October 2001 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Comments On Cathy Young's Defeatist Compromising
by Mike Alissi 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

Commentary From Reason Magazine Dear Matt - I wanted to be sure you've seen Jacob Sullum's latest column at Reason Online: <http://www.reason.com/sullum/101601.html> It's copied below. Thanks, Mike October 16, 2001 Fear of Prying By Jacob Sullum I first downloaded Pretty Good Privacy a couple of years ago, at the request of an interview subject. He was nervous about discussing his drug use through unprotected e-mail, and my willingness to use PGP reassured him not only that he would be safe from eavesdroppers but that he could trust me to take his privacy concerns seriously. It was a small illustration of encryption's power, but it brought home to me what a godsend this kind of readily available, easily used software must be to dissidents who risk prison by sharing unauthorized information or expressing forbidden opinions. Phil Zimmermann had such people in mind when he created PGP a decade ago and risked prison by posting it online. At the time, the U.S. government considered strong encryption software a "munition," and by making it available to human rights activists around the world Zimmermann was arguably violating a federal ban on the export of such weapons. Some politicians are trying to revive this sinister view of encryption in the wake of last month's terrorist attacks. In a floor speech a week after hijacked airplanes collided with the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) worried aloud about "somebody out there using encryption technology for the purposes of pursuing a terrorist act in the United States." He declared, "There is no excuse for anybody to be underwriting that type of activity in our country." To prevent terrorists from shielding their communications, Gregg wants to make all producers of encryption systems design their products so the government can read the messages they generate. The surveillance would be "judicially controlled" to make sure it "simply gets at the bad guys." Gregg's opposition to strong encryption is echoed in some surprising quarters. Boston Globe columnist Cathy Young, a colleague of mine at Reason magazine, has confessed that "the idea of people being able to encrypt electronic communications so that they are beyond surveillance" has always seemed "scary" to her, "precisely because of the threat of terrorism." This is like saying that computers or telephones or airplanes or box cutters are scary. Any technology can be used for good or ill. The question is whether the potential for evil justifies restrictions on legitimate uses. As more than one critic has pointed out, the arguments against strong encryption could also be used against strong locks, since criminals tend to hatch their plans behind closed doors. That doesn't mean all of us should make extra sets of house keys for the police in case they need to search our homes. We have been down this road before with various proposals during the 1990s for "key recovery" arrangements through which the authorities could break otherwise unbreakable codes. Now as then, the most decisive argument against encryption controls is that they wouldn't work because PGP-like software is already available from a variety of sources. Does Sen. Gregg plan to come to my house and erase my copy of PGP? If not, how can he possibly hope to stop terrorists, who are much more highly motivated than I am to shield their communications, from obtaining and using such software? The attempt to do so would weaken security rather than enhancing it. A 1998 report from a panel of distinguished cryptographers and computer scientists concluded that "there are compelling reasons to believe that, given the state of the art in cryptology and secure systems engineering, government-access key recovery is not compatible with large scale, economical, secure cryptographic systems." A member of the panel, Matt Blaze, recently told The Washington Post, "I am extremely doubtful that this could be done without weakening computer systems, and the costs would be absolutely staggering." In addition to the bugs introduced by added complexity, keeping extra copies of the keys used to decode messages would create tempting targets for thieves. The keys could also be compromised by incompetent or corrupt officials charged with protecting them. Misuse of official records is not exactly unheard of in this country, and the problem would be magnified if every unsavory regime that has enlisted in the war on terrorism were to be trusted with the keys to its citizens' e-mail. For the dissidents Phil Zimmermann is rightly proud of helping, the whole point of encryption is to guard against official surveillance. If Gregg's vision were ever realized, they would once again have to watch what they say. ) Copyright 2001 by Creators Syndicate Inc. Jacob Sullum's weekly column is distributed by Creators Syndicate. If you'd like to see it in your local newspaper, write or call the editorial page editor. ************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt(a)coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **************************************************************************

1 0

[cio.com] Let's Stop Wasting $78 Billion a Year
by Jim Choate 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

http://www.cio.com/archive/101501/wasting_content.html -- -- ____________________________________________________________________ The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion. Edmund Burke (1784) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

How do I?
by Smartlink2＠aol.com 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

Hey, I had a question. If I were interested in learning more about hacking bank computers, would you know where I could get that information, or perhaps you would be able to help me. Anyways you can write back to me at this address. Thanks Shiva

1 0

RIAA: We'll smother song swappers
by Jim Choate 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20011016/tc/riaa_we_ll_smother_song_swapper… -- -- ____________________________________________________________________ The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion. Edmund Burke (1784) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

STOPPING SIGNALS FROM SATELLITE TV PROVES DIFFICULT
by Steve Schear 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

STOPPING SIGNALS FROM SATELLITE TV PROVES DIFFICULT Issue: Television/Journalism Last week, at the urging of the White House, the major television and cable networks agreed not to run raw footage of Al Qaeda statements as they are broadcast by the Al Jazeera network from Qatar, which appears to be Mr. bin Laden's preferred conduit for communicating with the world. But because of the privatization and deregulation of the international satellite business in recent years, control of the nation's television signals is by no means limited to the coterie of United States companies that the White House turned to last week. In fact, the great majority of homes in the United States have the option of receiving Al Jazeera directly using a satellite dish antenna not much bigger than a pizza pan. For about four years, the EchoStar Dish Network operation has been carrying Al Jazeera, in Arabic, as a part of a premium tier of international channels. If any terrorists are in the country waiting for televised word from Mr. bin Laden - with or without hidden messages - last week's steps by the White House did next to nothing to thwart them. [SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Seth Schiesel] <http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/15/business/media/15SAT.html>

1 0

MOVES TO BLOCK INFORMATION FROM PUBLIC GO TOO FAR
by Steve Schear 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

MOVES TO BLOCK INFORMATION FROM PUBLIC GO TOO FAR Issue: Information Freedom [Editorial] Since Sept. 11, the government has been eager to limit the public's access to certain kinds of information. The USAToday's editorial staff argues that "Americans are being asked to give up their rights to information, with no evidence that it presents any real risk." They cite examples of recent government efforts to control what the public sees, such as President Bush's attempt to cut back the number of lawmakers who would receive intelligence briefings, to eight of 535 members, and the disappearance of information from some government Web sites. USAToday suggests that these moves violate the very spirit of freedom that America is fighting for. "They risk obliterating the checks on government decisions that come when lawmakers and the general public know what the administration is doing...If Americans are to continue supporting the war, it will be crucial for them to know their enemy and know of their government's successes and failures." [SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: ] <http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20011016/3541029s.htm> See Also: CENSORSHIP MAKES SENSE [SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR:] <http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20011016/3541026s.htm>

1 0

mirror volunteers needed
by Julian Assange 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

If you are brave and have a unix account/machine with approximately 2Gig of disk free, we need you. -- Julian Assange |If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people |together to collect wood or assign them tasks and proff(a)iq.org |work, but rather teach them to long for the endless proff(a)gnu.ai.mit.edu |immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint Exupery

6 6

[PGP] Fear of Prying By Jacob Sullum
by Matthew Gaylor 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

1 0

Got Ammo?
by Khoder bin Hakkin 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

In the most significant gun control measure of the year, Governor Davis approved legislation that requires handgun owners to pass a written test and prove to a state instructor that they know how to handle a gun safely. The laws, which go into effect in 2003, also require new owners of handguns to provide the Department of Justice with a thumbprint. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/16/national/16CALI.html JY how do you feel about the term "organ harvesting" ???

1 0

It does not really matter WHO did it ...
by Anonymous 16 Oct '01

16 Oct '01

... but WHO profits. Reichstag Fire They who will not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Recent events raise ghosts of the past. January 30, 1933 Weimar Republic President Paul von Hindenburg appoints Adolph Hitler Chancellor. February 27, 1933 The German Parliament (Reichstag) burns down. A dazed Dutch Communist named Marinus van der Lubbe is found at the scene and charged with arson. [He is later found guilty and executed]. February 28, 1933 President Hindenburg and Chancellor Hitler invoke Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution, which permits the suspension of civil liberties in time of national emergency. This Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of the People and State abrogates the following constitutional protections: - Free expression of opinion - Freedom of the press - Right of assembly and association - Right to privacy of postal and electronic communications - Protection against unlawful searches and seizures - Individual property rights - States' right of self-government A supplemental decree creates the SA (Storm Troops) and SS (Special Security) Federal police agencies. Who Did It? Historians do not agree on who is actually responsible for the Reichstag Fire: van der Lubbe acting alone -- a Communist plot -- or the Nazis themselves in order to create an incident. Writers such as Klaus P. Fischer feel that most likely the Nazis were involved. But regardless of who actually planned and executed the fire, it is clear that the Nazis immediately took advantage of the situation in order to advance their cause at the expense of civil rights. The Decree enabled the Nazis to ruthlessly suppress opposition in the upcoming election. March 5, 1933 National elections give Nazis 44% plurality in the Reichstag. Herman Gvring [who later played a central role in the Nazi government and war effort] declares that there is no further need for State governments. Over the next few weeks, each of the lawful Weimar State governments falls to the same ruse: - Local Nazi organizations instigate disorder; - The disorder is quelled by replacing the elected state government by appointed Nazi Reich Commissioners. March 24, 1933 The Reichstag passes the Law for Terminating the Suffering of People and Nation , also known as the Enabling Law , essentially granting Adolph Hitler dictatorial power. ANALYSIS The events in 1933 can be summarized as follows: While it is not clear whether the Nazis intentionally set the Reichstag fire in order to create a national crisis, or whether the Nazis simply were opportunistic, the event was used as justification for a sharp curtailment in constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties. The Nazis took advantage of the additional Federal police powers to suppress opponents. It is clear that in other situations, the Nazis did use the tactic of creating a "law and order" crisis so that they could provide a solution which further eroded civil liberties and entrenched their power. The right-wing Nazis and the left-wing communists were cut from the same cloth -- the point is not that the far right destroyed civil rights. Rather, the point is that a democracy can be destroyed by creating a law-and-order crisis and offering as a 'solution' the abdication of civil liberties and state's rights to a powerful but unaccountable central authority. http://www.weyrich.com/political_issues/reichstag_fire.html

1 0