   _________________________________________________________________ 
  /|                                                                \
 / |                 /// Magazine Information ///                   |
/__|                                                                |
   | Disclaimer: Read at your own risk.    (8=X                     |
   | ~~~~~~~~~~                                                     |
   |                                                                |
   | About DIG: We aim to keep our readers informed and interested  |
   | ~~~~~~~~~ and maybe even make you laugh (yeah right who am I   |
   | kidding). DIG will be of interest to hackers, phreaks,         |
   | technologists, and anyone curious about exploring their world. |
   |                                                                |
   | Release Dates: There is no set release schedule for DIG,       |
   | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ quarterly installments are expected, but the     |
   | release schedule may vary. Check our website (www.digzine.com) |
   | or sign up to our mailing list for updates.                    |
   |                                                                |
   | Writers Wanted: DIG needs writers! Starting next issue, if     |
   | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ your article is published, you will recieve     |
   | your choice of a free hardcopy of DIG, or some other cool      |
   | stuff we have on hand, like other zines or interesting         |
   | literature.                                                    |
   |                                                                |
   | Letters: We will print your (good) letters. If you would like  |
   | ~~~~~~~ to make a comment, ask a question, make a correction   |
   | or a contribution send them to dig@digzine.com and we will     |
   | publish them. If you don't want your letter published, just    |
   | let us know. All contact information will be kept private.     |
   |                                                                |
   | Distribution: DIG is available for free online and can also be |
   | ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ordered in limited hard copy at www.digzine.com   |
   | through Pay Pal (if you don’t have Pay Pal, drop us an email   |
   | for other payment options). The hard copy contains all the     |
   | same information as the online copy, but includes graphics,    |
   | and you can hold it in your hand! Feel free to and please do   |
   | copy, reprint, and distribute DIG, as long as nothing is       |
   | changed, and you don’t try to make a profit off of our work.   |
   | Distributors, please contact us for more information.          |
   |                                                                |
   | How to help: You can help us by letting everyone know about    |
   | ~~~~~~~~~~~ us, spread flyers, link to us, print more copies   |
   | to distribute, or write articles! Monetary donations are       |
   | accepted to help pay for hosting and printing, but providing   |
   | information or services would be a better donation.            |
   |                                                                |
   | Privacy: We will honor all confidentiality requests.  We keep  |
   | ~~~~~~~ no record of addresses, privacy is important to us.    |
   |                                                                |__
   | Contact: dig@digzine.com                                       |  /
   | ~~~~~~~ Our Public Key is available on the website.            | /
   \________________________________________________________________|/



        \\===>            ___     __             <===\\><><><><
        <\\              /   \   /__\                 \\><><><>
        ><\\           __\    \    __    ______        \\><><><
        <><\\         /        \  /  \  /      \        \\><><>
        ><><\\        \   |\    \ \   \ \  |\   \        \\><><
        <><><\\        \________/  \___\ \____   \        \\><>
        ><><><\\        ______________________\   \        \\><
        <><><><\\       \_________________________/         \\>
        ><><><><\\===>        issue number two           <===\\

toc+
   |
   +--introduction
   |
   +--the first big hack
   |
   +--letters
   |
   +--grab real video files
   |
   +--executable wrappers pt 1
   |
   +--overview of bit torrent
   |
   +--telephone recording techniques
   |
   +--summer fun
   |
   +--dmca
   |
   +--fallen manifesto


* Staff *

lowtec  - Editor In Chief
Strom Carlson - Layout Editor


************

<%%%{ Introduction }%%%>

	Hello and welcome to the second issue of DIG Magazine! I know it's 
been a long time coming, and we definitely are going to try to do more 
frequent releases in the future, but that all depends on the amount of 
submissions we recieve.

	Look for some new things going on with DIG in the near future!
Recently avid set up an IRC channel for us on irc.newnet.net #dig. Pop
in sometime to see if anyone is around. We also added a forum to the 
webpage just as another means of communication. Soon we will be offering 
T-Shirts for sale on the webpage, be sure to check back often.

	If you sent us any email, and either didn't get a response or
don't see your letter appearing here, please send again because we our
email alias was misconfigured for maybe a week while setting up a 
mailing list  - to be informed of new issue releases send a message to 
majordomo@digzine.com with the text "subscribe diglist" (no quotes)in 
the message body. I know for certain at least one person got the solution
to the challenge in the last issue ;).

	In other news, I would like to send out a call to everyone who 
reads this to take some action and help educate others. We need 
articles, we aren’t desperate for content, I just think it would be 
great if everyone took some time to write an article about something 
they are interested in. DIG isn’t just a hacking magazine or anything 
specific, it is meant to be interesting and thought provoking. What I’m 
saying is that I’d like to make this magazine a “by the people for the 
people” thing, otherwise what is the point? I’m not going to sit here 
and bombard you with news or information that no one is really 
interested in - that can be found anywhere. 


	I'd like to thank everyone who submitted articles, letters, spread 
the word about the zine and helped in putting everything together.

************

	This first article is an interesting story that I heard from an 
old school hacker in doing work on www.thebighack.org. I can't vouch for 
its accuracy, but I did meet him personally and many of the details 
check out. Either way it is quite intriguing and makes great lore. 
Anyone heard this story before?  -lowtec

<%%%{ The First Big Hack }%%%>

	For those who don’t know, before the well publicized hacker 
crackdowns of operation Sun Devil et. al. in 1990, there was a smaller 
crackdown near the end of 1985. Those of us in Texas referred to  it as 
“the incident”. During this time the Secret Service and other law 
enforcement agencies went into people’s houses and seized their 
computers and other equipment. Much of the equipment was never returned. 
Most were never formally charged with crimes. Some were, but the charges 
came months later.

	“The Mentor,” (Lloyd Blankenship) attended Southwest Texas State, 
(now called Texas State) in San Marcos, TX. I went to school there at 
the same time. I used to lurk on the LoD and other BBSes, but at the 
time I was in the larval stage. Most of the true technology of the day 
was new to me.

	Well, after the Feds came to town for “the incident” and took all 
of Lloyd’s hardware away, it started a bit of a buzz through the scene. 
Most of the peeps were nervous about hitting any of the traditional 
BBSes for communication. There was a general paranoia in the air. As it 
turns out, the Secret Service got what they came for and left, but that 
didn’t stop the general paranoia.

	One of the SMPD officers that helped the Feds when they came 
around saw this hacking thing as a potential stepping stone for him into 
the service. He had spoken up in the local press and said some nasty 
things about the mentor. He was generally viewing every geek with 
suspicion. Since San Marcos is such a small town, geeks were getting 
hassled by him when they where just hanging out, drinking, or conversing 
in groups.

	He decided to start hanging around the school lab undercover and 
looking for more suspicious activity. He wanted to make a big contact 
and slide himself directly upstairs. However, no one was in the mood for 
his nonsense.

	About the same time as the incident, SWT had replaced its old DEC 
10 computer with a shiny new two VAX cluster called Nyssa and Tegan. 
Along with this they had also attached SWT to both the BIT (Because Its 
Time) net and to SPAN (Space, Physics, Astronomy, Network). Of course 
this was before the TCP/IP protocol was ubiquitous. At that time people 
were pushing a 7 layer OSI model, a 5 layer TCP/IP model, and using 
other protocols to do actual work. Networking was a mess, but it was 
actually starting to work.

	Along with the shiny new VAX came a program called “talk”; it was 
the instant messenger of the time. You typed in the bottom half of the 
screen and someone somewhere else typed in the top half of the screen. 
It was very cool at the time. There were even a class of girls we called 
talk junkies. Because they never left the lab and never did anything 
interesting. Nice to have girls to look at though.

	Well under the nose of the nice officer who was often sitting a 
couple of terms down, everyone did start to “talk” again. The guy was so 
interested in the spook stuff, the secrecy, wire taps on private bbs and 
such that he missed the “talk” right under his nose.

	A plan was born.

	Occasionally, back in the lab, someone would mention a special 
phone number in passing. Rumors of the gang getting back together 
drifted around. Our own personal officer would go scurrying off to make 
a call. Other times, we would drop a hint about meeting up and all 
rendezvous at a bar near campus.

	Showdown was a typical country/biker/student bar and a good place 
to play spot the Fed if you know what I mean. They also had unlimited 10 
cent beers from 3 to 3:15. There were some quiet tables off in the back 
but also some big windows in front so you could see who was walking up 
during the day. If you sat at the bar and dropped a dollar in the tip 
jar, the bartender would ring the “tip” bell. It wasn’t exactly a full 
fledged storefront, but it was very Neuman/Redford. Right next to 
Showdown but facing LBJ street was a video arcade, after the 10 cent 
beer ran out we would go over there and drop the rest of our change.

	At first we would just have someone in the lab drop a “hint” about 
a meet, usually around         3:05 and he would rush out to get to the 
bar just after cheap beer ran out. A guy at the bar would drop a tip, 
ring the bell and all of us in the back would loudly “finish” our secret 
conversations and then file out past him to go play video games. He 
would skunk about for a while being very frustrated. We got such a bang 
out of this.

	Originally we were just going to leave it at this. One evening 
though after a long afternoon of game playing, he decided to hassle us. 
He would take one of us and lock him in the back seat of his car and 
grill us about our activities. Then he would to the same with another 
one of us. All in all what he did was seriously piss us off. Once the 
word spread through “talk” many others got pissed as well.

	We created our own temporary secret hacker society. It was called 
Lord Akalabeth’s Warriors. The name originally came from one of the guys 
over SPAN. (We were busy passing messages all over the country. It was 
so cool.) Originally we just liked the acronym it made, but we also got 
to make lots of clever jokes about Richard being the “origin” of all 
evil and so forth. Great fun, so the name stuck.

	While in the squad car, one of the guys noticed some Radio Shack 
crap. It seemed this guy was pretending he was James Bond. Ideas started 
flying. Just for fun we all started “quasi-covertly” carrying rat shack 
walkie talkies. Occasionally we would pretend to send secret messages to 
other LAW members. Not long afterward, the nice officer showed up at the 
rat shack for his own pair. This was big mistake number one. He took the 
bait. Big mistake number two was that he left his receipt on the counter.

	Every spy drama needs both a hero and a patsy. We found ours in a 
local who started playing games at the arcade during all of this. He was 
still a Senior in High School but he was pretty tall and looked older. 
He had one interesting quirk to hang a story on. He was terribly shy, he 
would almost never say a word. When he did he would whisper it (horrible 
stutter). Often times he would just write things down and pass us a 
note. We all thought this was too cool. Without his knowledge he became 
Lord Akalabeth himself.

	We all took to carrying a pad and chewing gum. We would slip him 
notes in the arcade and when he returned the note, we would take it, 
wrap our gum in it, and throw it away in plain site of the officer. In 
our chatter we started mentioning that this guy was so paranoid that he 
never spoke in public. He only talked over his computer. Predictably our 
nice officer started staking out his house. We took advantage of this to 
drive by his house, pause briefly, take out our walkie talkie, and pass 
a message. Then we would speed off without a reply.

	Using traditional means the nice officer had noticed that the kid 
did seem to be on the phone an awful lot. He had even asked the operator 
to make an emergency interruption, where he got to hear the phone line 
making lots of funny noises. Turns out the kid did have penchant for 
hardware.

	Well one day after we had been building to some major action, the 
nice officer had Lord Akalabeth’s house staked out, when a phone call 
went into the Chief of Police himself.
	
	In a panic, someone had called to say that there was this big guy 
who seemed to be stalking one of the local kids. He was just skunking 
around the back of the garage and now he was just sitting out front 
waiting. Obviously something horrible was going to happen. Hurry!!

	The Chief himself came, knocked on the door, met the nice kid. 
They went around by the garage and sure enough there was a shoe box 
there. Inside was a new lineman’s phone handset. There was also a 
soldering iron, a receipt, and strangely a twisted pair wire running 
through the bushes. They followed it, and sure enough, someone had 
tapped the phone line.

	The chief asked to see the boys bedroom. The boy had no problem at 
all giving him a tour. While they looked around, the Chief noticed a 
walkie talkie stuck under the bed. It had the transmit key taped down 
and had been modified and plugged into the wall with a transformer brick 
so the battery would not run down. The only other thing of interest was 
a primitive TDD machine attached to the phone. It seemed this particular 
boy was deaf.

	In all the hullabaloo with the Chief arriving, the nice officer 
had come in to assist. He explained that he had been watching this 
particular “hacker” on his off time. Big mistake number three. This, 
along with the receipt, seemed to catch the chief’s attention. Turns out 
this officer’s name was on the receipt for a pair of walkie talkies just 
like the modified one found in the boy’s bedroom. They looked in his car 
and sure enough there was a matching one.

	It seems even the police have some rules about invasion of 
privacy, without special legal protocols. A few days later, a credit 
card statement arrived in the mail with a charge for a brand new 
lineman’s handset.

	All of this caused quite a big stink and embarrassment for the 
SMPD. The boy and his family got a formal apology. We never saw the nice 
officer again after that.

	I never bothered to find out who made the phone call or exactly 
how the box got by the garage. How the walkie talkie got under the bed 
was a puzzle to me as well. But in the end, some things are better left 
unknown.

********

<%%%{  Letters  }%%%>

> the zine is damn cool! i have been telling all the connects i have 
> about it haven't gotten a bad remark yet. I Think there are alot of 
> peeps who have wanted a new source for sometime! while 2600 is still 
> awsome i will be reading Dig's as long as you keep making them. I can 
> take care of some flyers around town as well as the internet talks. I 
> noticed you had a scan in the issue will that author continue, or 
> could i be at service to you? I myself dabble in writing and will be 
> trying to write an interesting(osi, mtp1,2,&3,,omap,etc you get idea) 
> enough article for DIG. Incase you can't tell i really like what your 
> doing just letting you know so you have some feed back! Are you 
> planning on starting a IRC channel or dare i say network!?! 
> 
> Phreakz aren't dead just better, lol
> beta_2372 

Thanks for your help and glad you like our work.  I'm sure NO CARRIER 
will continue doing scans, and we'd love to see what you have to offer.  
Avid just set up an IRC channel for us on irc.newnet.net #dig, stop in 
sometime.


> how can i order dig through mail?
> pat1

If you are interested in receiving the latest issue through the mail, 
you can use PayPal on our website to order (credit cards accepted).  If 
you do not have PayPal and still wish to recive the hardcopy, send an 
email to us (dig@digzine.com) for an address you can send money (cash 
only) to.  Currently we are charging $3.50 USD for shipping, printing 
and envelope costs. Yes, that is an increase of $1.50 from the last 
issue, but we hope you will find that the overall quality (printing and 
articles) are well worth the cost.


> Hello,
> Just wanted to let you know that I have added a link 
> (actually multiple) to your website on my site, 
> http://page33.port5.com.  I hope to read more of your zine.  Do you 
> plan on selling it in stores like 2600?  I have been trying to get my 
> site off the ground with some articles, so I was also wondering what 
> your policy was on using articles from your zine.  Of course, there 
> would be full credit given to both Dig and the author of the article.
> Keep up the good fight.
> blakmac

Thanks for the link! For the moment, Dig is only an online/mail 
order/word of mouth zine; but in the future we might try to get on some 
shelves.  As far as using articles from Dig, the articles remain the 
property of the respective author, but as long as you don't charge money 
for people to see them and give credit there shouldn't be a problem.


********

<%%%{  Grab Real video files, and any streaming audio file.  }%%%>
> By avid (avid508@yahoo.com) <

	Sick of not being able to grab that proprietary Real video file or 
any audio file? Here is a quick and dirty way to grab rm, ram, smil, and 
other RealMedia files under Windows XP.

	Also below is a way to grab any audio stream. This also works on 
AOL's embedded links (and other AOL links). So why not head on over to 
keyword Sessions or aol://4344:128.lstn_aj.1350516.715032945 and grab 
some live recordings for yourself!

	You will need a copy of Streambox VCR suite 2, and CommView. Also, 
you need to have RealPlayer installed.

	A note before we start: save your open documents, and don't do 
anything important while running CommView. Occsionally it tends to 
reboot the PC when you click the stop button.

	Install Streambox VCR and CommView. Restart your machine. If 
you're using a dialup connection, start CommView before you dial.

	Another note: close all other applications which use your internet 
connection now. Trust me, it'll make your life much easier.

	Locate the page with the file that you want. Click the play button 
on CommView. Click the link of the file you want, let it load in 
RealPlayer and start playing. Once it starts playing, close real player.
DO NOT click the stop button on CommView! (Well you can try, but don't 
say I didn't warn you!).

	Locate the IP address of the server in the CommView window. RIGHT 
Click the IP address, click JUMP TO, click FIRST PACKET FROM (the IP 
address). CommView now jumps to the Packets received window.

	Scroll through the second box of Hex data for a URL starting with 
either HTTP, PNM, or RTSP.

	You're looking for something like 
http://www.proprietarysoftwaresucks.com/real.rm?666,900 If you don't see 
it, click the very next line in the first box, and again look in the 
second box through all the hex data for the URL. Continue this process 
until you find it. 

	Unfortunately, sometimes you won't find it at all, because the 
link may be hidden in applets, CGI, and other obtrusive obstacles. Now 
that you (hopefully) have the desired URL, copy everything from the 
protol to the file extention. Example, if you see
http://www.proprietarysoftwaresucks.com/real.rm?666,900
then just copy http://www.proprietarysoftwaresucks.com/real.rm
Now open Streambox VCR and select "paste link" from the menu. It will 
start downloading. If the download fails do not despair yet. Try pasting 
the URL into the other versions of Streambox that come bundeled with the 
Streambox suite you downloaded. If it still doesn't work then I suggest 
finding another method of obtaining this stream, or trying the download 
again later. 

	Still no luck? Please, read on!

	Here is a surefire way to grab that audio stream you crave. (There 
are programs available which claim to grab audio and video, but most of 
them don't work very well if they even work at all). You will need a 
quality WAV recording program such as CoolEdit 
(ftp.syntrillium.com/pub/), and a cable which has one 1/8th (headphone) 
connector on each end. If you don't have one, you can obtain one from 
Rat Shack.

 1) Turn down the main volume and Wave volume in your volume panel to 
    halfway, (on Windows double click the speaker next to your clock).

 2) Click options, properties, recording. Press OK.
    Check the select box under LINE IN, and drag the slider all the way 
    to the bottom. Next, connect the cable from the speaker to the line 
    in on your soundcard.

 3) Open CoolEdit. Double click the black bar at the bottom.

 4) Start playing your audio file with RealPlayer.

 5) Drag the LINE IN slider on the recording volume up SLOWLY.
    See the VU meters on CoolEdit bouncing up and down?
    You want to bring them up as much as possible without it touching 
    the end. If the meter shows red, then it might be a bit too high.
    
 6) Double click the meter once again to stop it.

 7) Click stop on RealPlayer.

 8) On CoolEdit, select file, new. Select your bitrate 
    (44,000 stereo if you plan on putting it to a CD).

 9) Press the record button on CoolEdit.

10) Press play on RealPlayer, and wait for it to finish playing.
    Once RealPlayer stops, click stop on CoolEdit.
    To delete the silence from the beginning of the sound,
    highlight it and press delete.
   
    If your sound is not loud enough, press CTRL + A (select all). Now 
select Normalize from the menu, and press enter. Once it's done save the 
file. Now you can burn it to disk or encode to MP3!

Thanks to the creators of Streambox, Flying Raichu, Souxin.com, and 
other people who work very hard at making sure everybody can download 
streaming files.
Shouts to: Telco Inside, lowtec, Hawkeye649.

********

<%%%{ Executable Wrappers Pt 1 }%%%>
    > Anonymous <

Disclaimer
~~~~~~~~~~
	I’m a software developer, and as such think that crack 
distribution is not helpful to the industry. However, I also think that 
having a false sense of security is bad, and that broken systems should 
either be fixed or not used.

Introduction
~~~~~~~~~~~~
	Software wrappers are often mentioned as the “way to go” to 
protect your program. What are wrappers, why are they popular, and are 
they actually worth the investment? In the process, a common wrapper 
called eLicense will be dissected (ie: busted) and suggestions made as 
to what would make a better wrapper-like protection.

	Wrappers are a method of controlling the execution of your 
program: who can run it where and for how long. The typical view of this 
from the user’s point of view is being able to use the program for 30 
days before it stops working. The “next step” for the user is to be able 
to buy it and perform some action on their computer so that it will keep 
working forever (though only on one computer).

	However, this is just a general description of a software 
protection mechanism. What makes wrappers different is the way they 
implement the protection. Wrappers require no modification to your 
unprotected program. They add their own code (either a DLL or by tacking 
another section on to the DLL, or sometimes like eLicense, both) which 
handles all the protection details, and lets you get on with writing the 
program. Most other types of protection (dongles, APIs, etc) require 
building-in to the program. This is obviously a lot more effort 
(especially to do it securely) which is why the zero-work solution of 
wrappers is often suggested. 

	However, with this ease of use come two prices: one is the dollar 
price to buy the protection (which often involves paying per-license for 
the use of the licensing-system-provider’s servers) and the other is a 
loss of security. What can be added to a file can be removed, and once 
the system is removed, the file is completely unprotected. So a lot of 
effort is put into making the wrapper hard to remove. In eLicense, there 
are two things done: the first is that the code segment is encrypted and 
the second is that the import table is obfuscated. These will be 
discussed later.

Communication
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
	Before worrying about how the software is unwrapped, a quick look 
is required at what needs to be done by the wrapper from a theoretical 
point of view. Since each license should only function on a single 
machine, there needs to be some way of making sure that a replay attack 
cannot be made on the system. A replay attack involves storing a request 
and the response, and feeding the response back again (perhaps with some 
minor changes) when another request comes in. For example, if the “key” 
(which allows unlimited use of the program) contained no hardware-
specific information and nothing from the client request was used to 
generate the key, then a replay attack is obvious. With one key, you 
could just give the key out to every request and have an unlimited 
number of licenses. One way to “fix” this is to have the client generate 
a random number (hardware independently), send it with the request, and 
then use the combination of that number and the key (which is dependent 
on that random number) to unlock the program.

	This can fail in two ways. The first is that if the random number 
is too small, or if the key changes too simply on the random number, 
only a few requests are needed to be able to generate a key for any 
random number. For example, if the key was just multiplied by the random 
number then returned modulo a prime number, then only a single request 
is needed to obtain enough information. Specifically, the function used 
to generate the number-specific key from the random number and the real 
key must be one-way. There are many functions like this, mostly from the 
realm of cryptography. 

	MD5 and SHA1 are by far the most commonly used in protection 
mechanisms due to their simplicity (no large-integer support needed), 
speed (they are very fast), and security (no reasonable known methods of 
“undoing” the function). These functions are called hashes, and take 
arbitrary length input and produce a fixed-length output. For example 
the SHA1 hash of the string “abc” is the hexadecimal string 
“a9993e364706816aba3e25717850c26c9cd0d89d”.

	However, there is still a problem. The random number must be 
stored somewhere, so with a bit of patience can be found and modified. 
Suddenly many computers can be using the same random number and key. 
What needs to be done is to stop this transfer of random numbers between 
computers, or store them securely. Or even better, have the hardware 
itself store the number!

	There are many ways to generate computer-specific numbers. MAC 
addresses on network cards, hard disk serial numbers (not the “c:” 
serial number, but the actual number hardwired into the drive, which all 
IDE and most SCSI disks have), and taking the hash of system information 
(such as CPU model, amount of RAM, plugged in hardware, etc). The 
implementation details will be ignored here. Suffice it to say that the 
implementation should be protected to stop it from being patched to 
return the same key regardless of the hardware. Not that this protection 
is easy to do, but it would be getting too far off topic.

Moving around
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
	One further consideration is with regard to moving licenses 
between computers. This is one of the things eLicense supports, but how 
safe is it? This comes back to the original problem of replay attacks. 
To move a license, the computer currently holding the license removes 
the key from the hard disk, and reports back to the server that it has 
done so. Then, another computer can request this same key and the server 
will not complain.

	One simple way to fool the wrapper is to record the key that is 
supplied for that particular hardware ID. Then, once it has been 
unlicensed, get it to request a license again and feed the previously 
given license back to it without passing the request back to the license 
server. The license server does not know that the software has been 
relicensed, and the wrapper thinks that it has. So another request (from 
a different computer) can be made to the license server, and so on.

	This can be partially fixed by having the client pass a random 
number to the server, but again the problem of keeping a stored random 
number secure arise, and cannot be blocked. There is also a much bigger 
problem in the form of file change detectors. If the locations of the 
license data files are known, as these areas can be backed up prior to 
unlicensing and then restored once the program is “unlicensed”. No 
amount of trickery will beat this attack, and it is very easy to do 
because there are multitude of tools out there that monitor changes to 
the hard disk (and registry). All the attacker needs to do is:
 
1) Take a snapshot of the system (when licensed)
2) Unlicense the application and see what changed
3) Relicense the application
4) Back up the files that get changed
5) Unlicense again
6) Copy the modified files back again

	The bottom line is that any system that allows unlicensing of 
computers can easily be broken to allow sharing of the licenses. One way 
that this can be made inconvenient is to require renewal of licenses 
after a certain period of time. This means that every time the license 
needs to be renewed, the files would have to be backed up and the whole 
process gone through again. This puts a limit on how shared a license 
can be. Sharing between 2 computers would not be much of a hassle, but 
sharing between 20 would be a huge hassle to deal with. In general, 
moving licenses is quite insecure so will be ignored (as should any 
wrapper or system that supports this).


Keys and exchanges
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
	So now that our clients are (securely) generating a number and 
using it to verify the key they have received, what does the exchange 
look like? First of all the client generates the number. Then it sends 
it along with a “give me a license” request to the server. The server 
performs some sort of one-way operation to generate a key for the 
client, and sends it back. Whenever the client runs, it re-generates the 
number, and verifies that the key it has is really for the computer it 
is running on. This is approximately what eLicense does.

	There is also a further requirement on the key to do with how it 
changes with a changing computer ID. Given a certain change (eg: 
flipping a particular bit), the change in the key should not be easily 
derived. If, for example, flipping bit 1 in the computer ID always 
resulted in flipping bits 2 and 4 in the key, then given a particular 
ID/key combination it would be trivial to generate a key for a second 
(slightly different) computer ID. If the bits flipped in the key for 
each bit in the computer ID is known, then it would become trivial to 
construct a key for any given computer ID.

	In cryptography, protection against this attack is known as 
avalanche and also strength against differential cryptanalysis. For any 
given change in the input (the computer ID), each bit in the output 
(key) should have a 50% chance of being changed. For example, the input 
101010 might have the output 100110, and the input 101011 might have the 
output 110000. So flipping bit 0 flips bits 1, 2, and 4. However, the 
input 001010 might have the output 111011 and the input 001011 might 
generate the output 001111, which only flips bit 3 despite bit 0 being 
the only bit changed again.

	What algorithm(s) can/should be used for generating the key? A 
good choice is DSA. It is a public-key signature algorithm, which gets 
around a problem with using hashes. The problem with hashes is that to 
check something, you have to run the correct text through the hash, then 
check to see if everything matches in the end. This is a problem, as the 
correct text can be intercepted, and suddenly the whole system breaks 
down again. For example, if you took the number, appended it to a secret 
code word, then hashed the whole thing, the same needs to be done for 
verification. So the secret code word can then be extracted into a key 
generator and it is back to square one again.

	With an asymmetric algorithm (which DSA is), this problem is 
overcome. The secret is split into two parts: the public part and the 
private part. The private part is (obviously) kept secret, and is used 
to generate the signature. The public part can only be used to verify 
the signature. So the client sends the information to the server, who 
generates a key (which contains information such as the expiry date) and 
then uses the private key to sign the information. The returned “key” is 
the information and the signature. When the client wishes to check the 
key, it uses the public key to verify the signature on the information, 
and rejects the key if it doesn’t work. The maths behind how this works 
can be read up in any decent cryptography book or from the FIPS PUB 
180-1 standard.

	The promotional materials for eLicense claim that is uses an 
asymmetric algorithm for key generation, which puts it into the “safe” 
class. However, they don’t appear to have any large-integer support in 
their libraries, which puts a shadow over the security of it, even more 
so as no particular algorithm is mentioned. If it is indeed a home-brew 
asymmetric algorithm, there is a large chance (judging from history) 
that it is not, in fact, asymmetric.

Trials
~~~~~~
	A very common use for wrappers is to enable the user to run the 
program under restricted conditions (such as only for certain period of 
time or only for a limited number of times). Of course, to run at all 
the program needs to have a valid key, which gives two options. The 
first is to require the user to be online when the program is first run, 
and send a request to the online key server to get a limited-use trial 
key. The second option is to have the wrapper generate the key.

	The second option is horribly insecure, though is the option taken 
by most wrapper programs. It requires any secret information (such as 
DSA private information) that is required to generate a key to be with 
the wrapper. However, this means that anyone with the ability to 
retrieve this information from the wrapper can also generate a key. 
Since eLicense takes this approach, this is probably the source of the 
information used by the DAMN eLicense Proxy to impersonate an eLicense 
server. The method used to communicate with the server has changed since 
the last update of this program, so it no longer works with newly 
wrapped eLicense-protected products. Before the changes, though, a large 
number of eLicense products could be “licensed” by the proxy, which was 
supplied with what appeared to be private information such as passwords.

	The first option is not ideal either, as it places several 
requirements on the user. But it is much more secure. For example, the 
user cannot just erase licensing files placed on their computer to get 
another trial period. This is because the unique computer ID (which 
depends on their hardware) can be stored on the central server, which 
would reject any requests for further trials. Also, since no private 
information needs to be stored in the wrapper, keys cannot be generated 
by the end users (usually by crack programs called keygens).

	Unwrapping, Improvements, and alternatives will be discussed in 
part two with code examples.



********


<%%%{ Overview of BitTorrent }%%%>
> by Vorpix <

	Bit Torrent is an up and coming P2P network of sorts that uses a 
method known as "swarming" to greatly increase bandwidth on large 
downloads.  A small client is all that is required on the user's end to 
enable downloading in situations where you'd often just be getting timed 
out.

	So, how does this magical program work?  It's quite simple really.  
The client program downloads a small file, called a torrent.  This 
torrent file contains the address to a BitTorrent tracker, and an index 
of the files that are to be downloaded.

	Next the client contacts the tracker to find a list of available 
"seeds."  A seed is someone who has completly downloaded the file, and 
is still running the client program, or someone who is currently 
downloading.  When a torrent is first being uploaded, the person 
uploading it simply opens the client and keeps it running.  Since they 
already have the file on their computer, it acts as the first seed.

	The real benefit of BitTorrent is that everyone who is in the 
process of downloading the files is also an uploader.  After the client 
has downloaded a certain portion of the file, that portion is made 
available to other users.  To encourage fair uploading, a client's 
download speed is directly affected by their upload speed.

	BitTorrent has many practical applications.  It has been used to 
distribute things such as new ISO's of Linux distributions, which are 
very large files with many thousands of people wanting to download them 
at once.  With BitTorrent, the load on the main server is minimized.  
Anyone with a decent connection and a will to help can keep the client 
running after it has been downloaded to further enhance the network.

	Another common use is in fansubs of Anime.  The site
http://a.scarywater.net/ has a number of torrents from various Subbing
groups.  (These are files in a fuzzy legal status, as just about all of
these groups only release files that are not available in english 
anywhere, and they remove any shows that are picked up to be distributed 
in the States.)

	Many sites have popped up offering a variety of other types of 
files.  One of the largest communities is at http://www.filesoup.com/.  
Here people arrange through the message boards when they will be posting 
torrents of recent movie rips, complete programs, and mp3's.  There are 
always new torrent sites popping up, so just do a google search if you 
want to find the newest, most active sites.  Remember, old sites without 
alot of participation will not be of any use to you, since there will be 
no one to send the files to you.

	Something downloaded by BitTorrent can be paused or stopped, and 
will continue just fine when it is started up again.  This allows huge 
files to be transmitted without the fear of the connection dying at 99% 
complete.

	It is important to note that BitTorrents are only effective as a 
file sharing application when there are many downloaders (and therefore 
many seeders).  Also, there must be people who are not simply leechers.  
These people close the client as soon as they have completed the 
download, ending their uploads.  The accepted BitTorrent etiquette is to 
keep your client running until you've uploaded at least as much as 
you've downloaded. Remember, without people uploading, this type of 
network fails.

Where can you get Bit Torrent?
BitTorrent Home - http://bitconjurer.org/BitTorrent/

How can you create a torrent?
Use the utility MakeTorrent, available here:
http://krypt.dyndns.org:81/torrent/maketorrent/

	MakeTorrent allows you to create a .torrent file of any file or 
folder on your computer.  You have to choose a tracker to host it with.  
MakeTorrent lists a number of popular trackers, but you should search 
for one of the torrent communities to find which tracker they recommend.  
Then, after the .torrent file is created, open that file in BitTorrent 
and save it to the same location as the original file.  Then you must 
send this .torrent file to other people.  You usually should upload it 
to the site you used as a tracker.  They normally will have forums for 
you to post to.

	Then, just keep the BitTorrent file open, and since you have the 
completed file, you will act as a seed.  Once someone else has 
downloaded the file, they will also be a seed.  The more people who 
download, the more seeds.

For more information, check out these sites (from FileSoup's Links page)

For more information, check out FileSoup’s Links page -  
http://www.filesoup.com/links.html

also look at...
Azureus (Java based client) - http://sourceforge.net/projects/azureus/

ABC (Yet Another Bittorrent Client) - 
	http://sourceforge.net/projects/azureus/


**********

<%%%{ Telephone reco

	So, for whatever reason, you want to make recordings from the 
telephone.  Although what you want to record and your motivations for 
doing so may be entirely unique, the actual method of recording is still 
the same.  Thus, this article will give an overview of equipment and 
techniques which produce the best recordings, as well as some general 
advice on what not to do.  Enjoy!

LEGALESE
	In many jurisdictions, it is illegal to record a telephone 
conversation without the consent of all parties involved, so check your 
local laws.  However, it is generally accepted that the “this call may 
be recorded” announcement applies to both the called party and the 
calling party, essentially giving you permission to record the 
conversation.

RECORDING MEDIUM
There are many kinds of portable recording equipment available on the 
consumer market today.  Some work for telephone recordings better than 
others:

Audiocassette
	Audiocassette recorders generally make adequate recordings, and 
the blank media is cheap (as of this writing, they can be purchased in 
large quantities for well under 50 cents each) and can be played pretty 
much universally.  Cassette recorders are generally inexpensive, but 
tend to be a little bulky by comparison to other devices on the market.  
However, it’s tough to find a portable recorder that does not have an 
automatic gain control for the microphone input, and thus the deck will 
continually change its recording level based on the volume of the input. 
The practical upshot of which is that if there is an important sound 
which occurs immediately after a very loud sound, it will be recorded at 
a low volume.

Microcassette
	These little cassettes are cute, and the actual recorders are 
smaller than standard cassette recorders because of the smaller media.  
However, they are generally designed solely to record dictation and 
speeches, and thus have all of the same limitations as regular cassettes 
but with less fidelity and pricier media.

MP3
	There are two varieties of recorder in this camp: units based on 
solid-state memory chips, and units based on hard drives.  On the plus 
side, they tend to make good digital recordings (but it’s important that 
you make sure to record in true MP3 format and not ADPCM, which wil give 
you far lower quality) and it’s easy to upload those recordings to your 
computer.  On the other hand, there is really no convenient way to 
archive your recordings without going through your PC and burning the 
mp3 files to CD.

DAT
	The good old Digital Audio Tape standard which popped up in the 
1980s is an excellent choice for making high-fidelity telephone 
recordings.  The media is available at most larger record and 
electronics stores, and the equipment is all top-notch quality, with the 
advantage that date and time stamping are built into the format.  The 
disadvantage is that not only is the media somewhat pricey ($5 per tape 
if you buy in 10-packs), but DAT Walkmans are prohibitively expensive 
(generally around $500-$700 even for a used one).

CD-R / CD-RW
	As of this writing, no portable device exists on the consumer 
market which will record audio directly to compact disc from a 
microphone input.  If one were to exist (and such a product may very 
well be readily available in consumer electronics stores within several 
years of this writing), it may prove to be a very cost-effective 
recording method.  However, since it doesn’t currently exist, no 
judgment can be made.

Computer
	If you’re at home and want a quick digital recording, you can’t 
beat the computer.  It will give you high-quality recordings that you 
can then burn to CD or compress to MP3 format easily.  However, if your 
goal is to make recordings out in the field, carrying a laptop is going 
to be a cumbersome affair unless you have something roughly equivalent 
in size to a Toshiba Libretto.  Palmtop computers that can make 
recordings could theoretically work, but you would need horrifyingly 
large amounts of memory to make high-quality lengthy recordings, and 
that could get expensive.

Minidisc
	This format, as far as I’m concerned, wins out over all the others 
for a reasonably inexpensive high-quality digital recording medium.  The 
equipment can be had very inexpensively if you buy it used, or you can 
buy a new recorder for about twice what you’d pay for a really good 
portable CD player.  The discs themselves are only moderately pricey 
($1.50-$2 per disc) and can record two and a half hours of audio per 
disc.  The discs are also easy to archive and stand up to a hell of a 
lot of abuse.  Add to that the fact that the recorder and the discs are 
quite tiny, and Minidisc wins the format wars for field telephone 
recording.

OTHER EQUIPMENT
Pickup Coil
	You can get these at Radio Shack for about $5 each.  Although they 
are not the ideal type of pickup coil for making recordings of the 
telephone network, the other kind (a loop-shaped coil that goes around 
the earpiece of a standard Western Electric G-type handset) has not been 
manufactured in years and is incredibly hard to come by.

Telephone Recording Control
	You’ve seen these at Radio Shack too; they plug directly into your 
phone line and directly into your recorder.  I personally dislike these 
for recordings, since the dynamics of two-wire telephone circuits are 
such that anything you send towards the network will be far higher in 
volume than anything that comes back at you from the network.  A pickup 
coil on a telephone is far better for making recordings you would 
actually want to listen to.

Western Electric Telephone
	This only applies if you are attempting to make a recording from 
home.  The fact is, sadly, that most modern telephone sets do not work 
as well with pickup coils as an older Western Electric telephone does.  
You can find these on eBay or at garage sales all the time; if you can’t 
find a Western Electric set, one made by Automatic Electric, 
ITT/Cortelco, Northern Electric/Northern Telecom, or Stromberg-Carlson 
will likely do the trick.  Of course, if you’re recording from a 
payphone, the good news is that your pickup coil will work just fine 
with most of them.

Headphones
	Any set of cheap headphones will do; because of the techniques 
described below, you will need to have a way to monitor your recording 
while you are making it.

SELECTING A PAYPHONE
	Pickup coils are marvelous things; they pick up only what comes 
from the earpiece, and do not hear any of the external noise that a 
microphone would.  However, there is another kind of external noise 
pickup coils will definitely hear: electromagnetic interference.  This 
interference can come from almost any electronic device, but typically 
the only interference of any significance that you’ll encounter near a 
payphone is that which comes from fluorescent lights.  If you pick up 
this interference, you’ll hear a humming sound at either 60 or 50 hertz, 
depending on what part of the world you’re in.  If you’re scouting 
around at night for a recordable payphone, it should be easy to avoid 
nearby fluorescent light fixtures.  If you’re scouting around during the 
day, you may have to resort to trial and error to find a hum-free phone.

SETTING UP AND RECORDING
	First, make sure that your recorder is recording at the highest 
possible level of quality.  In the case of minidisc (my preferred mobile 
recording format), this will be the MONO setting, which records one 
audio channel at full bitrate, thus allowing you to record 160 minutes 
on one 80 minute disc.  Plug your headphones and your pickup coil into 
your recorder and go into paused record mode, which will usually allow 
you to monitor what the coil is picking up without actually recording 
anything.  At this point, you will also want to turn off any automatic 
gain control setting that your recorder has; this step will result in a 
far more accurate representation of the true audio dynamics of the call.

	If you’re using the standard Radio Shack pickup coil, you’ll 
notice that it has a suction cup on one end; although your first 
instinct will probably be to stick it on the back of the handset, this 
is not the optimal way to use the coil.  The coil will get more 
amplitude (and thus achieve a better signal to noise ratio) if you cram 
the suction cup into the part of the receiver that you would normally 
hold against your ear.

	Now is a good time to check for hum at the phone.  If there is a 
minimal amount of hum, try moving the handset and coil around the 
phone’s enclosure to see where the hum is least audible.  Once you have 
brought the hum down to a satisfactory level, obtain a dial tone and 
adjust the recording level (not the headphone volume) to the point where 
the dial tone is as loud as it can be before it becomes distorted in any 
way.  If the dial tone is particularly quiet, this may not be the best 
method of calibration; watch your recorder’s audio levels meter and make 
sure that it never maxes out during the recording.  If they do, turn 
down the input volume.

	The recordings will always come out sounding far nicer if you 
place the palm of your hald squarely over the handset’s transmitter cap, 
thus blocking out any street or room noise you would otherwise pick up.  
If you need to talk to another party on the call while recording, lift 
your palm off the transmitter cap only for as long as you need to talk 
to the party; cover the transmitter after you are done so that the other 
party is not recorded along with street noise.  If you’re recording from 
a home phone and you have no need to talk to another party during the 
recording, removing the transmitter element from the handset is a 
sensible move. 

	With all this in mind, go ahead and un-pause your recorder once 
you’re ready to make your recording.  You may have to experiment a bit 
to find the techniques that work best for phones in your area, but for 
the most part these recording methods will give the best results.

	And, finally. always remember to have fun and to observe any 
applicable laws regarding recording conversations in your area.
         -Strom



**********

<%%%{ Summer Fun }%%%>
~ lowtec ~

	Sometimes I find myself bored, not for a lack of things to do, but 
for a lack of fun things to do. Maybe that’s just because I have no 
life, but I have a feeling other people experience boredom also. So, I 
made this list to help spice things up occasionally.


Start a magazine ;)
Paint a picture
Go camping
Have a BBQ
Play a sport
Workout
Make a movie
Silk Screen T-Shirts
Learn Martial Arts
Go bowling
Find a girl/boyfriend
Make some fireworks
Go Geocaching
Learn a new language
Draw
Chill
Learn how to develop your own film
Try cooking (and eating) something new
Lay down in front of the TV with sleeping bags and watch cartoons
Stare at girls (or boys)
Go to a concert
Go skydiving
Go to the beach
Go to a waterpark
Start a road trip with no final destination in mind and have an 
	adventure
Go snorkeling.. in your bathtub
Watch a movie, with no sound
Play your old video games
Read a book outside
Get in touch with old friends


**********

<%%%  DMCA  %%%>
> Anonymous <

	I always feel like I'm really wasting my time whenever I post 
anything on this subject, because there is so much written about it that 
I sometimes feel I couldn't possibly have anything original to say. But
sometimes I do wish that we the people were able to run ads to present
the other side of the story.

	The thing I would remind people is that one of the reasons the 
Bill of Rights was added to the U.S. Constitution was to protect the 
average citizen from the abuses of those in power -- primarily those in
government, but not exclusively. For example, the part about freedom
of religion was added to prevent one particular sect (in any given
area of the country) from forcing everyone to adhere to their creeds.
Had that not been placed in the Constitution, we could well have had
Northern Ireland type conflicts in various regions of this nation.

	I mention that because people tend to forget that back then, the
church was VERY powerful -- moreso than any corporation. The church
had the power to solely oppress anyone who expressed viewpoints that
were at variance with those of the church. The goal of the Bill of
Rights was to make sure that no one, not even those who claimed to be
the representatives of deity, had too much power over the individual.

	And then there is freedom of the press. A lot of powerful people 
and institutions stood to lose a lot from a free press, because people
could write whatever they wanted and have it distributed -- even if it 
offended the government or the church.

	Had corporations been as oppressive of people's rights back then 
as they are today, perhaps something would have been said in the Bill of
Rights about them as well. I'm sure that at very least, the founding
fathers would have had some discussion about whether a group of people
should obtain almost all the rights of an individual, but few of the
responsibilities, and very little personal liability for wrongdoing.
By that I mean, if you accidentally hit someone with your car, as an
individual you'll likely go to jail for some period of time. Yet if a
corporation takes some action, for the sake of maximizing profit, that
injures or even kills hundreds of people, it's very unlikely that
those responsible for that action will spend any time in jail at all.

	Thus, you as an individual arguably have less rights than the
corporation, if only because they can afford to hire a team of lawyers
and you probably can't -- and that totally goes against the principles
this country was founded on.

	Anyway, getting back to freedom of the press, let's suppose that 
it was discovered at some point that, say, 85% of everything being
printed were mostly "offensive" material, however you (or the
authorities) define offensive. There might be efforts to destroy the
offensive material, but no one would dare suggest destroying all the
printing presses, for the obvious reason that you can't have freedom
of the press if there are no presses.

	And that gets me to the point I really want to make. Printing 
presses were high technology in the day that the Bill of Rights was 
written; there was true freedom of the press and anyone could print what 
they wanted. 

	Today, people still read printed material, but they also get
information and entertainment from newer technologies, such as
television and the Internet.

	But what are we seeing today? Attempts by commercial interests to
have new technology banned!  Whether it's certain features on television 
recorders, or something like a file sharing programs, there is a desire 
to make these technologies illegal simply because a high percentage of 
the use is "offensive" to someone.  In these cases it's offensive not 
primarily because it harms individuals, but rather the interests of 
corporations -- the "middlemen" who, like trolls guarding a bridge, try 
their best to prevent transactions between those who create, and those 
who use the created material, without requiring a "toll" of some kind. 
These corporations add absolutely nothing to the creative process -- as 
non-persons (in the real sense, not the legal fiction we have been 
conditioned to accept), corporations don't "create" anything. They just 
take. Viewed one way, they are a somewhat more refined version of the 
mob's "insurance" racket.

	Now here's the question I have -- if printing presses were being
"misused" in such a way that they threatened corporate profits, or
public morals, or national security, what's the lowest level of
"legitimate" usage we would accept, based as a percentage, before we
loaded all the printing presses onto barges and sank them in the deepest 
sea? Well, we all know the answer to that -- as long as the Constitution 
is at all revered by the courts, printing presses will be with us. We 
don't destroy the technology because it can be misused. I submit that 
the Internet and file-sharing programs, and other forms of electronic 
media to a greater or lesser degree, are the "printing presses" of 
today. That does not mean that everything "printed" on them is legal, 
and action can be taken against illegal use, just as it is against 
certain offensive printed materials (which I won't enumerate because 
overly-aggressive content filters might block this message). But the 
technology -- the "printing press" of today -- does have legitimate 
uses. People have used file sharing programs to distribute works no 
longer protected by copyright, works in the public domain, and even 
their own creations which they wish to share with the world (and have a 
legal right to do so).

	Again, please keep in mind that the printing press originally 
needed protection because the rich and powerful didn't like it a bit. 
Religious leaders in particular didn't like it that people could 
distribute "unapproved" texts, and even pamphlets and books explaining
how a particular sect's doctrine deviated from the Holy Scriptures
(people might stop attending church, and that would cut into their
income!). Oppressive governments didn't like it because it allowed
those with eloquence to explain exactly how the government was
oppressing the people, and people might start to demand a change.
Powerful, self-important people didn't like it, because people could
educate themselves from a wide variety of sources, and weren't as
accustomed to groveling before a learned or influential person.
So who doesn't like file sharing technology? Once again, the rich and 
the powerful. It would make their lives so much easier if that pesky
technology would just disappear. They then wouldn't have to go after
individual violators of the law, and give them their day in court.
They could simply ignore due process. In short, they're more than
prepared to throw out any good that a technology might produce (for
example, allowing artists more direct access to those who enjoy their
work) in order to further their own self-interests. In one sense, they 
have judged the American people and found us all guilty, and the 
punishment they now wish to impose is to prohibit us from having
particular forms of technology.

	There are really two points that I wish those who are actively
involved in today's struggles could get across. If I owned a
billboard company, I'd make up two billboards and place then at
strategic locations all over my territory. The first billboard would 
read, "File-sharing programs are today's printing presses", and perhaps 
would have a picture of Benjamin Franklin operating an old style 
printing press turning out revolutionary-era pamphlets. The RIAA and 
MPAA want everyone to associate file sharing with theft, where the truth 
is that they give people greater freedom -- in particular, the freedom 
to distribute music, books, and other works they have either created, 
without having to deal with an industry that only has its own interests 
at heart. The second billboard would be a bit more general, and would 
have a large headline that reads "Corporations are NOT people, too." 
(with the word NOT in bright red) And underneath, "So why do they have 
so many more rights than you and I?" The last line could be varied from
location to location, for example, "So why do the politicians kowtow
to them and ignore the rest of us?" Or maybe, "And that's why they
sometimes get away with things that you'd be put in jail for doing."
I'm sure the creative folks among us could come up with several other
pithy endings.

	The problem with the latter, though, is that a lot of people don't
understand that certain corporations really are oppressive of individual 
rights. For example, they walk into Wal-Mart, where the people seem 
happy enough and where they think they are getting great prices, and 
start thinking that corporations are good for America. They don't bother 
to differentiate between those that are somewhat benign, and those (like 
the entertainment industry, and the largest telephone companies, and 
parts of the health care industry) who think that Americans exist solely 
for their profit -- that we are born as consumers, will die as 
consumers, and that they have a divine right to get as much money out of 
us as they possibly can. Or to put it in simpler terms, some are much 
greedier than others, and the greedy ones don't give a damn about 
individual rights, and would gladly spit on the Bill of Rights 
(figuratively speaking, of course -- a non-person can't spit) if it 
meant greater profits. From about the 50's through the 80's, we were 
constantly told that communism was the biggest threat to American 
society.  Since communism was bad, I think we all assumed that 
capitalism (the ideological opposite) was good.  Of course, it's not 
necessarily an either/or equation -- BOTH can be bad at times and good 
at times.  "Pure" communism, had it ever actually been practiced, may 
have had a few things to teach us.  But both systems, communism and 
capitalism alike, were corrupted by those who desired power and wealth. 
Communism's biggest failing may have been that it assumed that man is 
innately good, and its adherents were therefore blindsided when evil men
pretended to be good for a time, until they could seize power. Under 
capitalism, it's much harder to seize absolute power, but much easier to 
be a power-monger within a narrow field of influence -- a single 
industry, perhaps.  But in either case, the result is to maximize power 
and wealth for a select few, at the expense of the many common people.

	This isn't anything new -- many, many organizations and movements
throughout history were started out with somewhat benevolent
intentions, often by individuals who had no idea what sort of fruits
their efforts would yield. But any successful organization is like a
magnet to the very sort of cutthroat individuals that would use that
organization for their own personal gain. Such individuals (for example, 
some CEO's), caught up in their own success and the success of the 
organization, may begin to think they deserve all the best the society 
has to offer, and they are within their rights to use any means to get 
it. Hopefully, at some point their excesses catch up with them, when 
people get so fed up that they will no longer stand for it, and they 
finally lose their power.

	I suggest that we just may be about to get to that point with the
entertainment industry. The rich and powerful people who run that 
industry forget that the consumer who put them in power can easily 
de-throne them, simply by refusing to buy their products. Unfortunately, 
it probably won't happen until they've reached the point of acting like 
jack-booted thugs (I almost expect them to start hiring their own 
"enforcers" one of these days), and then a lot of innocent people will 
suffer (thugs don't much care who they terrorize, even if it's a 
completely innocent party). What really scares me is that our government 
seems to becoming more and more totalitarian, except that it's not 
communist or socialist ideologues that are trying to usurp power -- 
rather, it's corporate ideologues, who seem to think that the rights of 
the people are subservient to the rights of corporations.  These people 
have managed to get themselves elected to office, in both parties, and 
are pretty much running the country, and little by little all the 
freedoms we had in the first 200 years of our nation are being taken 
away. For someone coming from a totalitarian regime, I'm sure America 
still seems like a glorious land, but at least a few of us that have 
been around for more than a few years (especially those of us who grew 
up in rural areas) realize how many freedoms we've lost.

	When I was much younger, the fact that I would die someday really
scared me. Now, sometimes, I worry that I won't die before society has 
changed so much that I just can't stand living anymore.

	The above text was submitted anonymously -- since nothing on the 
web ever really dies, I don't want anything I've written tonight held
against me at some future date. I don't expect too many people will 
agree with everything I've said above, but it is just how I see things. 
The above text isn't copyrighted (I hereby place it in the public 
domain), so if I've made any good points, feel free to snip and use in 
your own writings -- no credit is requested or desired.

******

=========================================
+++ The Fallen Manifesto +++ The Skum +++
=========================================

The ignorant man is an end user. He is a lustful end user of desire. 
His desire is for the commodity. 
The commodity is his freedom. 
His freedom is his power.

The ignorant man lives in the present. 
The present of desire. 
The present of the commodity. 
The future is, for him, merely the leftover portion of time. 
Time waiting to be conquered by the almighty. 
And history is merely a story. 
The story of how he overcame what was not him.

The ignorant man hates to see how the past accumulates in the thing. 
Thus, he perpetually seeks the novel and discards what becomes the past. 
He buries it away so that he does not have to bear the sickening smell 
	of the outlived. 
He forgets it. 
As if it never existed.

Power is what the ignorant man already possesses. 
His single hatred is for things. 
Things that do not possess his freedom. 
Things that he has to bear to see though he does not wish to. 
Things that appear to him despite him. 
Things that have no right.

The ignorant man is the lawful tyrant. 
The apotheosis of human achievement. 
The self-made master. 
He deserves what he has. 
Those who do not have it deserve not to have it. 
They have had the chance to acquire what he has. 
The have not made it. 
They are worthless. 
Away with them!

Knowledge is what the ignorant man already knows. 
Truth is within his reach. 
His eyes are wide open. 
He sees everything. 
Everything is what he sees. 
The hidden is merely a myth. 
The unknown is a whimsical detail of the past. 
The human abyss is what has already been overcome.

The ignorant man is different. 
He deserves to be different. 
He gets pleasure out of being different. 
He is a lustful consumer of difference. 
He detests the thing that cannot be different. 
The thing that does not have the freedom to be different. 
The obsolete slave. 
The anachronism that should disappear as quickly as possible.

The ignorant man is orderly. 
His orderliness is what makes the universe worthwhile. 
His orderliness is the shadow of his superiority. 
His orderliness is his barricade against the thing that is not high and 
	contemporary enough to comprehend his virtuous truth. 
The thing that should not be.

The building block of the order of the ignorant man is the commodity. 
A nameless and past-less mass. 
The substructure of the ever present game of novelty and difference. 
A game that dissolves into the sameness of an ever lived present. 
Where everything disruptive fuses into a shapeless conglomeration of 
	novel experiences.

Now let us all pray for the fall of the ignorant man and the birth of 
	the fallen man. 
For the rise of the outcast whose blind eyes vividly see how powerless 
	and peripheral he is. 
The modern day Oedipus. 
The fallen king. 
He who knows that truth lies behind the apparent. 
He who blinds himself to the apparent. 
He who catches a glimpse of another reality. 
A reality hidden beneath the thick layers of falseness. 
Beyond the taken-for-granted deceit.

Let us hope that the seemingly insurmountable barricades of seeming 
	order will be demolished. 
Torn down by the feeble hands of the fallen man. 
The fallen man is the worst enemy of the present order. 
He knows that it is an arbitrary one. 
An order that cannot put forward any legitimate claim. 
An order that deserves to be murdered cold-bloodedly. 
A miserable order of the ignorant.

*********
eof

