June 1993 - cypherpunks-legacy

"RSA sells out" hue and cry (fwd)
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Jun '93

17 Jun '93

More from Big Jim at RSA, criticizing the idea that RSA should have licensed "its" algorithms to NIST only on the condition that they not be used for clipper/capstone/key escrow and similar schemes ********* Quoth Jim Bidzos, verily I saith unto thee: **************

1 0

help on hacking
by CWHITCOM＠bentley.edu 17 Jun '93

17 Jun '93

This is a followup to a request I sent around last week. I have a bit more information now. The request is from a major news organization that is working on a project concerning privacy. They are interested in how one gains access to private and public databases, security measures, etc. If you are interested in helping out, please contact tye(a)nws.globe.com. Coralee By the way, don't forget the Computers and Social Change Conference this Friday and Saturday at Roxbury Community College. There is a wide variety of workshops offered as well as lunch. For more information call Marlene Archer at 617-252-0600.

1 0

Subject lines for remailers
by nobody＠rosebud.ee.uh.edu 17 Jun '93

17 Jun '93

Another way in which incoming and outgoing messages can be linked up in a remailer is the Subject line. Most of the remailers keep this the same for incoming and outgoing messages. Most of the remailers also have the ability to let the user change the subject line as it goes through the remailer. My "chain" program which I put on soda lets you set the subject line but only in the last remailer of the chain (so that it goes to the destination with the right subject). If more people did that and we also adopted the convention of not having a subject line at all for the mail up to that point, then all mail through the remailers would have no subject and it would all look the same. (Actually, my mailer won't conveniently let me have no subject, so I would either have to have a blank subject or some default string.) Hal Finney 74076.1041(a)compuserve.com

1 0

"RSA sells out" hue and cry
by jim＠RSA.COM 17 Jun '93

17 Jun '93

Re "source" requirements for Clipper: See my last email to you. ATT, Motorola, etc. are licensed to use RSA and Diffie-Hellman. They are free to use those techniques to manage Clipper keys, as long as they pay their royalties for those techniques, without any contact with us. Or perhaps, when we lciensed them back in the mid and late 80's, we should have limited the use of public key to key management of "future algorithms we approve of?" ********************** END FORWARD *********************************** Draw your own conclusions. I sure will. -- Stanton McCandlish * Space Migration * Networking * ChaOrder * NO GOV'T. * anton(a)hydra.unm.edu * Intelligence Increase * Nano * Crypto * NO RELIGION * FidoNet: 1:301/2 * Life Extension * Ethics * VR * Now! * NO MORE LIES! * Noise in the Void BBS * +1-505-246-8515 (24hr, 1200-14400, v32bis, N-8-1) *

1 0

Contempt of court
by axelrod＠s106.es.llnl.gov 17 Jun '93

17 Jun '93

I gather that a court can order you to produce the means to decrypt cyphertext that the court has ruled is evidence. This would imply that the giving of the means to decrypt (which could simply be the uttering of a password) is not considered testimony, because you cannot be forced to give testimony under the 5th amendment. Is there a court decision on point for this issue. In another but similar context, can a court order you to give it the combination of a safe, that contains evidence? I suspect, if that is the case, then there is no 5th amendment protection against being so ordered to produce the means to decrypt messages, documents etc.

1 0

Contempt of court
by Duncan Frissell 17 Jun '93

17 Jun '93

>>>I think that Mr. Frissell's suggestion falls into the category of what >>>I've humbly termed "digital flash paper" mechanisms. >>>My highly esteemed legal opinion is that this could be considered >>>criminal obstruction of justice I call it a network operating system designed to cope with local security breaches. I am not required by law to keep business records in any particular jurisdiction. I am not even required to have access to everything in a business with which I am connected. >>>such a charge might be preferrable to one of Sedition :-)<<< But a charge of Sedition is such a rare honor. It's tough to get the Feds to bring one. One Sedition trial during WWII and one against White Supremicists a few years back. Feds lost both. Besides, if the system is run by non-Americans outside of the US, sedition can't apply (can it? - no treason certainly). (Mike McNally) Duncan Frissell

2 1

Re: yaa (yet another arti
by M..Stirner＠f28.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG 17 Jun '93

17 Jun '93

Uu> --Dave (trying to give some extra business to the anonymous Uu> remailers). I'd love to, but there hasn't been any sort of an updated description of the address syntax posted here since I got back on this list. I'd be thrilled if someone could post a current how-to for the remailers, or at least send it to me at the following address: ********************************************************************* * <m..stirner(a)f28.n125.z1.fidonet.org> - PGP Key D30909 via servers * * > What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not <* * > warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit <* * > of resistance? Let them take arms!" - Thomas Jefferson, 1787 <* ********************************************************************* ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 -- M. Stirner - via FidoNet node 1:125/1 UUCP: ...!uunet!kumr!shelter!28!M..Stirner INTERNET: M..Stirner(a)f28.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG

1 0

Re: YAA (yet another article)
by George A. Gleason 17 Jun '93

17 Jun '93

Re your "I like this ("Oh My God" proposal for tap authorisations): THis gives us a possibly interesting place to start from. Sponsor and lobby for (etc) new legislation which would update the existing wiretap laws to include the Oh My God! standard. The point being to put that standard in place & let it run in test mode for a while to see how it works. If it works out well in practice, and isnt subject to "venue abuse" (judge shopping), then it could be extended to key escrow systems. However, I still have a strong preference that even an "improved" key escrow system be implemented via the free market and make provision for free choice in cyphers. -gg

2 1

Contempt of court
by Duncan Frissell 17 Jun '93

17 Jun '93

>>>Note that a court could cite you for contempt for not complying >>>with a subpoena duces tecum (a subpoena requiring you to produce objects >>>or documents) if you fail to turn over subpoenaed backups. Assume that your application is running (mirrored) on five machines in five different jurisdictions and the machines will lock out one or more of their number if they receive a panic code, or one goes offline unexpectedly, or is not accessed in exactly the right way, you could easily respond to a subpoena duces tecum by stating truthfully that the requested records are not (or are no longer) under your control. The machines themselves can also be protected by careful choice of location and judicious use of remailers and requirements that they only be accessed by telenetting, etc. Besides what's the big deal about contempt of court. If you are worried about doing 2 years or less, locate yourself in another jurisdiction. No need to expose your body to high risk legal regimes. Duncan Frissell "But your Honor, I'm desperately trying to *conceal* my contempt for this court."

3 2

Jimbo B. responds again!
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Jun '93

17 Jun '93

Faced with the "charge" of selling out the govt, by "supporting Clipper" (more specifically for granting a license to them to use RSA's patented encryption in the key escrow scheme [as far as I can tell; I don't read legalese too well]), RSADSI/PKP's head Jim Bidzos responds thusly: Quoth Jim Bidzos, verily I saith unto thee: > From jim(a)RSA.COM Wed Jun 16 15:37:37 1993 > id <AA12154>; Wed, 16 Jun 1993 15:37:34 -0600 > Date: Wed, 16 Jun 93 14:35:49 PDT > From: jim(a)RSA.COM (Jim Bidzos) > Message-Id: <9306162135.AA17052(a)RSA.COM> > To: anton(a)hydra.unm.edu > In-Reply-To: Stanton McCandlish's message of Wed, 16 Jun 1993 13:26:42 -0600 (MDT) <9306161926.AA06434(a)hydra.unm.edu> > Subject: hmph > > > Well, I don't know where these things get discussed, but you can > certainly feel free to resend or post my email to you. I'm genuinely > confused, as I believe the situation is as simple as I put it to you. > Our claims of patent infringement by DSS, made over the last 18 > months, were well-known and publicized. NIST has capitulated. Seems > pretty straightforward to me. > > BTW, on Clipper, ATT, Motorola, IBM could have done Clipper without > ever talking to us. Contrary to popular belief, we don't dictate > terms to licensees. So, with their RSA or Diffie-Hellman licenses, > these companies could have simply replaced DES with Clipper > (continuing to use RSA for Clipper key management) and supported > Clipper without ever talking to us. (In fact, I believe this is > exactly what ATT did, as they had a DH/DES phone before they "joined" > the Clipper club.) Clipper will not fail or succeed because of any > Public-key patent license. It will go away simply because it was > ill-conceived, ill-timed, and undesirable. > > > --Jim > -- Stanton McCandlish * Space Migration * Networking * ChaOrder * NO GOV'T. * anton(a)hydra.unm.edu * Intelligence Increase * Nano * Crypto * NO RELIGION * FidoNet: 1:301/2 * Life Extension * Ethics * VR * Now! * NO MORE LIES! * Noise in the Void BBS * +1-505-246-8515 (24hr, 1200-14400, v32bis, N-8-1) *

1 0