April 2001 - cypherpunks-legacy

Bush should pick chief privacy officer straightaway, groups say
by Declan McCullagh 16 Apr '01

16 Apr '01

>Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 12:00:24 -0500 >To: politech(a)politechbot.com >From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> >Subject: Bush should pick chief privacy officer straightaway, groups say > >[If these worthy groups and academics were interested only in encouraging >the Feds to think more seriously about how agencies should approach >privacy, there would be nothing to criticize and everything to applaud. >But there is the potential for Bush to pick someone who is more interested >in upping regulations of the private sector, something that is not as >clearly a good thing. --Declan] > >*********** > >From: ari(a)cdt.org >Subject: Public Interest Groups and Academics Call on Bush Administration >to Fill Privacy Position >Message-Id: <20010416131813.2BEDD4A5B7(a)mail1.panix.com> >Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 09:18:13 -0400 (EDT) > >Public Interest Groups and Academics Call on Bush Administration to Fill >Privacy Position > >In a letter sent today, a diverse group of advocacy organizations and >academics called on the Director of the Office and Management and budget to >hire a new Chief Privacy Counselor. > >The signers expressed concern that privacy would lose the momentum that it >had gained at the end of last year. "We are concerned that without these >central staff resources dedicated solely to privacy, we will return to a >time when privacy was an afterthought in government and commercial data >processing; education of the different agencies took years rather than >months; and OMB staff knew little about the larger privacy issues effecting >the country," the letter read. > >The signers want the new counselor to oversee the implementation of existing >privacy law as it applies to the federal government and advise the President >on privacy policy in the public and private sectors. > >"Despite all that we have heard about the importance of privacy recently in >both the public and private sectors from Congress and in the polls," said >Center for Democracy and Technology Senior Policy Analyst Ari Schwartz, "we >are still waiting for the Administration to appoint leadership on the >issue." > >The organizational signers included The Center for Democracy and Technology, >Consumer Action, the Free Congress Foundation, OMB Watch, Private Citizen, >and Privacy Foundation along with seven important academic experts Mary J. >Culnan, Bentley College; Rod Dixon, Rutgers University Law School; Jerry >Kang, UCLA School of Law; Deirdre K. Mulligan, Boalt Law School, University >of California, Berkeley ; Joel R. Reidenberg, Fordham University School of >Law; Paul Schwartz, Brooklyn Law School; and David E. Sorkin, The John >Marshall Law School, Chicago. > >The full letter is available online at: >http://www.cdt.org/privacy/010412omb.shtml > >Contact: Ari Schwartz >Center for Democracy and Technology >202-637-9800 >ari(a)cdt.org > >---------------------------------- >CDT Update Subscription Information > >E-mail questions, comments, or requests to subscribe or unsubscribe >to ari(a)cdt.org or call (202) 637-9800. > >Detailed information about online civil liberties issues may be found >at http://www.cdt.org/ > >----------------------------------- >Ari Schwartz >Policy Analyst >Center for Democracy and Technology >1634 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100 >Washington, DC 20006 >202 637 9800 >fax 202 637 0968 >ari(a)cdt.org >http://www.cdt.org >-----------------------------------

1 0

Re: Escrow agents
by Tim May 16 Apr '01

16 Apr '01

At 12:09 PM +0300 4/16/01, Sampo Syreeni wrote: >On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, Tim May wrote: > >>The canonical example is of an escrow agent handling a deposit by a >>buyer of an untraceable killing. When the killer presents the >>appropriate form of evidence that this happened, and that he or she >>was "there" (*), the escrow holder pays. > >True. This is a case where Esther *can* verify that Bob's goods aren't >tainted: there's a body and it's common knowledge. Try this in case the hit >must be kept a secret. And how about trade in KP, and other sensitive >information? Since anonymous cash is likely to develop online, if at all, I >think infotrade is an important part of the picture. > Sure, I agree that information trade (bits, not bodies) is important. I gave the example I did to show how in at least some cases it is easy to see how a third party escrow agent can work and still maintain mutual untraceability between Alice, Bob, and Esther. For information trading, there are many kinds of information. In some cases, the information _might_ be so valuable as to induce Esther to defect (i.e., to steal). I think this is the case you presented, where the escrow agent should not be able to see the plaintext of the information being traded, which means Bob the Buyer may _claim_ that what he received from Alice was junk and Esther cannot decide whether to release the funds. However, many other forms of information sales are amenable to straightforward escrow use. The credit data base example. To first (and probably second, third) order, it doesn't matter if Esther can see specific credit queries, as she cannot build up the complete data base from isolated queries. That is, the bought information has presumably value for Bob the Buyer, but not much for Esther. (As in all escrow or surety bond calculations, the issue is whether a particular transaction is worth it for Esther to defect, to skip out and "burn" her own reputation. Between Esther not being able to cash the digital check and sparseness issues, and her estimated long term revenue stream, these all enter into the equation.) As I have said, the precise form the protocols will take for various kinds of information markets is not fruitful at this time. Structures will evolve. What's important is to realize that the means already exist (Blacknet showed this, trivially) to move transactions into cypherspace. Details will evolve. --Tim May -- Timothy C. May tcmay(a)got.net Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns

1 0

Misc p2p article
by George＠Orwellian.Org 16 Apr '01

16 Apr '01

Also, today's NYT has an article about national security needs for more language experts. ---- http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB987356381635082061.htm # # April 16, 2001 # # Asian Technology # # Two New Peer-to-Peer Programs Aim High, but Still Have Glitches # # By JEREMY WAGSTAFF Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL # # Time to grovel. I was hoping this week to be able to trumpet # a bunch of new programs that free you from some of the physical # constraints of modern computing. I was hoping to be able to say # that, at last, you were free of shackles such as overprotective # technical staff, the corporate Intranet and endless e-mail # attachments. # # But paradise, I'm afraid to say, has to be postponed for a while. # The two programs I've been toying with, new versions of which # were both released last week, are Groove Networks Inc.'s Groove # (www.groove.net1 ) and GoToMyPC (www.gotomypc.com2 ) from # Expertcity Inc. # # Groove is the first serious attempt to introduce peer-to-peer # computing to the business marketplace, giving employees a chance # to communicate and share files by setting up their own online # work groups. GoToMyPC offers the first Web-based -- and legal # -- method of accessing and controlling another computer. Both, # in theory, are great ideas, elegant in their simplicity and # genuinely useful. But neither worked perfectly. # # Peer-to-peer computing -- where multiple users can interact # directly, rather than through a server -- is probably the next # great thing for the Internet. Best known as a way to swap music # over the Net via Napster, so-called P-to-P applications allow # much more, such as letting users share files, messages or # calendars, or collaborate in real time on a document or drawing. # # As I've mentioned before, the Web will start coming into its # own once people stop obsessing about how to make money out of # other users and start capitalizing on the intrinsic benefits # of having millions of people all sharing a network. # # Peer-to-peer computing offers users the chance to set up their # own personalized networks atop the public Web. Without these # P-to-P systems, people have to use a number of imperfect # alternatives. For instance, users can rely on their Internet- # service providers to provide the tools (but they may be held # hostage to proprietary programs or HTML); or use corporate # networks (jealously guarded by techies rightly afraid of viruses # and other abuses); or shuffle e-mail messages among team members # (a cumbersome process). # # In practice, Groove isn't quite mature yet. The preview edition # looks and feels professional, and carries loads of useful # features, including instant messaging, file sharing, even a # doodling pad. It also supposedly works behind a firewall, and # around problems such as connecting to computers that share the # same Internet connection. # # Although the program is sturdier than its beta ancestors, I found # it unstable and unreliable. On one computer it wouldn't load # properly; on another it behaved erratically through the company # firewall and offered no easily accessible options that I could # tweak to make it perform better. # # Disappointing, but not fatal. Groove, or something like it, is # definitely the wave of the future: Freeing up employees to set # up their own peer groups without cluttering the corporate Intranet # makes sense. Pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, for one, # agrees: Last week it bought 10,000 licenses for more than 100,000 # employees world-wide, making it Groove Networks' first paying # customer. # # GoToMyPC, meanwhile, tackles a similar problem from a slightly # different angle, and is a unilateral peer-to-peer system, rather # than the more common variety that lets anyone talk to anyone # else. Whether on the Net or not, users have been hamstrung by # the fact that generally they only can run one computer at a time. # Working from home? Chances are you only can access the office # network with difficulty. Forget a vital file at home? There are # only one or two programs available that allow you to access a # remote computer, and most of them aren't Internet-based. Instead, # these programs rely on actually dialing into the computer via # a phone line. # # GoToMyPC aims to make the process simpler by harnessing the # Internet to link computers. It sounds simple, and it is: Assuming # the two computers are connected to the Internet (and most office # computers permanently are hooked up, as are PCs on a cable modem # or other high-speed Internet connection), the software merely # links them together. It establishes a digital handshake between # the two computers and makes sure the connection is secure from # prying eyes. That in a nutshell is how GoToMyPC works. # # Once again, in theory, this sounds good. The number of times # I've left important files in the office, or at home, doesn't # bear thinking about. To be able to fire up an Internet connection # -- any-where, anytime, since the software is simple to install # and not limited to any particular host PC -- and access your # data and programs is a very appealing idea. # # In practice, of course, there are problems. One is security. # If you can get into the computer, chances are some ne'er-do-well # can too, whatever levels of security Expertcity applies (and # there are plenty of them). That's why a lot of people disconnect # their computers from the Internet when they aren't around, even # if they're paying for a 24-hour connection (and if you don't # you should seriously consider doing so). # # The other problem may perhaps be due to my own dumbness and the # slowness of my connection but I couldn't get my two computers # to talk to each other at all. What's more, the software didn't # appear smart enough to know it already was loaded, so it would # go through this song-and-dance routine of installing fresh widgets # every time I tried to establish a connection. In the end it would # have been quicker for me to have gotten a taxi, caught the # afternoon shuttle flight, walked home from the airport and grabbed # the files myself. # # Finally, I'm not sure system administrators are going to be that # happy about allowing this kind of thing on their networks. Indeed, # Expertcity appears aware of this and offers a template for an # e-mail message you can send to your system administrator. Knowing # a few of these guys myself, it sounds a bit optimistic. # # Both of these programs are worth trying out -- they're free, # at least for the moment -- as long as you've got a good Internet # connection and you don't mind tinkering with glitchy software. # I'm not going to get too excited about them for now, but one # day we may all be wondering how we lived without them. # # Write to Jeremy Wagstaff at jeremy.wagstaff(a)awsj.com5 URL for this Article: http://interactive.wsj.com/archive/retrieve.cgi?id=SB987356381635082061.djm Hyperlinks in this Article: (1) http://www.groove.net/ (2) https://www.gotomypc.com (3) http://interactive.wsj.com/archive/retrieve.cgi?id=SB98633805226227884.djm (4) http://interactive.wsj.com/archive/retrieve.cgi?id=SB974071105710705230.djm

1 0

Re: Escrow agents
by Tim May 16 Apr '01

16 Apr '01

At 3:15 AM +0300 4/16/01, Sampo Syreeni wrote: >On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, Tim May wrote: > >>But the "paving stone," or touch stone, I want to bring up is this: >>the role of third party escrow agents. > >Escrow is practically useless unless Esther can verify that both parties >have kept to their promise. If the data Esther keeps is encrypted, this will >not, barring ZKPs, be possible. In an anonymous economy, having the data in >a usable form will give Esther an incentive to use up the tradeable goods >escrowed by Bob. Anonymity also gives her a real possibility to do that, >unlike with traditional escrow. Of course there are a host of nasty >complications, like how different sorts of tradeable items might be >protected from this sort of conduct (e.g. anonymous cash probably could be >protected from Esther, while sensitive corporate memos being sold to a >competitor perhaps couldn't), and the possibility of linking Esther to the >damage done to Bob in different kinds of transactions. Nevertheless, I think >this is a valid objection. The canonical example is of an escrow agent handling a deposit by a buyer of an untraceable killing. When the killer presents the appropriate form of evidence that this happened, and that he or she was "there" (*), the escrow holder pays. "You slay, we pay!" (Details of what the evidence might be are for the market to shake out.) (I have been using this example since 1988. Not as an advocacy of contract killings, but as an illustration of the issue. This scheme is different from AP, which is a lottery form.) Can the buyer of the hit renege? The escrow agent already holds the digital cash. (This assumes nonrepudiable digital cash.) --Tim May -- Timothy C. May tcmay(a)got.net Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns

2 1

Re: GPS bugs (was: Jim Bell Trial: Third Day (fwd))
by auto211076＠hushmail.com 16 Apr '01

16 Apr '01

> auto211076(a)hushmail.com wrote: > > > > Third Day: Jim Bell trial > > > > The defense requested information about the tracking device that was attached > > to Jim Bell's car: the type, make, and where installed in the car. London > > cited "law enforcement privilege" and argued that giving out that information > > would enable future surveillance subjects to find and dismantle such devices. > > (Earlier in the trial, it was mentioned that this was the first use of > > a GPS tracking device in the area.) > > From what little I know of GPS, the receiver must be able to "see sky." > So there can't be any metal objects between it and the sky. That means > it's unlikely for it to be on the underside of the car. Possible installation > places would be under the "skin" above the dashboard, any place that has > line of sight to the windshield or back window. If the car is a vinyl top, > under the roof would be good hiding place. Other speculation was that it might have been inside a vinyl bumper. > Of course the main body of the "bug" can be hidden anywhere inside the car, but > the antena needs to see sky. > > These things are usually cellphone enabled, so that way they don't constantly > transmit, and won't be easily caught by sweeps. Gordon's testimony was that it was a continuously-transmitting bug. Which of course brought up the question of the power supply. The bug transmitted on an RF frequency. Bell had mentioned to friends that he believed that he had been bugged, but lacking an RF frequency analyzer, he had been unable to find the bug. He apparently was concerned that both his house and car were bugged. Although why he didn't hire the services of a "bug-sweeper" is beyond me. > Defenses would include GPS and cell phone jammers, but these would have to > be on 24/7, thus draining the car's battery. GPS jammer would be more > desireable, since the cell phone side is just used to download the logs > of where the car has been, and the logs can be recovered by physically > recovering the bug. The power supply was a considerable source of speculation. If the bug had been attached to the battery, then it would have been much more detectable. Stories had it that Bell had checked under the hood; it would not take more than a VOM to detect a discharge. > One thing I don't know about in relation to GPS: are the military bits > sent on different frequencies than the civilian bits? Or are they just > encrypted? If they're different frequencies, then, you'd have to know > these to build an effective jammer. There was no discussion of military bits vs. civilian bits, rather military grade vs. civilian grade. > I of course have no information on what was actually installed in Jim > Bell's car, where, how, or by whom, except as emails have described > here, and I take this with a grain of salt. And some degree of skepticism has to be attached to the court testimony. It was painfully clear that the prosecutor had little handle on technical issues, and that even the agent who bugged Bell's car had limited knowledge of how the device worked. Some of the descriptions given in court about how GPS works were clearly wrong. > ObDisclaimer to Jeff Gordon and crew: this email posting does not constitute > any sort of intent to do anything. It is mereley an excercise of my > constitutionally protected rights to freedom of speech. Recall that > by the oath you have taken to protect and uphold the laws of the United > States of America when you first decided to work for the government, you > are required to protect defend my right to freedom of speech. If you weren't on the radar before, you are now. So are you planning on rooming with Jim or C.J.? Free, encrypted, secure Web-based email at www.hushmail.com

7 6

Google Search: FCC regulations 802.11 2.4GHz
by Jim Choate 16 Apr '01

16 Apr '01

http://www.google.com/search?q=FCC+regulations+802.11+2.4GHz -- ____________________________________________________________________ The ultimate authority...resides in the people alone. James Madison The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Our spy plane, and...
by George＠Orwellian.Org 16 Apr '01

16 Apr '01

David Honig <honig(a)sprynet.com> wrote: # # If you think you *are* being followed in a car, I'd suggest # you read Tomlinson's _The Big Breach_ (available online) # or at least those sections on surveillance and counter surveillance. # # Four left or right turns in succession should lose anyone, # and sudden reversals of signalled intent (signal right, go left) # can be useful, according to Mr. T. Unless there's also a tracker involved. Which reminds me (and perhaps I missed it), but was Bell's tracker installed with court approval, or just stuck on?

2 1

The Register - War-driving in the Bay (& RSA)
by Jim Choate 15 Apr '01

15 Apr '01

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/8/18285.html -- ____________________________________________________________________ The ultimate authority...resides in the people alone. James Madison The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Slashdot | Keeping DEA In The Loop About Amtrak Travelers
by Jim Choate 15 Apr '01

15 Apr '01

http://slashdot.org/yro/01/04/16/0147238.shtml -- ____________________________________________________________________ The ultimate authority...resides in the people alone. James Madison The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Slashdot | CCTV - The Fifth Utility
by Jim Choate 15 Apr '01

15 Apr '01

http://slashdot.org/yro/01/04/15/2248238.shtml -- ____________________________________________________________________ The ultimate authority...resides in the people alone. James Madison The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0