April 1993 - cypherpunks-legacy

Wiretapping chip: vid clips & sound bites
by szabo＠techbook.com 18 Apr '93

18 Apr '93

I was on a Portland-area TV forum this evening and was able to raise the wiretap chip issue to a lay audience (in addition to being in some ways a lay person myself on this issue, but quite concerned). Here are some talking points and phrases I found helpful: * Compared and contrasted a "wiretap chip", which gives government agencies the keys to your private conversations, and a "privacy chip" where you keep the keys (come to think of it, I'm not sure that second point is technically correct -- how would a truly private phone handle the keys?) * Compared giving government agencies crypto keys to giving the IRS the keys to your house and filing cabinet. * As examples I used lawyer/client, psychiatrist/patient, priest/confessor and political campaign work done over the phone. * Showed New York Times front page story (Fri. 4/16) to the camera, to demonstrate that this is important, not a fringe issue and that the wiretap chip is real. Quoted Stephen Bryen of Secured Communications Technologies Inc., "I think the government is creating a monster." * Emphasized importance of learning about telephone and e-mail technology, and how they can be made private with open cryptography. (As opposed to top-secret chip designs which I called "closed cryptography"). * Stated that I was switching from AT&T to another provider in protest of their selling phones containing wiretap chips. I wanted to use a see-thru telephone as a prop to point at computer chips inside the phone, but wasn't able to locate one in time. Some of this may sound corny and less accurate than a technical presentation, but I needed to make the lay audience at least mildly informed, sympathetic and perhaps even motivated to write their phone company or their Congresscritters within about the three minutes of air time. Further suggestions for sound bites, vid clips etc. to use in a media campaign greatly appreciated. Nick Szabo szabo(a)techbook.com

1 0

A Long History for Clipper...
by tcmay＠netcom.com 18 Apr '93

18 Apr '93

George Gleason writes: >Agreed with Phil here. Clipper can't have been developed since Inauguration >Day; it has to be a hand-me-down from the Bush administration, and I'm >willing to bet that Clinton has been sold a bill of goods to get his >support. Now a lot of folks on this list are ideologically committed to It's clearly stated that the program is at least 4 years old and that, for example, the contracts with VLSI Tech and Mxxxxtronix (I keep forgetting the name of the previously obscure So. Cal. defense contractor) were let 14 months ago, that production of the chips has begun, blah blah. No argument that the program started under Bush, and perhaps under Reagan (recall his various NSDDs and the Computer Security Act...). This doesn't mean the proposal will be casually tossed aside by Clinton as some objections are raised. Most policies of this sort percolate up through the entrenched bureacracies in Justice, State, Defense, NSA, etc. In this case, the AG, Janet Reno, was a well-known drug warrior in the Miami/Dade area....undoubtedly she made use of wiretaps, seizures, etc. She also probably understands the issues of law enforcement pretty well and fully understands what the proposal means. So, I don't think Clinton will easily change this policy. A firestorm of proposed civil disobedience, scoffing at the Clipper, etc., *might* have some effect. But I don't favor concentrating on legislative fixes. Give me technology any day. -Tim P.S. However, I'm trying to find the net address to send ersatz "protest" letters to Intergraph Corp about "Clipper." Clipper is the name of their 32-bit RISC chip--my thought is that enough indignant letters to Intergraph, deliberately confusing the Clinton Clipper with their product, will get Intergraph's lawyers to file a protest with the Administration! Perhaps even a name change will be ordered....a minor embarrassment, to be sure, but a stick in their eye nonetheless. -- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: MailSafe and PGP available.

1 0

Re: Thoughts on the proposal
by George A. Gleason 18 Apr '93

18 Apr '93

Agreed with Phil here. Clipper can't have been developed since Inauguration Day; it has to be a hand-me-down from the Bush administration, and I'm willing to bet that Clinton has been sold a bill of goods to get his support. Now a lot of folks on this list are ideologically committed to positions which are opposite to those of the Clinton amdministration, but please let's not let that blur our perception here. Clinton has shown a decent commitment to civil liberties (particularly concerning sexual freedom and reproductive rights, a very hard place to take a stand because there's such strong rightwing opposition); he's also shown an interest in telecom issues; I suspect what we're facing here isn't malice but lack of information on his part. Crypto is an elite area in math and computer science; for most people outside of this circle it's something they assume that they could never possibly understand and so they tend to accept the word of experts at hand. And the experts who are closest to the White House are at Fort Meade. The task we face is to bring the expertise of the best minds on our side, to the attention of the White House. -gg

1 0

Comments from Jim Bidzos, Pres. of RSA Data Security
by tcmay＠netcom.com 18 Apr '93

18 Apr '93

Jim Bidzos, Pres. of RSA Data Security, sent me a nice note this evening in response to my posting on sci.crypt. In that post, I suggested that only RSA has the algorithms and protocols ready to go for an alternative to Clipper, and that perhaps we should set aside our differences with RSA (over patents on software, etc.) and instead seek an alliance. Basically, Jim said he knew *nothing* of Clipper until he read about it in the Friday morning papers!! If true, this is astounding. (And having met Jim several times, I believe him.) He's also preparing a FAQ entitled "RSA/PKP/Clipper Flap FAQ" to deal with the many questions raised. Jim has some interesting theories about the motivations for Clipper, and why AT&T was so quick to jump on the bandwagon. Please don't quote my comments in public discussions of this issue (Jim asked me not to, which is why I'm being vaguely elliptic here.) This is all I can say for now, but I remain convinced that RSA was not involved (I suspect the presence of "jim(a)rsa.com" on the NIST mailing list, as reported in this group by a couple of folks, is not necessarily the cabal that put Clipper together). Interesting times indeed! -Tim May -- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: MailSafe and PGP available.

1 0

RE: CLIP: Media Blitz
by TO1SITTLER＠APSICC.APS.EDU 18 Apr '93

18 Apr '93

Sorry I can't quote, but Giant media blitz sounds like a great idea to me. Post the media list and put it on the FTP site too. Roots-up sounds much more cypherpunk than funds- and TV- and newspaper-down. Thank you, Matt. Kragen

1 0

Re: PGP & RSA -> Legal
by Clark Reynard 18 Apr '93

18 Apr '93

If RSA wished to make it extremely difficult to get its patent revoked, it could raise its regular price to something on the order of $50,000. Then, it could offer a $49,900.00 discount to those who would be willing to perform for them the 'service' of writing to the government to complain about any possible outlawing of cryptographic technology. Then, if the government wished to illegalize this software, since the software was legal at the time of purchase, it could not be confiscated without due payment of value. If thousands of people were to say, "Hey, this software's worth fifty thousand dollars, you have to pay that." It would throw at least something of a legal obstacle in the path of this obscene government menace. Does anyone know of any legal precedent which might be binding to a case of this nature? I know that eminent domain laws are usually _very_ generous in compensation for property seized for public works, if there is even the slightest _trace_ of impropriety in their actions. ---- Robert W. Clark rclark(a)nyx.cs.du.edu PGP signature available by mail or finger

2 1

Re: 1st Amendment Clipped?
by karn＠qualcomm.com 18 Apr '93

18 Apr '93

>I then transmit the following and am arrested -- >-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- [cipher text deleted] >Won't the prosecution be embarrassed when I decrypt it in court and present >the plaintext: > 1st Amendment > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of [remaining text deleted] No, they won't. Possession of such an OBVIOUSLY subversive document will prove conclusively that you're a dangerous enemy of the state, and must be severely dealt with. You'll be lucky to have a swift and painless execution. Thought for the day: "All I want is peace on earth, good will toward men." "We're the United States Government. We don't do that sort of thing!" --Sneakers (great flick, just saw it. Seemed appropriate.) Phil

1 0

CLIP: Media Blitz
by Matthew J Miszewski 18 Apr '93

18 Apr '93

Cypherpunks, I know Ive got a huge list of fax/phone numbers and addresses of all of the MAJOR media sources in this country. Im going to find it now. The idea is a major blitz on the media's editorial boards from plain old outraged readers (OK cypherpunks aren't plain or old), the media shows like Larry King, et al would love a point counterpoint on this topic and this could create a cypher phenomenon from the roots up. If this sounds like a good idea to others out there let me know. I believe that a groundswell (or apparent one) will catch the eye of those in Congress and in WAShington much more than will petitions or letters from an ambiguous and generally anonymous email list (although everyones thoughts are in the right place). People in Washington react to what appears to be public sentiment. So lets create it :-) Ill post the media list unless many people would rather me not do so. Matt

1 0

Fear
by TO1SITTLER＠APSICC.APS.EDU 18 Apr '93

18 Apr '93

I just thought I should add that I agree with the last poster. Cryptography will be increasingly hard to learn in the future, if this kind of thing goes on. But it will be ten or fifteen years before anyone has computers which can crack an 128-bit version of DES. I am cryptologically naive, but I think that people can always find privacy when they want it. An underground cypherpunk movement may be the only way to bring up new cryptographers. More important is the issue of equipment. Is a computer communications equipment? If so, we might have clipper chips on our motherboards. Reading input from the keyboard. This is a crisis for privacy. Can someone, preferably the people who run the cypherpunk list, set up a Privacy Advertising Fund? I would be willing to donate money, and hopefully many other cypherpunks would too. We might win that way. Urge people to protest with full-page ads in newspapers. With 30- second TV spots. With demonstrations. I will donate, if it is formed, but I can not form it except under the most extreme conditions. I have no experience in advertising or management. Be afraid. Be very afraid. Kragen Sittler

1 0

More True Names: The NIST Security Board
by Harry Shapiro 18 Apr '93

18 Apr '93

The csspub mailing list: csspab(a)mail-gw.ncsl.nist.gov, and address on the clipper mailing list, seems to contain basically the members of the NIST security board. In addition to the names already posted, their true names are as follows: burrows@ecf = James Burrows a director of NIST's National Computer Systems Laboratory mcnulty@ecf = F. Lynn McNulty an associate director for computer security at the National Institute of Standards and Technology's Computer Systems Laboratory Gangemi(a)dockmaster.ncsc.mil = Gaetano Gangemi is director of the secure systems program at Wang Laboratories Inc. He wrote: Computer Security Basics by Deborah Russell and G. T. Gangemi, Sr. -1991, O'Reilly and Associates slambert(a)cgin.cto.citicorp.com = Sandra Lambert is vice-president of information security at Citibank, N.A. lipner(a)mitre.org = Lipner is Mitre Corp.'s director of information systems. gallagher(a)dockmaster.ncsc.mil = Patrick Gallagher, director of the National Security Agency's National Computer Security Center and a security board member walker(a)tis.com = Stephen Walker a computer security expert and president of Trusted Information Systems, Inc. in Glenwood, Md willis(a)rand.org = Willis H. Ware a the Rand Corp. executive who chairs the security board. whitehurst(a)vnet.ibm.com = William Whitehurst is a security board member and director of IBM Corp.'s data security programs. -- Harry Shapiro habs(a)panix.com List Administrator of the Extropy Institute Mailing List Private Communication for the Extropian Community since 1991

1 0