December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

[less paranoid NOISE] Re: Odd Satellite observations
by jfricker＠vertexgroup.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ok well like I said it was just paranoid noise. So the sats can locate ships at sea. I wonder what else? At 01:58 PM 9/9/96 GMT, Jim wrote: >On Sun, 08 Sep 1996 11:45:45 -0700, I wrote: > >>I saw three satellites gliding across the sky (east to west) in >>a tight right triangle formation. The entire formation was not >>bigger than my hand at arms length. Has anyone else observed >>this? > >John: You probably saw one of the NOSS (Naval Ocean Surveillance >System) constellations. There are several of these groupings -- all >in triangular arrays. They use some form of interferometry to locate >ships at sea. > >Jim > > >

1 0

Lexis-Nexis Database
by Andrew Fabbro 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Note: personal experience indicates that L-N can remove you without your SSN, so there's no need to provide it, though they'll ask for it. Expect to attend a mandatory on-hold-music concert with a 20-25 minute program. L-N won't verify if your name is in the database, but will "performa process which will remove you if you are there". Andrew Fabbro <afabbro(a)umich.edu> ITD Marketing Research http://www-personal.umich.edu/~afabbro/ PGP mail preferred; finger for key ---------------------------------------------------------------------- PRIVACY Forum Digest Tuesday, 3 September 1996 Volume 05 : Issue 17 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 11:22:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Larry Hunter <hunter(a)intr.net> Subject: Lexis-Nexis personal information database Lexis-Nexis sells a commercial database called "Ptrax" which holds detailed personal information on nearly all Americans (L-N claims it contains 300 million names). This database includes name, current address, up to two previous addresses, phone number, birth-date, social security number, mother's maiden name and possible other personal information. This database is kept quite current. Through the Nexis Express service, this information could be available to any individual with a credit card. As most readers will are aware, such information could easily be used for theft of identity and other frauds. It is possible to have one's name removed from this database by making a telephone request. Call (800)543-6862, select option 4 ("all other questions") and tell the representative answering that you wish to remove your name from the Ptrax database. You may also send a fax to (513)865-7360, or physical mail to LEXIS-NEXIS / P.O. Box 933 / Dayton, Ohio 45401-0933. Sending physical mail to confirm your name has been removed is always a good idea. As word of the existence of this database has spread on the net, Lexis-Nexis has been inundated with calls, and has set up a special set of operators to handle the volume. In addition, Andrew Bleh (rhymes with "Play") is a manager responsible for this product, and is the person to whom complaints about the service could be directed. He can be reached at the above 800 number, selection option 4 and then ask for extension 3385. The information in this note has been been confirmed by me, and was originally provided in forwarded messages from Russell Whitaker, Jason Werner, Vern Winters, Katherine Florman and Reuben Snipper. Larry Hunter hunter(a)intr.net ------------------------------ End of PRIVACY Forum Digest 05.17 ************************

1 0

Re: Los Angeles Times article on Helsingius and anon.penet.fi
by Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

John Gilmore wrote: > PS: I would counsel against the kind of false anonymity provided by > the Finnish server, though. Providing information under the promise > that it will "never be revealed or misused" is a lot more dangerous > than never providing it at all. E.g. "Anonymous cash" that is really > based on dossiers or account-numbers isn't anonymous at all. Even > physical cash is getting easier to trace; the British government has > been tracking money by serial numbers for years, with custom machines > in the banks, to de-anonymize Irish freedom-fighters (oops, I mean > terrorists). Anonymity is another area, like privacy, where changes > from technology can make big social differences. There is a massive difference between anonymous speech and anonymous transactions. Anonymous speech can create problems (defamation etc.) but in the main these are not problems the courts are particularly good at dealing with. In the UK the libel laws are not so much a redress for legitimate grievance than a way for a senior Tory to obtain a nice lump sum towards his pension if he should happen to be filmed handing over 5000 quid in a breifcase to a prostitute he'd never met. The "problems" encountered by the Church of Scientology demonstrate that the court process itself can be imeasurably more harmfull than any imagined grievance. Should society have laws to protect trades secrets? Probably , but not to protect the likes of the CoS. If the Internet makes such laws difficult to enforce then we should return to the original concerns that prompted society to create the laws in the first place and see if the Internet provides better was of achieving the same result. Anonymous transactions are a rather different matter. It is more difficult to argue for anonymity. The extreeme examples of Chaumian cash create considerable difficulties such as making a perfect conduit for ransom proceeds and the profits of drug trafficing. Simply ignoring these problems will result in the proponents of anonymity simply being ignored. The principle fear of the authorities appears to be terrorist rather than normal criminal activities. Terrorism is no longer limited to far off irredentist struggles that ex-patriates can harbour romantic thoughts about. The reality the the IRA is an organisation that murders children by placing a bomb in a rubbish bin outside a MacDonalds has been brought home to the suporters of Noraid through the bombings of the World Trade Center, Oaklahoma and Atlanta. If one lives in a country where there is little terrorism it is easy to imagine that people driven to extreeme actions are driven by a extreeme situation. If one is faced with the reality of terrorism one soon reaches the conclusion that its perpetrators are simply ordinary psychopaths. Having stated that terrorism is an important concern for the state it is necessary to ask whether it is necessary to restrict freedom to combat terrorism. In answering one must bear in mind that a central part of most terrorist strategies is to force the state to respond with disproportionate measures (here recent events in Chetchnya indicate that Trotsky was not widely read in the USSR). Absolutely anonymous cash may create problems, but what if it were possible to generate small quantities of "marked bills" within an otherwise anonymous system. If the circumstances under which the marked bills could be distributed were limited to a small set of tightly controlled circumstances the legitimate need of the government to oppose terrorism and organised crime could be met without imposing a Singapore style system with total monitoring. In effect what is taking place is a negotiation between two groups, the government and civil rights activists. If one side refuses to consider the needs of the other they will be marginalised. Absolutism in politics is usually a bad thing. Politics usually works through compromises. The art being to ensure that one compromises the inessential terms in order to defend the key items. In the present Presidential race the one policy area in which Clinton is potentially vulnerable is privacy. Its the one area which the Republicans could raise and claim it as their own (whether justifiable or not). The Clinton camp could not move from their current position without dropping Freeh overboard, since Freeh has run the FBI without any Ruby ridge or Waco style cockups on his watch I don't think that is likely to happen. If privacy is raised as a policy concern in this election it will reoccur in the next and both parties will have to justify their policies in terms of personal privacy as well as everything else. Just because the election is practically settled does not mean that the campaign will not affect what happens during the administration. Clinton clearly wants Gore to be his successor and is going to want to make it as easy as possible for him to win. Clinton is the kind of politician I can trust - give him an issue and I trust him to look at the opinion polls. If Dole makes any kind of headway in '96 with a privacy plank then Gore will have to have one in 2000. Phill

5 5

Snake-Oil FAQ
by wlkngowl＠unix.asb.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Subject: Snake-Oil FAQ's New Maintainer From: Rob Rothenburg Walking-Owl <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> C. Matthew Curtin <cmcurtin(a)research.megasoft.com> will be taking-over the "Snake-Oil FAQ". I no longer have the time to finish (let alone maintain) it. - --Rob -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3b Charset: cp850 iQEVAwUBMjRWPATNlSxdPy6ZAQEnIwf+PXgXNNBZP7ylTfMhugeH8FuFDY/zybNb poSIWCRUhM7EEndYkuyzaTYC44aE0ltAkiN7HvaqXbExQEmEv34aYTa+u9ISabOK BOEQdgi8oCHJlQ3R6lBTMWKfpFELpORsjDJbsKt/Gcgef+uInMUG8RF7F3Va40dh CTar/Nr4Quj/EkkVaY6hkaXsMF0CvWq+cKZmo8KR0v4vPeWEKHskslfgXSpfPR9d uXYyUVD21HRSG5YTZmdm3PJn3GUvgXuQdz1pooQ+x+u8EXsOFRjAEiaFtMey2DYW imHub+XewnbS93JGZ+q+J93hHpL2OE8LMQFB8ViUe6K05uj7RBi06Q== =wMjQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Crypto Anachy MUD
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Did anyone make the point (I gave up on the thread) that we already have a great Crypto Anarchy MUD with lots of the coding already done. We call it the Internet. Digital cash, strong crypto, remailers, everything. I have never been able to figure out why anyone would want to play games on a computer in any case when the whole system is a game. Word processing, spreadsheets, telecoms -- it's all a game. And they pay you to play it. DCF

2 1

Anonymous FedEx, was: What is the EFF doing exactly?
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>David Lesher wrote: >Try & mail an anonymous FedEx package. Not a problem. You merely use the FedEx number of local company. Get FedEx forms from an unmanned FedEx pick-up point, fill one in (using an impact printer, if desired, to simulate the appearance of the pre-addressed forms given to their regular customers), attach to parcel and drop it in the box (no finger prints please). Works like a charm. PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Snoop Daty Data | Internet: azur(a)netcom.com Grinder | Voice: 1-702-655-2877 Sacred Cow Meat Co. | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 7075 W. Gowan Road, #2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Just say NO to perscription DRUGS.

2 1

Re: Anonymous phone calls (was: What is the EFF doing exactly?)
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:03 PM 9/7/96 CST, roy(a)scytale.com wrote: >In Minneapolis, USWest has Telecard phones everywhere, and vending >machines with bill accepters. The calls are also flat rate at $0.25. ... >Can Telecards be audited for usage? If a TLA black-bags my $25 Telecard >from my wallet, can they reconstruct what calls I made with it? Easily. They get the card number off the card, and then check their long distance records for calls made with that card number. With some cards, you can recharge the card instead of getting new ones, if for some reason you want to increase the audit trail substantially. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> # You can get PGP software outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto

2 1

TWA flight 800, surface to air missles, conspiracypunks
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 11:26:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Brock N. Meeks <brock(a)well.com> To: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)eff.org> Surface to air missles do not need to make contact to explode. They have a proximity system that explodes the missle if it gets within range. Of course, sometimes the missle does hit; there is a famous story -- documented -- of an SA-2 (an old Soviet SAM) hitting an RF-4 during Viet Nam. The missle didn't explode but stuck in the plane like a dart; the pilot flew the plane back to the airfield and was told to ditch the plane when the air traffic control noticed it stuck in his plane. -- Brock

1 0

Re: talker
by pjb＠ny.ubs.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

sure sounds like it. is it possible that there could be two such as this? -paul > From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Sun Sep 8 03:04:36 1996 > X-Authentication-Warning: jekyll.piermont.com: Host perry@localhost didn't use HELO protocol > To: doom13(a)juno.com (Floyd W Odom) > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Subject: Re: talker > Reply-To: perry(a)piermont.com > X-Reposting-Policy: redistribute only with permission > Date: Sat, 07 Sep 1996 23:40:18 -0400 > From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry(a)piermont.com> > Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Content-Length: 255 > > > Floyd W Odom writes: > > I am doom13. If there is anyone out there who is a hacker or > > would like to be one you can talk to me and find out stuff like cracking. > > Just drop a message at doom13(a)juno.com. > > Are you the same jerk who was posting a week ago? >

3 2

Re: [WAS xs4all.nl] Terrorists
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:35 AM 9/9/96 -0500, Adam Shostack wrote: >Stephan Schmidt wrote: > >| One thought : How many of you would support terrorist >| web server (say Oklahoma, TWA, Iran, Lybia, RAF, IRA, ...) ? > >I've given support to at least two terrorist organization, probably >closer to five in the last year. I can't see supporting one more >would do any more harm. > >Adam And I support a terrorist organization (the US Government) every year whether I want to or not. The US was convicted of a major violation of international law (akin to terrorism) in the International Court of Justice back in the '80s for air sowing mines in Nicaragua's main harbor. DCF

2 1

CATO terrorism conference -- tomorrow @ 8:30 am, free
by declan＠well.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

More info on tomorrow's terrorism conference at CATO is at: http://www.cato.org/events/calendar.html This is especially timely given the report that the Aviation Safety and Security Commission (chaired by Gore) sent to Clinton with 20 recommendations. One is to enact "automated passenger profiling" of all domestic travellers, which would include airline access to FBI/CIA databases. This $10 million project bans anonymous air travel and, needless to say, raises significant privacy questions. -Declan >Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 12:23:13 -0400 >Mime-Version: 1.0 >To: declan(a)well.com (Declan McCullagh) >From: Solveig Bernstein <sberns(a)cato.org> >Subject: Terrorism Conference > >Cato's Conference, *Combatting Terrorism, Preserving Freedom," scheduled for >Tuesday, September 10, 1996 is now > > >* FREEEEE* > >That's right, the registration fee of $50 has been WAIVED!!! > >Come listen to Nadine Strossen, Dorothy Denning, David Kopel, and many >others discuss terrorism, foreign policy, civil liberties, and the >telecommunications infrastructure. > >Please redistribute freely. > >Conference begins at 8:30 at 1000 Mass. Ave. > > >- Solveig >********************************************************************** >Solveig Bernstein, Esq. >(202) 789-5274 >(202) 842-3490 (fax) > >Assistant Director of Telecommunications & Technology Studies >Cato Institute >1000 Mass. Ave. NW >Washington, DC 20001 >

1 0

Re: Kiddie porn on the Internet
by Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn wrote: > > "News" stories are now circulating on radio about child pornography on > the Internet, and how an organization called "Save The Children" is > working very hard to identify the trafficers and their accomplii. > > Save The Children is complaining that they can't find all of the dirty > dealers of kid-porn, since much of the traffic is encrypted! > > So who is Save The Children? First, since they're an international > organization raising funds in the U.S., they obviously operate at the > pleasure of the State Department. Ho hum. Remember the incidents at the > Denny's restaurant chain where Denny's was sued for discrimination > against minorities? Did it seem a little bizarre for the 1990's? I'm trying to work out just what sort of confused idea is going on here. Save the Children is an international charity that is based in the UK. It is ultra respectable, Princess Ann being its president and very active in that role (ie not merely titular). Its also a-political which it has to be for tax reasons and because otherwise the royals couldn't have anything to do with it. Their main mission is sending food to Ethiopia and other famine areas, development work etc. It is ultra-worthy stuff. I think that a more rational explanation of the Dennys case is that being weasels the Dennys management decided they needed some good PR before the judgement brought them bad PR. >*** The recievers of the porn should not be punished for the photographers >action, the same as if I would complain that someone burglarized my home becuase >i left the door open. It was their ignorance that caused their loss. Its the consumers who create a market. If someone burgals your house and I knowingly buy the stolen goods its a crime. Phill

1 0

Re: [WAS xs4all.nl] Terrorists
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:49 AM 9/9/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >I don't worry overmuch about a few thousand or even a few million people >dying as a result of something we have had an influence on developing, >anymore than the developers of many technologies need to worry about how >others use their technologies. > >And the net effect of crypto anarchy is to destabilize and marginalize >central governments, which is a net positive effect. If some eggs get >broken in the process, the biological imperative will generate more eggs. >No big deal. Particularly since governments murdered 160 million in the last 100 years while we civilians have only managed to murder a paltry 20 million or fewer. A savings of 160 million deaths leaves a lot of room for a non-harmful increase in private murder. We could increase the private murder rate by 8 to 10 times and still break even. Note too that most terrorism is aimed at governments (even if practiced on civilians). In the absence of government, terrorist incentives may be reduced. DCF "I don't know if we ought to trust governments with the Net, they might use it to nuke Hiroshima or conquer Europe or something."

1 0

L.A. Times articles, etc.
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm sure everyone is familiar with how newspaper articles are not necessarily "pure" news, i.e., they're often slanted toward a particular point of view. Go back a few years, maybe 20 or more, and look at the front page of the L.A. Times (or probably any big-city paper). Many or most news pieces written by UPI, AP, etc., now 100% are written internally. What y'all might want to think about is not just slanting and bias, but how certain people and organizations can actually *plant* a phony story on page one of a major paper like the L.A. Times. Go back a few months and check out the front-page article on real estate prices in the Calif. "Ventura Keys" area. Totally false. Story alleged that prices were "skyrocketing"; prices actually were absolutely flat, after having fallen by 35% or more in the previous couple of years. Whoever authorized this story, if they didn't get a big kickback or gain some points for some future operation, then I can't imagine why they would print such a thing. I hate to suggest anyone become more cynical than they already are, but, the front page(s) of a big-city newspaper are some of the most valuable real estate in western civilization, so do the math....

1 0

Re: Test...sorry about this - Reply - Reply
by Barbara Gamble 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I subscribed just once, real name. Yep, the Welcome msg is ReallyTrulyFine[M]. I reallytrulyread it. High-traffic, though, is relative. In light of Z.B.'s post , I thought that maybe I , too, had a mail probem. Seriously, thanks for the info. >>> Jean-Francois Avon <jf_avon(a)citenet.net> 09/09 2:26 pm >>> On 9 Sep 96 at 11:10, Barbara Gamble wrote: > I got it too. And since I am a new subscriber, I thought it might > be the normal traffic. The Welcome msg *did* say the list is > high-traffic. Still, I was aghast--300 all at once, another 100 > just in the last hour. Is that typical? (Please forgive such a > question from a newcomer to the list.) Usually, between 35 and 100 posts a day, most of which I delete. Did you subscribe twice or three times under slightly different names (but identical e-mail adresses)? RTFine Welcome Message, it explains everything you have to know Hope you'll stay with us. Jean-Francois Avon, Montreal QC Canada DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee Limoges porcelain, silverware and crystal JFA Technologies, R&D consultant physicists, technologists and engineers PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891

1 0

Re: Court challenge to AOL junk-mail blocks
by Will Rodger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >If you know a valid email address on the spammers system you can always >bounce each message back to them. If enough people turned the messages >back on them it might give them the opportunity to experience first hand >what its like to receive tons of mail you don't want or need... > Ah, but they never do. Why not? Because spammers _invariably_ forge the return addresses to keep exactly that from happening. Indeed, Cyber Promo claims it "had an understanding" with AOL that it could use AOL boxes or bogus adresses to keep bounced messages from coming back at them and crashing their server. Deliberatlely forging addresses, Cyber claims, is entirely legal. AOL says it's fraud. Interesting footnote: AOL, of course, is able to trace a lot of the spam it gets. It has sent back thousands of messages at once to Cyber which, in turn, has gotten it bumped from several ISPs once their servers crashed as a result. Tough business, huh? Will Rodger Washington Bureau Chief Inter@ctive Week -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMjSGvTqp6Cc7rRIJAQHCEQP/fZwhp/GTSwj9Emusgh9QFnAlafpOL2qI ces6RqwSoZfmbAmhREh836sakjS2d+mHdYK84FH7WdXWnuzMlDAPCls7OO8AU4t8 oMN7koLM3cpgwlavt/Lw8NJp3wC5OnRnrqNeunkBvNEBs8aaJ+C6isH/zrErgbt5 0QL9cYlEyq8= =EW/y -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Hettinga Plays Horseman, Gets the Last Word...
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It seems the former Office of Technology Assessment, now called the Institute for Technology Assessment (Go, Newt!), had a need for a horseman on their law-enforcement panel tomorrow. Anyone know where I can get a riding crop? :-). I'm scheduled, anyway. I'm in Cupertino at the moment (the Mac-Crypto conference was, er, insanely great; more on that later), and I haven't received the plane tickets yet (Bob Hettinga: You Buy, I Fly), though they're supposed to show up today. We'll see when I get home tonight. Oh. Any former Pac-Man addicts remember the name of the ghosts? I think there were four, right? Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- The Institute For Technology Assessment ITA INSTITUTE FOR TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP DIGITAL MONEY AND PUBLIC POLICY SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 US House of Representatives, Cannon Office Building, Room 121 A Workshop on Public Policy and New Technology: "Digital Money" is a rapidly evolving financial/communications technology. It is important that government, industry, and the public fully understand the unique characteristics and potential benefits and costs of this radically new technology, so that benefits may be fully realized and costs avoided through early, judicious attention to public policy issues and concerns. This workshop brings together the stakeholders and interested parties -including the public and their government representatives-to consider the issues that may be posed by this emerging technology. In this workshop, attention will be focused on three questions: What issues need to be resolved now if development of digital money is to proceed with minimal social costs and institutional risks? Where is there general agreement about needed actions, or about reasonable solutions to recognized problems? Where are there true uncertainties that must be monitored, solved empirically, or objectively researched? The workshop will consist of three sessions. Each will begin with invited presentations, followed by open discussion among presenters and participants. Moderator: Dr. Wayne Boucher of Strategic Futures International 10 a.m. Greetings and Introductions Keynote Address: The Honorable Michael Castle Chairman, Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy House Committee on Banking and Financial Services 10:30 a.m. Session I : Digital Money Systems, Today and Tomorrow - Industry Perspectives Who are the players in developing digital money -and what new players will emerge? What are the potential benefits -and costs-for banks, credit card companies, telecom companies, software vendors, or others? What has been learned from early pilot systems? What are the relative advantages-and risks-of smart cards vs. network-based systems? What older payment systems lose ground to electronic money and smart cards? Is the playing field level with respect to regulation and legislation? Specific issues that may be raised include questions about state licensing, Bank Secrecy Act coverage and financial privacy, protocols for payments of different sizes, clearinghouses, and multiple mints. PRESENTERS: Roger Applewhite, Benton International, Inc., Torrance, California William Barr, Bellcore, Basking Ridge, N.J. Electronic Funds Transfer Association, Reston, Virginia Kawika Daguio, American Bankers Association, Washington, D.C. 12:30 p.m. Buffet lunch 1:15 p.m. Session II. Government's Role in the Development of Digital Money How may existing laws and regulations impede the development of digital money? Does the possibility of future regulations or restrictions threaten to drive development in sub-optimal directions? Do banks or other potential developers need firmer assurances about regulatory intentions? Does existing legislation and regulation adequately protect property and contract rights with regard to digital money? What might be the effect of European data protection initiatives, and what steps can the US government take to circumvent international friction over this issue? What are the major risks imposed by digital money, including risks of devaluation of US currency? Could private insurance buttress against network failure, electronic runs on money, or other sources of catastrophic risk? To what extent could a failure in digital money systems contaminate or threaten the traditional banking system, or the integrity of traditional money systems? Who will set standards with respect to risk management and capital adequacy of clearing systems? Should smart cards and small internet transactions be exempt from Regulation E and EFTA protections against consumer liability? Would -or should Representative Markey's On-line Privacy Bill cover digital money transactions? Would non-bank digital money mints be covered by the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 and the Electronic Communications Act of 1986? Which party would bear the risk of loss in case of hard-disk crashes, counterfeiting, network failure, etc.? PRESENTERS: Melanie Fein, Arnold & Porter, Washington, D.C. L. Richard Fisher, Morrison & Foerster, Washington, D.C. Professor Sarah Jane Hughes, Indiana University Law School 2:45 p.m. Session III: Law Enforcement Issues Will anonymous instantaneous digital money create the possibility of new crimes, or new versions of old crimes -theft, money laundering, insider trading, etc.? How would the flow of invisible, non-traceable money affect law enforcement and the administration of justice? Do benefits of encryption outweigh the possible harm to law enforcement capabilities? Does digital money threaten the new focus of law enforcement on seizing the proceeds of criminal enterprises? Considering the lessor of the Digital Telephony Act, can early cooperation between digital money providers and law enforcement avoid the heavy costs of retrofitting systems to accommodate the needs of law enforcement? What is the appropriate role of government in assuring the security of digital money systems against breaches by insiders, or criminals, or terrorists? To what extent would digital money threaten the ability of the IRS to collect taxes or to prosecute tax dodgers? PRESENTERS: Roger Weiner, Deputy Director, FinCEN, U.S. Department of the Treasury Scott Charney, Chief, Computer Crimes Section, U.S. Department of Justice Robert Hettinga, Boston, MA 4:00 p.m. Adjournment Conference Organizers Steven Bonorris, Vary Coates (ITA) 202 686 0693 ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender." -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard, for Bart Simpson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

SPL -- Suspicious Persons List
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Digitaltronics Corporation V.P of Human Relations: "Joe, thanks for coming in this morning. I'm sure you're busy, so I'll make this as short as possible. OK with you?" Joseph Shlubsky, Programmer: "Uh, sure." <nervously> Digitaltronics: "Joe, we have a problem. We understand that on your last two business trips you've been flagged for Special Processing at airport security. We checked, and it seems you're on the Suspicious Persons List. As you know, this causes problems for your fellow travellers (no pun intended, eh Joe <laughs>). And, Joe, it undermines the corporate image for one of our people to be on the SPL. I'm sure you see our problem?" JS: "Uh...." Digitaltronics: "Joe, we're not sure what you've been doing to get yourself put on the SPl, and we're forbidden by the Fairness in Employment Act from even asking you about your interests and affiliations, but we really can't have representatives of Digitaltronics being pulled aside for SPL processing, now can we?" JS: "But I told them I was only carrying a briefcase, and that they could search it all they wanted to, and--" Digitaltronics: "Joe, I'm sorry, but we're going to have to let you go. You know how these things are. Nothing can be done. Not our decision, when you think about it. The government has their ideas of who should be on the Suspicious Persons List, and there's just nothing we can do about it. We just can't have our corporate image linked to persons on the SPL. Now, Joe, you'll get a generous 6 weeks of severance pay, and Daphne will assist you with your outplacement processing. Of course, Joe, you will have to go through an inspection every morning until you're fully processed...there's that SPL matter, you know." <laughs> JS: "Uh..."

3 2

Re: ... subversive leftists
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:57 PM 9/9/96, William H. Geiger III wrote: >In <Pine.LNX.3.94.960909125148.16761A-100000(a)blau.pin.de>, on 09/09/96 at >12:53 PM, > Stephan Schmidt <schmidt(a)pin.de> said: > > >>I hope this one was ironic. > >>> The Democratic People's German Reich is fully justified in cutting off >>> contacts with subversive radical publications in Jew-dominated nations like >>> Holland. >>> >>> As Reichskommander Schmidt points out: "The citizen-units who access >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>But this one is tasteless and insulting even if it was >>meant ironic. > >If the boot fits....... > I don't know why Stephan waited so many days to make his comment. It was my noticing that I had "collided" with his name, Schmidt, when I made my facetious post that caused me to almost immediately issue a clarification that I was not thinking of him when I made my first post. To be clear, again, I was not basing my "Reichskommander Schmidt" line on Stephan Schmidt. That was just a coincidence. As to the "Reichskommander," in our country, and on the Net, such jokes are not illegal. I rather suspect they are in Germany, either the DDR or the Western side. As to "tasteless and insulting," a matter of personal perspective. I find it helpful to call a spade a spade, and others apparently do as well. --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

U.S. as a Terrorist State
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:29 PM 9/9/96, Duncan Frissell wrote: >And I support a terrorist organization (the US Government) every year >whether I want to or not. The US was convicted of a major violation of >international law (akin to terrorism) in the International Court of Justice >back in the '80s for air sowing mines in Nicaragua's main harbor. This is a lie, a lie by the subversive left. As is well-known, the recent unpleasantness surrounding the Sandanista State was a police action in which Air America was protecting its agricultural subsidies to certain freedom-loving, non-leftist nations. Principally Bolivia, Columbia, and Peru. As noted foodstuff vendor, the Culinary Institute of America, was the prime importer of these agricultural products, the CIA was of course involved in this police action to protect the flow of their goods. The mining of a harbor of a state with which we are not at war, and which has a government elected by a democratic process, is justified if the Commander in Chief believes it is. When the U.S. funds freedom fighters in Iran and Iraq, this is different of course from when Libya funds terrorists. (It is different because our Commander in Chief tells us it is.) That the World Court would find the United States guilty of terrorist actions (and cases are pending involving the U.S.-funded bombing of Cuban planes, the use of bomblets in toys dropped in other police action cases, and the funding of the Brigate Rose by Gehlen operatives...) shows the World Court is becoming dangerously independent. I suggest the U.S. cut off funding until it learns to heel. --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

papers on anonymous protocols
by Wei Dai 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I found a couple of papers on anonymous protocols that I haven't seen mentioned here before. I'll list them for people who might be interested: Cryptographic Defense Against Traffic Analysis by Rackoff and Simon. http://pct.microsoft.com/papers/ta.ps gives a proof of security for a mix-net like protocol. A. Pfitzmann, B. Pfitzmann, M. Waidner: ISDN-MIXes - Untraceable Communication with Very Small Bandwidth Overhead; Proc. Kommunikation in verteilten Systemen, Feb. 1991, Mannheim, Informatik-Fachberichte 267, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg 1991, 451-463. describes a protocol for anonymous telephone calls. Wei Dai

2 1

Crypto Num Mum, Hmm
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Washington Post, September 9, 1996, p. A2. Computers: Number Crunchers' 1 and Only It's big. It's beautiful. And it's prime. Computer scientists at Cray Research have discovered the largest known prime number. A prime number, for those of us who have forgotten grade school mathematics, can only be divided by itself and by 1. Smaller primes include 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11. The new one, 2^1257787-1, is a bit bigger. Printed out, the 378,632 digit number would take up 12 newspaper pages. "We're pretty confident that this is the largest known prime number," said researcher Paul Gage. There are an infinite number of primes but they are extremely difficult to find. The newly discovered prime number is of a type known a "Mersenne" prime, named for a 17th century French monk and mathematician. It is easier to prove the prime-ness of Mersenne numbers than other primes, thanks to complex mathematical software. Cray runs the prime-testing program to search for bugs in its new supercomputers. Gage said the discovery of the prime was a happy byproduct of the process. The new number was discovered during a six-hour run testing a new Cray T94 system. Prime numbers are useful in the field of cryptography, where they are used to help construct virtually unbreakable codes. The new prime is far larger than those commonly used. Said Gage, "A cryptographer interested in numbers this big wouldn't be talking about it." -- John Schwartz [End]

3 2

Re: China joins Singapore, Germany, ....
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:29 PM 9/9/96, Duncan Frissell wrote: >Course there hasn't really been much net censorship. Germany and China's >attempts have not been effective. The Feds lack a mechanism for "blocking >sites." There is no one in a position to give such an order. There is no >chance that such an order would be obeyed in any widespread way in any case. >Outlaw boards crackdowns didn't diminish the number of outlaw boards. Porno >boards crackdowns did not diminish the number of porno boards. Since it is >easier to create a site than it is to set up a board, legal maneuvers by the >Feds won't work. > >Making sites "illegal to connect to" is meaningless because most users won't >even know what is on the list and most of those who do will be encouraged to >connect to them rather than discouraged. While I agree with Duncan's sentiments (obviously) and even agree that censorship is impossible to completely implement, I think Duncan is oversimplifying and thus trivializing the dangers to Chinese, German, Singaporan, etc., subjects. Prison sentences in Germany for those who reveal forbidden information about "the Holocaust," prison terms (or worse) for dissidents in Burma, China, and, of course, various other nations and "democratic people's republics." Even here in the United States, connecting to an illegal site may mean imprisonment. (The charge: trafficking in child pornography, for example.) Rather than saying such laws are "meaningless," developing blinded, steganographic, etc. proxies may be a more useful strategy. --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 2

RE: What is the EFF doing exactly?
by jbugden＠smtplink.alis.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This may be a hopelessly naive question, but is it possible to refuse payment in cash? Is it really good for all debts public and private? James ---------- From: kamml(a)secret.org Sent: Monday, September 09, 1996 3:23 PM To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: What is the EFF doing exactly? Fedex will not accept cash in New York City. I have tried to pay cash and been refused. I have talked to customer service and confirmed that they will not accept cash in NYC although they will elsewhere.

3 2

Re: Terrorists
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:58 PM 9/9/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >Remember, folks, it is _governments_ which interfere with natural movements >of people, capital, but not birds. > >I don't want to jeopardize my reputation as a List.Racist, but I think one >of the longterm (not in the next 15 years) implications of the things we >talk about will be the increased lowering of national borders. (Yes, I have >long talked about national borders being only speed bumps...here I'm >talking about _physical_ borders.) I assume defacto open borders pretty quickly. We currently have 40 million crossings a year (mostly us and Canadians) but as people get richer that is bound to grow rapidly. Since technology causes wealth and wealthy people like to travel and governments don't like to block wealthy travelers and travelers can increase faster than border guards swamping occurs. What happens when 2000-passenger surface effect aircraft (or other new travel technologies) start showing up on the market and la migra has to deal with high volume travel. They're having trouble with current levels at JFK and Miami. They scale back. I'm not predicting de jure open borders just defacto open borders. And with those who work on the net being able to work from everywhere and nowhere, they will be able to work in countries where they do not have work authorization as easily as a novelist can today. DCF

1 0