August 1993 - cypherpunks-legacy

birth of Software Patent Institute
by L. Detweiler 14 Aug '93

14 Aug '93

Don't know anything about this, but it's a definite Cypherpunk cause... the first question to ask would be whether they're in touch with LPF at all. ------- Forwarded Message

2 1

User suggestion on MacPGP
by bwp＠mindvox.phantom.com 14 Aug '93

14 Aug '93

One of the best improvements implemented in MacPGP 2.3 was the ability for the user to enable an option that let PGP keep the key passphrase in memory so you don't have to re-type it each message. However, I have ran up against two problems with its implementation. 1). if you mis-type the passphrase, the incorrect phrase goes into memory and MacPGP takes it instead of putting back up a dialog box for you to re-try. The result of any mis-typed passphrase is therfore a bad passphrase error that you cannot recover from except by quitting and re-starting MacPGP. 2). if you try to generate another key pair after typing (or mis-typing) a passphrase, MacPGP takes the passphrase from memory and automatically applies it to the new secret key. This is inconvenient especially if the mis-typed phrase is so badly munged that the user cannot remember what she typed ;-). -bwp

1 0

Pine
by Warren Keith Russell 14 Aug '93

14 Aug '93

R. Tait wrote the following: >Does anyone have elisp to integrate PGP into Emacs? I'm fed up of >having to use VI to send/receive all my encrypted mail, and there's no >point in me writing any code if someone already has. Which prompts me to ask: Is anyone out there using the Pine email software? If so, do you know of any way to integrate PGP into Pine? If not, any other ideas? I see a lot of signed messages out there, but the only way for me to send one is to shell out to AIX, use vi to create a message, run pgp to create the signed message, then run Pine and read the message in, at which point I can finally send it. Notice that this message isn't signed. It's just too much hassle! Thanks for any advice anyone can give me. Keith ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keith Russell Dynix Library Systems, Provo, Utah, U.S.A. keru(a)cpu.us.dynix.com or keru(a)devg.us.dynix.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Get Rush Limbaugh to mock Clipper phonez
by plmoses＠unix.cc.emory.edu 14 Aug '93

14 Aug '93

David Koontz sez, get some national figure to belittle the government. Well, Limbaugh does it for a living.....

1 0

Anyone have the Gus Simmons paper?
by tcmay＠netcom.com 14 Aug '93

14 Aug '93

I recently scanned and OCRed the first part of the Gus Simmons preprint on subliminal channels in the Digital Signature System, then I posted this to the Cypherpunks list. Eric Hughes has asked me to scan in the whole paper and upload it the soda archives. (I cannot agree to OCR it all, however, as even my excellent OCR package cannot handle the many equations, subscripts, superscripts, etc. Eric proposes that I upload the raw TIFF file and then Cypherpunk volunteers can, if they wish, open the images and work on parts. Well, that's the theory.) But I can't find my copy anywhere! Also, a couple of people said a more recent revision is now circulating. So, could anyone who has a version--any version will do in a pinch, but the more recent the better--get in touch with me? Even better would be to bring it to the Cypherpunks meeting tomorrow (the Mountain View one). Thanks, -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: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it.

1 0

No Subject
by koontzd＠lrcs.loral.com 14 Aug '93

14 Aug '93

I used to have a collection of COMSEC posters, which were at best inane. Sort of in the same vein as a T shirt, how about: CRIPPLED PRIVACY: [ Artwork of MYK-78A ] / (or replace with Uncle SAM pointing finger) N ever S ay A nything you DON'T want overheard. or [ Artwork of MYK-78A ] (identifying legend) Cryptographically Secure from all but Government TYRANNY or Does PRIVACY have to be a choice between being eavesdropped on by anybody OR the U.S. GOVERNMENT? SECURE CRYPTO is the ultimate FREE SPEECH! or [ Artwork of Robot Cop, from THX 1138 ] [ speech bubble "Are you now, or have you ever been ... ? ] A country that can have the McCarthy Era has no business allowing its government to spy on its Citizens. BAN MANDATORY PHONE BUGS! or [ Artwork of SPY with headphones ] PRIVACY is not having to worry about being overheard by the government. FREE SPEECH doesn't end at the your phone handset. Unfortunately George Orwells 'Animal Farm' isn't widely enough read to us quotes for making the point. Its probably only applicable after the other shoe drops anyway. Did you notice that the artwork in Dorthy Dennings 'American Scientist' article showed a minority member with headsets listening to a decoded clipper phone conversation? One wonders if this was intended as a propoganda ploy to disarm as being Politically unCorrect (PUNC) critizism of the action? What we need is a national talk show host/comedian belittling the governments plan.

1 0

Re: CA online legislative database access
by peb＠PROCASE.COM 14 Aug '93

14 Aug '93

I agree with sentiments against a direct democracy for all the reasons given and some extra reasons: laws should have expiration dates and a better feedback process is needed to determine whether particular laws are beneficial (hmm, sounds like PPL.) The real problem seems to be a general lack of education and wealth, but there is always the bell curve--such things will always be unevenly distributed. However, tracking proposed laws via the net creates the possibility of anyone being able to have a cheap lobbyist--the stuff can be posted and filtered, etc. This has nothing to do with people proposing stupid laws whenever they feel like it (this would require more significant legal changes). Paul E. Baclace peb(a)procase.com

1 0

Requesting all records of the Clipper review panel
by gnu 14 Aug '93

14 Aug '93

This is a draft, which will be sent out within a day or two. John Karl Bell Deputy Director of Administration Freedom of Information Act Officer National Institute of Standards and Technology Building 101, Room A-110 Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Dear Mr. Bell: This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 U.S.C. $ 552, on behalf of Mr. John Gilmore for all agency records pertaining to and utilized by the Skipjack review panel ("Panel"). This request also requests access to records which must be made available under the Federal Advisory Committee Act ("FACA"), 5 U.S.C. App. II (1972). Section 8(b)(2) of the FACA requires that the supervising agency for an advisory committee must assemble and maintain records for the committee; Section 8(b)(3) of the FACA provides that such records are subject to the FOIA. The Panel's review is being performed pursuant to the President's direction that "respected experts from outside the government [] be offered access to the confidential details of the algorithm to assess its capabilities and publicly report their finding." The Acting Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology sent letters of invitation to potential reviewers. This request for records includes, but is not limited to: all records relating to the selection of the Panel members; all records of the Panel's activities and use of funds [FACA $ 12(a)]; the charter of the Panel [FACA $ 9(c)]; all notices of Panel meetings [FACA $ 10(a)(2)]; all written determinations to close any part of a Panel meeting [FACA $ 10(d)]; all records, reports, transcripts, minutes, appendices, working papers, drafts, studies, agenda or other documents which were made available to or prepared by the committee [FACA $$10(b) & (c)]. For instance, the Panel's interim report states that: We attended an initial meeting at the Institute for Defense Analyses Supercomputing Research Center (SRC) from June 21-23. At that meeting, the designer of SKIPJACK provided a complete, detailed description of the algorithm, the rationale for each feature, and the history of the design. The head of the NSA evaluation team described the evaluation process and its results. Other NSA staff briefed us on the LEAF structure and protocols for use, generation of device keys, protection of the devices against reverse engineering, and NSA's history in the design and evaluation of encryption methods contained in SKIPJACK. Additional NSA and NIST staff were present at the meeting to answer our questions and provide assistance. All staff members were forthcoming in providing us with requested information. All records pertaining to this and other meetings of the Panel are included within the scope of this FOIA/FACA request. If the requested records are not in the possession of your agency, I ask that you forward this request to any agency that you believe may have records that are responsive to this request. In the alternative, I ask that you inform me of other agencies that might have such records. As you know, the FOIA provides that even if some requested material is properly exempted from mandatory disclosure, all segregable portions must be released. [5 U.S.C. $ 552(b)] If any or all material covered by this request is withheld, please inform me of the specific exemptions that are being claimed. If any of the requested material is released with deletions, I ask that each deletion be marked to indicate the exemption(s) being claimed to authorize each particular withholding. In addition, I ask that your agency exercise its discretion to release information that may be technically exempt but where withholding would serve no important public interest. As you know, the FOIA provides that agencies may reduce or waive fees if it would be "in the public interest because furnishing the information can be considered as primarily benefiting the public." [5 U.S.C. $ 552(a)(4)(A)] Release of this material would be of benefit to the public because of the importance of public discussion of technology which can enhance personal privacy. Moreover, in previous FOIA requests to NIST, Mr. Gilmore has amply demonstrated his ability and willingness to disseminate such information to the general public. I therefore ask that you waive any fees relating to this request. Mr. Gilmore promises to pay up to $1000 in processing costs should this fee waiver be denied, so that NIST can begin processing this request while you rule on the propriety of this fee waiver. If you have any questions regarding this request, please telephone me at the above number. I would be happy to discuss ways in which this request could be clarified or somewhat redesigned to reflect the agency's filing system and speed the search for records. As provided under the FOIA, I will expect a reply within 10 working days. Sincerely yours, Lee Tien On behalf of Mr. John Gilmore

1 0

CA online legislative database access
by L. Detweiler 14 Aug '93

14 Aug '93

Letter writers needed ASAP! This is the bill that will open up legislative databases to the masses and serve as a model for other states and even the country! cypherfolks, do you have any idea what these efforts are the faint glimmers of? Imagine a future society where *anyone* can propose laws, not just the elite few called Legislators and identified in an exceedingly time-consuming, tedious, and troublesome process. Imagine that everyone has complete access and full understanding of all the laws that affect one's life, and the ability to propose and *pass* superior modifications. It would be a sort of Legislative Free Enterprise, a competition in the marketplace of laws such that superior ones would prosper and inferior, archaic, and absurd laws would be rooted out and expunged by the citizenry itself, in a very dynamic, interactive, and responsive process! Far from this bureacratic nightmare we lumber in daily! Write that small letter to set in motion this grandiose cyberspatial karma! ------- Forwarded Message >Date: Tue, 10 Aug 93 17:14:01 -0500 >Newsgroups: austin.eff >From: jwarren(a)well.sf.ca.us (Jim Warren) >Subject: UPDATE #21-AB1624: *ACTION ALERT*: END-GAME APPROACHING (& misc notes) > >[MODERATOR'S NOTE: This is a California bill, but its outcome could set >a precedent which would help or hurt similar efforts in other states, >including Texas. If you've got friends in California, you might want >to pass this along to them. -- Prentiss Riddle, riddle(a)tic.com] > >August 9, 1993 > >*** PLEASE WRITE, NOW!*** PLEASE, DON'T STOP NOW! > > Assembly Bill 1624, mandating online public access to public legislative >information via the public networks (i.e., the Internet and all the nets >connected to it - including wherever you are receiving this msg), will either >pass the Legislature by Sept. 10th, or will die - and we have to re-fight the >whole battle, year after year. > LETTERS & FAXES ARE *NEEDED*!. THEY *WILL* DETERMINE THE OUTCOME. > >REMAINING 1993 LEGISLATION SCHEDULE > Jul 16th, the Legislature went into remission - uh, recess. > Aug 16th, the Legislature reconvenes to diddle remaining 1993 business. > Sep 10th, the Legislature quits working in Sacramento for the year. > Oct 10th, the Governor must veto legislatively-approved bills he opposes. >On AUGUST 18TH, the Senate Rules Committee run by Sen. Dave Roberti >(D-Van Nuys area) will hear AB1624. If Roberti doesn't like it, he can and >will kill it. If Roberti passes it, it will almost-certainly pass the >Senate. Then we need for the Assembly to "concur in amendments" and the >Governor to not veto it. > > > Address letters/faxes to "State Capitol, Sacremanto CA 95814." > >AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, send a one-page letter supporting AB1624 to the >Senate Rules Committee - who have seen essentially *no* support for it: >Sen. David Roberti, Chair, Room 400; fax/916-323-7224; voice/916-445-8390. > and to the other four members (tiny, *powerful* committee!): >Sen. Ruben Ayala (D-Chino area), Room 5108; f/916-445-0128; v/916-445-6868. >Sen. Robert Beverly (R-Long Bch), Room 5082; f/not avail.; v/916-445-6447. >Sen. William Craven (R-Oceanside), Room 3070; f/not avail.; v/916-445-3731. >Sen. Nick Petris (D-Alameda), Room 5080; fax/916-327-1997; v/916-445-6577. > >Important: Please send COPIES of ALL letters to the AB1624 author: >Hon. Debra Bowen, Room 3126; voice/916-445-8528; fax/916-327-2201. > > >CAN EMAIL VIA ME, IF YA CAN'T FIND TIME FOR SNAIL-MAIL > If you don't have time to send snail-mail, you can email your message via >jwarren(a)well.sf.ca.us. > Write it exactly as you would snail-mail, but be SURE TO INCLUDE your name, >address and phone #s for legislators' independent verification. Upon receipt >by email, I will print and/or fax the entire message to Bowen and to the >legislator(s) to whom you address it. (Please allow for that delay.) > > >LEGI-TECH'S OLDER BROTHER DONE GOOD! > The McClatchy organization is the owner of Legi-Tech, one of the two >largest online distributors of California legislative information. They are >also owner of a number of newspapers - their flagship being the powerful >Sacramento Bee. > On Jul 26th, the Bee ran an editorial *strongly* supportive of AB1624 - >laudible, principled action by The Bee, McClatchy, and presumably by >Legi-Tech in the face of a difficult trade-off between the public's >interests versus their business interests. > Applause! Applause! > > >CALIFORNIA LEGISPEAK: "AUTHOR" VS. "SPONSOR" VS. "SUPPORTER" > In California legislative circles: >A bill's AUTHOR is a legislator who introduced the bill. >A bill's SPONSOR(S) is a person or organization, if any, that requested that >the bill be introduced by the bill's author. >A bill's SUPPORTER(S) is a person or organization that is officially listed >as being in favor of the bill, usually including its sponsor(s), if any. > All bills have one or more authors. Some bills do NOT have sponsors. > AB1624's author was Assembly Member Debra Bowen. It had no sponsors, but >has a growing number of supporters. > > >PROGRAMMERS: SAMPLE LEGISLATIVE DATA-FILES ALSO AVAILABLE AT CPSR.ORG > AB1624 Update #19 detailed a set of sample data-files for review and >test-programming, available from Tim Pozar's KUMR.LNS.COM by anonymous ftp. > As of Jul 22nd, those Legislative Data Center sample files were/are also >online at cpsr.org in /ftp/cpsr/states/california/ab1624/sample_data >for binary ftp access. For questions about accessing them there, contact: >Al Whaley al(a)sunnyside.com +1-415 322-5411(Tel), -6481 (Fax) >Sunnyside Computing, Inc., PO Box 60, Palo Alto, CA 94302 > > >We have a voice. Use it or loose it. >--jim >Jim Warren, columnist for MicroTimes, Government Technology & BoardWatch >jwarren(a)well.sf.ca.us -or- jwarren(a)autodesk.com >345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; voice/415-851-7075; fax/415-851-2814 > > > ------- End of Forwarded Message

4 4

Re: Spooking of neural nets and image recognition...
by nfe＠scf.nmsu.edu 14 Aug '93

14 Aug '93

As to serveilence cameras, is anyone familiar with methods of not getting photographed in the first place? Some methods I've heard of: 1) spray paint or vasoline on the lens (kinda obvious :) 2) putting a pin or finnishing nail in it's coaxial cable (umbilical if you will) - how good of a job of scrabbling the image will this do? 3) mounting a "test pattern" in front of the lens. 4) placing a magnet on the side of the camera (does this work?) 5) timing the pan, and taking advantage of "dead areas" (areas not covered for brief periods). Anyone familiar with the general range/resolution ratio, and how wide an area will get covered? Any other methods?

2 1