH      / "We don't do windows..."

http://www.xnet.com/~drwho/      |  PGP public keys available on my web page.
________________________________/

 
 
 

WIPO Treaty "URGENT NOTICE FOR THOSE WHO HAVENT READ"

Post by fl.. » Fri, 03 Jul 1998 04:00:00



Quote:

>The only time when the people really get what the people need is when
>they SPEAK UP and FORCE themselves to be heard.  And I don't see much
>of that happening right now.

"Power concedes nothing without a demand."

        --Frederick Douglass, who should damn well know

--

 Ben


 
 
 

WIPO Treaty "URGENT NOTICE FOR THOSE WHO HAVENT READ"

Post by Curtis D. Lev » Tue, 07 Jul 1998 04:00:00



Quote:>Consider me a person who feels that the U.S.A. is anything *but* the
>most free country in the world anymore.  We have lost a lot of freedom
>in this nation in the past 50 years or so (and the past decade or so
>has been the worst).  Why?  Because no one does a DAMN thing about
>it.

This much is true.

Quote:>The news/entertainment media in this country are just a controlled as
>in any other -- not so much by governments as by government
>sympathisers.  People buy into all the propaganda that is fed to them
>on a daily basis, and don't even bother to question it.  I guess
>because it's just "too much work" to think or try to understand *both*
>sides of an issue.  And indeed, in many cases, it can be very
>difficult to find the OTHER side of an issue when all opposition is
>silenced.  Welcome to what some have labelled the "New World Order".

My feeling is that a larger percentage of the media is controlled more by
anti government corporations, who feel the need to destabilize the govt to
satisfy their own corporate urges. Drug dealers and other organized
criminals have far more influence on the media than the govt does. The
govt is also saddled with a good percentage of blame simply because they
are in a position of responsibility that directly interacts with whatever
might be occuring. In other words, someone esle gets it wrong , and Unc
gets the blame.

Quote:>The only time when the people really get what the people need is when
>they SPEAK UP and FORCE themselves to be heard.  And I don't see much
>of that happening right now.

It helps for the people to know the truth. That's about the only time
anyone really listens. Re the 60's, where dope smoking college students
supported the cong by purchasing their product, and then protested the war
in vietnam. All this while Gi's were being poisoned, and shot at with
bullets paid for by the hippie left. All the time this was going on, the
people of vietnam also blamed the govt, but it was unclear exactly which
govt they were in support of. Now, it's too late to ask. Because now, they
are communist. Think it's over ? Every time someone does a line of
*, or smokes a crackrock, the money is going in support of the FARC,
a columbian communist revolutionary movement. Peru has something similar
in the Shining Path. Note any similarities between this and the Nam ? Note
the same cries for freedom, and protest ? Shame it takes a communist
revolution to get anyone's attention these days. Also a shame there's so
much * as a result of our bad habits. I wonder how many people died
today.  

Quote:>Well, I don't want the trouble either, and I shouldn't have to go
>through it, considering that, over 200 years after this country was
>founded on the principles of freedom, we are STILL fighting FOR those
>freedoms.  Something is wrong.  But if you're not part of the
>solution, you're part of the problem.

OK, you tell me. What is the solution ?
 
 
 

WIPO Treaty "URGENT NOTICE FOR THOSE WHO HAVENT READ"

Post by who » Wed, 08 Jul 1998 04:00:00



<deleted comments about communists and illegal/criminalized substances>
(sorry, but did you really want to reread the previous post?)

So, then the * the guy down the street grows in his spare room, or
the methampetamines the biker gangs cook in desert cabins, or the pcp, or
lsd, or extasy (this could go on all night!) that some over-impressionable
chem student mixes is really supporting a social/political paradigm that
Im guessing you dont even really understand? (wow, that was a bad run-on
sentence. I will pay attention in English class, I will...)
Im not denying that some (well, alot) of the resources spent on '*'
go south for less than admirable causes. However, what needs to be
considered, and in my opinion rethought, is why.  A series of articles in
the LA Times has once again reminded me that prisons are big buisness.

That said, Im now feeling really strange for posting this to a unix
security news group. But maybe security needs to have a base in social
reality.

jeremy

 
 
 

WIPO Treaty "URGENT NOTICE FOR THOSE WHO HAVENT READ"

Post by lamo.. » Thu, 09 Jul 1998 04:00:00



Quote:>My feeling is that a larger percentage of the media is controlled more by
>anti government corporations, who feel the need to destabilize the govt to
>satisfy their own corporate urges. Drug dealers and other organized
>criminals have far more influence on the media than the govt does.

That's only if you define "drug dealers" to be very, very broad.  Certainly
the CIA probably has more influence on the media than the rest of the
government does, and they're the largest drug dealers out there.  However, if
you mean the standard picture of "drug dealers" as having influence on
the media -- don't make me laugh.  If they had that much influence, *
would be legal, and they wouldn't be risking landing in prison.  Much more
influence is exerted in the media by advertising (propaganda) groups such as
the PDFA (Partnership for a Drug Free America).  (Of course they're funded
by tobacco and * companies, who are also "drug dealers", but I assume
you're not including them since what they do is not presently illegal and
therefore they are not "organized criminals" -- digression into tobacco
suits > /dev/null).

Quote:>The
>govt is also saddled with a good percentage of blame simply because they
>are in a position of responsibility that directly interacts with whatever
>might be occuring. In other words, someone esle gets it wrong , and Unc
>gets the blame.

They're also the only meager democratic form in our society.  Getting
the people to attack and blame the government, and thereby to weaken it
strengthens corporations.

Quote:>>The only time when the people really get what the people need is when
>>they SPEAK UP and FORCE themselves to be heard.  And I don't see much
>>of that happening right now.

>It helps for the people to know the truth. That's about the only time
>anyone really listens. Re the 60's, where dope smoking college students
>supported the cong by purchasing their product, and then protested the war
>in vietnam. All this while Gi's were being poisoned, and shot at with
>bullets paid for by the hippie left.

Yeah, right.  That huge supply-line of pot coming out of Hanoi, right
through the american military presence there in south-east asia and on
over into America.  Heh, wrong.  Look, you can't even ship pot from SE Asia
in through Vancouver, CA and across the border into Seattle without
dramatically increasing the price due to the US-Canada border.  Same goes
for *.  Most of the foreign pot or * comes into Seattle through
Mexico.  Now, compare the difficulty of getting across the US-Canada border
with getting pot out of Vietnam (by the NVA/VC) during the war, and tell
me with a straight face that the "hippie left" was paying for NVA bullets.

Nice fantasy you've got.

Quote:>All the time this was going on, the
>people of vietnam also blamed the govt, but it was unclear exactly which
>govt they were in support of. Now, it's too late to ask. Because now, they
>are communist. Think it's over ? Every time someone does a line of
>*, or smokes a crackrock, the money is going in support of the FARC,
>a columbian communist revolutionary movement. Peru has something similar
>in the Shining Path. Note any similarities between this and the Nam ? Note
>the same cries for freedom, and protest ? Shame it takes a communist
>revolution to get anyone's attention these days. Also a shame there's so
>much * as a result of our bad habits. I wonder how many people died
>today.  

*Please*.  First of all, the 60's were about a hell of a lot more than the
"hippie left."  It's nice to attempt to whitewash the 60's by claming it
was just about a bunch of oversexed, overdrugged college students, but that's
propaganda.  It's also about desegragation and people lying dead in the gutter
due to race hatred -- those in control would rather you forget about that,
though.  And the Vietnam war had very little to do with "Communism."  In
particular, the US military intelligence tried for years to find connections
between Hanoi and either China or Russia but completely failed -- and this
was then interpreted as a sign that they were so well behaved that they
didn't need to get any orders for their leaders in the Internatial Communist
* to Sap us of our Precious Bodily Fluids.  The fact is that the
Vietnam war arose because of a grass-roots opposition to a US puppet government
that threatened to elminate US corporate access to Vietnam.  This was
unacceptable so the US helped to prop this government up by waging a war
against the people of Vietnam -- this is why more bombs were dropped on
South Vietnam in the war than in the North.  Due to the escalation of the war
the Viet Cong emerged as the * opposition political power, which was
not the case prior to the War when the Buddhists were emerging as the
* opposition to the US government.  Had we not politically polarized
Vietnam due to waging war and driving the population to support Hanoi, they
very well might have evolved popular democratic forms -- which was
unacceptable since they would have been hostile to US and foreign capital.
The result was that we had to destroy the country and push the country into
supporting those who would fight against us.

When it comes to Afghanistan we have no difficulty in seeing that the USSR
came in to prop up a puppet government, and we recognize that the faults of
the Mujahudeen (sp!) do not in any way condone the actions of the USSR.  Yet
the actual parallels between Afghanistan and the US invasion of Vietnam are
simply unthinkable in this country.

And the same people who will reduce all criticism of the US invasion of
Vietnam to "so we were supposed to just let the commies take over?" are the
same ones who would have no difficulty whatsoever in understanding that
the opposition of * and aggression and the right of political
self-determination in Afghanistan vastly outweigh the failings of one
particularly vocal and * minority.

--
Lamont Granquist (lamontg at u dot washington dot edu)
ICBM: 47 39'23"N 122 18'19"W
"It all comes from here, the stench and the peril."--Frodo (from Perl5/toke.c)

 
 
 

WIPO Treaty "URGENT NOTICE FOR THOSE WHO HAVENT READ"

Post by Curtis D. Lev » Fri, 10 Jul 1998 04:00:00


On 8 Jul 1998 03:17:42 GMT,


>the media -- don't make me laugh.  If they had that much influence, *
>would be legal, and they wouldn't be risking landing in prison.  Much more

If * were legal, would they fetch the same price ? Would the drug cartels
have the power or influence they have now ? Hardly.

MS with closed source
vs Unix with open source for comparison.

Quote:>They're also the only meager democratic form in our society.  Getting
>the people to attack and blame the government, and thereby to weaken it
>strengthens corporations.

How so ?

A democratic MS. |<dream.

Quote:>Yeah, right.  That huge supply-line of pot coming out of Hanoi, right
>through the american military presence there in south-east asia and on
>over into America.  Heh, wrong.  Look, you can't even ship pot from SE Asia

Try through Laos and Cambodia.

Quote:>for *.  Most of the foreign pot or * comes into Seattle through
>Mexico.  Now, compare the difficulty of getting across the US-Canada border

Mexican Brown *.

Quote:>with getting pot out of Vietnam (by the NVA/VC) during the war, and tell
>me with a straight face that the "hippie left" was paying for NVA bullets.

Asian Herion is still a big problem. And yes, the communists were using it
to finance the war.

Quote:>Nice fantasy you've got.

Think this is a dream ?

Quote:>*Please*.  First of all, the 60's were about a hell of a lot more than the
>"hippie left."  It's nice to attempt to whitewash the 60's by claming it
>was just about a bunch of oversexed, overdrugged college students, but that's
>propaganda.  It's also about desegragation and people lying dead in the gutter
>due to race hatred

Or political views. Things like, I am having this good revolution that says
I own everything you used to, and now you work for me, and I pay you back
by slaughtering your religious leaders, teachers, and mayors. I also use
* and poison to brainwash you, and because you are soo stupid, I sell
everything that the Govt owns on the black market, behind your back. And
you may not realize it yet, but it's you who is the criminal, and I am a
great man of many things.

Sound like MS vs unix ?

Quote:>particular, the US military intelligence tried for years to find connections
>between Hanoi and either China or Russia but completely failed

Except for the Russian contingent manning the POW camps that we had direct
contact with. And the russian and chinese weaponry.

Quote:>* to Sap us of our Precious Bodily Fluids.  The fact is that the
>Vietnam war arose because of a grass-roots opposition to a US puppet government
>that threatened to elminate US corporate access to Vietnam.  This was
>unacceptable so the US helped to prop this government up by waging a war
>against the people of Vietnam -- this is why more bombs were dropped on
>South Vietnam in the war than in the North.

Well, I think the reason for that was Cong. We weren't there to fight the north
but the Viet Cong. The Viet Cong were mainly South Vietnamese nationals who
happened to be communist revolutionaries. And most of the time, they happened
to be in the South. We didn't bomb the North until after the North invaded
the south. See how it works ?

Notice how MS vs unix didn't start until MS invaded the Inet ?

Quote:>the Viet Cong emerged as the * opposition political power, which was
>not the case prior to the War when the Buddhists were emerging as the
>* opposition to the US government.

And before that, the Minh, and then, there were the japanese.
Those people fought for years. And believe it or not, there
was already a democratic form of Govt in South Vietnam. And
Cambodia was tyrannical. I believe Thailand was too, but I
am not sure. Earlier, you screamed about the 60's and human
rights. What, only 2 million people killed in Cambodia ?
Decapitated, and left out on display ?

BTW, ever see how MS handles programmers who question their
authority ?

  Had we not politically polarized

Quote:>Vietnam due to waging war and driving the population to support Hanoi, they
>very well might have evolved popular democratic forms

OK, we were waging war. Not the Cong, but us. And the Cong pushed
the people towards democracy.

When it got so bad that
the vietnamese succumbed to the revolution, then we were fighting
an enemy on all fronts. This started during the Tet offensive.
There was supposed to be a truce.

Any ex mac users here ?

Quote:>The result was that we had to destroy the country and push the country into
>supporting those who would fight against us.

Which country ? Vietnam, or the US ?

Hello linux.

Quote:>When it comes to Afghanistan we have no difficulty in seeing that the USSR
>came in to prop up a puppet government, and we recognize that the faults of
>the Mujahudeen (sp!) do not in any way condone the actions of the USSR.  Yet
>the actual parallels between Afghanistan and the US invasion of Vietnam are
>simply unthinkable in this country.

Afghanistan. You mean, that place where women now have to wear veils, cannot
work, and men are killed for religious beliefs ? How can you compare Vietnam
to Afghanistan ? Did the Afghan succomb to democracy ? Don't they share
a common border ? Aren't the Russians still fighting in the south ?

But, NT is better, isn't it ?

Quote:>And the same people who will reduce all criticism of the US invasion of
>Vietnam to "so we were supposed to just let the commies take over?" are the
>same ones who would have no difficulty whatsoever in understanding that
>the opposition of * and aggression and the right of political
>self-determination in Afghanistan vastly outweigh the failings of one
>particularly vocal and * minority.

Yeah, that's true. But things are improving.

FreeBSD will do it. You'll see.

Curtis - kd4zkw

 
 
 

WIPO Treaty "URGENT NOTICE FOR THOSE WHO HAVENT READ"

Post by lamo.. » Fri, 10 Jul 1998 04:00:00



>On 8 Jul 1998 03:17:42 GMT,

>>the media -- don't make me laugh.  If they had that much influence, *
>>would be legal, and they wouldn't be risking landing in prison.  Much more

>If * were legal, would they fetch the same price ? Would the drug cartels
>have the power or influence they have now ? Hardly.

Ask Pablo Escobar if he'd rather * was legal like * where he
could get legal profits the same way that * bottlers do.  I think you'd
find that the only "drug dealers" that are against legalization are the CIA.

Quote:>>Yeah, right.  That huge supply-line of pot coming out of Hanoi, right
>>through the american military presence there in south-east asia and on
>>over into America.  Heh, wrong.  Look, you can't even ship pot from SE Asia

>Try through Laos and Cambodia.

*fantasy*.  Maybe the Chinese were buying * coming from N. Vietnam, but
America was getting * from Asia via the US military presence in Asia.

Quote:>>for *.  Most of the foreign pot or * comes into Seattle through
>>Mexico.  Now, compare the difficulty of getting across the US-Canada border

>Mexican Brown *.

Yes.

Quote:>>with getting pot out of Vietnam (by the NVA/VC) during the war, and tell
>>me with a straight face that the "hippie left" was paying for NVA bullets.

>Asian Herion is still a big problem. And yes, the communists were using it
>to finance the war.

Cite evidence.

Quote:>>Nice fantasy you've got.

>Think this is a dream ?

Yes.

Quote:>>*Please*.  First of all, the 60's were about a hell of a lot more than the
>>"hippie left."  It's nice to attempt to whitewash the 60's by claming it
>>was just about a bunch of oversexed, overdrugged college students, but that's
>>propaganda.  It's also about desegragation and people lying dead in the gutter
>>due to race hatred

>Or political views. Things like, I am having this good revolution that says
>I own everything you used to, and now you work for me, and I pay you back
>by slaughtering your religious leaders, teachers, and mayors. I also use
>* and poison to brainwash you, and because you are soo stupid, I sell
>everything that the Govt owns on the black market, behind your back. And
>you may not realize it yet, but it's you who is the criminal, and I am a
>great man of many things.

Yeah, you've definitely been brainwashed.  Don't forget to spit on MLKs
grave while you're at it.

Quote:>>particular, the US military intelligence tried for years to find connections
>>between Hanoi and either China or Russia but completely failed

>Except for the Russian contingent manning the POW camps that we had direct
>contact with.

More fantasy.

Quote:>And the russian and chinese weaponry.

Evidence of business deals.  The *US GOVERNMENT* tried to find political ties
between Hanoi and Russia/China and failed.  There weren't any.

Quote:>>* to Sap us of our Precious Bodily Fluids.  The fact is that the
>>Vietnam war arose because of a grass-roots opposition to a US puppet government
>>that threatened to elminate US corporate access to Vietnam.  This was
>>unacceptable so the US helped to prop this government up by waging a war
>>against the people of Vietnam -- this is why more bombs were dropped on
>>South Vietnam in the war than in the North.

>Well, I think the reason for that was Cong. We weren't there to fight the north
>but the Viet Cong. The Viet Cong were mainly South Vietnamese nationals who
>happened to be communist revolutionaries.

Why is it that everyone who is fighting a foreign invasion on their soil
is suddenly a "communist revolutionary"?  The fact that they might be a bit
ticked off at the complimentary bombings of their neighborhood by american
B-52s is never mentioned.  Even Kennedy's advisors realized that some
"impressionable" Vietnamese might be affected by such "accidental" bombings
and react negatively (by, say, joining the VC).

Quote:>And most of the time, they happened
>to be in the South. We didn't bomb the North until after the North invaded
>the south. See how it works ?

You have got to be kidding.  In the first place we were engaged in
"sabotage" missions in the North starting in 1961 or 1962 and the "Tonkin
Gulf incident" in 1964 was not an invasion of the South by the North, and
was a fraud and pretext to begin US bombing of the North.

Quote:>>the Viet Cong emerged as the * opposition political power, which was
>>not the case prior to the War when the Buddhists were emerging as the
>>* opposition to the US government.

>And before that, the Minh, and then, there were the japanese.
>Those people fought for years. And believe it or not, there
>was already a democratic form of Govt in South Vietnam.

Puppet government.  The GVN, with US backing, started repressing their own
population starting shortly after 1954, and they barred the 1956 elections
(not quite democratic).  Over 10,000 South Vietnamese were killed prior
to 1957.  Some 60,000 were killed between 1957 and 1961.  In 1961 Kennedy
began intensifying the US military presence in the country and the slaughter
of the Vietnamese escalated.

Quote:>And
>Cambodia was tyrannical. I believe Thailand was too, but I
>am not sure. Earlier, you screamed about the 60's and human
>rights. What, only 2 million people killed in Cambodia ?
>Decapitated, and left out on display ?

Yeah, after we carpet bombed Laos and Cambodia in the early 70's they
turned on the intellectuals/ruling classes and killed about 500,000 of
them.  Thank you for making my points for me.

Quote:>BTW, ever see how MS handles programmers who question their
>authority ?

Carpet Bombing.  Just like the USA.  Then they lock the ones who survive
up in a room and let them tear each other to shreds.  Just like in Cambodia.

Quote:>  Had we not politically polarized
>>Vietnam due to waging war and driving the population to support Hanoi, they
>>very well might have evolved popular democratic forms

>OK, we were waging war. Not the Cong, but us. And the Cong pushed
>the people towards democracy.

No, we pushed the people to the Viet Cong.

--
Lamont Granquist (lamontg at u dot washington dot edu)
ICBM: 47 39'23"N 122 18'19"W
"It all comes from here, the stench and the peril."--Frodo (from Perl5/toke.c)

 
 
 

WIPO Treaty "URGENT NOTICE FOR THOSE WHO HAVENT READ"

Post by Curtis D. Lev » Tue, 14 Jul 1998 04:00:00



>hmmm, http://www.dfc.org and http://www.eff.org have decent pages on it as
>well. And like you were saying, CERT's ( http://www.cert.org ) ability to
>effectively collect and diseminate information about computer security issues
>will be almost obliterated, because there is no way that any sane person
>would call up a division of the FBI and tell "oh i just broke federal law and
>found some security bugs in the xyz software package". This outstandingly bad
>law is from the same people that gave us the CDA (communications decency act)

Has anyone bothered to ask the Federal Govt. why such a law is being
enacted ? Could it have something to do with the fact that most
computer hacks occur after the Bug report has been posted ?
Just a theory.

And no way of knowing that a bug exists until after a fix has been
issued by a company, or maintainer, etc. Or not being told at all.

Maybe they could limit that to commercial OS's that aren't maintained
by individuals. Perhaps we can get them to put a clause in for
'Open Source Software'. That might eliminate alot of the FUD.
Just a suggestion.

Curtis - kd4zkw