From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo)
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 93 04:24:01 PST
To: ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu (L. Detweiler)
Subject: Re: some pseudopool FUN
In-Reply-To: <9311150645.AA24431@longs.lance.colostate.edu>
Message-ID: <199311151223.EAA13250@mail.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Given the many idiotic things already claimed by Detweiler, 
(including at one time or another, hotly accusing most list-active Bay Area 
cypherpunks of being "pseudospoofs" of each other, when all he had to
do to verify our True Names was call), I don't know if it's necessary 
to point out Detweiler's own "pseudospoofing" and the forged quotations 
he is now throwing around.  But despite his voluminous whoppers and
mad slanders I've seen some folks actually taking some of his stuff 
seriously.  So I just want to make sure everybody understands there's 
a head full of hypocrisy to go along with the head full of otherwise
misfiring neurons:

S.Boxx:
> <sigh> nobody is interested in preventing pseudospoofing here. 
>...

Hi, Detweiler.  I see here you're discounting your own voluminous
posts on the matter.  Typing in lower case doesn't hide your unique 
word choices, tone of voice, and opinions, and even the occasional 
slip by both of your 'nyms into UPPER CASE RANTS.  Sorry to spoil
your mad fun, but "CRIMINAL, TREACHEROUS PSEUDOSPOOFING" for
rhetorical leverage just ain't as easy as you make it out
to be.  The practicum of always having to keep in mind the
many ways you can screw up and reveal identity makes the practice
severely self-limiting.

For readers not familiar with the parties involved, I will point 
out some of the more obvious (to me) "pseudospooling", Detweiler's
seemingly purposeful mixing up of quote attributions:

> E.Hughes, on Pseudospoofing software
> >...
> >Tim May and I were talking about this a long
> >time, and he just beat me to learning enough PERL to write the thing.

It's highly improbable that Tim May would go anywhere near Perl, and 
it's also quite improbable Eric Hughes would have made such a gaffe.  
(Which just goes to show I _am_ Hughes and May, otherwise how could
I know, eh Detweiler?)

> Jamie Dinkelacker:
> >I oppose using it in a bogus fashion because the software is not
> >designed for such a use, there is absolutely no protection for it (any
> >key can be added), because I, and all the other Keyserver admins,....

Jamie is quite talented in the business world, but
again it's unlikely in the extreme that he has time
and interest left over for administering key servers.

> Nick Szabo:
> >As an example, look at Ender's Game, where Ender's brother and sister
> >get on the net under pseudonyms, and get treated just like everyone
> >else.  There is no biases.  People are judged on their actions and
> >words, not by who they are, how old they are, what they look like, or
> >anything like that.  Maybe you are blind, I don't know.  I've never
> >met you.

And what's wrong with this is the most obvious to me, since I
didn't say it.

My own memory, recognition of my own style, and
if all else fails my own archives are sufficient to quickly
dispatch "pseudospooling" attacks against myself.  On
Usenet there are commonly disputes over false quotations
(usually non-malicious misattribution due to the nesting
mess, but not always).  The reputation of the "pseudospooler" 
is *plonked* when they are found out, especially if they
are malicious.  In public it's practically impossible
to get away with severely malicious misquoting, unless
the victim is both quite isolated and of such bad repute
that readers don't believe the archive he produces.
It might be feasible to defame people behind their backs, by 
sending false quotations in mail to small numbers of third parties.
There must be quite a bit of accumulated BBS, FidoNet,
and Usenet lore on the matter; anybody have good war
stories?

By extrapolation the quotes attributed to Arther Chandler,
Hal Finney, and Perry Metzger were also likely "pseudospools",
many of which will be obvious to those falsely quoted or their
freinds, or those who keep good archives.  And alas for
Detweiler, any attributions he makes in the future will be
highly suspect, as will the appearance of newbies on the
net who just happen to agree with him and sound like him
in somewhat improbable ways.

The only remaining paranoia I have on this matter is that
Detweiler is really Tim May's most elaborate "Stealth Bomber" gimmick 
to date.  If so, either AI (Artificial Insanity?) is vastly more
advanced than I had thought, or ... (Detweiler, take over
for me here!)

Nick Szabo				szabo@netcom.com