December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

A useful quote/stat to spread
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"In a Time/CNN poll of 1,000 Americans conducted last week by Yankelovich Partners, two-thirds said it was more important to protect the privacy of phone calls than to preserve the ability of police to conduct wiretaps. When informed about the Clipper Chip, 80% said they opposed it." - Philip Elmer-Dewitt, "Who Should Keep the Keys", _TIME_, Mar. 4 1994

1 0

clipper & corp. espionage
by eman＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, I'm new to the list. I was wondering if the clipper chip passed. what's stopping corrupt government people from selling access to the encryption to the highest bidders to spy on competitors communications. just curious. Emanuel(eman(a)netcom.com)

1 0

Public Key
by fhalper＠pilot.njin.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Kent, would you send me your key again. I have to talk to you. Reuben Halper -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.3 mQCPAi16KosAAAEEAMUwRni4a9+GbuAhHDLcBWK60hCJUYxhr2hYokpELAhx0ejp 2fq61Tu9Hjn051CN8Xy5nu6sv2ODfG/t59l4DJSb5pirQaII3zaX0rMX0ydwGDoW YakL4ow1lNY+d/k14KpIuUW404+fNuNhIGSkdVLQIfbOgh0preK7/P44AKvdABEB AAG0JlJldWJlbiBIYWxwZXIgPGZoYWxwZXJAcGlsb3Qubmppbi5uZXQ+iQCVAgUQ LXorceK7/P44AKvdAQEUxwQAoffTibRlwE5tNQVGvrulh1OQgXNhTRec9vUaUwPy U64FIZ+KnmdfYgiJYXtcItA90EB9MDexazKeqJzMOPShVNOfyiwy2yUlnQs425f8 DxBvM//zuvj6s4/mXDTPUZtG9PP0HVaEGTJY15JdfRqtj/w+HHnsHlgCnj0NnIhX TW8= =D9UX -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

Welcome to the foia-keys announcement list; request update
by gnu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You expressed interest in my FOIA request for the Clipper key database. Here's a minor update on the request. We send all our FOIA requests by registered mail, return reciept requested. According to the Post Office, NIST received our request on 28 Feb 94. This means that their response is due ten or twenty business days after that day. Based on experience, we believe that an actual timely response is unlikely; the government doesn't feel an obligation to follow the law. However, I encourage you to call or write NIST's FOIA officer (Karl Bell, Deputy Director of Administration, NIST, Building 101, Gaithersburg, Maryland) to indicate your interest in both the content and the timeliness of his response. John Gilmore gnu(a)toad.com

1 0

Re: clipper & corp. espionage
by dmandl＠lehman.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Hi, I'm new to the list. I was wondering > if the clipper chip passed. what's stopping > corrupt government people from selling access > to the encryption to the highest bidders to spy > on competitors communications. > just curious. > > Emanuel(eman(a)netcom.com) Nothing. --Dave.

1 0

Re: Mondex card
by Patrick Breitenbach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Recent articles on Mondex: The Economist, 1/29/94 NewsBytes, "The Cashless Card: UK Banks Introduce Mondex", 1/6/94 >From what I can tell: Mondex appears to be a rather agressive attempt at an open system for digital cash. The three major players are NatWest, Midland Bank and British Telecom. Unlike many other efforts, they are using a completely anonymous method rather than auditing all transactions. The cards are smart (IC chips embedded on a credit card sized card. I am not sure of the security specifics. They will be capable of representing 5 core currencies and many more temporarily. The "Mondex" name has been reserved in 30 countries and market research has been done in Japan, the US, Germany and France as well as the UK. They are piloting in the British town of Swindon (not sure of the size). Other interesting moves along these lines: Electronic Payment Services/MAC Network are piloting prepay Lufthansa/German Post/2 German Banks looking at multi-app card patrick breitenbach patrickb(a)panix.com

1 0

Re: clipper & corp. espionage
by lefty＠apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Hi, I'm new to the list. I was wondering >if the clipper chip passed. what's stopping >corrupt government people from selling access >to the encryption to the highest bidders to spy >on competitors communications. > >just curious. Um, the goodwill and general trustworthiness of our elected officials and their duly-designated appointees? Just a guess, mind you. -- Lefty (lefty(a)apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.

1 0

New Remailer
by ub075＠freenet.victoria.bc.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

With a fair number of remailers down lately, I thought that I'd announce my remailer. It's been running for a long time now, and I still haven't got PGP to work. The remailer is rperkins(a)nyx.cs.du.edu. No logs are kept by me of this service. Aburt, the operator does not know about the remailer, but if he asks me to remove it, I will. -- Ryan Perkins - 1:340/13 | I feel that suicide jumpers see a glimpse of ub075(a)freenet.victoria.bc.ca | sanity as they throw themselves from the ledge. Ask for PGP 2.3 public key | That's why they scream all the way down. 8C5357 : 9F FF BA 93 54 D5 18 78 4B 1E DA GC E3 4E

1 0

Re: New Remailer
by ub075＠freenet.victoria.bc.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>With a fair number of remailers down lately, I thought that I'd announce >my remailer. It's been running for a long time now, and I still haven't >got PGP to work. The remailer is rperkins(a)nyx.cs.du.edu. Couple other things. Mail to rperkins(a)nyx10.cs.du.edu and rperkins(a)nox.cs.du.edu will work too. It supports the "##" paste header, and will strip all lines after a "." on the first column of a line. -- Ryan Perkins - 1:340/13 | I feel that suicide jumpers see a glimpse of ub075(a)freenet.victoria.bc.ca | sanity as they throw themselves from the ledge. Ask for PGP 2.3 public key | That's why they scream all the way down. 8C5357 : 9F FF BA 93 54 D5 18 78 4B 1E DA GC E3 4E

1 0

Leahy to hold hearings on Clipper Chip!
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: From: jberman(a)eff.org Jerry Berman Date: Mon, 7 Mar 1994 19:09:22 -0500 Subject: Leahy to hold hearings on Clipper Chip! Dear Friends on the Electronic Frontier: I have some good news to share with you. Senator Leahy just sent me a letter indicating that he *will* be scheduling hearings on the Administration's Clipper Chip proposal. I would like to thank all of you who sent us messages to forward to him urging hearings. I'm sure that stack of messages we printed out made a significant impact on the Senator -- the stack was over seven inches tall! (We look forward to the day when no trees will have to be sacrificed in the furtherance of democracy!) And if you haven't written a message to Rep. Cantwell yet about her proposed amendment to the Export Control Act, please do so and forward it to cantwell(a)eff.org. This is an address we set up to enable us to collect messages in support of her bill. We have been printing out messages and delivering them each week -- so far we've received over 4500 letters of support. For more information on the Cantwell bill, send a message to cantwell-info(a)eff.org. Thanks again. We'll let you know as soon as the Clipper hearing gets scheduled. Sincerely, Jerry Berman EFF Executive Director -.-.-.-.-.-.-. forward from Sen. Leahy -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary Washington, DC 20510 March 1, 1994 Mr. Jerry Berman Executive Director Electronic Frontier Foundation 1001 G Street, Suite 950 East Washington, DC 20001 Dear Jerry, Thank you for forwarding to me the many thoughtful and informative messages you received over the Internet regarding the Administration's recent approval of an escrowed encryption standard, known as the Clipper Chip. Many of the messages urge Congress to hold hearings to review the Administration's Clipper Chip standard. In fact, I intend to hold a hearing before the Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology and the Law, which I chair, to consider the important issues raised by the Clipper Chip. I will let you know when a date for the hearing is scheduled. Thank you again. Sincerely, /s/ PATRICK J. LEAHY United States Senator PJL/jud -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. JOIN EFF!! ========== EFF's work as a civil liberties organization in Washington has been very successful, but the realization of our goals of freedom and privacy online can only come with the active and vocal participation of the entire online community. Now that you have personally experienced both the threat of the loss of your privacy and the power having won the first battle, won't you take that next step and become a member of EFF? By joining EFF, you will help us to expand our reach to educate and involve an even greater number of people in the shaping of these critical issues. Your tax-deductible donation will tie you into the EFF information network and support our public policy and legal work. As a member, you will be guaranteed timely the timely information and mechanism you need to respond on these issues. Our voices in unity *do* make a difference. -------- 8< ------- cut here ------- 8< -------- MEMBERSHIP IN THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION ================================================ Print out in monospaced (non-proportional) font and mail to: Membership Coordinator Electronic Frontier Foundation 1001 G Street, NW, Suite 950 East, Washington, DC 20001 SIGN ME UP! ----------- I wish to become a member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. I enclose: ___ Regular membership -- $40 ___ Student membership -- $20 * Special Contribution I wish to make an additional tax-deductible donation in the amount of $__________ to further support the activities of EFF and to broaden participation in the organization. PAYMENT METHOD: --------------- ___ Enclosed is a check or money order payable to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. ___ Please charge my: ___ MasterCard ___ Visa ___ American Express Card Number: _____________________________________________ Expiration Date: _________________________________________ Signature: _______________________________________________ NOTE: We do not recommend sending credit card information via email! YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION: ------------------------- Name: __________________________________________________________ Organization: __________________________________________________ Address: _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ Phone: _____________________ FAX: _____________________ BBS: _____________________ BBS Name: ____________________ E-mail addresses: ______________________________________________ ______________________________________________ PREFERRED CONTACT ___ Electronic: Please contact me via the Internet address listed above. I would like to receive the following at that address: ___ EFFector Online - EFF's biweekly electronic newsletter (back issues available from ftp.eff.org, pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector). ___ Online Bulletins - bulletins on key developments affecting online communications. NOTE: Traffic may be high. You may wish to browse these publications in the Usenet newsgroup comp.org.eff.news (also available in FidoNet, as EFF-NEWS). ___ Paper: Please contact EFF through the US Mail at the street address listed above. NOTE: Paper documents available upon request. "Networks & Policy" Newsletter automatically sent via US Mail. PRIVACY POLICY -------------- EFF occasionally shares our mailing list with other organizations promoting similar goals. However, we respect an individual's right to privacy and will not distribute your name without explicit permission. ___ I grant permission for the EFF to distribute my name and contact information to organizations sharing similar goals. [This form from eff.org 3/7/94 Cantwell--please leave this line on the form!] The Electronic Frontier Foundation is a nonprofit, 501(c)(3) organization supported by contributions from individual members, corporations and private foundations. Donations are tax-deductible.

1 0

Decoding the Electronic Future
by catalyst-remailer＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

US News & World Report Copyright, 1994, U.S. News & World Report All rights reserved. U.S.NEWS & WORLD REPORT, MARCH 14, 1994 DECODING THE ELECTRONIC FUTURE By Vic Sussman WILL ENCRYPTION SECURE OR DENY PRIVACY RIGHTS? Would you hand over a spare set of house keys to your local police to help them fight crime, trusting that they would never enter your home without good reason? According to opponents of the so-called Clipper chip, a powerful new telecommunications encoding device, that is an apt metaphor for what the White House, the FBI and the supersecret National Security Agency are asking of a gullible American public. Clipper backers insist the innovation will not only help in an increasingly desperate fight against crime but actually give Americans more privacy than ever. The Clipper controversy--which has sparked frenzied debate and angry protests in recent weeks--swirls around a small sliver of silicon that can be built into telephones. Ordinary phones can be tapped with anything from cheap scanners to quaint-tech alligator clips. But Clipper phones use encryption technology to scramble voice, fax, electronic mail and other data transmissions into digital gibberish. Only other Clipper phones can unscramble the information, which makes the Clipper an untappable system. Well, almost. A phone that can't be tapped is every cop's nightmare, because anyone from drug traffickers to terrorists would be able to scheme and plot with impunity. So under a plan hatched by the NSA and backed by the White House, government agents would be able to unscramble Clipper's secret code by using two mathematical keys. To guard against abuse, the keys would be held by two government agencies. Authorities would first have to get a warrant--standard wiretap procedure--before obtaining the decoders. Key escrow, as it's called, may sound good on paper, but critics maintain it will be both invasive and ineffectual. In addition, Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont maintains that Clipper is a ``misstep in export policy.'' U.S. companies would have a tough time selling compromised telecommunications products overseas and consequently would have to manufacture both domestic and foreign versions, an expensive proposition. IBM, Apple, Microsoft and the Software Publishers Association, among many others, oppose Clipper. Leahy's Technology and the Law Subcommittee is planning March hearings on these issues. HISTORY'S SHADOW. Critics are also doubtful that Clipper's decoding keys will be sufficient to deter government recklessness, pointing to past abuses by the FBI, NSA and CIA. But Georgetown University computer scientist Dorothy Denning contends that much more stringent controls against illegal eavesdropping exist today. ``The greater danger,'' she insists, ``is losing the ability to wiretap, giving organized crime and terrorism the advantage.'' Law enforcement authorities also say they are looking for no more authority than they already have--to make lawful requests to have the telecommunications industry cooperate in crime prevention. But Marc Rotenberg, Washington director of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, a public-interest group that has collected more than 50,000 signatures on an anti-Clipper petition, doesn't buy that argument. In fact, he says, the government has admitted the system could be easily breached by the NSA, which wouldn't need a warrant if it made its demand under the rubric of national security. Many valid concerns about Clipper, says Rotenberg, ``are similarly dismissed with the claim of national security, a dangerous way to design our civilian communications infrastructure.'' The Clipper chip has been proposed as a voluntary standard. But once the Internal Revenue Service, the Pentagon and other agencies order tens of thousands of Clipper phones, it will be impossible to do government business using any other equipment. Indeed, the biggest fear raised by Clipper is that it is the digital camel's nose under the electronic tent. Another White House proposal, for instance, would require that all future telecommunications systems--everything from phones to online services--be ``wiretap friendly,'' says Jerry Berman, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Even the most vociferous Clipper opponents concede a legitimate need for electronic surveillance, but many would like to see Congress rather than agencies like the NSA determine the proper balance of government needs and individual rights. Cliff Stoll, whose book THE CUCKOO'S EGG focused attention on computer espionage, thinks the Clipper controversy is overblown by both sides. In fact, he contends, the typical telephone or computer user doesn't need any encryption more powerful than pig Latin. Erhaps-pay.

1 0

(forward message on privacy)
by Evil Pete 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message Date: Sun, 6 Mar 1994 21:04:02 -0800 From: lile(a)netcom.com (Lile Elam) Message-Id: <199403070504.VAA22694(a)mail.netcom.com> To: kw-comm(a)remarque.berkeley.edu Subject: chips... Today I ran into a situation that made me completely nausiated and feel like my privacy had been completely invaded... It involves a chip which is implanted in animals and used for identification... Prehaps I over-reacted but my gut tells me that I haven't. That's what makes me still feel nausiated when I think about it. So I thought I would see what you thought about it. My housemate and I are looking to get some cats for our house. We decided to go to the Peninsula Humane Society (in the south San Francisco area) and see about adopting them from there as this is where lost or stray animals are kept and if unclaimed after a month, are put to sleep. I fell in-love with a beautiful black simi-long hair cat named "Hawk", a five year old male with yellow eyes. We got along really well (I am a cat person by nature) and I decided to adopt him. He is very gental and loving which seems so strange for such a big male cat. I kept calling him "she" :). So, I went to the front desk and spoke with the Animal Coordinator/Advisor. Everything was going great and they were impressed that my dad's a veterinarian. Said it sounded like we could provide Hawk with a wonderful home. Then the woman said, "All we have to do is implant a microchip in the animal and you'll be set". Well, I turned pale and said, "What's this chip and why is it needed?" I was told that it was used to identify the animal in case it became lost. A identifaction number is stored on this microchip and can be used to find the pet's owner and home. Well, I said I didn't want a chip in this cat and that it was a violation of privacy. There was a woman standing next to me, awaiting getting her pet, and she turned to me and said, "I don't see what the problem is?" I responded, "Well, if their doing this to animals, how soon will it be before they implant the same sort of thing in us?" She said, "Oh, I hadn't thought about it like that." and became quiet. I told the attendant that I was strongly opposed to this chip implant and couldn't accept the cat with it. So she is going to check with her boss tomorrow to see if I can get the cat without the chip. She said she understood my concerns about big brother and that a few people have had similar reactions. I'll send you an update tomorrow and let you know if I can get the cat without the chip... I was really upset about this. My housemate asked me why and I said, "It's too close. Don't forget that we are animals too! We can't really talk til we're 2 so I could see this I.D. microchip being used in human babies. And what about people who might suffer from memory loss? A reason to use a chip in adults would be to "identify" you if you forgot who you were or if you were not using your born identity. The possiblities are endless!" And with the NII coming, well it's as bad as the clipper chip, if not worse! So, am I totally over-reacting? I really do feel like this chip is wrong and don't know what to do... Below is the brocure contents about the C.H.I.P. program. How do you feel about it? thanks, - -lile ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lile Elam | "Remember... No matter where you go, there you are." lile(a)netcom.com | Un*x Admin / Artist | Buckaroo Banzai ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C. H. I. P. Campaign to Help Identify Pets Peninsula Humane Society 12 Airport Blvd. San Mateo, CA 94401 Seventy percent of missing animals never come home because they have no permanent I.D. or their owners don't know how to find them. Here at PHS, only 3% of the stray cats and 57% of the stray dogs brought to the shelter ever return to their family. Because you care about your animals, your home is as secure as possible. But thefts, accidents and natural desasters such as fires and earthquakes, do happen - even to caring and responsible pet owners like you. Despite your best efforts, your animal could get loose and become lost. That's why your newly adopted friend has become part of our new Campaign to Help Identify Pets (CHIP). PHS is working in conjunction with InfoPet, maker of computerized identification microchips, to expand our lost and found services. With the new microchip implant program, we hope to reunite as many animals as possible with their families. High-Tech Identification: - ------------------------- When you adopted your animal, a tiny microchip implant, no larger than a grain of rice, was implanted under his/her skin. There was no additional cost for this implant, and the procedure was easy and required no anesthetic. It was as simple as a routine vaccination. The microchip contains a unique I.D. number which can be activated by a special hand-held scanning device (much like bar codes in grocery stores). In the future, if your animal becomes lost and is brought to the shelter or a local participating veterinary hospital, his/her unique I.D. number will be read by the scanner. This number can then be traced through a computer database that stores vital information such as your name, address and phone number. If your animal was adopted from PHS, his/her records will be kept on a computer at our shelter, and InfoPet's national registry, will list the PHS Adoptee" and our phone number next to his I.D. number. When other, non-PHS aniamls are "chipped" by a private veterinarian, their records go on file directly with th InfoPet national computer registry. InfoPet National Registry: - -------------------------- Although your adopted pet is automatically registered with PHS, for an additional fee of $30 you can also register your animal directly with the InfoPet national registry. (To do so, use the InfoPet form that was given to you at the time you brought your animal home from the shelter.) The InfoPet database is accessable 24 hours a day and can be reached by calling toll free 1-800-INFOPET. If you choose to register directly with InfoPet, they will replace the PHS Adoptee listing with your animal's record which includes your name, address, phone number, and other facts that will be helpful to someone trying to reunite you with your pet. Regardless of where you are registered, however, keep in mind that the registries are only helpful if they are kept up to date with current information. If you move or change your phone number, be sure to notify PHS and/or InfoPet right away. Licensing and Microchip Identification: - --------------------------------------- The microchip does not replace the need to license your animal with the San Mateo County Animal Services Division. By law, every dog and cat must be licensed and have proof of rabies vaccination. In addition, under the current ordinance in the unincorporated areas of San Mateo County, dogs and cats must be spayed or neutered unless the owner possesses a breeding or unaltered animal permit. You have 60 days to licenses your animals(s). A current tag should be worn by both dogs and cats at all times. However, the microchip implant is an acceptable alternative to waaring a tag for cats only. Dogs are encuraged to have the implant in the event their collar is broken or lost. Commonly Asked Questions: - ------------------------- Q) How is the chip implanted? Is it painful? A) Done with a specialized sterile needle containing the chip, the injection is simple and requires no anesthetic. The procedure takes seconds and causes no more discomfort than a routine injection. Q) Is the chip large? Will it bulge under the skin? A) The microchip is 11 mm in length or the size of a grain of rice. Once implanted it is invisible from the skin's surface. Q) Will the chip move around in my animals body? A) No, it is injected under the skin. The body naturally forms a wall around the chip and keeps it secure. Q) Will the implant mictrochip cause any medical problems? A) No, it is made of bio-comptible glass which is naturally accepted by the tissue of your animal. Q) Why should I microchip my animal when he already has a license or never goes outside? A) For extra protection. Animals can accidently escape the confines of your home or lose their collars in a variety of situations. Q) Can the I.D. number be changed? A) No, it is unalterable and provides permanent identification. Q) Can the information be accidently erased or deactivated in any way? A) The microchips have a lifespan of approximately 20 years. To date, no chip has gone inactive. Q) Can other companion animals get the microchip implant? A) Right now PHS will only implant adopted cats and dogs. Howerver, microchips have been implanted in other animals. Contact InfoPet or your local veterinarian for more information. Q) Are all microchips the same? Can the InfoPet chip be read by other company scanners? A) No, unfortunately there are several different companies currently producing microchips and scanning devices. At this time, most of the chips can only be read by the scanning devices produced by the sanme ccompany. It is our hope that a common scanning device will be available in the future. In the meantime, PHS will check each animal brought to the shelter first for the InfoPet chip (the chip being used throughout San Mateo County) and then for the other chip that is being used in a few other communities in the bay area. Q) What happens if I move out of the area? A) Notify InfoNet's computer bank (Tool-Free: 1-800-INFOPET), then contact your new veterinarian, aniaml shelter or humane society in your new location to find out if they have the InfoPet microchip scanning program available. For More Information, Please call: (415) 340-7022, ext.320 ------- End of Forwarded Message

2 1

Wrong permissions for screen.man
by rcain＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-- Bob Cain rcain(a)netcom.com 408-354-8021 "I used to be different. But now I'm the same." --------------PGP 1.0 or 2.0 public key available on request.------------------

1 0

keeping secrets from myself
by cort＠ecn.purdue.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here is a practical problem that has me frustrated.... Situation: Assume that I am the treasurer at my local church. This implies responsibility to record each Sunday's offering (the money collected) in the church financial books. An account is maintained for each member of the church. Money received from members each Sunday is credited to their respective accounts. Each January, a report is prepared for each parishioner showing a summary of the charitable contributions for the previous year. This information is used for tax purposes. Currently, the treasurer knows EVERYTHING about EVERYONE (regarding charitable giving). As a privacy advocate, this is indeed uncomfortable (for giver and treasurer). Problem: I want to know as little as possible about church member giving. Give and Take: It will be difficult/impossible to prevent the treasurer from seeing each weeks' checks. However, a privacy improvement may be achieved if the running totals are kept hidden. How can I provide a comprehensive year-end statement to each parishioner while maintaining maximum privacy? Does cryptography have anything to offer to this situation? What procedures/protocols could be implemented? What privacy enhancements could be included with the church accounting software? Cort.

1 0

ANNOUNCE: Cypherpunks meeting March 12
by hughes＠ah.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ANNOUNCEMENT ============ Monthly Cypherpunks Meeting Saturday, 12 March 1994 MBONE: 12:00 noon PST - 3:00 p.m. PST Bay Area physical: 12:00 noon PST - 6:00 p.m. Cygnus Support Offices, Mt. View, CA Theme for March: Politics, Strategy, and Action The time has come to go on the offensive. We have labored too long in reaction to the government attempts to restrict cryptography. This meeting will be a planning meeting for real-life strategies in the political arena. -- The Free Communication Amendment to the Constitution of the United States Section 1. Free, private, and secure speech being necessary to the stability of a free state, the right of the people to possess, to import into or to export from the United States and all territory subject to its jurisdiction, to manufacture, to buy, to sell, and to use communications and cryptography devices shall not be denied, abridged, or infringed by the United States or by any of the states. Section 2. Anonymous listening and anonymous speech being necessary for the free expression of unpopular beliefs and opinions, the right not to identify oneself and the right to use a pseudonym to identify oneself, to listen and to speak, for both public and private speech, shall not be denied, abridged, or infringed by the United States or by any of the states. -- Anti-Clipper legislation -- Senate hearings on Clipper -- HR 3627, removal on civilian encryption equipment from the ITAR -- Positioning of cryptography in the marketplace of ideas Jim Warren, the miracle man behind the passage of California AB 1624, which mandated public access to legislation data which were already computerized, will be speaking at Mt. View. About the MBONE. We have considered a real-time audio conference via the MBONE. Interest has been expressed from the following places: Boston, Washington, D.C., Boulder, Austin, New York, Cleveland, San Diego, Seattle, Finland, Germany Unfortunately, it is unclear whether Cygnus Support, where the SF Bay Area cypherpunks meet, will be ready for the MBONE by this Saturday. Nevertheless, with enough other sites participating, there will be an MBONE conference at this time regardless of whether the Mt. View site is able to participate. There will have to be some spontaneous symmetry breaking for running that channel should Mt. View be unable to join. It may be possible for Mt. View to participate by making a direct connection to an MBONE site and have an audio mix happen there. This has yet to be tested. Specific announcements with addresses and directions for each of the MBONE sites will follow. This one should be good. Eric ------------------------------------------------------- [Directions to Cygnus provided by John Gilmore. -- EH] Cygnus Support 1937 Landings Drive Mt. View, CA 94043 +1 415 903 1400 switchboard +1 415 903 1418 John Gilmore Take US 101 toward Mt. View. From San Francisco, it's about a 40-minute drive. Get off at the Rengstorff Ave/Amphitheatre Parkway exit. If you were heading south on 101, you curve around to the right, cross over the freeway, and get to a stoplight. If you were heading north on 101, you just come right off the exit to the stoplight. The light is the intersection of Amphitheatre and Charleston Rd. Take a right on Charleston; there's a right-turn-only lane. Follow Charleston for a short distance. You'll pass the Metaphor/Kaleida buildings on the right. At a clump of palm trees and a "Landmark Deli" sign, take a right into Landings Drive. At the end of the road, turn left into the complex with the big concrete "Landmark" sign. Follow the road past the deli til you are in front of the clock tower that rises out of one of the buildings, facing you. Enter through the doors immediately under the clock tower. They'll be open between noon and 1PM at least. (See below if you're late.) Once inside, take the stairs up, immediately to your right. At the top of the stairs, turn right past the treetops, and we'll be in 1937 on your left. The door is marked "Cygnus". If you are late and the door under the clock tower is locked, you can walk to the deli (which will be around the building on your left, as you face the door). Go through the gate in the fence to the right of the deli, and into the back lawns between the complex and the farm behind it. Walk forward and right around the buildings until you see a satellite dish in the lawn. Go up the stairs next to the dish, which are the back stairs into the Cygnus office space. We'll prop the door (or you can bang on it if we forget). Or, you can find the guard who's wandering around the complex, who knows there's a meeting happening and will let you in. They can be beeped at 965 5250, though you'll have trouble finding a phone. Don't forget to eat first, or bring food at noon! I recommend hitting the burrito place on Rengstorff (La Costen~a) at about 11:45. To get there, when you get off 101, take Rengstorff (toward the hills) rather than Amphitheatre (toward the bay). Follow it about ten blocks until the major intersection at Middlefield Road. La Costen~a is the store on your left at the corner. You can turn left into the narrow lane behind the store, which leads to a parking lot, and enter by the front door, which faces the intersection. To get to the meeting from there, just retrace your route on Rengstorff, go straight over the freeway, and turn right at the stoplight onto Charleston; see above. See you there! John Gilmore

2 1

Response to CJ request for Applied Cryptography
by Phil Karn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

United States Department of State Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs Office of Defense Trade Controls Washington, DC 20522-0602 MAR 2 1994 [stamped] In reply refer to ODTC Case CJ 038-94 YOUR LETTER DATED: February 12, 1994 REQUEST FOR COMMODITY JURISDICTION DETERMINATION FOR: "Applied Cryptography" Cryptographic Book by Bruce Schneier Your commodity jurisdiction (CJ) request was referred to the Departments of Commerce and Defense for their review and recommendations. As a result, the Department of State has determined that the referenced commodity is not subject to the licensing jurisdiction of the Department of State since the item is in the public domain. However, this ruling covers only the subject book and not the two source code disks that the book references and that are available from the author. Should you require further assistance on this matter, please contact Maj. Gary Oncale at (703) 875-5655. Sincerely, [signed] William B. Robinson Director Office of Defense Trade Controls Phil Karn 7431 Teasdale Avenue San Diego, CA 92122

1 0

Re: Standard for Stenography?
by Carl Ellison 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bill Stewart wrote: >Carl Ellison's "tran" program takes an interesting approach for data >scrambling - it takes a simple checksum of the first N bytes of the data, >which is order-invariant (I think it was a byte-wise XOR?) >and uses it as a random-number seed for scrambling blocks of data; >it's easy to reverse because the checksum is the same after scrambling. The old tran used the sum of the bytes. The new tran uses the histogram of the bytes (of the first block -- 8KB or the whole message). This carries more information. That seeds a PRNG (currently subtract-with-borrow, but it could be made stronger -- e.g., with DES or IDEA encrypting the output before use) which then drives a pairwise byte swap over each 8KB block of the stream. This is a self-inverse. I can send code to anyone interested. It's also on ripem.msu.edu. - Carl

1 0

INFOPET
by jim＠bilbo.suite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just called 1-800-INFOPET and sure enough, INFOPET is for real. The guy who answered the phone was quite proud of their efforts, claiming to have over a million people (yes, he used the word "people") in their database (people == pet owners, veterinarians, animal shelters). Jim_Miller(a)suite.com

2 1

intricacies of cpunks link-up?
by Matt Thomlinson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've mailed eric on this, but no response yet and our time is running out. If seattle was to get a group meeting set up for saturday and we wanted to link up with the bay area meeting, what _exactly_ should I be asking for? MBONE connections? (is this video, btw, or just an audio link?) I was hoping to get this set up, but.. we'll see. answers appreciated. mt Matt Thomlinson Say no to the Wiretap Chip! University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Internet: phantom(a)u.washington.edu phone: (206) 548-9804 PGP 2.2 key available via email or finger phantom(a)hardy.u.washington.edu

1 0

EFF's Barlow v. Denning on Clipper - AOL March 10, 9PM EST LIVE
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CLIPPER CHIP DEBATE Thursday, March 10, 9 pm eastern Dorothy Denning, cryptologist and chair of the computer science department at Georgetown University, will debate John Perry Barlow, cognitive dissident and co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, in the TIME Odeon on America Online this Thursday at 9 pm. Philip Elmer-DeWitt, TIME senior writer, and Robert Pondiscio, TIME public affairs director, will moderate. The floor will be open to questions from the audience. You need an America Online account to participate. Call America Online at 703-448-8700 to subscribe. Philip Elmer-DeWitt ped(a)panix.com ped(a)well.com TIME Magazine philiped(a)aol.com Read TIME on America Online, where we get paid to take abuse. -- Stanton McCandlish * mech(a)eff.org * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist F O R M O R E I N F O, E - M A I L T O: I N F O @ E F F . O R G O P E N P L A T F O R M O N L I N E R I G H T S V I R T U A L C U L T U R E C R Y P T O

2 1

Church Accounting - keeping secrets from myself
by wcs＠anchor.ho.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cortland Starrett (cort(a)ecn.purdue.edu) asked a question about how a church treasurer could keep track of running totals of donations from parishioners without being blatantly reminded of what they are except at tax time. Secrecy doesn't have to be real high, since the treasurer does see each check as it comes in, and could keep track separately. One technique that could be adapted is to add a large random number to each person's initial balance, and then subtract that at the end of the year to get the total for tax purposes. Pick a bunch of numbers, say between 100K and 900K save them in a file, and give everyone a copy of their number. Also add up the total of the random numbers so that you can get the whole spreadsheet to balance. Then everybody's running total can be visible without it conveying any useful information except to people who want to track changes from week to week, since you can't tell if $654321 means you gave $1 (with a random number of 654320) or $554321. The total number shouldn't cause overflow problems for 32-bit integers unless you've got more than 3-4000 people. For convenience, you may want to derive the random number from a hash of the person's name, in case they or use lose records. Not letting the left hand know what the right hand is doing..... Bill P.S. Of course, this is just another example of how taxation negatively affects people's lives - if you weren't paying income taxes, you wouldn't need to keep track of deductions to charities, and you could just pay in cash.

1 0

Decoding the Electronic Future
by nobody＠jarthur.cs.hmc.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

US News & World Report Copyright, 1994, U.S. News & World Report All rights reserved. U.S.NEWS & WORLD REPORT, MARCH 14, 1994 DECODING THE ELECTRONIC FUTURE By Vic Sussman WILL ENCRYPTION SECURE OR DENY PRIVACY RIGHTS? Would you hand over a spare set of house keys to your local police to help them fight crime, trusting that they would never enter your home without good reason? According to opponents of the so-called Clipper chip, a powerful new telecommunications encoding device, that is an apt metaphor for what the White House, the FBI and the supersecret National Security Agency are asking of a gullible American public. Clipper backers insist the innovation will not only help in an increasingly desperate fight against crime but actually give Americans more privacy than ever. The Clipper controversy--which has sparked frenzied debate and angry protests in recent weeks--swirls around a small sliver of silicon that can be built into telephones. Ordinary phones can be tapped with anything from cheap scanners to quaint-tech alligator clips. But Clipper phones use encryption technology to scramble voice, fax, electronic mail and other data transmissions into digital gibberish. Only other Clipper phones can unscramble the information, which makes the Clipper an untappable system. Well, almost. A phone that can't be tapped is every cop's nightmare, because anyone from drug traffickers to terrorists would be able to scheme and plot with impunity. So under a plan hatched by the NSA and backed by the White House, government agents would be able to unscramble Clipper's secret code by using two mathematical keys. To guard against abuse, the keys would be held by two government agencies. Authorities would first have to get a warrant--standard wiretap procedure--before obtaining the decoders. Key escrow, as it's called, may sound good on paper, but critics maintain it will be both invasive and ineffectual. In addition, Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont maintains that Clipper is a ``misstep in export policy.'' U.S. companies would have a tough time selling compromised telecommunications products overseas and consequently would have to manufacture both domestic and foreign versions, an expensive proposition. IBM, Apple, Microsoft and the Software Publishers Association, among many others, oppose Clipper. Leahy's Technology and the Law Subcommittee is planning March hearings on these issues. HISTORY'S SHADOW. Critics are also doubtful that Clipper's decoding keys will be sufficient to deter government recklessness, pointing to past abuses by the FBI, NSA and CIA. But Georgetown University computer scientist Dorothy Denning contends that much more stringent controls against illegal eavesdropping exist today. ``The greater danger,'' she insists, ``is losing the ability to wiretap, giving organized crime and terrorism the advantage.'' Law enforcement authorities also say they are looking for no more authority than they already have--to make lawful requests to have the telecommunications industry cooperate in crime prevention. But Marc Rotenberg, Washington director of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, a public-interest group that has collected more than 50,000 signatures on an anti-Clipper petition, doesn't buy that argument. In fact, he says, the government has admitted the system could be easily breached by the NSA, which wouldn't need a warrant if it made its demand under the rubric of national security. Many valid concerns about Clipper, says Rotenberg, ``are similarly dismissed with the claim of national security, a dangerous way to design our civilian communications infrastructure.'' The Clipper chip has been proposed as a voluntary standard. But once the Internal Revenue Service, the Pentagon and other agencies order tens of thousands of Clipper phones, it will be impossible to do government business using any other equipment. Indeed, the biggest fear raised by Clipper is that it is the digital camel's nose under the electronic tent. Another White House proposal, for instance, would require that all future telecommunications systems--everything from phones to online services--be ``wiretap friendly,'' says Jerry Berman, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Even the most vociferous Clipper opponents concede a legitimate need for electronic surveillance, but many would like to see Congress rather than agencies like the NSA determine the proper balance of government needs and individual rights. Cliff Stoll, whose book THE CUCKOO'S EGG focused attention on computer espionage, thinks the Clipper controversy is overblown by both sides. In fact, he contends, the typical telephone or computer user doesn't need any encryption more powerful than pig Latin. Erhaps-pay.

1 0

Re: Decoding the Electronic Future
by jim＠bilbo.suite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[..] Law enforcement authorities also say they are looking for no more authority than they already have--. [..] Perhaps LE is not asking for more *authority*, but they sure are asking for more *capability*. If LE had the capability to do everything they're currently authorized to do (wiretaps, search and seizure, follow people, undercover officers, sting operations, obtain financial records, public security cameras, etc), on a nationwide scale, the US would truly be a police state. It's not so much the amount of "authority" that is keeping the US from being a police state, it is LE's level of capability. Don't give LE more capabilities. One person's opinion, Jim_Miller(a)suite.com

1 0

ViaCrypt PGP for Unix, CompuServe
by Mike Ingle 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I got a flyer from ViaCrypt today about these: ViaCrypt PGP for MS/DOS $99.98 one user, $299.98 five user ViaCrypt PGP for Unix $149.98 one user, $449.98 five user ViaCrypt PGP for C$ $119.98 one user The Unix versions are for: SunOS 4.1.x, RS/6000 AIX, HP 9000 700/800 UX, SCO 386/486 UNIX (others soon). The Compu$pend version integrates into CompuServe Information Manager or CS Navigator for Windows. Includes the regular PGP and an integration program for CompuServe. DigiSig+ cryptographic modules: RSA, DES, and DSS. Developers' Kit $950 two user for MS/DOS. DigiSig+ D150. Software crypto engine. $80 to $20 depending on quantity. DigiSig+ D350. Parallel port crypto device, looks like a modem. $625 DigiSig+ D355. As above but plugs into serial port. $635 DigiSig+ D360. Internal board for PC. $595 Memory card - securely stores a secret key. $30 for two.

1 0

Re: (forward message on privacy)
by flesh＠wps.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message:

2 1