From lx@redundancy.redundancy.org Sat Dec 3 01:17:34 2005 From: lx@redundancy.redundancy.org (David Thiel) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 17:17:34 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] sexist assumptions in README, process_receiving_im() Message-ID: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> When a private conversation is ended, the user is told: %s has closed his private connection to you; you should do the same. There are also multiple masculine references in the README. Obviously, females are also potential users of using the software. Thanks! David From lx@redundancy.redundancy.org Sat Dec 3 01:26:07 2005 From: lx@redundancy.redundancy.org (David Thiel) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 17:26:07 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] sexist assumptions in README, process_receiving_im() In-Reply-To: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> References: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> Message-ID: <20051203012607.GF31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 05:17:34PM -0800, David Thiel wrote: > There are also multiple masculine references in the README. Obviously, > females are also potential users of using the software. s/using // From gmaxwell@gmail.com Sat Dec 3 02:37:46 2005 From: gmaxwell@gmail.com (Gregory Maxwell) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 21:37:46 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] sexist assumptions in README, process_receiving_im() In-Reply-To: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> References: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> Message-ID: On 12/2/05, David Thiel wrote: > When a private conversation is ended, the user is told: > > %s has closed his private connection to you; you should do the same. > > There are also multiple masculine references in the README. Obviously, > females are also potential users of using the software. I hope you are aware that in English when the gender is unknown we use the masculine. To quote the resident OTR using female on your complaint "I think it's stupid." From lx@redundancy.redundancy.org Sat Dec 3 03:01:13 2005 From: lx@redundancy.redundancy.org (David Thiel) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 19:01:13 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] sexist assumptions in README, process_receiving_im() In-Reply-To: References: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> Message-ID: <20051203030113.GA789@redundancy.redundancy.org> On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 09:37:46PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > > There are also multiple masculine references in the README. Obviously, > > females are also potential users of using the software. > > I hope you are aware that in English when the gender is unknown we use > the masculine. According to whom? Is there some problem with "ended their session"? Even if you make that claim for the documentation, in the context of the status message, the gender of the other person *is* known to the end user, thus making the pronoun inaccurate if that person is a female. From gmaxwell@gmail.com Sat Dec 3 03:17:30 2005 From: gmaxwell@gmail.com (Gregory Maxwell) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 22:17:30 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] sexist assumptions in README, process_receiving_im() In-Reply-To: <20051203030113.GA789@redundancy.redundancy.org> References: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203030113.GA789@redundancy.redundancy.org> Message-ID: On 12/2/05, David Thiel wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 09:37:46PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > > > There are also multiple masculine references in the README. Obviously, > > > females are also potential users of using the software. > > I hope you are aware that in English when the gender is unknown we use > > the masculine. > > According to whom? You're kidding, right? Almost every style guide out there, including the Chicago Manual of style. Are you not a native speaker of English? (not trying to be rude, I'm just shocked you don't know this). English lacks a gender neutral singular personal pronoun. >Is there some problem with "ended their session"? 'Their' is plural and OTR doesn't yet support multi user sessions? :) I don't think it would be bad to rephrase it to avoid a pronoun alltogher, but it strikes me as an odd complaint. > Even if you make that claim for the documentation, in the context of the > status message, the gender of the other person *is* known to the end > user, thus making the pronoun inaccurate if that person is a female. It is the software speaking, and it doesn't know. And why are you so sure I know the gender of the people I talk to? :) From lx@redundancy.redundancy.org Sat Dec 3 03:45:34 2005 From: lx@redundancy.redundancy.org (David Thiel) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 19:45:34 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] sexist assumptions in README, process_receiving_im() In-Reply-To: References: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203030113.GA789@redundancy.redundancy.org> Message-ID: <20051203034534.GB789@redundancy.redundancy.org> On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 10:17:30PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > 'Their' is plural and OTR doesn't yet support multi user sessions? "Their" is indeed traditionally plural, but is in common usage as a singular gender-neutral pronoun, and has been for some time. It's fairly well established now, though there are some pedants who still can't stand it for some reason. Some interesting reading: http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austheir.html > I don't think it would be bad to rephrase it to avoid a pronoun > alltogher, but it strikes me as an odd complaint. In my opinion, that's probably the best course. The complaint is mostly that it looks rather silly to see "Rebecca has ended his private communications with you". The gender in this cause is obvious to me, because I know this person and know that she is female. Thanks, David From gmaxwell@gmail.com Sat Dec 3 03:52:13 2005 From: gmaxwell@gmail.com (Gregory Maxwell) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 22:52:13 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] sexist assumptions in README, process_receiving_im() In-Reply-To: <20051203034534.GB789@redundancy.redundancy.org> References: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203030113.GA789@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203034534.GB789@redundancy.redundancy.org> Message-ID: On 12/2/05, David Thiel wrote: > > I don't think it would be bad to rephrase it to avoid a pronoun > > alltogher, but it strikes me as an odd complaint. > > In my opinion, that's probably the best course. The complaint is mostly > that it looks rather silly to see "Rebecca has ended his private > communications with you". The gender in this cause is obvious to me, > because I know this person and know that she is female. Then why didn't you just initally suggest we change it to "Rebecca has ended the private communcation with you" or "Private communcation ended by remote system" or any of the other nearly infinite permutations which involve neither gender confusion nor misuse of the personal plural? You could have just done that yet you saw fitting to claim sexism. Pardon me while I cough 'bullshit'. From lx@redundancy.redundancy.org Sat Dec 3 04:10:40 2005 From: lx@redundancy.redundancy.org (David Thiel) Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 20:10:40 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] sexist assumptions in README, process_receiving_im() In-Reply-To: References: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203030113.GA789@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203034534.GB789@redundancy.redundancy.org> Message-ID: <20051203041040.GC789@redundancy.redundancy.org> On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 10:52:13PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > Then why didn't you just initally suggest we change it to "Rebecca has > ended the private communcation with you" or "Private communcation > ended by remote system" or any of the other nearly infinite > permutations which involve neither gender confusion nor misuse of the > personal plural? I didn't make a suggestion at all, since the exact syntax of how it could be corrected doesn't really matter. How about "Rebecca has ended private communication with you" - or would it be "communications"? Any of those suggestions are fine. > You could have just done that yet you saw fitting to claim sexism. I should clarify then - I didn't know that such offense would be taken on a function being "sexist", and I meant it rather tongue in cheek. My actual complaint is that the message is awkward when the person it applies to is not male. It's not meant to be an affront to your grammatical prowess or the code as a whole. My apologies if I offended. -David From jcohen07@brandeis.edu Sat Dec 3 18:28:51 2005 From: jcohen07@brandeis.edu (Jason Cohen) Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 13:28:51 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] sexist assumptions in README, process_receiving_im() In-Reply-To: <20051203041040.GC789@redundancy.redundancy.org> References: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203030113.GA789@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203034534.GB789@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203041040.GC789@redundancy.redundancy.org> Message-ID: <4391E3E3.80806@brandeis.edu> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070008060005050308010300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm surprised David's remarks were immediately attacked as "stupid" and "bullshit" without even a consideration of their validity. Some have said that he must be a non-English speaker to have made such a ridiculous request. Perhaps as a non-English speaker he noticed something strange that you all have become accustomed to. The fact that "his" is /still /used as a gender-neutral pronoun doesn't prove that the statement is not sexist. It only proves that our language itself is sexist. If you're trying to refer to an individual with an unknown gender you have three options: 1) use "him" (the common solution), 2) use "their" even though it is a plural pronoun,or 3) use his/her, which I would imagine some of you may find awkward English. The fact that so many people use "their" incorrectly as a singular pronoun shows that at least some people have a desire for a gender-neutral pronoun and are forced to resort to incorrect grammar so that their writing isn't perceived as awkward. Why can't we just change the sexist and illogical convention and begin using "his/her"? This sounds awkward to most English speakers only because they're not accustomed to hearing or seeing it. Yet, that strikes me as a pretty poor argument for continuing to use "his" when referring to an individual of unknown gender that not only sounds awkward to non-English speakers but is in addition conceptually flawed and a vestige of a patriarchal society that did consider women second-class citizens. It's also not just "his" that poses this problem. People still refer to mankind, businessmen, firemen, fisherman, man-made, mailman, policemen, congressman etc. There's nothing exclusively male about any of the mentioned professions, yet they are commonly or exclusively referred to with a non gender-neutral term. Likewise, man-made and mankind are referring to humanity and not just men so it would be far more appropriate to refer to humankind and human-made. However, society has successfully shifted away from some gendered terms such as stewardess which is now commonly referred to as a flight attendant without any awkwardness in its usage. I think it is important to note that such a large number of native English speakers use "their" as a singular pronoun that its usage has now become standard for non-formal writing. Many English speakers don't even realize that their usage of "their" is grammatically incorrect as its usage has become so common. I therefore see no difficulty in replacing his/her with his. It may be awkward for a short period time, but it will become normal over time, just as other changes in our language have come to be accepted. Jason Cohen David Thiel wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 10:52:13PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > >> Then why didn't you just initally suggest we change it to "Rebecca has >> ended the private communcation with you" or "Private communcation >> ended by remote system" or any of the other nearly infinite >> permutations which involve neither gender confusion nor misuse of the >> personal plural? >> > > I didn't make a suggestion at all, since the exact syntax of how it > could be corrected doesn't really matter. How about "Rebecca has ended > private communication with you" - or would it be "communications"? > Any of those suggestions are fine. > > >> You could have just done that yet you saw fitting to claim sexism. >> > > I should clarify then - I didn't know that such offense would be taken > on a function being "sexist", and I meant it rather tongue in cheek. > My actual complaint is that the message is awkward when the person > it applies to is not male. It's not meant to be an affront to your > grammatical prowess or the code as a whole. My apologies if I offended. > > -David > _______________________________________________ > OTR-users mailing list > OTR-users@lists.cypherpunks.ca > http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/mailman/listinfo/otr-users > --------------070008060005050308010300 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm surprised David's remarks were immediately attacked as "stupid" and "bullshit" without even a consideration of their validity. Some have said that he must be a non-English speaker to have made such a ridiculous request. Perhaps as a non-English speaker he noticed something strange that you all have become accustomed to. The fact that "his" is still used as a gender-neutral pronoun doesn't prove that the statement is not sexist. It only proves that our language itself is sexist.

If you're trying to refer to an individual with an unknown gender you have three options: 1) use "him" (the common solution), 2) use "their" even though it is a plural pronoun,or 3) use his/her, which I would imagine some of you may find awkward English. The fact that so many people use "their" incorrectly as a singular pronoun shows that at least some people have a desire for a gender-neutral pronoun and are forced to resort to incorrect grammar so that their writing isn't perceived as awkward.

Why can't we just change the sexist and illogical convention and begin using "his/her"? This sounds awkward to most English speakers only because they're not accustomed to hearing or seeing it. Yet, that strikes me as a pretty poor argument for continuing to use "his" when referring to an individual of unknown gender that not only sounds awkward to non-English speakers but is in addition conceptually flawed and a vestige of a patriarchal society that did consider women second-class citizens.

It's also not just "his" that poses this problem. People still refer to mankind, businessmen, firemen, fisherman, man-made, mailman, policemen, congressman etc. There's nothing exclusively male about any of the mentioned professions, yet they are commonly or exclusively referred to with a non gender-neutral term. Likewise, man-made and mankind are referring to humanity and not just men so it would be far more appropriate to refer to humankind and human-made. However, society has successfully shifted away from some gendered terms such as stewardess which is now commonly referred to as a flight attendant without any awkwardness in its usage. I think it is important to note that such a large number of native English speakers use "their" as a singular pronoun that its usage has now become standard for non-formal writing. Many English speakers don't even realize that their usage of "their" is grammatically incorrect as its usage has become so common. I therefore see no difficulty in replacing his/her with his. It may be awkward for a short period time, but it will become normal over time, just as other changes in our language have come to be accepted.

Jason Cohen

David Thiel wrote: 
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 10:52:13PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
  
Then why didn't you just initally suggest we change it to "Rebecca has
ended the private communcation with you" or "Private communcation
ended by remote system" or any of the other nearly infinite
permutations which involve neither gender confusion nor misuse of the
personal plural?
    

I didn't make a suggestion at all, since the exact syntax of how it
could be corrected doesn't really matter. How about "Rebecca has ended
private communication with you" - or would it be "communications"?
Any of those suggestions are fine.

  
You could have just done that yet you saw fitting to claim sexism.
    

I should clarify then - I didn't know that such offense would be taken
on a function being "sexist", and I meant it rather tongue in cheek.
My actual complaint is that the message is awkward when the person
it applies to is not male. It's not meant to be an affront to your
grammatical prowess or the code as a whole. My apologies if I offended.

-David
_______________________________________________
OTR-users mailing list
OTR-users@lists.cypherpunks.ca
http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/mailman/listinfo/otr-users
--------------070008060005050308010300-- From gmaxwell@gmail.com Sat Dec 3 19:36:47 2005 From: gmaxwell@gmail.com (Gregory Maxwell) Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 14:36:47 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] sexist assumptions in README, process_receiving_im() In-Reply-To: <4391E3E3.80806@brandeis.edu> References: <20051203011734.GD31275@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203030113.GA789@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203034534.GB789@redundancy.redundancy.org> <20051203041040.GC789@redundancy.redundancy.org> <4391E3E3.80806@brandeis.edu> Message-ID: On 12/3/05, Jason Cohen wrote: > I'm surprised David's remarks were immediately attacked as "stupid" and > "bullshit" without even a consideration of their validity. Some have said > that he must be a non-English speaker to have made such a ridiculous > request. [snip] It's an artifact of the language, yes, to accuse the author of the readme (or the readme itself) of sexist assumptions as David did is both stupid and bullshit. > If you're trying to refer to an individual with an unknown gender you have > three options: 1) use "him" (the common solution), 2) use "their" even > though it is a plural pronoun,or 3) use his/her, which I would imagine some > of you may find awkward English. Or just use a sentence structure that doesn't require a pronoun, as is most natural here. > Why can't we just change the sexist and illogical convention and begin > using "his/her"? We're talking about a readme for a somewhat obsecure piece of software here, not the chicago manual of style. People in writing and academic circles have not solved this in a way which makes everyone happy, so it would be foolish to assume we could. >This sounds awkward to most English speakers only because > they're not accustomed to hearing or seeing it. Yet, that strikes me as a > pretty poor argument for continuing to use "his" when referring to an > individual of unknown gender that not only sounds awkward to non-English > speakers but is in addition conceptually flawed and a vestige of a > patriarchal society that did consider women second-class citizens. The claim that the mere use of the male word is an example of sexism has not been substantiated. If it sounds odd to a non-native speaker it is because they do not realize that we use the male word to refer to gendern unknow as well. > It's also not just "his" that poses this problem. People still refer to > mankind, businessmen, firemen, fisherman, man-made, mailman, policemen, > congressman etc. There's nothing exclusively male about any of the mentioned > professions, yet they are commonly or exclusively referred to with a non > gender-neutral term. Here your own sexism shows: We are all man, including women. Here you attempt to say that men and women are not the same thing. From jcohen07@brandeis.edu Sat Dec 3 22:11:44 2005 From: jcohen07@brandeis.edu (Jason Cohen) Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 17:11:44 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place Message-ID: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030304010009020103010105 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On 12/3/05, Jason Cohen wrote: > >> I'm surprised David's remarks were immediately attacked as "stupid" and >> "bullshit" without even a consideration of their validity. Some have said >> that he must be a non-English speaker to have made such a ridiculous >> request. >> > [snip] > > It's an artifact of the language, yes, to accuse the author of the > readme (or the readme itself) of sexist assumptions as David did is > both stupid and bullshit. > > Neither David nor I accused the author of being sexist. Rather, we accused the author of using an archaic language convention that we believe is illogical and sexist. We didn't mount personal attacks on the author. In fact, my entire email was directed at changing our language, not at attacking the author or the README. >> If you're trying to refer to an individual with an unknown gender you have >> three options: 1) use "him" (the common solution), 2) use "their" even >> though it is a plural pronoun,or 3) use his/her, which I would imagine some >> of you may find awkward English. >> > > Or just use a sentence structure that doesn't require a pronoun, as is > most natural here. > > That is a fine solution for this particular case. My response was more general. There are certainly going to be times where it's most appropriate to use a singular pronoun when the sex of the individual referred to is unknown. I am merely arguing that when that case occurs "his/her" or "his or her" should be used as an alternative to the common "his". >> Why can't we just change the sexist and illogical convention and begin >> using "his/her"? >> > > We're talking about a readme for a somewhat obsecure piece of software > here, not the chicago manual of style. > > People in writing and academic circles have not solved this in a way > which makes everyone happy, so it would be foolish to assume we could. > > I understand your willingness to stay out of the fray for a still contested issue. However, unless you decide to refrain from using "his" when referring to an unknown individual throughout all OTR's documentation, you are making a choice to continue the status quo. By continuing to use "his" in this situation, you are stating that you accept its usage and find it appropriate. If you're going to use singular pronouns, abstaining from the debate is simply not an option. >> This sounds awkward to most English speakers only because >> they're not accustomed to hearing or seeing it. Yet, that strikes me as a >> pretty poor argument for continuing to use "his" when referring to an >> individual of unknown gender that not only sounds awkward to non-English >> speakers but is in addition conceptually flawed and a vestige of a >> patriarchal society that did consider women second-class citizens. >> > > The claim that the mere use of the male word is an example of sexism > has not been substantiated. If it sounds odd to a non-native speaker > it is because they do not realize that we use the male word to refer > to gendern unknow as well. > > It sounds odd to a non-native speaker because it doesn't appear logical to use a male pronoun when referring to an individual of an unknown gender. You continue to support the practice because it's a convention of the English language. I tried to stress in my last email that this fact is not conclusive. Simply because our language has a particular convention which has been used for hundreds of years does not mean that the convention is appropriate. Some gendered terms have already been replaced by gender-neutral terms such as flight attendant as a replacement for stewardess. There is an academic debate occurring at the moment as to whether we should change the language to reflect a commitment to gender equality. You can't abstain from that debate by saying that this is how the way things have been done in the past and therefore are appropriate for the present. >> It's also not just "his" that poses this problem. People still refer to >> mankind, businessmen, firemen, fisherman, man-made, mailman, policemen, >> congressman etc. There's nothing exclusively male about any of the mentioned >> professions, yet they are commonly or exclusively referred to with a non >> gender-neutral term. >> > > Here your own sexism shows: We are all man, including women. Here you > attempt to say that men and women are not the same thing. > > I believe the word man does and should refer to a male member of the human race. I am not contesting that "Man" has in the past and continues to be used to refer to all humans. My assertion is that it is inappropriate to refer to humanity as Man. The use of Man to refer to all humans suggests that men are the preferred or more important sex and the only sex worth mentioning. I don't suggest that an individual who uses the word "Man" in this way is sexist- only that the word does have a sexist connotation. One need only look to our history to see this. The marriage ceremony declares that the two individuals have become "Man and Wife". The man retains his identity while the woman becomes a wife with all the duties that attach to that title. Under English common law and under American law until well into the 19th century when a woman and man married the woman lost her civil existence. The system called "coverture" denied a woman the right to hold property, sue in a court of law, become a juror, or contract. Blackstone states that when a woman married she and her husband become one- the husband. Freedom was defined as the ability to contract and the only groups that were denied this right were slaves, women, and children. She completely lost her existence as recognized by the law. Despite societal change, this fact is still a part of our language. Simone de Beauvior argued in /The Second Sex (1949/) that the two sexes are Men and the Other sex. Women weren't considered to have a distinct identity but rather were referred to as a contrast to men. All of these sexist traditions and legal practices explain why Man is used to refer to all of humanity rather than just the male sex. If we continue to use these sexist laden conventions we are unwittingly enforcing sexism. Jason Cohen > _______________________________________________ > OTR-users mailing list > OTR-users@lists.cypherpunks.ca > http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/mailman/listinfo/otr-users > --------------030304010009020103010105 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Gregory Maxwell wrote: 
On 12/3/05, Jason Cohen <jcohen07@brandeis.edu> wrote:
  
 I'm surprised David's remarks were immediately attacked as "stupid" and
"bullshit" without even a consideration of their validity. Some have said
that he must be a non-English speaker to have made such a ridiculous
request.
    
[snip]

It's an artifact of the language, yes, to accuse the author of the
readme (or the readme itself) of sexist assumptions as David did is
both stupid and bullshit.
Neither David nor I  accused the author of being sexist. Rather, we accused the author of using an archaic language convention that we believe is illogical and sexist. We didn't mount personal attacks on the author. In fact, my entire email was directed at changing our language, not at attacking the author or the README. 

 If you're trying to refer to an individual with an unknown gender you have
three options: 1) use "him" (the common solution), 2) use "their" even
though it is a plural pronoun,or 3) use his/her, which I would imagine some
of you may find awkward English.
    

Or just use a sentence structure that doesn't require a pronoun, as is
most natural here.
That is a fine solution for this particular case. My response was more general. There are certainly going to be times where it's most appropriate to use a singular pronoun when the sex of the individual referred to is unknown. I am merely arguing that when that case occurs "his/her" or "his or her" should be used as an alternative to the common "his". 
 Why can't we just change the sexist and illogical convention and begin
using "his/her"?
    

We're talking about a readme for a somewhat obsecure piece of software
here, not the chicago manual of style.

People in writing and academic circles have not solved this in a way
which makes everyone happy, so it would be foolish to assume we could.
I understand your willingness to stay out of the fray for a still contested issue. However, unless you decide to refrain from using "his" when referring to an unknown individual throughout all OTR's documentation, you are making a choice to continue the status quo. By continuing to use "his" in this situation, you are stating that you accept its usage and find it appropriate. If you're going to use singular pronouns, abstaining from the debate is simply not an option. 
This sounds awkward to most English speakers only because
they're not accustomed to hearing or seeing it. Yet, that strikes me as a
pretty poor argument for continuing to use "his" when referring to an
individual of unknown gender that not only sounds awkward to non-English
speakers but is in addition conceptually flawed and a vestige of a
patriarchal society that did consider women second-class citizens.
    

The claim that the mere use of the male word is an example of sexism
has not been substantiated. If it sounds odd to a non-native speaker
it is because they do not realize that we use the male word to refer
to gendern unknow as well.
It sounds odd to a non-native speaker because it doesn't appear logical to use a male pronoun when referring to an individual of an unknown gender. You continue to support the practice because it's a convention of the English language. I tried to stress in my last email that this fact is not conclusive. Simply because our language has a particular convention which has been used for hundreds of years does not mean that the convention is appropriate. Some gendered terms have already been replaced by gender-neutral terms such as flight attendant as a replacement for stewardess. There is an academic debate occurring at the moment as to whether we should  change the  language to reflect  a commitment to gender equality. You can't abstain from that debate by saying that this is how the way things have been done in the past and therefore are appropriate for the present. 
 It's also not just "his" that poses this problem. People still refer to
mankind, businessmen, firemen, fisherman, man-made, mailman, policemen,
congressman etc. There's nothing exclusively male about any of the mentioned
professions, yet they are commonly or exclusively referred to with a non
gender-neutral term.
    

Here your own sexism shows: We are all man, including women.  Here you
attempt to say that men and women are not the same thing.
I believe the word man does and should refer to a male member of the human race. I am not contesting that "Man" has in the past and continues to be used to refer to all humans. My assertion is that it is inappropriate to refer to humanity as Man. The use of Man to refer to all humans suggests that men are the preferred or more important sex and the only sex worth mentioning.  I don't  suggest that an individual who uses the word "Man" in this way is sexist- only that the word does have a sexist connotation.

One need only look to our history to see this.  The marriage ceremony declares that the two individuals have become "Man and Wife". The man retains his identity while the woman becomes a wife with all the duties that attach to that title. Under English common law and under American law until well into the 19th century when a woman and man married the woman lost her civil existence. The system called "coverture" denied a woman the right to hold property, sue in a court of law, become a juror, or contract. Blackstone states that when a woman married she and her husband become one- the husband. Freedom was defined as the ability to contract and the only groups that were denied this right were slaves, women, and children. She completely lost her existence as recognized by the law. Despite societal change, this fact is still a part of our language. Simone de Beauvior  argued in The Second Sex (1949) that the two sexes are Men and the Other sex. Women weren't considered to have a distinct identity but rather were referred to as a contrast to men. All of these sexist traditions and legal practices explain why Man is used to refer to all of humanity rather than just the male sex. If we continue to use these sexist laden conventions we are unwittingly enforcing sexism.

Jason Cohen
_______________________________________________
OTR-users mailing list
OTR-users@lists.cypherpunks.ca
http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/mailman/listinfo/otr-users
--------------030304010009020103010105-- From kat@paip.net Mon Dec 5 01:18:50 2005 From: kat@paip.net (Kat Hanna) Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 20:18:50 -0500 (EST) Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> Message-ID: Okay, I'll jump in. I think language is important. Important to how we see the world around us and to how we see ourselves in the world. The fact that my first programming textbook sometimes used feminine pronouns made me feel engaged and included in a way that most science and technology textbooks had never done. That made a difference in my ability to see myself as potentially successful in the field. I favor changing constructions into gender-neutral forms when possible, alternating the use of "she" and "he" when it isn't confusing to the reader, and using "she or he" or "he/she" where appropriate. (In fact, in cryptography this problem is often solved by the fact that our cast of characters is of mixed sex.) I am also one of those pedants about subject-verb agreement that will not accept the so-called "singular their". Security software documentation often has a higher precision requirement than that of other software. And while I'm not willing to put words into Ian's mouth, I think he considered this particular example carefully. It's not okay, as pretty much everyone has suggested, to substitute a passive construction: the very point of the alert is that your buddy has closed her/his end of the connection, *but yours is still open*. I think that these sorts of alerts should use some form of the she/he variety. I think other general uses of "he" in the README should be examined to determine some reasonable alternative. And I volunteer to do this editing after my semester ends. [For the record, up until this point no member of the OTR dev team had been involved in this discussion.] Cheers. -Kat From paul@cypherpunks.ca Mon Dec 5 18:30:28 2005 From: paul@cypherpunks.ca (Paul Wouters) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 19:30:28 +0100 (CET) Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> Message-ID: On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, Kat Hanna wrote: > It's not okay, as pretty much everyone has suggested, to substitute a > passive construction: the very point of the alert is that your buddy has > closed her/his end of the connection, *but yours is still open*. semi-off topic. If it is that important that we close our end as well, since our remote buddy closed his/her end, why don't we just close it instead of asking the (local) user to close it? Then we could just write: OTR session with $buddy closed. Paul From ian@cypherpunks.ca Mon Dec 5 18:55:44 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 13:55:44 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> Message-ID: <20051205185544.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 07:30:28PM +0100, Paul Wouters wrote: > On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, Kat Hanna wrote: > > > It's not okay, as pretty much everyone has suggested, to substitute a > > passive construction: the very point of the alert is that your buddy has > > closed her/his end of the connection, *but yours is still open*. > > semi-off topic. > If it is that important that we close our end as well, since our remote > buddy closed his/her end, why don't we just close it instead of asking > the (local) user to close it? > > Then we could just write: OTR session with $buddy closed. That's a security problem. Suppose you were typing a long (private) message to your buddy, and she closes her end of the private connection just before you hit "Enter". You absolutely do *not* want your message to go out in the clear. So what we do instead is this: when your buddy closes her end of the connection, all outgoing messages to her are *blocked* until you select whether to restart the private conversation, or end it. - Ian From lx@redundancy.redundancy.org Mon Dec 5 19:41:33 2005 From: lx@redundancy.redundancy.org (David Thiel) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 11:41:33 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> Message-ID: <20051205194133.GA90907@redundancy.redundancy.org> On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 08:18:50PM -0500, Kat Hanna wrote: > It's not okay, as pretty much everyone has suggested, to substitute a > passive construction: the very point of the alert is that your buddy has > closed her/his end of the connection, *but yours is still open*. Actually, it seems that in OTR 3, if the remote party terminates the OTR session, it automatically ends the session for the local user. This being the case, I think a passive construction will do just fine. There's no reason to instruct the user to terminate the conversation, since it's already been done for them. > [For the record, up until this point no member of the OTR dev team > had been involved in this discussion.] Thanks, that's good to know. Cheers, David From lx@redundancy.redundancy.org Mon Dec 5 19:47:35 2005 From: lx@redundancy.redundancy.org (David Thiel) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 11:47:35 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: <20051205185544.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> <20051205185544.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: <20051205194735.GB90907@redundancy.redundancy.org> On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 01:55:44PM -0500, Ian Goldberg wrote: > That's a security problem. Suppose you were typing a long (private) > message to your buddy, and she closes her end of the private connection > just before you hit "Enter". You absolutely do *not* want your message > to go out in the clear. So what we do instead is this: when your buddy > closes her end of the connection, all outgoing messages to her are > *blocked* until you select whether to restart the private conversation, > or end it. You're right, and this is indeed what happens - ignore my explanation in the previous post, I was misled by the OTR icon displaying "Finished". Here's how the logs go if you send a message after a session is terminated by the remote user: (11:43:16) somegirl has ended his private conversation with you; you should do the same. (send a message) (11:43:17) Your message was not sent. Either end your private conversation, or restart it. (oops, refresh) (11:43:30) Attempting to refresh the private conversation with somegirl... (11:43:31) Private conversation with somegirl started. From CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM Mon Dec 5 22:33:01 2005 From: CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM (CLAY SHENTRUP) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 14:33:01 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: <20051205185544.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> <20051205185544.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: <9129d8bb0512051433g3fac2daxc3f33f94f9a8b613@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_38837_15250354.1133821981790 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline Pgo+IFNvIHdoYXQgd2UgZG8gaW5zdGVhZCBpcyB0aGlzOiB3aGVuIHlvdXIgYnVkZHkKPgpjbG9z ZXMgaGVyIGVuZCBvZiB0aGUgY29ubmVjdGlvbiwgYWxsIG91dGdvaW5nIG1lc3NhZ2VzIHRvIGhl ciBhcmUKPiAqYmxvY2tlZCogdW50aWwgeW91IHNlbGVjdCB3aGV0aGVyIHRvIHJlc3RhcnQgdGhl IHByaXZhdGUgY29udmVyc2F0aW9uLAo+IG9yIGVuZCBpdC4KCgpieSAiZW5kIiBpdCwgeW91IGp1 c3QgbWVhbiAiZ28gYmFjayB0byBhbGxvd2luZyBwbGFpbiB0ZXh0IiwgcmlnaHQ/CgotLQpUSEUg TEFTVCBQRVJTT04gVE8gRElFIEJZIEZJUklORyBTUVVBRCBJTiBUSEUKVVMgV0FTIEpPSE4gQUxC RVJUIFRBWUxPUiwgSU4gVVRBSCBJTiAxOTk2Lgo= ------=_Part_38837_15250354.1133821981790 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline PGJsb2NrcXVvdGUgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlci1sZWZ0OiAxcHggc29saWQgcmdiKDIwNCwgMjA0LCAy MDQpOyBtYXJnaW46IDBwdCAwcHQgMHB0IDAuOGV4OyBwYWRkaW5nLWxlZnQ6IDFleDsiIGNsYXNz PSJnbWFpbF9xdW90ZSI+U28gd2hhdCB3ZSBkbyBpbnN0ZWFkIGlzIHRoaXM6IHdoZW4geW91ciBi dWRkeTxicj48L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+PGRpdj48YmxvY2txdW90ZSBjbGFzcz0iZ21haWxfcXVvdGUi IHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXItbGVmdDogMXB4IHNvbGlkIHJnYigyMDQsIDIwNCwgMjA0KTsgbWFyZ2lu OiAwcHQgMHB0IDBwdCAwLjhleDsgcGFkZGluZy1sZWZ0OiAxZXg7Ij4KY2xvc2VzIGhlciBlbmQg b2YgdGhlIGNvbm5lY3Rpb24sIGFsbCBvdXRnb2luZyBtZXNzYWdlcyB0byBoZXIgYXJlPGJyPipi bG9ja2VkKiB1bnRpbCB5b3Ugc2VsZWN0IHdoZXRoZXIgdG8gcmVzdGFydCB0aGUgcHJpdmF0ZSBj b252ZXJzYXRpb24sPGJyPm9yIGVuZCBpdC48L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+PGRpdj48YnI+YnkgJnF1b3Q7 ZW5kJnF1b3Q7IGl0LCB5b3UganVzdCBtZWFuICZxdW90O2dvIGJhY2sgdG8gYWxsb3dpbmcgcGxh aW4gdGV4dCZxdW90OywgcmlnaHQ/Cjxicj48L2Rpdj48L2Rpdj48YnI+LS0gPGJyPlRIRSBMQVNU IFBFUlNPTiBUTyBESUUgQlkgRklSSU5HIFNRVUFEIElOIFRIRTxicj5VUyBXQVMgSk9ITiBBTEJF UlQgVEFZTE9SLCBJTiBVVEFIIElOIDE5OTYuCg== ------=_Part_38837_15250354.1133821981790-- From ian@cypherpunks.ca Mon Dec 5 23:50:03 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 18:50:03 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: <9129d8bb0512051433g3fac2daxc3f33f94f9a8b613@mail.gmail.com> References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> <20051205185544.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> <9129d8bb0512051433g3fac2daxc3f33f94f9a8b613@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051205235003.GI4463@smtp.paip.net> On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 02:33:01PM -0800, CLAY SHENTRUP wrote: > > So what we do instead is this: when your buddy closes her end of the > > connection, all outgoing messages to her are *blocked* until you > > select whether to restart the private conversation, or end it. > > by "end" it, you just mean "go back to allowing plain text", right? "go back to sending plaintext", but yes. - Ian From erecio@polywog.org Tue Dec 6 00:40:47 2005 From: erecio@polywog.org (Emilio M. Recio) Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 19:40:47 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] mailing list search? Message-ID: <4394DE0F.8090101@polywog.org> is there a way I can do a search the mailing list archives? I compiled otr from scratch, both the library, and the gaim-plugin. I am also using a compiled version of gaim (1.5). However, even after restarting, the plugin doesn't show up on the list of available plugins. I checked and otr was installed correctly (in the Plugins directory). -Elmo From kat@paip.net Tue Dec 6 00:51:53 2005 From: kat@paip.net (Kat Hanna) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 19:51:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: [OTR-users] mailing list search? In-Reply-To: <4394DE0F.8090101@polywog.org> References: <4394DE0F.8090101@polywog.org> Message-ID: The easiest way by far is to use google with your search terms plus "site:lists.cypherpunks.ca". As for your problem, try starting gaim with "gaim -d"; it should see the plugin and tell you why it doesn't load. -Kat On Mon, 5 Dec 2005, Emilio M. Recio wrote: > is there a way I can do a search the mailing list archives? I compiled > otr from scratch, both the library, and the gaim-plugin. I am also using > a compiled version of gaim (1.5). However, even after restarting, the > plugin doesn't show up on the list of available plugins. I checked and > otr was installed correctly (in the Plugins directory). > > -Elmo > _______________________________________________ > OTR-users mailing list > OTR-users@lists.cypherpunks.ca > http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/mailman/listinfo/otr-users > From CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM Tue Dec 6 03:51:07 2005 From: CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM (CLAY SHENTRUP) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 19:51:07 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: <20051205235003.GI4463@smtp.paip.net> References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> <20051205185544.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> <9129d8bb0512051433g3fac2daxc3f33f94f9a8b613@mail.gmail.com> <20051205235003.GI4463@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: <9129d8bb0512051951i4d8e67edn1199721d5472200@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_719_1578349.1133841067442 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline PiA+IGJ5ICJlbmQiIGl0LCB5b3UganVzdCBtZWFuICJnbyBiYWNrIHRvIGFsbG93aW5nIHBsYWlu IHRleHQiLCByaWdodD8KPgo+ICJnbyBiYWNrIHRvIHNlbmRpbmcgcGxhaW50ZXh0IiwgYnV0IHll cy4KCgpteSBleHBlcmllbmNlIGlzIHRoYXQgaXQgd29uJ3QgZXZlbiBhbGxvdyBwbGFpbiB0ZXh0 IHVudGlsIGFmdGVyIGkgc3VibWl0IHRvCnRoYXQuCg== ------=_Part_719_1578349.1133841067442 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline PGJyPgo8ZGl2PjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFpbF9xdW90ZSIgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlci1s ZWZ0OiAxcHggc29saWQgcmdiKDIwNCwgMjA0LCAyMDQpOyBtYXJnaW46IDBwdCAwcHQgMHB0IDAu OGV4OyBwYWRkaW5nLWxlZnQ6IDFleDsiPiZndDsgYnkgJnF1b3Q7ZW5kJnF1b3Q7IGl0LCB5b3Ug anVzdCBtZWFuICZxdW90O2dvIGJhY2sgdG8gYWxsb3dpbmcgcGxhaW4gdGV4dCZxdW90Oywgcmln aHQ/Cjxicj48YnI+JnF1b3Q7Z28gYmFjayB0byBzZW5kaW5nIHBsYWludGV4dCZxdW90OywgYnV0 IHllcy48L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+PGRpdj48YnI+Cm15IGV4cGVyaWVuY2UgaXMgdGhhdCBpdCB3b24n dCBldmVuIDxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXN0eWxlOiBpdGFsaWM7Ij5hbGxvdzwvc3Bhbj4gcGxh aW4gdGV4dCB1bnRpbCBhZnRlciBpIHN1Ym1pdCB0byB0aGF0Ljxicj4KPC9kaXY+PC9kaXY+Cg== ------=_Part_719_1578349.1133841067442-- From erecio@polywog.org Tue Dec 6 13:09:26 2005 From: erecio@polywog.org (Emilio Recio) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 08:09:26 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] gaim not loading static plugin, etc. In-Reply-To: References: <4394DE0F.8090101@polywog.org> Message-ID: <43958D86.3070803@polywog.org> Since i didn't find anything of interest on the mailing lists. I ran "gaim -d" and it didn't find the gaim-otr plugin at all. The odd part is that when I did a "make uninstall" to recompile the plugin, there was only one file. It seems like the static library (gaim-otr.la), but not the shared library. So... I recompiled the plugin with (enable-shared): ./configure --disable-nls --prefix=/usr/local/ --enable-shared So... I got this: plugins: /usr/local/lib/gaim/gaim-otr.so is unloadable: libotr.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory So... I did a search (libotr.so.2): $ locate libotr.so.2 /usr/local/src/libotr-3.0.0/src/.libs/libotr.so.2.0.0 /usr/local/src/libotr-3.0.0/src/.libs/libotr.so.2 /usr/local/lib/libotr.so.2.0.0 /usr/local/lib/libotr.so.2 So... I ldd'd it: $ ldd /usr/local/lib/gaim/gaim-otr.so linux-gate.so.1 => (0x00de6000) libgcrypt.so.11 => /usr/lib/libgcrypt.so.11 (0x00c8e000) libgpg-error.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgpg-error.so.0 (0x00f0c000) libotr.so.2 => not found libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0x00541000) libnsl.so.1 => /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x006a2000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x003b3000) So... I added it (/usr/local/lib) to /etc/ld.so.conf, reran ldconfig. Thanks for the "gaim -d" tip... but... why is --enable-shared required? Shouldn't gaim automagically load the statically linked gaim-otr.la? Kat Hanna wrote: > The easiest way by far is to use google with your search terms plus > "site:lists.cypherpunks.ca". > > As for your problem, try starting gaim with "gaim -d"; it should see the > plugin and tell you why it doesn't load. From ian@cypherpunks.ca Tue Dec 6 13:53:34 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 08:53:34 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: <9129d8bb0512051951i4d8e67edn1199721d5472200@mail.gmail.com> References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> <20051205185544.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> <9129d8bb0512051433g3fac2daxc3f33f94f9a8b613@mail.gmail.com> <20051205235003.GI4463@smtp.paip.net> <9129d8bb0512051951i4d8e67edn1199721d5472200@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051206135334.GL4463@smtp.paip.net> On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 07:51:07PM -0800, CLAY SHENTRUP wrote: > > > by "end" it, you just mean "go back to allowing plain text", right? > > > > "go back to sending plaintext", but yes. > > > my experience is that it won't even allow plain text until after i submit to > that. What do you mean? If Alice and Bob are in a private conversation, and Bob ends his side of it, and then sends a plaintext message to Alice, Alice will see it, along with a warning telling her that it was received unprotected. - Ian From ian@cypherpunks.ca Tue Dec 6 13:59:11 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 08:59:11 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] gaim not loading static plugin, etc. In-Reply-To: <43958D86.3070803@polywog.org> References: <4394DE0F.8090101@polywog.org> <43958D86.3070803@polywog.org> Message-ID: <20051206135911.GM4463@smtp.paip.net> On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 08:09:26AM -0500, Emilio Recio wrote: > Since i didn't find anything of interest on the mailing lists. I ran > "gaim -d" and it didn't find the gaim-otr plugin at all. The odd part is > that when I did a "make uninstall" to recompile the plugin, there was > only one file. It seems like the static library (gaim-otr.la), but not > the shared library. > > So... I recompiled the plugin with (enable-shared): > ./configure --disable-nls --prefix=/usr/local/ --enable-shared > > So... I got this: > plugins: /usr/local/lib/gaim/gaim-otr.so is unloadable: libotr.so.2: > cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory > > So... I did a search (libotr.so.2): > $ locate libotr.so.2 > /usr/local/src/libotr-3.0.0/src/.libs/libotr.so.2.0.0 > /usr/local/src/libotr-3.0.0/src/.libs/libotr.so.2 > /usr/local/lib/libotr.so.2.0.0 > /usr/local/lib/libotr.so.2 > > So... I ldd'd it: > $ ldd /usr/local/lib/gaim/gaim-otr.so > linux-gate.so.1 => (0x00de6000) > libgcrypt.so.11 => /usr/lib/libgcrypt.so.11 (0x00c8e000) > libgpg-error.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgpg-error.so.0 (0x00f0c000) > libotr.so.2 => not found > libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0x00541000) > libnsl.so.1 => /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x006a2000) > /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x003b3000) > > So... I added it (/usr/local/lib) to /etc/ld.so.conf, reran ldconfig. > > Thanks for the "gaim -d" tip... but... why is --enable-shared required? > Shouldn't gaim automagically load the statically linked gaim-otr.la? The .la *isn't* the static library. Static libs end in ".a". A ".la" file is just information *about* a shared library (it's a text file; look at it and see). I think now that you have /usr/local/lib in your /etc/ld.so.conf, compiling without an explicit --enable-shared should probably work fine. - Ian From erecio@polywog.org Tue Dec 6 14:11:44 2005 From: erecio@polywog.org (Emilio Recio) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 09:11:44 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] gaim not loading static plugin, etc. In-Reply-To: <20051206135911.GM4463@smtp.paip.net> References: <4394DE0F.8090101@polywog.org> <43958D86.3070803@polywog.org> <20051206135911.GM4463@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: <43959C20.1070604@polywog.org> Thanks for the information. It's been years since I worked on libraries on linux, I assumed it was a new gcc/glibc thing. Ian Goldberg wrote: > The .la *isn't* the static library. Static libs end in ".a". A ".la" > file is just information *about* a shared library (it's a text file; > look at it and see). > > I think now that you have /usr/local/lib in your /etc/ld.so.conf, > compiling without an explicit --enable-shared should probably work fine. From CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM Tue Dec 6 18:53:36 2005 From: CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM (CLAY SHENTRUP) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 10:53:36 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: <20051206135334.GL4463@smtp.paip.net> References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> <20051205185544.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> <9129d8bb0512051433g3fac2daxc3f33f94f9a8b613@mail.gmail.com> <20051205235003.GI4463@smtp.paip.net> <9129d8bb0512051951i4d8e67edn1199721d5472200@mail.gmail.com> <20051206135334.GL4463@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: <9129d8bb0512061053n33daf03hdfbd2a0e4b30b16e@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_11345_6070885.1133895216367 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline YnV0IGlmIGFsaWNlIGhhc24ndCBlbmRlZCBoZXIgc2Vzc2lvbiB5ZXQsIGFuZCB0cmllcyB0byBz ZW5kIHNvbWV0aGluZyB0bwpib2IsIGl0IHdpbGwgcmVmdXNlIHRvIHNlbmQgaXQgdW50aWwgc2hl J3MgZW5kZWQgaGVyIHNpZGUgYXMgd2VsbC4gIGRpZCBpCmdldCBzb21lIGFiYmVyYW50IHZlcnNp b24gb2Ygb3RyPwoKY2xheQoKT24gMTIvNi8wNSwgSWFuIEdvbGRiZXJnIDxpYW5AY3lwaGVycHVu a3MuY2E+IHdyb3RlOgo+Cj4gT24gTW9uLCBEZWMgMDUsIDIwMDUgYXQgMDc6NTE6MDdQTSAtMDgw MCwgQ0xBWSBTSEVOVFJVUCB3cm90ZToKPiA+ID4gPiBieSAiZW5kIiBpdCwgeW91IGp1c3QgbWVh biAiZ28gYmFjayB0byBhbGxvd2luZyBwbGFpbiB0ZXh0IiwgcmlnaHQ/Cj4gPiA+Cj4gPiA+ICJn byBiYWNrIHRvIHNlbmRpbmcgcGxhaW50ZXh0IiwgYnV0IHllcy4KPiA+Cj4gPgo+ID4gbXkgZXhw ZXJpZW5jZSBpcyB0aGF0IGl0IHdvbid0IGV2ZW4gYWxsb3cgcGxhaW4gdGV4dCB1bnRpbCBhZnRl ciBpCj4gc3VibWl0IHRvCj4gPiB0aGF0Lgo+Cj4gV2hhdCBkbyB5b3UgbWVhbj8gIElmIEFsaWNl IGFuZCBCb2IgYXJlIGluIGEgcHJpdmF0ZSBjb252ZXJzYXRpb24sIGFuZAo+IEJvYiBlbmRzIGhp cyBzaWRlIG9mIGl0LCBhbmQgdGhlbiBzZW5kcyBhIHBsYWludGV4dCBtZXNzYWdlIHRvIEFsaWNl LAo+IEFsaWNlIHdpbGwgc2VlIGl0LCBhbG9uZyB3aXRoIGEgd2FybmluZyB0ZWxsaW5nIGhlciB0 aGF0IGl0IHdhcyByZWNlaXZlZAo+IHVucHJvdGVjdGVkLgo+Cj4gICAgLSBJYW4KPiBfX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwo+IE9UUi11c2VycyBtYWls aW5nIGxpc3QKPiBPVFItdXNlcnNAbGlzdHMuY3lwaGVycHVua3MuY2EKPiBodHRwOi8vbGlzdHMu Y3lwaGVycHVua3MuY2EvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9vdHItdXNlcnMKPgoKCgotLQpUSEUgTEFT VCBQRVJTT04gVE8gRElFIEJZIEZJUklORyBTUVVBRCBJTiBUSEUKVVMgV0FTIEpPSE4gQUxCRVJU IFRBWUxPUiwgSU4gVVRBSCBJTiAxOTk2Lgo= ------=_Part_11345_6070885.1133895216367 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline YnV0IGlmIGFsaWNlIGhhc24ndCBlbmRlZCBoZXIgc2Vzc2lvbiB5ZXQsIGFuZCB0cmllcyB0byBz ZW5kIHNvbWV0aGluZyB0byBib2IsIGl0IHdpbGwgcmVmdXNlIHRvIHNlbmQgaXQgdW50aWwgc2hl J3MgZW5kZWQgaGVyIHNpZGUgYXMgd2VsbC4mbmJzcDsgZGlkIGkgZ2V0IHNvbWUgYWJiZXJhbnQg dmVyc2lvbiBvZiBvdHI/PGJyPjxicj5jbGF5PGJyPjxicj48ZGl2PjxzcGFuIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFp bF9xdW90ZSI+Ck9uIDEyLzYvMDUsIDxiIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFpbF9zZW5kZXJuYW1lIj5JYW4gR29s ZGJlcmc8L2I+ICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86aWFuQGN5cGhlcnB1bmtzLmNhIj5pYW5AY3lw aGVycHVua3MuY2E8L2E+Jmd0OyB3cm90ZTo8L3NwYW4+PGJsb2NrcXVvdGUgY2xhc3M9ImdtYWls X3F1b3RlIiBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6IDFweCBzb2xpZCByZ2IoMjA0LCAyMDQsIDIwNCk7 IG1hcmdpbjogMHB0IDBwdCAwcHQgMC44ZXg7IHBhZGRpbmctbGVmdDogMWV4OyI+Ck9uIE1vbiwg RGVjIDA1LCAyMDA1IGF0IDA3OjUxOjA3UE0gLTA4MDAsIENMQVkgU0hFTlRSVVAgd3JvdGU6PGJy PiZndDsgJmd0OyAmZ3Q7IGJ5ICZxdW90O2VuZCZxdW90OyBpdCwgeW91IGp1c3QgbWVhbiAmcXVv dDtnbyBiYWNrIHRvIGFsbG93aW5nIHBsYWluIHRleHQmcXVvdDssIHJpZ2h0Pzxicj4mZ3Q7ICZn dDs8YnI+Jmd0OyAmZ3Q7ICZxdW90O2dvIGJhY2sgdG8gc2VuZGluZyBwbGFpbnRleHQmcXVvdDss IGJ1dCB5ZXMuCjxicj4mZ3Q7PGJyPiZndDs8YnI+Jmd0OyBteSBleHBlcmllbmNlIGlzIHRoYXQg aXQgd29uJ3QgZXZlbiBhbGxvdyBwbGFpbiB0ZXh0IHVudGlsIGFmdGVyIGkgc3VibWl0IHRvPGJy PiZndDsgdGhhdC48YnI+PGJyPldoYXQgZG8geW91IG1lYW4/Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7SWYgQWxpY2Ug YW5kIEJvYiBhcmUgaW4gYSBwcml2YXRlIGNvbnZlcnNhdGlvbiwgYW5kPGJyPkJvYiBlbmRzIGhp cyBzaWRlIG9mIGl0LCBhbmQgdGhlbiBzZW5kcyBhIHBsYWludGV4dCBtZXNzYWdlIHRvIEFsaWNl LAo8YnI+QWxpY2Ugd2lsbCBzZWUgaXQsIGFsb25nIHdpdGggYSB3YXJuaW5nIHRlbGxpbmcgaGVy IHRoYXQgaXQgd2FzIHJlY2VpdmVkPGJyPnVucHJvdGVjdGVkLjxicj48YnI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 IC0gSWFuPGJyPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f PGJyPk9UUi11c2VycyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3Q8YnI+PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOk9UUi11c2Vyc0Bs aXN0cy5jeXBoZXJwdW5rcy5jYSI+Ck9UUi11c2Vyc0BsaXN0cy5jeXBoZXJwdW5rcy5jYTwvYT48 YnI+PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL2xpc3RzLmN5cGhlcnB1bmtzLmNhL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8v b3RyLXVzZXJzIj5odHRwOi8vbGlzdHMuY3lwaGVycHVua3MuY2EvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9v dHItdXNlcnM8L2E+PGJyPjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT48L2Rpdj48YnI+PGJyIGNsZWFyPSJhbGwiPjxi cj4tLSA8YnI+VEhFIExBU1QgUEVSU09OIFRPIERJRSBCWSBGSVJJTkcgU1FVQUQgSU4gVEhFCjxi cj5VUyBXQVMgSk9ITiBBTEJFUlQgVEFZTE9SLCBJTiBVVEFIIElOIDE5OTYuCg== ------=_Part_11345_6070885.1133895216367-- From ian@cypherpunks.ca Tue Dec 6 21:55:18 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 16:55:18 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Discussion of the use of "his" as a gender-neutral pronoun in an unlikely place In-Reply-To: <9129d8bb0512061053n33daf03hdfbd2a0e4b30b16e@mail.gmail.com> References: <43921820.8000906@brandeis.edu> <20051205185544.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> <9129d8bb0512051433g3fac2daxc3f33f94f9a8b613@mail.gmail.com> <20051205235003.GI4463@smtp.paip.net> <9129d8bb0512051951i4d8e67edn1199721d5472200@mail.gmail.com> <20051206135334.GL4463@smtp.paip.net> <9129d8bb0512061053n33daf03hdfbd2a0e4b30b16e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051206215518.GO4463@smtp.paip.net> On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 10:53:36AM -0800, CLAY SHENTRUP wrote: > but if alice hasn't ended her session yet, and tries to send something to > bob, it will refuse to send it until she's ended her side as well. did i > get some abberant version of otr? No, that's right; that's what I said. Once Bob ends his side of the session, Alice can receive plaintext from him, but not send it, until she ends her side as well. - Ian From douglas.c.robinson@gmail.com Wed Dec 7 17:55:59 2005 From: douglas.c.robinson@gmail.com (Douglas C. Robinson) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 12:55:59 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Knoppix with GAIM-OTR Message-ID: <8de316b10512070955p367a59ddk3255710f7b64275e@mail.gmail.com> I've Googled this already with no success, but is anyone aware of a Knoppix-like distro that has the full GAIM with GAIM-OTR plugin? This seems to me to be a wonderful combination for cyber-cafe use.... Thanks, Robi From jonkress@gmail.com Fri Dec 9 18:38:57 2005 From: jonkress@gmail.com (Jon Kress) Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:38:57 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] remove In-Reply-To: <20051209153846.GS4463@smtp.paip.net> References: <20051209153846.GS4463@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: <4399CF41.6020007@gmail.com> This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms010608090908070307040304 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ian Goldberg wrote: >The updated version of otrproxy for OSX, including support for the v2 >protocol, and a fix to support non-ASCII charsets, is now available. > >http://www.cypherpunks.ca/otr/binaries/osx/otrproxy-0.3.1.dmg > > - Ian >_______________________________________________ >OTR-announce mailing list >OTR-announce@lists.cypherpunks.ca >http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/mailman/listinfo/otr-announce > > > --------------ms010608090908070307040304 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIH5TCC Ak0wggG2oAMCAQICAw9GsTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQQFADBiMQswCQYDVQQGEwJaQTElMCMGA1UE ChMcVGhhd3RlIENvbnN1bHRpbmcgKFB0eSkgTHRkLjEsMCoGA1UEAxMjVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNv bmFsIEZyZWVtYWlsIElzc3VpbmcgQ0EwHhcNMDUwODA5MTg0NTI1WhcNMDYwODA5MTg0NTI1 WjBEMR8wHQYDVQQDExZUaGF3dGUgRnJlZW1haWwgTWVtYmVyMSEwHwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJq b25rcmVzc0BnbWFpbC5jb20wgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBAKRoIh3BiXS1 UXz5cp7nJY8C7sA100bjgZu9Kzk+ZadEf0Fw5PXJAo6WSDtXtwqrgM89+d6pQnToU8RQEjn8 12mBGLwjUDNhMdtoqJZUouZLW3UfkCdE8I23lLdaAmv5B7C1s86lJPIYBBGvFKpnz0t9hjIu biWAfV0cnOdTbWVZAgMBAAGjLzAtMB0GA1UdEQQWMBSBEmpvbmtyZXNzQGdtYWlsLmNvbTAM BgNVHRMBAf8EAjAAMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAA4GBAAa9+ykV7KwKsnZXFOKZZvQaYXvQs8rS ml8zKskHcm1AAyYVTaIEWKrbEq0lAk/1t4xy5eiXybqmeNfAb+mAOVVGkHAr9KKYzsMO6qiS r9Swn5DYpSzqINz5HXJA6N3SYL9moDqKXITpRK5ewfYB0hzPuRobADzNaoc3QYeF7UkxMIIC TTCCAbagAwIBAgIDD0axMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAMGIxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlpBMSUwIwYDVQQK ExxUaGF3dGUgQ29uc3VsdGluZyAoUHR5KSBMdGQuMSwwKgYDVQQDEyNUaGF3dGUgUGVyc29u YWwgRnJlZW1haWwgSXNzdWluZyBDQTAeFw0wNTA4MDkxODQ1MjVaFw0wNjA4MDkxODQ1MjVa MEQxHzAdBgNVBAMTFlRoYXd0ZSBGcmVlbWFpbCBNZW1iZXIxITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmpv bmtyZXNzQGdtYWlsLmNvbTCBnzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOBjQAwgYkCgYEApGgiHcGJdLVR fPlynucljwLuwDXTRuOBm70rOT5lp0R/QXDk9ckCjpZIO1e3CquAzz353qlCdOhTxFASOfzX aYEYvCNQM2Ex22iollSi5ktbdR+QJ0TwjbeUt1oCa/kHsLWzzqUk8hgEEa8UqmfPS32GMi5u JYB9XRyc51NtZVkCAwEAAaMvMC0wHQYDVR0RBBYwFIESam9ua3Jlc3NAZ21haWwuY29tMAwG A1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEEBQADgYEABr37KRXsrAqydlcU4plm9Bphe9CzytKa XzMqyQdybUADJhVNogRYqtsSrSUCT/W3jHLl6JfJuqZ418Bv6YA5VUaQcCv0opjOww7qqJKv 1LCfkNilLOog3PkdckDo3dJgv2agOopchOlErl7B9gHSHM+5GhsAPM1qhzdBh4XtSTEwggM/ MIICqKADAgECAgENMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMIHRMQswCQYDVQQGEwJaQTEVMBMGA1UECBMM V2VzdGVybiBDYXBlMRIwEAYDVQQHEwlDYXBlIFRvd24xGjAYBgNVBAoTEVRoYXd0ZSBDb25z dWx0aW5nMSgwJgYDVQQLEx9DZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIFNlcnZpY2VzIERpdmlzaW9uMSQwIgYD VQQDExtUaGF3dGUgUGVyc29uYWwgRnJlZW1haWwgQ0ExKzApBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWHHBlcnNv bmFsLWZyZWVtYWlsQHRoYXd0ZS5jb20wHhcNMDMwNzE3MDAwMDAwWhcNMTMwNzE2MjM1OTU5 WjBiMQswCQYDVQQGEwJaQTElMCMGA1UEChMcVGhhd3RlIENvbnN1bHRpbmcgKFB0eSkgTHRk LjEsMCoGA1UEAxMjVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVtYWlsIElzc3VpbmcgQ0EwgZ8wDQYJ KoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBAMSmPFVzVftOucqZWh5owHUEcJ3f6f+jHuy9zfVb8hp2 vX8MOmHyv1HOAdTlUAow1wJjWiyJFXCO3cnwK4Vaqj9xVsuvPAsH5/EfkTYkKhPPK9Xzgnc9 A74r/rsYPge/QIACZNenprufZdHFKlSFD0gEf6e20TxhBEAeZBlyYLf7AgMBAAGjgZQwgZEw EgYDVR0TAQH/BAgwBgEB/wIBADBDBgNVHR8EPDA6MDigNqA0hjJodHRwOi8vY3JsLnRoYXd0 ZS5jb20vVGhhd3RlUGVyc29uYWxGcmVlbWFpbENBLmNybDALBgNVHQ8EBAMCAQYwKQYDVR0R BCIwIKQeMBwxGjAYBgNVBAMTEVByaXZhdGVMYWJlbDItMTM4MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4GB AEiM0VCD6gsuzA2jZqxnD3+vrL7CF6FDlpSdf0whuPg2H6otnzYvwPQcUCCTcDz9reFhYsPZ Ohl+hLGZGwDFGguCdJ4lUJRix9sncVcljd2pnDmOjCBPZV+V2vf3h9bGCE6u9uo05RAaWzVN d+NWIXiC3CEZNd4ksdMdRv9dX2VPMYICujCCArYCAQEwaTBiMQswCQYDVQQGEwJaQTElMCMG A1UEChMcVGhhd3RlIENvbnN1bHRpbmcgKFB0eSkgTHRkLjEsMCoGA1UEAxMjVGhhd3RlIFBl cnNvbmFsIEZyZWVtYWlsIElzc3VpbmcgQ0ECAw9GsTAJBgUrDgMCGgUAoIIBpzAYBgkqhkiG 9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wNTEyMDkxODM4NTdaMCMGCSqG SIb3DQEJBDEWBBQOFvOSEuhBDQcbLfbQqwEvZ64QrTBSBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xRTBDMAoGCCqG SIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBQDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG 9w0DAgIBKDB4BgkrBgEEAYI3EAQxazBpMGIxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlpBMSUwIwYDVQQKExxUaGF3 dGUgQ29uc3VsdGluZyAoUHR5KSBMdGQuMSwwKgYDVQQDEyNUaGF3dGUgUGVyc29uYWwgRnJl ZW1haWwgSXNzdWluZyBDQQIDD0axMHoGCyqGSIb3DQEJEAILMWugaTBiMQswCQYDVQQGEwJa QTElMCMGA1UEChMcVGhhd3RlIENvbnN1bHRpbmcgKFB0eSkgTHRkLjEsMCoGA1UEAxMjVGhh d3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVtYWlsIElzc3VpbmcgQ0ECAw9GsTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASB gF/Ya9o2XLjrN0wa+VGKf1cLIfiFVgzxnpEgB5v4lAZSRfLsQK0Pcox2HJ4oxniIz4D3GC7i jR0wFLw8WvVYQZtRVv2bcMKUIFGDO3C/2lECeMkxIVHOLv9UFUPQv1gtn1KexToWFpseNe2T eZSpI/GzO7xqvoaGWcfLz9AVNcZdAAAAAAAA --------------ms010608090908070307040304-- From secanon@m-net.arbornet.org Thu Dec 8 00:22:50 2005 From: secanon@m-net.arbornet.org (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 19:22:50 -0500 (EST) Subject: [OTR-users] OTR Weakness Message-ID: <200512080022.jB80Mofx090779@m-net.arbornet.org> Correct me if I'm wrong, and it is very possible that I am, but isn't D-H vulnerable to brute-force attacks in the same manner as RSA attacks? If indeed that is true, perhaps it would be wise to increase the bitlength of the keys that otr uses, as currently, it is very-nearly in reach of easily-crackable by people with super-computers. On a seperate note, DSA has been compromised in the current way that it is created: that is, using SHA1-160 on both ends. I recommend an immediate upgrade to either TIGER (recommended) or SHA2-512. Sincerely, Anonymous From ian@cypherpunks.ca Sat Dec 10 23:42:36 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:42:36 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] OTR Weakness In-Reply-To: <200512080022.jB80Mofx090779@m-net.arbornet.org> References: <200512080022.jB80Mofx090779@m-net.arbornet.org> Message-ID: <20051210234236.GG4463@smtp.paip.net> On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 07:22:50PM -0500, Anonymous wrote: > Correct me if I'm wrong, and it is very possible that I am, but isn't > D-H vulnerable to brute-force attacks in the same manner as RSA > attacks? If indeed that is true, perhaps it would be wise to increase > the bitlength of the keys that otr uses, as currently, it is > very-nearly in reach of easily-crackable by people with > super-computers. I disagree that 1536-bit DH is "very nealy in reach of easily crackable". Do you have data to back this up? [The attacks to be concerned about aren't brute-force attacks; those clearly are out of reach.] > On a seperate note, DSA has been compromised in the current way that > it is created: that is, using SHA1-160 on both ends. I recommend an > immediate upgrade to either TIGER (recommended) or SHA2-512. Do you have a pointer to this? Collisions in SHA1 shouldn't affect DSA. We have in fact started migrating over to SHA-256, but some things (like fingerprints) can't change without losing compatibility. - Ian From mhkhung@gmail.com Sun Dec 11 00:31:24 2005 From: mhkhung@gmail.com (Michael Hung) Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:31:24 +0000 GMT Subject: [OTR-users] OTR Weakness Message-ID: <1925219337-1134261080-cardhu_blackberry.rim.net-13413-@engine07> I might be wrong but I don't think the standard dsa supports sha256. Rsa works fine of course.. Michael -----Original Message----- From: Ian Goldberg Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:42:36 To:otr-users@lists.cypherpunks.ca Subject: Re: [OTR-users] OTR Weakness On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 07:22:50PM -0500, Anonymous wrote: > Correct me if I'm wrong, and it is very possible that I am, but isn't > D-H vulnerable to brute-force attacks in the same manner as RSA > attacks? If indeed that is true, perhaps it would be wise to increase > the bitlength of the keys that otr uses, as currently, it is > very-nearly in reach of easily-crackable by people with > super-computers. I disagree that 1536-bit DH is "very nealy in reach of easily crackable". Do you have data to back this up? [The attacks to be concerned about aren't brute-force attacks; those clearly are out of reach.] > On a seperate note, DSA has been compromised in the current way that > it is created: that is, using SHA1-160 on both ends. I recommend an > immediate upgrade to either TIGER (recommended) or SHA2-512. Do you have a pointer to this? Collisions in SHA1 shouldn't affect DSA. We have in fact started migrating over to SHA-256, but some things (like fingerprints) can't change without losing compatibility. - Ian _______________________________________________ OTR-users mailing list OTR-users@lists.cypherpunks.ca http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/mailman/listinfo/otr-users From tirali@dmreklam.com Sun Dec 11 02:10:47 2005 From: tirali@dmreklam.com (tirali@dmreklam.com) Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 04:10:47 +0200 Subject: [OTR-users] otr key problem Message-ID: <8E089A182D0144ADB76C003676C83EE3.MAI@areshosting.com> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----=_NextPart_000_000B_2EABBADF.92E24747 Content-type: text/plain; charset="windows-1254" i am using gaim v1.5.0 and the latest otr release .. the problem i am facing is that i was able to use otr from a different machine and now i cannot generate keys.. it says generating ... and then says OK. but there are no Keys. when i attempt to make a private conversation it automatically tries to generate a key says OK and then with every message it again tries to generate a key and says OK but actually fails. Is there a workaround for this ? i uninstalled otr and reinstalled it but no luck. ----=_NextPart_000_000B_2EABBADF.92E24747-- From ian@cypherpunks.ca Sun Dec 11 02:53:38 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 21:53:38 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] otr key problem In-Reply-To: <8E089A182D0144ADB76C003676C83EE3.MAI@areshosting.com> References: <8E089A182D0144ADB76C003676C83EE3.MAI@areshosting.com> Message-ID: <20051211025338.GH4463@smtp.paip.net> On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 04:10:47AM +0200, tirali@dmreklam.com wrote: > i am using gaim v1.5.0 and the latest otr release .. the problem i am > facing is that i was able to use otr from a different machine and now > i cannot generate keys.. it says generating ... and then says OK. but > there are no Keys. when i attempt to make a private conversation it > automatically tries to generate a key says OK and then with every > message it again tries to generate a key and says OK but actually > fails. Is there a workaround for this ? i uninstalled otr and > reinstalled it but no luck. It sounds like you don't have the right permissions to save the private keys file for some reason. What OS is this? If it's *nix, what does "ls -al ~/.gaim" say? If it's Windows, I'm not sure what the equivalent thing is. - Ian From CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM Fri Dec 16 19:21:47 2005 From: CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM (CLAY SHENTRUP) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 11:21:47 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] jabber jingle Message-ID: <9129d8bb0512161121p64da64f0ic60ca9d070d36fe5@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_11079_801619.1134760907652 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline V2VsbCwgYWZ0ZXIgYWxsIHRoZSBldmFuZ2VsaXNtIEkndmUgZG9uZSBpbiBzdXBwb3J0IG9mIFNJ UCBmb3IgSVAgdGVsZXBob255LAppdCB0dXJucyBvdXQgdGhhdCBHb29nbGUgaGFzIGJhY2tlZCBv cGVuIGV4dGVuc2lvbnMgdG8gWE1QUCAoSmFiYmVyKSB0bwplbmFibGVkIHZvaXAuICBOb3Qgb25s eSBpcyB0aGlzIGVzc2VudGlhbGx5IHdoYXQncyBhbHJlYWR5IHVzZWQgaW4gR29vZ2xlClRhbGsg KHdoaWNoIHdpbGwgZXZlbnR1YWxseSBiZSB0b3RhbGx5IG9wZW4gYW5kIGNvbXBhdGlibGUgd2l0 aCBvdGhlciBKYWJiZXIKbmV0d29ya3MpLCBpdCdzIHNpbXBsZSB0byBpbXBsZW1lbnQgKG11Y2gg c2ltcGxlciB0aGFuIFNJUCkgYW5kIGJldHRlciB3aXRoCmZpcmV3YWxscy4KCkdhaW0gMiBpcyBz dXBwb3NlZCB0byBzdXBwb3J0IEppbmdsZSBldmVudHVhbGx5LCB1c2luZyBub25lIG90aGVyIHRo YW4KbGliamluZ2xlLiAgSSB0aGluayBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBhd2Vzb21lIHRvIHNlZSB0aGUgZnVu ZGFtZW50YWxzIG9mIE9UUgphcHBsaWVkIHRvIHRoaXMgaW4gc29tZSB3YXkgdGhhdCBpcyBzdWl0 YWJsZSBmb3Igdm9pY2UuICBJcyB0aGlzIGFueXRoaW5nCmFueSBvZiB0aGUgZGV2ZWxvcGVycyB0 aGluayB3b3VsZCBiZSBpbnRlcmVzdGluZz8KCk15IG9waW5pb24gaXMgdGhhdCB3aXRoIEdvb2ds ZSBiYWNraW5nIGl0LCBhbmQgd2l0aCBpdHMgb3BlbiBuYXR1cmUsIEppbmdsZQpsb29rcyBsaWtl IGl0J3MgZ29pbmcgdG8gYmUgdGhlIGV2ZW50dWFsIGRlIGZhY3RvIHN0YW5kYXJkIGZvciBWb0lQ LiAgTWF5YmUKdGhhdCdzIHByZW1hdHVyZSwgYnV0IGl0IG1ha2VzIGEgbG90IG9mIHNlbnNlLiAg R2FpbSAyIGlzIHN1cHBvc2VkIHRvIGJlCndpY2tlZC4gIE9UUiBzdXBwbGVtZW50ZWQgVm9JUCB3 b3VsZCBiZSBldmVuIG1vcmUgd2lja2VkLgoKVGhhbmtzLApDbGF5CgotLQpIZXJlJ3MgYW4gaWRl YSB0aGF0IHdvdWxkIHNhdmUgdGhlIHdvcmxkOiAgSSB0aGluaywgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIGdldCBzb21l IGxhcmdlCm1hZ25ldGljIHJpbmdzIGFuZCBhdHRhY2ggd2lyZXMgdG8gdGhlbSBzdWNoIHRoYXQg b25lIHdpcmUgaXMgYXR0YWNoZWQgdG8KZWFjaCBvZiBhIHNldCBvZiB0d28gbWFnbmV0aWMgcmlu Z3MgaW4gb3Bwb3NpbmcgcG9sYXJpdHkuIFRoZW4sIHdlIHNob3VsZApkaWcgdXAgZXZlcnlvbmUg dGhhdCB3YXMgYSBncmVhdCB0aGlua2VyIG9mIHRoZSBlbmxpZ2h0ZW5tZW50IGFuZCBkaXAgdGhl bQppbiBtb2x0ZW4gaXJvbi4gQWZ0ZXIgdGhhdCwgZm9sbG93aW5nIE1heHdlbGwncyBmYW1vdXMg ZXF1YXRpb25zLCB3ZSdsbCBqdXN0CnRlbGwgdGhhdCBnaXJsIGFuZCBhbGwgdGhlIG90aGVyIHN0 dXBpZHMgdGhhdCB3ZSBwcmF5ZWQgZm9yIGl0IHRvIGhhcHBlbiBhbmQKamVidXMgbWFkZSBpdCB3 b3JrLCB3ZSdsbCBwdXQgYWxsIG9mIG91ciBpcm9uIGNvdmVyZWQgdGhpbmtlcnMgb2YgdGhlCmVu bGlnaHRlbm1lbnQgYmFjayBpbiB0aGVpciBncmF2ZXMgaW5zaWRlIHRoZSBtYWduZXRpYyByaW5n cy4gT25jZSB0aGVyZSwKdGhlIGNvbWJpbmVkIHNwZWVkIHdpdGggd2hpY2ggdGhleSB0dXJuIHdp bGwgYmUgZW5vdWdoIHRvIHdlZW4gdXMgb2ZmIGZvc3NpbApmdWVscy4KCuKAlE5BVEUgT0JPUk5Z LCBUQUxLSU5HIEFCT1VUIEEgR0lSTCBXSE8gRE9FU04nVCBCRUxJRVZFIElOIEdMT0JBTCBXQVJN SU5HCg== ------=_Part_11079_801619.1134760907652 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline V2VsbCwgYWZ0ZXIgYWxsIHRoZSBldmFuZ2VsaXNtIEkndmUgZG9uZSBpbiBzdXBwb3J0IG9mIFNJ UCBmb3IgSVAgdGVsZXBob255LCBpdCB0dXJucyBvdXQgdGhhdCBHb29nbGUgaGFzIGJhY2tlZCBv cGVuIGV4dGVuc2lvbnMgdG8gWE1QUCAoSmFiYmVyKSB0byBlbmFibGVkIHZvaXAuJm5ic3A7IE5v dCBvbmx5IGlzIHRoaXMgZXNzZW50aWFsbHkgd2hhdCdzIGFscmVhZHkgdXNlZCBpbiBHb29nbGUg VGFsayAod2hpY2ggd2lsbCBldmVudHVhbGx5IGJlIHRvdGFsbHkgb3BlbiBhbmQgY29tcGF0aWJs ZSB3aXRoIG90aGVyIEphYmJlciBuZXR3b3JrcyksIGl0J3Mgc2ltcGxlIHRvIGltcGxlbWVudCAo bXVjaCBzaW1wbGVyIHRoYW4gU0lQKSBhbmQgYmV0dGVyIHdpdGggZmlyZXdhbGxzLgo8YnI+PGJy PkdhaW0gMiBpcyBzdXBwb3NlZCB0byBzdXBwb3J0IEppbmdsZSBldmVudHVhbGx5LCB1c2luZyBu b25lIG90aGVyIHRoYW4gbGliamluZ2xlLiZuYnNwOyBJIHRoaW5rIGl0IHdvdWxkIGJlIGF3ZXNv bWUgdG8gc2VlIHRoZSBmdW5kYW1lbnRhbHMgb2YgT1RSIGFwcGxpZWQgdG8gdGhpcyBpbiBzb21l IHdheSB0aGF0IGlzIHN1aXRhYmxlIGZvciB2b2ljZS4mbmJzcDsgSXMgdGhpcyBhbnl0aGluZyBh bnkgb2YgdGhlIGRldmVsb3BlcnMgdGhpbmsgd291bGQgYmUgaW50ZXJlc3Rpbmc/Cjxicj48YnI+ TXkgb3BpbmlvbiBpcyB0aGF0IHdpdGggR29vZ2xlIGJhY2tpbmcgaXQsIGFuZCB3aXRoIGl0cyBv cGVuIG5hdHVyZSwgSmluZ2xlIGxvb2tzIGxpa2UgaXQncyBnb2luZyB0byBiZSB0aGUgZXZlbnR1 YWwgZGUgZmFjdG8gc3RhbmRhcmQgZm9yIFZvSVAuJm5ic3A7IE1heWJlIHRoYXQncyBwcmVtYXR1 cmUsIGJ1dCBpdCBtYWtlcyBhIGxvdCBvZiBzZW5zZS4mbmJzcDsgR2FpbSAyIGlzIHN1cHBvc2Vk IHRvIGJlIHdpY2tlZC4mbmJzcDsgT1RSIHN1cHBsZW1lbnRlZCBWb0lQIHdvdWxkIGJlIGV2ZW4g bW9yZSB3aWNrZWQuCjxicj48YnI+VGhhbmtzLDxicj5DbGF5PGJyIGNsZWFyPSJhbGwiPjxicj4t LSA8YnI+SGVyZSdzIGFuIGlkZWEgdGhhdCB3b3VsZCBzYXZlIHRoZSB3b3JsZDombmJzcDsmbmJz cDtJIHRoaW5rLCB3ZSBzaG91bGQgZ2V0IHNvbWUgbGFyZ2UgbWFnbmV0aWMgcmluZ3MgYW5kIGF0 dGFjaCB3aXJlcyB0byB0aGVtIHN1Y2ggdGhhdCBvbmUgd2lyZSBpcyBhdHRhY2hlZCB0byBlYWNo IG9mIGEgc2V0IG9mIHR3byBtYWduZXRpYyByaW5ncyBpbiBvcHBvc2luZyBwb2xhcml0eS4gVGhl biwgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIGRpZyB1cCBldmVyeW9uZSB0aGF0IHdhcyBhIGdyZWF0IHRoaW5rZXIgb2Yg dGhlIGVubGlnaHRlbm1lbnQgYW5kIGRpcCB0aGVtIGluIG1vbHRlbiBpcm9uLiBBZnRlciB0aGF0 LCBmb2xsb3dpbmcgTWF4d2VsbCdzIGZhbW91cyBlcXVhdGlvbnMsIHdlJ2xsIGp1c3QgdGVsbCB0 aGF0IGdpcmwgYW5kIGFsbCB0aGUgb3RoZXIgc3R1cGlkcyB0aGF0IHdlIHByYXllZCBmb3IgaXQg dG8gaGFwcGVuIGFuZCBqZWJ1cyBtYWRlIGl0IHdvcmssIHdlJ2xsIHB1dCBhbGwgb2Ygb3VyIGly b24gY292ZXJlZCB0aGlua2VycyBvZiB0aGUgZW5saWdodGVubWVudCBiYWNrIGluIHRoZWlyIGdy YXZlcyBpbnNpZGUgdGhlIG1hZ25ldGljIHJpbmdzLiBPbmNlIHRoZXJlLCB0aGUgY29tYmluZWQg c3BlZWQgd2l0aCB3aGljaCB0aGV5IHR1cm4gd2lsbCBiZSBlbm91Z2ggdG8gd2VlbiB1cyBvZmYg Zm9zc2lsIGZ1ZWxzLgo8YnI+PGJyPuKAlE5BVEUgT0JPUk5ZLCBUQUxLSU5HIEFCT1VUIEEgR0lS TCBXSE8gRE9FU04nVCBCRUxJRVZFIElOIEdMT0JBTCBXQVJNSU5HCg== ------=_Part_11079_801619.1134760907652-- From gmaxwell@gmail.com Fri Dec 16 21:38:04 2005 From: gmaxwell@gmail.com (Gregory Maxwell) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 16:38:04 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] jabber jingle In-Reply-To: <9129d8bb0512161121p64da64f0ic60ca9d070d36fe5@mail.gmail.com> References: <9129d8bb0512161121p64da64f0ic60ca9d070d36fe5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 12/16/05, CLAY SHENTRUP wrote: > Well, after all the evangelism I've done in support of SIP for IP telephony, > it turns out that Google has backed open extensions to XMPP (Jabber) to > enabled voip. Not only is this essentially what's already used in Google > Talk (which will eventually be totally open and compatible with other Jabber > networks), it's simple to implement (much simpler than SIP) and better with > firewalls. > > Gaim 2 is supposed to support Jingle eventually, using none other than > libjingle. I think it would be awesome to see the fundamentals of OTR > applied to this in some way that is suitable for voice. Is this anything > any of the developers think would be interesting? > > My opinion is that with Google backing it, and with its open nature, Jingle > looks like it's going to be the eventual de facto standard for VoIP. Maybe > that's premature, but it makes a lot of sense. Gaim 2 is supposed to be > wicked. OTR supplemented VoIP would be even more wicked. I think cryptography for voice is essential. Unfortunate the reality of things is such that we really can't provide the same cryptographic behavior in regard to repudiation with voice that we can provide with IM. It would not be much work to use an OTR protected channel to exchange a session key for voice, but care must be taken to ensure that the session key does not reduce the repudiation for the voice call. Lobbying should be done with google *now* to make sure the right support is in place in the majority of the clients for encrypted voice. From CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM Sat Dec 17 08:30:53 2005 From: CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM (CLAY SHENTRUP) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:30:53 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] jabber jingle In-Reply-To: References: <9129d8bb0512161121p64da64f0ic60ca9d070d36fe5@mail.gmail.com> <9129d8bb0512161343n139b81a4v1ef1b9ea86308f4b@mail.gmail.com> <9129d8bb0512170004w4ae4e9cbv8d0459b0445f10b4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <9129d8bb0512170030r7fcd6e68h4cab20a9620ff86@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_16189_14524554.1134808253696 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline SSBkb24ndCB0aGluayB0aGlzIG1ha2VzIHNlbnNlLCBidXQgSSdtIHRvbyBleGhhdXN0ZWQgcmln aHQgbm93IHRvIGhhdmUgYQpjbGVhciBtaW5kIGFuZCBhbmFseXplIGl0LiAgSWFuPyAgQW55b25l PwoKLUNsYXkKCk9uIDEyLzE3LzA1LCBHcmVnb3J5IE1heHdlbGwgPGdtYXh3ZWxsQGdtYWlsLmNv bT4gd3JvdGU6Cj4KPiBPbiAxMi8xNy8wNSwgQ0xBWSBTSEVOVFJVUCA8Q0xBWUBicm9rZW5sYWRk ZXIuY29tPiB3cm90ZToKPiA+IGR1ZGUsIHRoZSByZWNvcmRpbmcgb2YgdGhlIGNhbGwgd291bGQg YmUgc3Ryb25nZXIgcHJvb2YgdGhhbiBhbnkga2V5cwo+IHdvdWxkCj4gPiBiZS4gIGl0IHdvdWxk IGJlIGVhc2llciB0byBzdGVhbCBoaXMgcHJpdmF0ZSBrZXlzIGFuZCBpbXBlcnNvbmF0ZSBoaW0K PiB0aGFuCj4gPiBmYWtlIGhpcyB2b2ljZS4KPgo+IEFsaWNlICh0aGUgc2VjcmV0IHBvbGljZSkg Y2FuIG9ubHkgcmVjb3JkIHRoZSBlbmNyeXB0ZWQgY2FsbC4gU2hlCj4ga25vd3MgdGhlIEJvYiBz ZW50IHNvbWUgYnl0ZXMgYnV0IGNhbid0IHByb3ZlIHdoYXQgdGhleSBtZWFuLiAgQWxpY2UKPiBk b2Vzbid0IHRydXN0IHRyZW50IGNvbXBsZXRlbHkuLi4gd2hpY2ggaXMgd2h5IHNoZSBkb2Vzbid0 IGp1c3QgdGFrZQo+IGhpcyB3b3JkIGZvciBpdCB3aGVuIGhlIHNheXMgYm9iIHdhcyBwbGFubmlu ZyBvbiBvdmVydGhyb3dpbmcgdGhlCj4gZ292ZXJubWVudC4KPgo+IFdpdGggT1RSIG9uIHRleHQs ICB0cmVudCBjYW4gZ2l2ZSBhbGljZSBhIGRlY3J5cHRlZCBjb3B5IG9mIGEgbWVzc2FnZQo+IGFu ZCB0aGUgc2Vzc2lvbiBrZXkgdXNlZCB0byBlbmNyeXB0IHRoYXQgbWVzc2FnZS4uLiBhbmQgQWxp Y2UsIGV2ZW4KPiB0aG91Z2ggc2hlIGhhcyBhIHJlY29yZGluZyBvZiB0aGUgZW5jcnlwdGVkIGRh dGEgLCBjYW4ndCBiZSBjb21wbGV0ZWx5Cj4gc3VyZSB0aGF0IFRyZW50IGlzbid0IGZyYW1pbmcg Qm9iLiAuLi4gdGhpcyBpcyBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZXJlIGlzIGEgaGlnaAo+IHJhdGlvIG9mIGtleSBk YXRhIHRvIHRyYW5zbWl0dGVkIG1lc3NhZ2VzIChiZWNhdXNlIHRoZXJlIGlzIGFuIGVESAo+IGV4 Y2hhbmdlIGV2ZXJ5IG1lc3NhZ2UgcGFpcikuICBUcmVudCBjb3VsZCBoYXZlIGp1c3Qgc2VhcmNo ZWQgZm9yCj4gc2Vzc2lvbiBrZXlzIHRoYXQgY2F1c2VkIGJvYidzIG1lc3NhZ2VzIHRvIGRlY3J5 cHQgdG8gaGlzIGNob2ljZSBvZgo+IHRleHQuIEJlY2F1c2UgdGhlIHNlc3Npb24ga2V5IGlzIGEg a2V5IHRvIGFuIEFFUyBzdHJlYW0gY2lwaGVyIChhbmQKPiBub3QgYSBvbmV0aW1lIHBhZCkgdGhp cyB3b3VsZCByZXF1aXJlIG5vbiB0cml2aWFsIGVmZm9ydCBmcm9tIHRyZW50LAo+IGJ1dCBpZiB0 aGUgbWVzc2FnZXMgYXJlIHNob3J0IHRoaXMgc3RheXMgd2l0aGluIHRoZSByZWFsbSBvZiBkb3Vi dC4KPgo+IFRoZSBzYW1lIHByb3RlY3Rpb24gaXNuJ3QgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGZvciB2b2ljZS4KPgoK CgotLQpIZXJlJ3MgYW4gaWRlYSB0aGF0IHdvdWxkIHNhdmUgdGhlIHdvcmxkOiAgSSB0aGluaywg d2Ugc2hvdWxkIGdldCBzb21lIGxhcmdlCm1hZ25ldGljIHJpbmdzIGFuZCBhdHRhY2ggd2lyZXMg dG8gdGhlbSBzdWNoIHRoYXQgb25lIHdpcmUgaXMgYXR0YWNoZWQgdG8KZWFjaCBvZiBhIHNldCBv ZiB0d28gbWFnbmV0aWMgcmluZ3MgaW4gb3Bwb3NpbmcgcG9sYXJpdHkuIFRoZW4sIHdlIHNob3Vs ZApkaWcgdXAgZXZlcnlvbmUgdGhhdCB3YXMgYSBncmVhdCB0aGlua2VyIG9mIHRoZSBlbmxpZ2h0 ZW5tZW50IGFuZCBkaXAgdGhlbQppbiBtb2x0ZW4gaXJvbi4gQWZ0ZXIgdGhhdCwgZm9sbG93aW5n IE1heHdlbGwncyBmYW1vdXMgZXF1YXRpb25zLCB3ZSdsbCBqdXN0CnRlbGwgdGhhdCBnaXJsIGFu ZCBhbGwgdGhlIG90aGVyIHN0dXBpZHMgdGhhdCB3ZSBwcmF5ZWQgZm9yIGl0IHRvIGhhcHBlbiBh bmQKamVidXMgbWFkZSBpdCB3b3JrLCB3ZSdsbCBwdXQgYWxsIG9mIG91ciBpcm9uIGNvdmVyZWQg dGhpbmtlcnMgb2YgdGhlCmVubGlnaHRlbm1lbnQgYmFjayBpbiB0aGVpciBncmF2ZXMgaW5zaWRl IHRoZSBtYWduZXRpYyByaW5ncy4gT25jZSB0aGVyZSwKdGhlIGNvbWJpbmVkIHNwZWVkIHdpdGgg d2hpY2ggdGhleSB0dXJuIHdpbGwgYmUgZW5vdWdoIHRvIHdlZW4gdXMgb2ZmIGZvc3NpbApmdWVs cy4KCuKAlE5BVEUgT0JPUk5ZLCBUQUxLSU5HIEFCT1VUIEEgR0lSTCBXSE8gRE9FU04nVCBCRUxJ RVZFIElOIEdMT0JBTCBXQVJNSU5HCg== ------=_Part_16189_14524554.1134808253696 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline SSBkb24ndCB0aGluayB0aGlzIG1ha2VzIHNlbnNlLCBidXQgSSdtIHRvbyBleGhhdXN0ZWQgcmln aHQgbm93IHRvIGhhdmUgYSBjbGVhciBtaW5kIGFuZCBhbmFseXplIGl0LiZuYnNwOyBJYW4/Jm5i c3A7IEFueW9uZT88YnI+Cjxicj4KLUNsYXk8YnI+PGJyPjxkaXY+PHNwYW4gY2xhc3M9ImdtYWls X3F1b3RlIj5PbiAxMi8xNy8wNSwgPGIgY2xhc3M9ImdtYWlsX3NlbmRlcm5hbWUiPkdyZWdvcnkg TWF4d2VsbDwvYj4gJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpnbWF4d2VsbEBnbWFpbC5jb20iPmdtYXh3 ZWxsQGdtYWlsLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7IHdyb3RlOjwvc3Bhbj48YmxvY2txdW90ZSBjbGFzcz0iZ21h aWxfcXVvdGUiIHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXItbGVmdDogMXB4IHNvbGlkIHJnYigyMDQsIDIwNCwgMjA0 KTsgbWFyZ2luOiAwcHQgMHB0IDBwdCAwLjhleDsgcGFkZGluZy1sZWZ0OiAxZXg7Ij4KT24gMTIv MTcvMDUsIENMQVkgU0hFTlRSVVAgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpDTEFZQGJyb2tlbmxhZGRl ci5jb20iPkNMQVlAYnJva2VubGFkZGVyLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7IHdyb3RlOjxicj4mZ3Q7IGR1ZGUs IHRoZSByZWNvcmRpbmcgb2YgdGhlIGNhbGwgd291bGQgYmUgc3Ryb25nZXIgcHJvb2YgdGhhbiBh bnkga2V5cyB3b3VsZDxicj4mZ3Q7IGJlLiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwO2l0IHdvdWxkIGJlIGVhc2llciB0 byBzdGVhbCBoaXMgcHJpdmF0ZSBrZXlzIGFuZCBpbXBlcnNvbmF0ZSBoaW0gdGhhbgo8YnI+Jmd0 OyBmYWtlIGhpcyB2b2ljZS48YnI+PGJyPkFsaWNlICh0aGUgc2VjcmV0IHBvbGljZSkgY2FuIG9u bHkgcmVjb3JkIHRoZSBlbmNyeXB0ZWQgY2FsbC4gU2hlPGJyPmtub3dzIHRoZSBCb2Igc2VudCBz b21lIGJ5dGVzIGJ1dCBjYW4ndCBwcm92ZSB3aGF0IHRoZXkgbWVhbi4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDtBbGlj ZTxicj5kb2Vzbid0IHRydXN0IHRyZW50IGNvbXBsZXRlbHkuLi4gd2hpY2ggaXMgd2h5IHNoZSBk b2Vzbid0IGp1c3QgdGFrZQo8YnI+aGlzIHdvcmQgZm9yIGl0IHdoZW4gaGUgc2F5cyBib2Igd2Fz IHBsYW5uaW5nIG9uIG92ZXJ0aHJvd2luZyB0aGU8YnI+Z292ZXJubWVudC48YnI+PGJyPldpdGgg T1RSIG9uIHRleHQsJm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7dHJlbnQgY2FuIGdpdmUgYWxpY2UgYSBkZWNyeXB0ZWQg Y29weSBvZiBhIG1lc3NhZ2U8YnI+YW5kIHRoZSBzZXNzaW9uIGtleSB1c2VkIHRvIGVuY3J5cHQg dGhhdCBtZXNzYWdlLi4uIGFuZCBBbGljZSwgZXZlbgo8YnI+dGhvdWdoIHNoZSBoYXMgYSByZWNv cmRpbmcgb2YgdGhlIGVuY3J5cHRlZCBkYXRhICwgY2FuJ3QgYmUgY29tcGxldGVseTxicj5zdXJl IHRoYXQgVHJlbnQgaXNuJ3QgZnJhbWluZyBCb2IuIC4uLiB0aGlzIGlzIGJlY2F1c2UgdGhlcmUg aXMgYSBoaWdoPGJyPnJhdGlvIG9mIGtleSBkYXRhIHRvIHRyYW5zbWl0dGVkIG1lc3NhZ2VzIChi ZWNhdXNlIHRoZXJlIGlzIGFuIGVESDxicj4KZXhjaGFuZ2UgZXZlcnkgbWVzc2FnZSBwYWlyKS4m bmJzcDsmbmJzcDtUcmVudCBjb3VsZCBoYXZlIGp1c3Qgc2VhcmNoZWQgZm9yPGJyPnNlc3Npb24g a2V5cyB0aGF0IGNhdXNlZCBib2IncyBtZXNzYWdlcyB0byBkZWNyeXB0IHRvIGhpcyBjaG9pY2Ug b2Y8YnI+dGV4dC4gQmVjYXVzZSB0aGUgc2Vzc2lvbiBrZXkgaXMgYSBrZXkgdG8gYW4gQUVTIHN0 cmVhbSBjaXBoZXIgKGFuZDxicj5ub3QgYSBvbmV0aW1lIHBhZCkgdGhpcyB3b3VsZCByZXF1aXJl IG5vbiB0cml2aWFsIGVmZm9ydCBmcm9tIHRyZW50LAo8YnI+YnV0IGlmIHRoZSBtZXNzYWdlcyBh cmUgc2hvcnQgdGhpcyBzdGF5cyB3aXRoaW4gdGhlIHJlYWxtIG9mIGRvdWJ0Ljxicj48YnI+VGhl IHNhbWUgcHJvdGVjdGlvbiBpc24ndCBhdmFpbGFibGUgZm9yIHZvaWNlLjxicj48L2Jsb2NrcXVv dGU+PC9kaXY+PGJyPjxiciBjbGVhcj0iYWxsIj48YnI+LS0gPGJyPkhlcmUncwphbiBpZGVhIHRo YXQgd291bGQgc2F2ZSB0aGUgd29ybGQ6Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7SSB0aGluaywgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIGdl dApzb21lIGxhcmdlIG1hZ25ldGljIHJpbmdzIGFuZCBhdHRhY2ggd2lyZXMgdG8gdGhlbSBzdWNo IHRoYXQgb25lIHdpcmUKaXMgYXR0YWNoZWQgdG8gZWFjaCBvZiBhIHNldCBvZiB0d28gbWFnbmV0 aWMgcmluZ3MgaW4gb3Bwb3NpbmcKcG9sYXJpdHkuIFRoZW4sIHdlIHNob3VsZCBkaWcgdXAgZXZl cnlvbmUgdGhhdCB3YXMgYSBncmVhdCB0aGlua2VyIG9mCnRoZSBlbmxpZ2h0ZW5tZW50IGFuZCBk aXAgdGhlbSBpbiBtb2x0ZW4gaXJvbi4gQWZ0ZXIgdGhhdCwgZm9sbG93aW5nCk1heHdlbGwncyBm YW1vdXMgZXF1YXRpb25zLCB3ZSdsbCBqdXN0IHRlbGwgdGhhdCBnaXJsIGFuZCBhbGwgdGhlIG90 aGVyCnN0dXBpZHMgdGhhdCB3ZSBwcmF5ZWQgZm9yIGl0IHRvIGhhcHBlbiBhbmQgamVidXMgbWFk ZSBpdCB3b3JrLCB3ZSdsbApwdXQgYWxsIG9mIG91ciBpcm9uIGNvdmVyZWQgdGhpbmtlcnMgb2Yg dGhlIGVubGlnaHRlbm1lbnQgYmFjayBpbiB0aGVpcgpncmF2ZXMgaW5zaWRlIHRoZSBtYWduZXRp YyByaW5ncy4gT25jZSB0aGVyZSwgdGhlIGNvbWJpbmVkIHNwZWVkIHdpdGgKd2hpY2ggdGhleSB0 dXJuIHdpbGwgYmUgZW5vdWdoIHRvIHdlZW4gdXMgb2ZmIGZvc3NpbCBmdWVscy48YnI+PGJyPuKA lE5BVEUgT0JPUk5ZLCBUQUxLSU5HIEFCT1VUIEEgR0lSTCBXSE8gRE9FU04nVCBCRUxJRVZFIElO IEdMT0JBTCBXQVJNSU5HCg== ------=_Part_16189_14524554.1134808253696-- From CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM Sat Dec 17 10:51:58 2005 From: CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM (CLAY SHENTRUP) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:51:58 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] jabber jingle In-Reply-To: <9129d8bb0512170102u78a1e63bp80259d2ae5280f2f@mail.gmail.com> References: <9129d8bb0512161121p64da64f0ic60ca9d070d36fe5@mail.gmail.com> <9129d8bb0512161343n139b81a4v1ef1b9ea86308f4b@mail.gmail.com> <9129d8bb0512170102u78a1e63bp80259d2ae5280f2f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <9129d8bb0512170251m6011ee64i9c8a4021d0a64a62@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_16829_27470364.1134816718660 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline PiBMZXRzIGFzc3VtZSBCb2IgaXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGVzIHdpdGggVHJlbnQuICBBbGljZSBpcyBh biBldmlsCj4Kb3BwcmVzc2l2ZSBnb3Zlcm5tZW50IHRvIHJlY29yZHMgYWxsIGNvbW11bmljYXRp b25zLiAgVHJlbnQgbGF0ZXIKPiBiZWNvbWVzIGEgdHJhaXRvciBhbmQgdHVybnMgb3ZlciBoaXMg aGlzIHNlc3Npb24ga2V5cyB0byBBbGljZS4gIFRoZXJlCj4gaXMgbm8gd2F5IHRoYXQgYWxpY2Ug Y2FuIGRpcmVjdGx5IHByb3ZlIHRoYXQgdGhlIHNlc3Npb24ga2V5IHdhcyB0aGUKPiBvbmUgYm9i IGFncmVlZCB0bywgaG93ZXZlciB0aGUgc2Vzc2lvbiBrZXkgc3VjY2Vzc2Z1bGx5IGNvbnZlcnRz IHRoZQo+IGRhdGEgYWxpY2UgY2FwdHVyZWQgaW50byBzb21ldGhpbmcgdGhhdCBzb3VuZHMgIGEg bG90IGxpa2UgYm9iLiAgVGhlCj4gcHJvYmFiaWxpdHkgb2YgVHJlbnQgZmluZGluZyBzb21lIGtl eSB3aGljaCBkZWNyeXB0cyB0byBzb21ldGhpbmcgdGhhdAo+IHNvdW5kcyBsaWtlIGJvYiB0YWxr aW5nIGFib3V0IHNvbWV0aGluZyBvdGhlciB0aGFuIHdoYXQgaGUgYWN0dWFsbHkKPiBzYWlkIGlz IGluZmluaXRlc2ltYWwKCgpPa2F5LCB5b3UncmUgdGhyb3dpbmcgbWUgd2l0aCB5b3VyIG1pc3Vz ZSBvZiBBbGljZSBoZXJlLiAgQnV0IGlmIEFsaWNlCmluZGVlZCBvYnNlcnZlZCBhbGwgb2YgdGhl IGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24sIGV2ZW4gaWYgaXQgd2FzIHRleHQsIHRoZW4gdGhleQp3b3VsZCBzZWUg dGhlIGVuY3J5cHRlZCBtZXNzYWdlcyBjb21pbmcgZnJvbSBCb2IsIGFzIHdlbGwgYXMgaGlzIHNp Z25lZCBESApoYWxmIGtleS4gIElmIFRyZW50IGNvdWxkIHByb2R1Y2UgYSBwcml2YXRlIERIIHZh bHVlIHRoYXQgaW4gY29uanVuY3Rpb24Kd2l0aCBCb2IncyBwdWJsaWMga2V5IHdvdWxkIHByb2R1 Y2UgYSBrZXkgdGhhdCBUcmVudCBoYXMsIHdoaWNoIHdvdWxkCmRlY3J5cHQgdGhlIHJlY29yZGVk IG1lc3NhZ2UgdG8gc29tZXRoaW5nIHJlY29nbml6YWJsZSwgdGhlbiBJIHRoaW5rIHRoYXQKd291 bGQgZ2l2ZSBBbGljZSAob3IgTXIuIENoYXJyaW5ndG9uIGlmIHlvdSBsaWtlKSB0aGUgbWVhbnMg dG8ga25vdyBwcm92ZQp0aGF0IEJvYiBzYWlkIHdoYXQgaGUgc2FpZC4gIEkgdGhpbmsgdGhlIHBs YXVzaWJsZSBkZW5pYWJpbGl0eSBpcyBvbmx5IGlmCnlvdSB3ZXJlbid0IG9ic2VydmVkIGluIHRo ZSBhY3QuCgpJbiB0aGUgbGltaXQsIHlvdXIgZXhhbXBsZSByZWxpZXMgdXBvbiByZWNvZ25pemlu ZyBCb2IncyB2b2ljZSwgd2hpY2ggd291bGQKZ2l2ZSB0aGUgc2FtZSBjZXJ0YWludHkgdGhhdCBp dCB3YXMgQm9iLCBldmVuIGlmIHRoZSBtZXNzYWdlIHdhcyBuZXZlcgplY3J5cHRlZC4gIFNvIHdo YXQgZG9lcyBPVFIgaGF2ZSB0byBkbyB3aXRoIHRoYXQ/CgoKLS0KSGVyZSdzIGFuIGlkZWEgdGhh dCB3b3VsZCBzYXZlIHRoZSB3b3JsZDogIEkgdGhpbmssIHdlIHNob3VsZCBnZXQgc29tZSBsYXJn ZQptYWduZXRpYyByaW5ncyBhbmQgYXR0YWNoIHdpcmVzIHRvIHRoZW0gc3VjaCB0aGF0IG9uZSB3 aXJlIGlzIGF0dGFjaGVkIHRvCmVhY2ggb2YgYSBzZXQgb2YgdHdvIG1hZ25ldGljIHJpbmdzIGlu IG9wcG9zaW5nIHBvbGFyaXR5LiBUaGVuLCB3ZSBzaG91bGQKZGlnIHVwIGV2ZXJ5b25lIHRoYXQg d2FzIGEgZ3JlYXQgdGhpbmtlciBvZiB0aGUgZW5saWdodGVubWVudCBhbmQgZGlwIHRoZW0KaW4g bW9sdGVuIGlyb24uIEFmdGVyIHRoYXQsIGZvbGxvd2luZyBNYXh3ZWxsJ3MgZmFtb3VzIGVxdWF0 aW9ucywgd2UnbGwganVzdAp0ZWxsIHRoYXQgZ2lybCBhbmQgYWxsIHRoZSBvdGhlciBzdHVwaWRz IHRoYXQgd2UgcHJheWVkIGZvciBpdCB0byBoYXBwZW4gYW5kCmplYnVzIG1hZGUgaXQgd29yaywg d2UnbGwgcHV0IGFsbCBvZiBvdXIgaXJvbiBjb3ZlcmVkIHRoaW5rZXJzIG9mIHRoZQplbmxpZ2h0 ZW5tZW50IGJhY2sgaW4gdGhlaXIgZ3JhdmVzIGluc2lkZSB0aGUgbWFnbmV0aWMgcmluZ3MuIE9u Y2UgdGhlcmUsCnRoZSBjb21iaW5lZCBzcGVlZCB3aXRoIHdoaWNoIHRoZXkgdHVybiB3aWxsIGJl IGVub3VnaCB0byB3ZWVuIHVzIG9mZiBmb3NzaWwKZnVlbHMuCgrigJROQVRFIE9CT1JOWSwgVEFM S0lORyBBQk9VVCBBIEdJUkwgV0hPIERPRVNOJ1QgQkVMSUVWRSBJTiBHTE9CQUwgV0FSTUlORwo= ------=_Part_16829_27470364.1134816718660 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline PHNwYW4gY2xhc3M9ImdtYWlsX3F1b3RlIj48YnI+PC9zcGFuPjxzcGFuIGNsYXNzPSJxIj48Ymxv Y2txdW90ZSBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6IDFweCBzb2xpZCByZ2IoMjA0LCAyMDQsIDIwNCk7 IG1hcmdpbjogMHB0IDBwdCAwcHQgMC44ZXg7IHBhZGRpbmctbGVmdDogMWV4OyIgY2xhc3M9Imdt YWlsX3F1b3RlIj5MZXRzIGFzc3VtZSBCb2IgaXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGVzIHdpdGggVHJlbnQuJm5i c3A7Jm5ic3A7QWxpY2UgaXMgYW4gZXZpbAo8YnI+CjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4KPC9zcGFuPjxkaXY+ PHNwYW4gY2xhc3M9InEiPjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFpbF9xdW90ZSIgc3R5bGU9ImJv cmRlci1sZWZ0OiAxcHggc29saWQgcmdiKDIwNCwgMjA0LCAyMDQpOyBtYXJnaW46IDBwdCAwcHQg MHB0IDAuOGV4OyBwYWRkaW5nLWxlZnQ6IDFleDsiPm9wcHJlc3NpdmUgZ292ZXJubWVudCB0byBy ZWNvcmRzIGFsbCBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9ucy4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDtUcmVudCBsYXRlcgo8YnI+YmVj b21lcyBhIHRyYWl0b3IgYW5kIHR1cm5zIG92ZXIgaGlzIGhpcyBzZXNzaW9uIGtleXMgdG8gQWxp Y2UuJm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7VGhlcmUKPGJyPmlzIG5vIHdheSB0aGF0IGFsaWNlIGNhbiBkaXJlY3Rs eSBwcm92ZSB0aGF0IHRoZSBzZXNzaW9uIGtleSB3YXMgdGhlPGJyPm9uZSBib2IgYWdyZWVkIHRv LCBob3dldmVyIHRoZSBzZXNzaW9uIGtleSBzdWNjZXNzZnVsbHkgY29udmVydHMgdGhlPGJyPmRh dGEgYWxpY2UgY2FwdHVyZWQgaW50byBzb21ldGhpbmcgdGhhdCBzb3VuZHMmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDth IGxvdCBsaWtlIGJvYi4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDtUaGU8YnI+CnByb2JhYmlsaXR5IG9mIFRyZW50IGZp bmRpbmcgc29tZSBrZXkgd2hpY2ggZGVjcnlwdHMgdG8gc29tZXRoaW5nIHRoYXQKPGJyPnNvdW5k cyBsaWtlIGJvYiB0YWxraW5nIGFib3V0IHNvbWV0aGluZyBvdGhlciB0aGFuIHdoYXQgaGUgYWN0 dWFsbHk8YnI+c2FpZCBpcyBpbmZpbml0ZXNpbWFsPC9ibG9ja3F1b3RlPjwvc3Bhbj48ZGl2Pjxi cj4KT2theSwgeW91J3JlIHRocm93aW5nIG1lIHdpdGggeW91ciBtaXN1c2Ugb2YgQWxpY2UgaGVy ZS4mbmJzcDsgQnV0IGlmCkFsaWNlIGluZGVlZCBvYnNlcnZlZCBhbGwgb2YgdGhlIGNvbW11bmlj YXRpb24sIGV2ZW4gaWYgaXQgd2FzIHRleHQsCnRoZW4gdGhleSB3b3VsZCBzZWUgdGhlIGVuY3J5 cHRlZCBtZXNzYWdlcyBjb21pbmcgZnJvbSBCb2IsIGFzIHdlbGwgYXMKaGlzIHNpZ25lZCBESCBo YWxmIGtleS4mbmJzcDsgSWYgVHJlbnQgY291bGQgcHJvZHVjZSBhIHByaXZhdGUgREggdmFsdWUK dGhhdCBpbiBjb25qdW5jdGlvbiB3aXRoIEJvYidzIHB1YmxpYyBrZXkgd291bGQgcHJvZHVjZSBh IGtleSB0aGF0ClRyZW50IGhhcywgd2hpY2ggd291bGQgZGVjcnlwdCB0aGUgcmVjb3JkZWQgbWVz c2FnZSB0byBzb21ldGhpbmcKcmVjb2duaXphYmxlLCB0aGVuIEkgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCB3b3VsZCBn aXZlIEFsaWNlIChvciBNci4gQ2hhcnJpbmd0b24gaWYKeW91IGxpa2UpIHRoZSBtZWFucyB0byBr bm93IHByb3ZlIHRoYXQgQm9iIHNhaWQgd2hhdCBoZSBzYWlkLiZuYnNwOyBJCnRoaW5rIHRoZSBw bGF1c2libGUgZGVuaWFiaWxpdHkgaXMgb25seSBpZiB5b3Ugd2VyZW4ndCBvYnNlcnZlZCBpbiB0 aGUKYWN0Ljxicj4KPGJyPgpJbiB0aGUgbGltaXQsIHlvdXIgZXhhbXBsZSByZWxpZXMgdXBvbiBy ZWNvZ25pemluZyBCb2IncyB2b2ljZSwgd2hpY2gKd291bGQgZ2l2ZSB0aGUgc2FtZSBjZXJ0YWlu dHkgdGhhdCBpdCB3YXMgQm9iLCBldmVuIGlmIHRoZSBtZXNzYWdlIHdhcwpuZXZlciBlY3J5cHRl ZC4mbmJzcDsgU28gd2hhdCBkb2VzIE9UUiBoYXZlIHRvIGRvIHdpdGggdGhhdD88YnI+CjwvZGl2 PjwvZGl2Pgo8YnIgY2xlYXI9ImFsbCI+PGJyPi0tIDxicj5IZXJlJ3MgYW4gaWRlYSB0aGF0IHdv dWxkIHNhdmUgdGhlCndvcmxkOiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwO0kgdGhpbmssIHdlIHNob3VsZCBnZXQgc29t ZSBsYXJnZSBtYWduZXRpYyByaW5ncyBhbmQKYXR0YWNoIHdpcmVzIHRvIHRoZW0gc3VjaCB0aGF0 IG9uZSB3aXJlIGlzIGF0dGFjaGVkIHRvIGVhY2ggb2YgYSBzZXQgb2YKdHdvIG1hZ25ldGljIHJp bmdzIGluIG9wcG9zaW5nIHBvbGFyaXR5LiBUaGVuLCB3ZSBzaG91bGQgZGlnIHVwCmV2ZXJ5b25l IHRoYXQgd2FzIGEgZ3JlYXQgdGhpbmtlciBvZiB0aGUgZW5saWdodGVubWVudCBhbmQgZGlwIHRo ZW0gaW4KbW9sdGVuIGlyb24uIEFmdGVyIHRoYXQsIGZvbGxvd2luZyBNYXh3ZWxsJ3MgZmFtb3Vz IGVxdWF0aW9ucywgd2UnbGwKanVzdCB0ZWxsIHRoYXQgZ2lybCBhbmQgYWxsIHRoZSBvdGhlciBz dHVwaWRzIHRoYXQgd2UgcHJheWVkIGZvciBpdCB0bwpoYXBwZW4gYW5kIGplYnVzIG1hZGUgaXQg d29yaywgd2UnbGwgcHV0IGFsbCBvZiBvdXIgaXJvbiBjb3ZlcmVkCnRoaW5rZXJzIG9mIHRoZSBl bmxpZ2h0ZW5tZW50IGJhY2sgaW4gdGhlaXIgZ3JhdmVzIGluc2lkZSB0aGUgbWFnbmV0aWMKcmlu Z3MuIE9uY2UgdGhlcmUsIHRoZSBjb21iaW5lZCBzcGVlZCB3aXRoIHdoaWNoIHRoZXkgdHVybiB3 aWxsIGJlCmVub3VnaCB0byB3ZWVuIHVzIG9mZiBmb3NzaWwgZnVlbHMuPGJyPjxicj7igJROQVRF IE9CT1JOWSwgVEFMS0lORyBBQk9VVCBBIEdJUkwgV0hPIERPRVNOJ1QgQkVMSUVWRSBJTiBHTE9C QUwgV0FSTUlORwo= ------=_Part_16829_27470364.1134816718660-- From shane@shaneland.co.uk Sat Dec 17 17:41:35 2005 From: shane@shaneland.co.uk (Shane M. Coughlan) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 17:41:35 +0000 Subject: [OTR-users] Making a distribution of Gaim with OTR preinstalled In-Reply-To: References: <9129d8bb0512161121p64da64f0ic60ca9d070d36fe5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <43A44DCF.1010604@shaneland.co.uk> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hello OTR people! My name is Shane Coughlan, and I am a member of the Mobility Project. We're interested in bringing mobility and security closer together. We're working on a portable version of Gaim with OTR plugin preinstalled. It's a distribution designed to help people take their IM client with them on a USB stick. It's called Mobility IM distribution, and we have a beta online at http://mobility.shaneland.co.uk (early days yet). We're busy creating systems for verifying files and encrypting profiles (using a combination of file hashing technology and symmetric encryption from GnuPG), though that's not going to be ready for some months. Now, an issue we've noticed during our OTR test conversations is that long messages passing through Yahoo! (and possibly other networks) sometimes generate a loop. Gaim complains its a badly formed message, and it attempts (infinite loop) to resend the message. It's a little annoying, and does not occur when OTR is not enabled. Is there any way to stop this? In addition, are there any notices or documentation that we should include with our distribution to make it better for the public at large? Thanks for making OTR. It's a wonderful concept. Best regards Shane http://mobility.shaneland.co.uk I'm also a member of: Enigmail OpenPGP for Thunderbird http://enigmail.mozdev.org WinPT: http://www.winpt.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3-cvs-3966 (MingW32) iD8DBQFDpE3PTa6KuhPvdOoRA1RCAKCgF4ieGzMamfHmXPWdyBEppNLQ5ACghMJK 2vKjoAZwC3VBOgYK7FYppyM= =2jZ6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ian@cypherpunks.ca Sat Dec 17 18:04:07 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:04:07 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Making a distribution of Gaim with OTR preinstalled In-Reply-To: <43A44DCF.1010604@shaneland.co.uk> References: <9129d8bb0512161121p64da64f0ic60ca9d070d36fe5@mail.gmail.com> <43A44DCF.1010604@shaneland.co.uk> Message-ID: <20051217180406.GL4463@smtp.paip.net> On Sat, Dec 17, 2005 at 05:41:35PM +0000, Shane M. Coughlan wrote: > Now, an issue we've noticed during our OTR test conversations is that > long messages passing through Yahoo! (and possibly other networks) > sometimes generate a loop. Gaim complains its a badly formed message, > and it attempts (infinite loop) to resend the message. It's a little > annoying, and does not occur when OTR is not enabled. The "right" way to solve this is with fragmentation. gaim-otr-3.0.0 included support for assembling fragments, but not for generating them. There are two hard parts of fragmenting long messages: 1. How do you know what size of fragment to use? 2. Some networks have a rate-limiter that trips when you try to send messages (i.e. fragments) too quickly. The only plausible solution to #1 is icky (hard-code maximum sizes for each known network, ugh). The IM networks simply don't in general provide enough information to determine the maximum size at runtime. #2 is really a bug in gaim: it's already got code that's supposed to automatically throttle outgoing messages, based on the networks' reported rate limits, but, last I checked, it didn't work. Maybe the new gaim-2 has fixed it, though. It's definitely something we're keeping in mind, though. This is discussed from time to time on the otr-dev list. - Ian From eyv@cs.umn.edu Sun Dec 18 20:37:06 2005 From: eyv@cs.umn.edu (Eugene Y. Vasserman) Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:37:06 -0600 Subject: [OTR-users] Gaim2 and OTR3 In-Reply-To: <20051218114527.7897.82515.Mailman@brandeis.paip.net> References: <20051218114527.7897.82515.Mailman@brandeis.paip.net> Message-ID: <43A5C872.8080306@cs.umn.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hi All, So, the Gaim2 beta seems to be out. Would be nice to see a compatible OTR3. Then I can make a clean break from Gaim 1. :) Thanks very much for all your great work, Eugene - -- Eugene Y. Vasserman http://www.cs.umn.edu/~eyv/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDpchy4S3hfPlRZlkRA91VAJ4hmIEWO9YP0VgvzEH0q/0z8EC8VACfVDg3 E/bX+5rmJ+ugZRDe/1UWvKM= =vX4c -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ian@cypherpunks.ca Sun Dec 18 22:54:15 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 17:54:15 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Gaim2 and OTR3 In-Reply-To: <43A5C872.8080306@cs.umn.edu> References: <20051218114527.7897.82515.Mailman@brandeis.paip.net> <43A5C872.8080306@cs.umn.edu> Message-ID: <20051218225415.GP4463@smtp.paip.net> On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 02:37:06PM -0600, Eugene Y. Vasserman wrote: > Hi All, > So, the Gaim2 beta seems to be out. Would be nice to see a compatible > OTR3. Then I can make a clean break from Gaim 1. :) > Thanks very much for all your great work, > Eugene I just checked in a patch (based on the one Dustin sent in) to make gaim-otr work with gaim2. When I checked earlier today, though, there wasn't a win32 build of gaim2 yet, so I can't build a win32 version of the plugin. - Ian From CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM Mon Dec 19 01:01:19 2005 From: CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM (CLAY SHENTRUP) Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 17:01:19 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] Gaim2 and OTR3 In-Reply-To: <20051218225415.GP4463@smtp.paip.net> References: <20051218114527.7897.82515.Mailman@brandeis.paip.net> <43A5C872.8080306@cs.umn.edu> <20051218225415.GP4463@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: <9129d8bb0512181701w651195c5l78b2d068ce0279a2@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_27169_30189981.1134954079921 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline SWFuOgoKSSB0aGluayBJIHNwZWFrIGZvciB0aGUgZW50aXJlIGNvbW11bml0eSB3aGVuIEkgc2F5 LCB5b3UncmUgYSBwaW1wLgoKT24gMTIvMTgvMDUsIElhbiBHb2xkYmVyZyA8aWFuQGN5cGhlcnB1 bmtzLmNhPiB3cm90ZToKPgo+IE9uIFN1biwgRGVjIDE4LCAyMDA1IGF0IDAyOjM3OjA2UE0gLTA2 MDAsIEV1Z2VuZSBZLiBWYXNzZXJtYW4gd3JvdGU6Cj4gPiBIaSBBbGwsCj4gPiBTbywgdGhlIEdh aW0yIGJldGEgc2VlbXMgdG8gYmUgb3V0LiBXb3VsZCBiZSBuaWNlIHRvIHNlZSBhIGNvbXBhdGli bGUKPiA+IE9UUjMuIFRoZW4gSSBjYW4gbWFrZSBhIGNsZWFuIGJyZWFrIGZyb20gR2FpbSAxLiA6 KQo+ID4gVGhhbmtzIHZlcnkgbXVjaCBmb3IgYWxsIHlvdXIgZ3JlYXQgd29yaywKPiA+IEV1Z2Vu ZQo+Cj4gSSBqdXN0IGNoZWNrZWQgaW4gYSBwYXRjaCAoYmFzZWQgb24gdGhlIG9uZSBEdXN0aW4g c2VudCBpbikgdG8gbWFrZQo+IGdhaW0tb3RyIHdvcmsgd2l0aCBnYWltMi4gIFdoZW4gSSBjaGVj a2VkIGVhcmxpZXIgdG9kYXksIHRob3VnaCwgdGhlcmUKPiB3YXNuJ3QgYSB3aW4zMiBidWlsZCBv ZiBnYWltMiB5ZXQsIHNvIEkgY2FuJ3QgYnVpbGQgYSB3aW4zMiB2ZXJzaW9uIG9mCj4gdGhlIHBs dWdpbi4KPgo+ICAgIC0gSWFuCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX18KPiBPVFItdXNlcnMgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0Cj4gT1RSLXVzZXJzQGxpc3RzLmN5 cGhlcnB1bmtzLmNhCj4gaHR0cDovL2xpc3RzLmN5cGhlcnB1bmtzLmNhL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGlu Zm8vb3RyLXVzZXJzCj4KCgoKLS0KSGVyZSdzIGFuIGlkZWEgdGhhdCB3b3VsZCBzYXZlIHRoZSB3 b3JsZDogIEkgdGhpbmssIHdlIHNob3VsZCBnZXQgc29tZSBsYXJnZQptYWduZXRpYyByaW5ncyBh bmQgYXR0YWNoIHdpcmVzIHRvIHRoZW0gc3VjaCB0aGF0IG9uZSB3aXJlIGlzIGF0dGFjaGVkIHRv CmVhY2ggb2YgYSBzZXQgb2YgdHdvIG1hZ25ldGljIHJpbmdzIGluIG9wcG9zaW5nIHBvbGFyaXR5 LiBUaGVuLCB3ZSBzaG91bGQKZGlnIHVwIGV2ZXJ5b25lIHRoYXQgd2FzIGEgZ3JlYXQgdGhpbmtl ciBvZiB0aGUgZW5saWdodGVubWVudCBhbmQgZGlwIHRoZW0KaW4gbW9sdGVuIGlyb24uIEFmdGVy IHRoYXQsIGZvbGxvd2luZyBNYXh3ZWxsJ3MgZmFtb3VzIGVxdWF0aW9ucywgd2UnbGwganVzdAp0 ZWxsIHRoYXQgZ2lybCBhbmQgYWxsIHRoZSBvdGhlciBzdHVwaWRzIHRoYXQgd2UgcHJheWVkIGZv ciBpdCB0byBoYXBwZW4gYW5kCmplYnVzIG1hZGUgaXQgd29yaywgd2UnbGwgcHV0IGFsbCBvZiBv dXIgaXJvbiBjb3ZlcmVkIHRoaW5rZXJzIG9mIHRoZQplbmxpZ2h0ZW5tZW50IGJhY2sgaW4gdGhl aXIgZ3JhdmVzIGluc2lkZSB0aGUgbWFnbmV0aWMgcmluZ3MuIE9uY2UgdGhlcmUsCnRoZSBjb21i aW5lZCBzcGVlZCB3aXRoIHdoaWNoIHRoZXkgdHVybiB3aWxsIGJlIGVub3VnaCB0byB3ZWVuIHVz IG9mZiBmb3NzaWwKZnVlbHMuCgrigJROQVRFIE9CT1JOWSwgVEFMS0lORyBBQk9VVCBBIEdJUkwg V0hPIERPRVNOJ1QgQkVMSUVWRSBJTiBHTE9CQUwgV0FSTUlORwo= ------=_Part_27169_30189981.1134954079921 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline SWFuOjxicj4KPGJyPgpJIHRoaW5rIEkgc3BlYWsgZm9yIHRoZSBlbnRpcmUgY29tbXVuaXR5IHdo ZW4gSSBzYXksIHlvdSdyZSBhIHBpbXAuPGJyPjxicj48ZGl2PjxzcGFuIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFpbF9x dW90ZSI+T24gMTIvMTgvMDUsIDxiIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFpbF9zZW5kZXJuYW1lIj5JYW4gR29sZGJl cmc8L2I+ICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86aWFuQGN5cGhlcnB1bmtzLmNhIj5pYW5AY3lwaGVy cHVua3MuY2EKPC9hPiZndDsgd3JvdGU6PC9zcGFuPjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFpbF9x dW90ZSIgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlci1sZWZ0OiAxcHggc29saWQgcmdiKDIwNCwgMjA0LCAyMDQpOyBt YXJnaW46IDBwdCAwcHQgMHB0IDAuOGV4OyBwYWRkaW5nLWxlZnQ6IDFleDsiPk9uIFN1biwgRGVj IDE4LCAyMDA1IGF0IDAyOjM3OjA2UE0gLTA2MDAsIEV1Z2VuZSBZLiBWYXNzZXJtYW4gd3JvdGU6 PGJyPgomZ3Q7IEhpIEFsbCw8YnI+Jmd0OyBTbywgdGhlIEdhaW0yIGJldGEgc2VlbXMgdG8gYmUg b3V0LiBXb3VsZCBiZSBuaWNlIHRvIHNlZSBhIGNvbXBhdGlibGU8YnI+Jmd0OyBPVFIzLiBUaGVu IEkgY2FuIG1ha2UgYSBjbGVhbiBicmVhayBmcm9tIEdhaW0gMS4gOik8YnI+Jmd0OyBUaGFua3Mg dmVyeSBtdWNoIGZvciBhbGwgeW91ciBncmVhdCB3b3JrLDxicj4mZ3Q7IEV1Z2VuZTxicj48YnI+ CkkganVzdCBjaGVja2VkIGluIGEgcGF0Y2ggKGJhc2VkIG9uIHRoZSBvbmUgRHVzdGluIHNlbnQg aW4pIHRvIG1ha2U8YnI+Z2FpbS1vdHIgd29yayB3aXRoIGdhaW0yLiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwO1doZW4g SSBjaGVja2VkIGVhcmxpZXIgdG9kYXksIHRob3VnaCwgdGhlcmU8YnI+d2Fzbid0IGEgd2luMzIg YnVpbGQgb2YgZ2FpbTIgeWV0LCBzbyBJIGNhbid0IGJ1aWxkIGEgd2luMzIgdmVyc2lvbiBvZjxi cj50aGUgcGx1Z2luLgo8YnI+PGJyPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyAtIElhbjxicj5fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXzxicj5PVFItdXNlcnMgbWFpbGluZyBs aXN0PGJyPjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpPVFItdXNlcnNAbGlzdHMuY3lwaGVycHVua3MuY2EiPk9U Ui11c2Vyc0BsaXN0cy5jeXBoZXJwdW5rcy5jYTwvYT48YnI+PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL2xpc3Rz LmN5cGhlcnB1bmtzLmNhL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vb3RyLXVzZXJzIj4KaHR0cDovL2xpc3Rz LmN5cGhlcnB1bmtzLmNhL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vb3RyLXVzZXJzPC9hPjxicj48L2Jsb2Nr cXVvdGU+PC9kaXY+PGJyPjxiciBjbGVhcj0iYWxsIj48YnI+LS0gPGJyPkhlcmUncwphbiBpZGVh IHRoYXQgd291bGQgc2F2ZSB0aGUgd29ybGQ6Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7SSB0aGluaywgd2Ugc2hvdWxk IGdldApzb21lIGxhcmdlIG1hZ25ldGljIHJpbmdzIGFuZCBhdHRhY2ggd2lyZXMgdG8gdGhlbSBz dWNoIHRoYXQgb25lIHdpcmUKaXMgYXR0YWNoZWQgdG8gZWFjaCBvZiBhIHNldCBvZiB0d28gbWFn bmV0aWMgcmluZ3MgaW4gb3Bwb3NpbmcKcG9sYXJpdHkuIFRoZW4sIHdlIHNob3VsZCBkaWcgdXAg ZXZlcnlvbmUgdGhhdCB3YXMgYSBncmVhdCB0aGlua2VyIG9mCnRoZSBlbmxpZ2h0ZW5tZW50IGFu ZCBkaXAgdGhlbSBpbiBtb2x0ZW4gaXJvbi4gQWZ0ZXIgdGhhdCwgZm9sbG93aW5nCk1heHdlbGwn cyBmYW1vdXMgZXF1YXRpb25zLCB3ZSdsbCBqdXN0IHRlbGwgdGhhdCBnaXJsIGFuZCBhbGwgdGhl IG90aGVyCnN0dXBpZHMgdGhhdCB3ZSBwcmF5ZWQgZm9yIGl0IHRvIGhhcHBlbiBhbmQgamVidXMg bWFkZSBpdCB3b3JrLCB3ZSdsbApwdXQgYWxsIG9mIG91ciBpcm9uIGNvdmVyZWQgdGhpbmtlcnMg b2YgdGhlIGVubGlnaHRlbm1lbnQgYmFjayBpbiB0aGVpcgpncmF2ZXMgaW5zaWRlIHRoZSBtYWdu ZXRpYyByaW5ncy4gT25jZSB0aGVyZSwgdGhlIGNvbWJpbmVkIHNwZWVkIHdpdGgKd2hpY2ggdGhl eSB0dXJuIHdpbGwgYmUgZW5vdWdoIHRvIHdlZW4gdXMgb2ZmIGZvc3NpbCBmdWVscy48YnI+PGJy PuKAlE5BVEUgT0JPUk5ZLCBUQUxLSU5HIEFCT1VUIEEgR0lSTCBXSE8gRE9FU04nVCBCRUxJRVZF IElOIEdMT0JBTCBXQVJNSU5HCg== ------=_Part_27169_30189981.1134954079921-- From eyv@cs.umn.edu Mon Dec 19 19:59:27 2005 From: eyv@cs.umn.edu (Eugene Y. Vasserman) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 13:59:27 -0600 Subject: [OTR-users] Gaim2 and OTR3 In-Reply-To: <20051219114335.26905.65079.Mailman@brandeis.paip.net> References: <20051219114335.26905.65079.Mailman@brandeis.paip.net> Message-ID: <43A7111F.4030007@cs.umn.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 I'm running the Windows build now. :) If you need testers, I'd be happy to test the Windows side. Thanks, Eugene On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 02:37:06PM -0600, Eugene Y. Vasserman wrote: >> Hi All, >> So, the Gaim2 beta seems to be out. Would be nice to see a compatible >> OTR3. Then I can make a clean break from Gaim 1. :) >> Thanks very much for all your great work, >> Eugene > I just checked in a patch (based on the one Dustin sent in) to make > gaim-otr work with gaim2. When I checked earlier today, though, there > wasn't a win32 build of gaim2 yet, so I can't build a win32 version of > the plugin. > > - Ian - -- Eugene Y. Vasserman http://www.cs.umn.edu/~eyv/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDpxEf4S3hfPlRZlkRA27OAJ9Wl7tvSMIHYAn59ehCLjkg7vwzZwCePoJI 0KV9hgko8pSBN70W3bJX6rQ= =fbtX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dguido@gmail.com Tue Dec 20 20:29:04 2005 From: dguido@gmail.com (Daniel Guido) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:29:04 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Re: OTR-users digest, Vol 1 #138 - 1 msg In-Reply-To: <20051220113130.13077.64551.Mailman@brandeis.paip.net> References: <20051220113130.13077.64551.Mailman@brandeis.paip.net> Message-ID: <9c2204930512201229p346beb76i7c34b38a80c0d3e2@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_3899_12086397.1135110544669 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Windows builds are available here: http://geddeth.dk/downloads/gaim/ ------=_Part_3899_12086397.1135110544669 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Windows builds are available here: http://geddeth.dk/downloads/gaim/
------=_Part_3899_12086397.1135110544669-- From ian@cypherpunks.ca Tue Dec 20 20:39:53 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:39:53 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Re: OTR-users digest, Vol 1 #138 - 1 msg In-Reply-To: <9c2204930512201229p346beb76i7c34b38a80c0d3e2@mail.gmail.com> References: <20051220113130.13077.64551.Mailman@brandeis.paip.net> <9c2204930512201229p346beb76i7c34b38a80c0d3e2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051220203953.GX4463@smtp.paip.net> On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 03:29:04PM -0500, Daniel Guido wrote: > Windows builds are available here: http://geddeth.dk/downloads/gaim/ I've sent a version of gaim-otr.dll for gaim-2.x to Paul for packaging. We should have a version for people to try out soon. Thanks, - Ian From ian@cypherpunks.ca Wed Dec 21 21:11:29 2005 From: ian@cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:11:29 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Gaim2 and OTR3 In-Reply-To: <43A7111F.4030007@cs.umn.edu> References: <20051219114335.26905.65079.Mailman@brandeis.paip.net> <43A7111F.4030007@cs.umn.edu> Message-ID: <20051221211129.GE4463@smtp.paip.net> On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 01:59:27PM -0600, Eugene Y. Vasserman wrote: > I'm running the Windows build now. :) > If you need testers, I'd be happy to test the Windows side. OK, Paul's packaged up a win32 version of gaim2-otr: http://otr.cypherpunks.ca/binaries/windows/gaim2-otr-3.0.0.exe Try it out, and let us know what's up. Thanks, - Ian From firefox-gen@walala.org Fri Dec 23 04:52:05 2005 From: firefox-gen@walala.org (A. Bourdon) Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:52:05 -0500 Subject: [OTR-users] Glib 2.0+ compile error w/ OTR 3.0 Message-ID: <20051222235205.v1pkveuddlw00oc4@www.libertarianactivism.com> Hi all. I'm new to the mailing list here (obviously). I've been using OTR for GAIM on Win32 for a while now with no problems- very good programming! However, I just tried compiling the latest 3.0 verion for Linux (SuSE 10.0 Pro in my case) and have run into a small but aparently critical problem. All libraries appear to be installed, and my Glib version is 2.8.1-3.i586, higher than the >= 2.4 version required by the configure script. Even so, I get the following error output: checking for libgcrypt-config... /usr/local/bin/libgcrypt-config checking for LIBGCRYPT - version >= 1.2.0... yes checking LIBGCRYPT API version... okay checking for libotr CFLAGS... checking for libotr LIBS... -lotr checking for libotr headers version 3.x >= 3.0.0... found. checking for otrl_message_receiving in -lotr... yes checking for pkg-config... /usr/bin/pkg-config checking for glib-2.0 >= 2.4 gtk+-2.0 >= 2.4 gaim >= 1.0... configure: error: glib ./configure: line 19502: exit: gtk: numeric argument required ./configure: line 19502: exit: gtk: numeric argument required Any ideas? I've never seen this specific error with any other software I've ever compiled... Thanks, Andrew From kat@paip.net Fri Dec 23 05:03:52 2005 From: kat@paip.net (Kat Hanna) Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 00:03:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: [OTR-users] Glib 2.0+ compile error w/ OTR 3.0 In-Reply-To: <20051222235205.v1pkveuddlw00oc4@www.libertarianactivism.com> References: <20051222235205.v1pkveuddlw00oc4@www.libertarianactivism.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, A. Bourdon wrote: > Hi all. I'm new to the mailing list here (obviously). I've been using OTR for > GAIM on Win32 for a while now with no problems- very good programming! However, > I just tried compiling the latest 3.0 verion for Linux (SuSE 10.0 Pro in my > case) and have run into a small but aparently critical problem. All libraries > appear to be installed, and my Glib version is 2.8.1-3.i586, higher than the >= > 2.4 version required by the configure script. Even so, I get the following error > output: > > checking for libgcrypt-config... /usr/local/bin/libgcrypt-config > checking for LIBGCRYPT - version >= 1.2.0... yes > checking LIBGCRYPT API version... okay > checking for libotr CFLAGS... > checking for libotr LIBS... -lotr > checking for libotr headers version 3.x >= 3.0.0... found. > checking for otrl_message_receiving in -lotr... yes > checking for pkg-config... /usr/bin/pkg-config > checking for glib-2.0 >= 2.4 gtk+-2.0 >= 2.4 gaim >= 1.0... configure: error: > glib > ./configure: line 19502: exit: gtk: numeric argument required > ./configure: line 19502: exit: gtk: numeric argument required Can you post line 19502? Do you have -devel packages for glib and gtk installed? Thanks. -Kat From CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM Wed Dec 28 21:30:07 2005 From: CLAY@BROKENLADDER.COM (CLAY SHENTRUP) Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:30:07 -0800 Subject: [OTR-users] JEP-0116 Message-ID: <9129d8bb0512281330y8f8c6b1s779a96e1a12277c7@mail.gmail.com> ------=_Part_58525_10658009.1135805407612 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline SSB3YXMgd29uZGVyaW5nIHdoZXRoZXIgSWFuIG9yIGFueW9uZSBlbHNlIGNvdWxkIGJlIGNvbnZp bmNlZCB0byBpbXBsZW1lbnQKWE1QUCBleHRlbnNpb24gSkVQLTAxMTYgPGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuamFi YmVyLm9yZy9qZXBzL2plcC0wMTE2Lmh0bWw+IGluIEdhaW0sCmFuIE9UUi1saWtlIGVuY3J5cHRp b24gc2NoZW1lIGF0IHRoZSBwcm90b2NvbCBsZXZlbCBmb3IgSmFiYmVyLiAgSSB0aGluawphcHBs aWNhYmlsaXR5IHRvIEppbmdsZSB3b3VsZCBhbHNvIGJlIHF1aXRlIGltcG9ydGFudCwgZm9yIHZv aWNlCnRyYW5zYWN0aW9ucy4gIEknbSB3aWxsaW5nIHRvIGRvbmF0ZSAyMDAkIHRvIGFueW9uZSB3 aG8gd2lsbCBkbyB0aGlzLCBhbmQKaG9wZWZ1bGx5IG90aGVycyB3aWxsIGZpbmQgaXQgdmFsdWFi bGUgYW5kIGhlbHAgYXMgd2VsbC4KCkkgaGF2ZW4ndCByZWFkIHRocm91Z2ggdGhlIHNwZWMgdGhv cm91Z2hseSwgc28gSSdtIG9ubHkgYXNzdW1pbmcgaXQgaGFuZGxlcwpodXJkbGVzIHByZXZpb3Vz bHkgY3Jvc3NlZCBieSBPVFIgKGxpa2UgdGhlIGZhbHNlIGlkZW50aXR5IGV4cGxvaXQpLgoKSSB1 bmRlcnN0YW5kIHlvdSdyZSBhd2FyZSBvZiB0aGVzZSBleHRlbnNpb24sIElhbiwgYW5kIEkgd29u ZGVyZWQgd2hldGhlcgp5b3UgaGF2ZSBhbnkgdGhvdWdodHMgYWJvdXQgdGhpcy4gIE9UUiBpcyBh IGdyZWF0IHN5c3RlbSwgYnV0IGlzIHNvcnQgb2YgYQpoYWNrLCB1c2luZyB3aGl0ZSBzcGFjaW5n IGFuZCBzdWNoIHRvIHdvcmsgd2l0aCBhIHJhbmdlIG9mIHByb3RvY29scy4KU29tZXRoaW5nIHRo YXQgd291bGQgd29yayBhdCB0aGUgcHJvdG9jb2wgbGV2ZWwsIGFzIHdlbGwgYXMgYWRkcmVzcyB2 b2ljZSwKd291bGQgYmUgcXVpdGUgZGVzaXJhYmxlLgoKVGhhbmtzLApDbGF5CgotLQpIZXJlJ3Mg YW4gaWRlYSB0aGF0IHdvdWxkIHNhdmUgdGhlIHdvcmxkOiAgSSB0aGluaywgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIGdl dCBzb21lIGxhcmdlCm1hZ25ldGljIHJpbmdzIGFuZCBhdHRhY2ggd2lyZXMgdG8gdGhlbSBzdWNo IHRoYXQgb25lIHdpcmUgaXMgYXR0YWNoZWQgdG8KZWFjaCBvZiBhIHNldCBvZiB0d28gbWFnbmV0 aWMgcmluZ3MgaW4gb3Bwb3NpbmcgcG9sYXJpdHkuIFRoZW4sIHdlIHNob3VsZApkaWcgdXAgZXZl cnlvbmUgdGhhdCB3YXMgYSBncmVhdCB0aGlua2VyIG9mIHRoZSBlbmxpZ2h0ZW5tZW50IGFuZCBk aXAgdGhlbQppbiBtb2x0ZW4gaXJvbi4gQWZ0ZXIgdGhhdCwgZm9sbG93aW5nIE1heHdlbGwncyBm YW1vdXMgZXF1YXRpb25zLCB3ZSdsbCBqdXN0CnRlbGwgdGhhdCBnaXJsIGFuZCBhbGwgdGhlIG90 aGVyIHN0dXBpZHMgdGhhdCB3ZSBwcmF5ZWQgZm9yIGl0IHRvIGhhcHBlbiBhbmQKamVidXMgbWFk ZSBpdCB3b3JrLCB3ZSdsbCBwdXQgYWxsIG9mIG91ciBpcm9uIGNvdmVyZWQgdGhpbmtlcnMgb2Yg dGhlCmVubGlnaHRlbm1lbnQgYmFjayBpbiB0aGVpciBncmF2ZXMgaW5zaWRlIHRoZSBtYWduZXRp YyByaW5ncy4gT25jZSB0aGVyZSwKdGhlIGNvbWJpbmVkIHNwZWVkIHdpdGggd2hpY2ggdGhleSB0 dXJuIHdpbGwgYmUgZW5vdWdoIHRvIHdlZW4gdXMgb2ZmIGZvc3NpbApmdWVscy4KCuKAlE5BVEUg T0JPUk5ZLCBUQUxLSU5HIEFCT1VUIEEgR0lSTCBXSE8gRE9FU04nVCBCRUxJRVZFIElOIEdMT0JB TCBXQVJNSU5HCg== ------=_Part_58525_10658009.1135805407612 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline SSB3YXMgd29uZGVyaW5nIHdoZXRoZXIgSWFuIG9yIGFueW9uZSBlbHNlIGNvdWxkIGJlIGNvbnZp bmNlZCB0byBpbXBsZW1lbnQgWE1QUCBleHRlbnNpb24gPGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5qYWJi ZXIub3JnL2plcHMvamVwLTAxMTYuaHRtbCI+SkVQLTAxMTY8L2E+IGluIEdhaW0sIGFuIE9UUi1s aWtlIGVuY3J5cHRpb24gc2NoZW1lIGF0IHRoZSBwcm90b2NvbCBsZXZlbCBmb3IgSmFiYmVyLiZu YnNwOyBJIHRoaW5rIGFwcGxpY2FiaWxpdHkgdG8gSmluZ2xlIHdvdWxkIGFsc28gYmUgcXVpdGUg aW1wb3J0YW50LCBmb3Igdm9pY2UgdHJhbnNhY3Rpb25zLiZuYnNwOyBJJ20gd2lsbGluZyB0byBk b25hdGUgMjAwJCB0byBhbnlvbmUgd2hvIHdpbGwgZG8gdGhpcywgYW5kIGhvcGVmdWxseSBvdGhl cnMgd2lsbCBmaW5kIGl0IHZhbHVhYmxlIGFuZCBoZWxwIGFzIHdlbGwuCjxicj48YnI+SSBoYXZl bid0IHJlYWQgdGhyb3VnaCB0aGUgc3BlYyB0aG9yb3VnaGx5LCBzbyBJJ20gb25seSBhc3N1bWlu ZyBpdCBoYW5kbGVzIGh1cmRsZXMgcHJldmlvdXNseSBjcm9zc2VkIGJ5IE9UUiAobGlrZSB0aGUg ZmFsc2UgaWRlbnRpdHkgZXhwbG9pdCkuPGJyPjxicj5JIHVuZGVyc3RhbmQgeW91J3JlIGF3YXJl IG9mIHRoZXNlIGV4dGVuc2lvbiwgSWFuLCBhbmQgSSB3b25kZXJlZCB3aGV0aGVyIHlvdSBoYXZl IGFueSB0aG91Z2h0cyBhYm91dCB0aGlzLiZuYnNwOyBPVFIgaXMgYSBncmVhdCBzeXN0ZW0sIGJ1 dCBpcyBzb3J0IG9mIGEgaGFjaywgdXNpbmcgd2hpdGUgc3BhY2luZyBhbmQgc3VjaCB0byB3b3Jr IHdpdGggYSByYW5nZSBvZiBwcm90b2NvbHMuJm5ic3A7IFNvbWV0aGluZyB0aGF0IHdvdWxkIHdv cmsgYXQgdGhlIHByb3RvY29sIGxldmVsLCBhcyB3ZWxsIGFzIGFkZHJlc3Mgdm9pY2UsIHdvdWxk IGJlIHF1aXRlIGRlc2lyYWJsZS4KPGJyPjxicj5UaGFua3MsPGJyPkNsYXk8YnI+PGJyPi0tIDxi cj5IZXJlJ3MgYW4gaWRlYSB0aGF0IHdvdWxkIHNhdmUgdGhlIHdvcmxkOiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwO0kg dGhpbmssIHdlIHNob3VsZCBnZXQgc29tZSBsYXJnZSBtYWduZXRpYyByaW5ncyBhbmQgYXR0YWNo IHdpcmVzIHRvIHRoZW0gc3VjaCB0aGF0IG9uZSB3aXJlIGlzIGF0dGFjaGVkIHRvIGVhY2ggb2Yg YSBzZXQgb2YgdHdvIG1hZ25ldGljIHJpbmdzIGluIG9wcG9zaW5nIHBvbGFyaXR5LiBUaGVuLCB3 ZSBzaG91bGQgZGlnIHVwIGV2ZXJ5b25lIHRoYXQgd2FzIGEgZ3JlYXQgdGhpbmtlciBvZiB0aGUg ZW5saWdodGVubWVudCBhbmQgZGlwIHRoZW0gaW4gbW9sdGVuIGlyb24uIEFmdGVyIHRoYXQsIGZv bGxvd2luZyBNYXh3ZWxsJ3MgZmFtb3VzIGVxdWF0aW9ucywgd2UnbGwganVzdCB0ZWxsIHRoYXQg Z2lybCBhbmQgYWxsIHRoZSBvdGhlciBzdHVwaWRzIHRoYXQgd2UgcHJheWVkIGZvciBpdCB0byBo YXBwZW4gYW5kIGplYnVzIG1hZGUgaXQgd29yaywgd2UnbGwgcHV0IGFsbCBvZiBvdXIgaXJvbiBj b3ZlcmVkIHRoaW5rZXJzIG9mIHRoZSBlbmxpZ2h0ZW5tZW50IGJhY2sgaW4gdGhlaXIgZ3JhdmVz IGluc2lkZSB0aGUgbWFnbmV0aWMgcmluZ3MuIE9uY2UgdGhlcmUsIHRoZSBjb21iaW5lZCBzcGVl ZCB3aXRoIHdoaWNoIHRoZXkgdHVybiB3aWxsIGJlIGVub3VnaCB0byB3ZWVuIHVzIG9mZiBmb3Nz aWwgZnVlbHMuCjxicj48YnI+4oCUTkFURSBPQk9STlksIFRBTEtJTkcgQUJPVVQgQSBHSVJMIFdI TyBET0VTTidUIEJFTElFVkUgSU4gR0xPQkFMIFdBUk1JTkcK ------=_Part_58525_10658009.1135805407612--