December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: [Noise] was Re: Giving 6 year old kids [guns]
by liberty＠gate.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- After a conversation with a well-respected cypherpunk in private email, I have been convinced to reveal publicly that at age 6 [first grade] I had access to a .22 semiautomatic rifle and a 12GA shotgun, with good safety instruction and accuracy in each (though the 12GA's kick took a bit of getting-used-to). I was instructed to shoot any burglar, and I feel lucky that we never had any. The thought of taking these (or any!) guns to school _never_ entered my mind. I drove a car (on private land) when I was only a bit older. There are certain 6 year olds who are quite capable of taking proper responsibility with firearms, and there are also certain 26 year olds who probably should reconsider gun ownership. That's life. The reason I posted this non-cryptography stuff (sorry, Perry!) here is that many non-US citizens may not understand the strong "gun culture," (which is actually more a gun-safety culture, IMO) in this country. Gun-grabber-hypocrites like syndicated columnist Carl Rowan are provably the *least* safe gun owners, and the evidence also proves beyond any doubt the good old bumper-sticker saying: "Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun." [Any replies to private e-mail, please.] JMR Regards, Jim Ray -- DNRC Minister of Encryption Advocacy "It is long past time to end the laughable presumption that voters who can easily cope with the choices offered at Burger King are somehow 'confused' by more than two choices at the voting booth." -- me, in the Miami Herald, June 24, 1996, p. 10A. Defeat the Duopoly! Vote "NOTA," not Slick/Dull in November. Harry Browne for President. Jo Jorgensen for Vice-president. http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/ ___________________________________________________________________ PGP id.E9BD6D35 51 5D A2 C3 92 2C 56 BE 53 2D 9C A1 B3 50 C9 C8 <mailto:liberty@gate.net> http://www.shopmiami.com/prs/jimray Coming soon, the "Pennies For Perot" page. Keep billionaires off welfare! ___________________________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Freedom isn't Freeh. iQCVAwUBMfGbIm1lp8bpvW01AQG0fgP+LWV9lprYEWahaIhsyLHvMSnc6fjbpDF+ eeTac9Wb1+j78KzT8zxpmnw7I5/nuVZqJRFkZCSjKIclWf2/uzxbi+vRLwf7HWgn iIrnZgv3ozmYZUfCoYx31PbpjT0JYUTxsDvPO+TGwQYuLeYwBH865V3JAXGc7FDO KFB49zbWvnE= =GHZ8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Snake Oil FAQ
by Jean-Paul Kroepfli 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Very good idea, and nice implemantation of the idea. Please, let us know of the new version. Would be a minimal information about cyphering vs scrambling, secret vs public key system, useful for the newbies and not redondant with the large classical FAQ. Best regards, Jean-Paul ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- Jean-Paul et Micheline Kroepfli (our son: Nicolas and daughter: Celine) eMail: JeanPaul.Kroepfli(a)utopia.fnet.fr Also Compuserve and MSNetwork Phone: +33 81 55 52 59 (F) PostMail: F-25640 Breconchaux (France) or: +41 21 843 27 36 (CH) or: CP 138, CH-1337 Vallorbe Fax: +33 81 55 52 62 (Switzerland) Zephyr(r) : InterNet Communication and Commerce, Security and Cryptography consulting PGP Fingerprint : 19 FB 67 EA 20 70 53 89 AF B2 5C 7F 02 1F CA 8F "The InterNet is the most open standard since air for breathing"

1 0

RE: ABC news on Internet Telephony
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:37 AM 7/21/96 +0200, Remo Pini wrote: >>A single central office has many times the bandwidth of the widest >>part of the internet, and the average state has hundreds of CO's. >>If even a small portion of the Internets current users tried >>placing a call things would grind to a halt. A huge increase in the >>number of backbones and their bandwidth would solve this, but who >>will pay the bill? > >I guess Internet-telephony is one of the bandwidth killers. Potentially. However, there has been some mention of a new standard for voice compression that puts voice into 2400 bits per second, a factor of about 25 lower than the phone company normally uses. (They use 8,000 samples per second at 8 bits per sample, companded.) At that rate, a pair of modern, 2.4 Gb/s fibers could handle 1 million simultaneous phone calls. Since some of the newer fiber systems put 8 or more separate channels down a single fiber, that would work out to 8 million conversations. I have to conclude that we shouldn't even be close to running out of Internet capacity, _IF_ it were driven by state-of-the-art fiber and similar-speed switches. But it probably isn't. At best, Internet probably only gets a fraction of the capacity of a given fiber wherever it flows. This will have to change. >>TANSTAAFL >> >>Sometime ago the discussion was on the cost of laying new fiber, >>may I suggest the realworld heuristic of "a million dollars a >>mile." > >There are of course a lot of alternatives: In most cases, "new fiber" isn't needed, and will probably only be rarely needed on long-distance links. As I understand it, most cableways are laid with extra tubes, into which new fiber cables can be blown in (using compressed air) long after the trench is filled. The specific example I saw, there were three 2" diameter tubes in a larger tube, and according to the contractor (I asked...) only one of the tubes would be filled at that time. In addition, while he wasn't sure, he thought that at least some of the 36-fiber cable in that one tube would remain "dark," or unused until it was later needed. I don't know how expensive it is to add that extra fiber cable into an existing tube, but it would be VASTLY cheaper than the original trenching operation. Further, much of the improved transmission technology can be used on the older fibers to increase their capacity: A fiber now used to transmit a single 2.4 gigabit signal can be upgraded, simply using new channelized transmitters and receivers to increase the data rate to 8 or 16 times the previous rate. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

Re: Filtering out Queers is OK
by mpd＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

David Sternlight (david(a)SternBot.com) writes: > There are many others who have come to similar conclusions > about the formation of independent judgement in children, > and lots of non-Piaget experiments. Your comments are > diversionary and in fact by the end of your post you come to > agree with my basic point. Every doctrine has its followers, and I will admit "Piaget-Speak" is still quite popular in certain circles, and its buzzwords are often heard in arguments promoting child inferiority and dismissing childrens' concerns. That hardly means I agree with your basic point, which is that parents should be able to do whatever they want in controlling their childrens' information sources without their children having any recourse against them. > That is also false in its implications. Librarians are in > loco parentis, This, of course, varies with local statutes, as does the legal definition of "In Loco Parentis." Generally it applies to teachers, people hired to care for children, and some relatives, such as grandparents. I am not familar with any locale where librarians are specifically mentioned, and most librarians will be more than happy to explain to you that a library is not a free babysitting service, and that they are not caregivers. > and most libraries are VERY careful about what materials > young children are exposed to and what is more, are > responsive to community pressure in the matter since most > libraries are community-based. Most libraries let "young adults" (read anyone who has hit their teenage years) read pretty much anything they want. "Parents on the warpath" have managed to apply pressure in recent years, and libraries are a bit less free than they used to be, but I think the American Library Association has done a pretty good job in standing its ground against agitators and pressure groups. > So after trying to refute my point, you come to agree with > it and want to shift the issue to the question of at what > age.... No - I stated in my original message that young children do need some reasonable constraints to guard them from exposure to material which might cause them emotional pain. This is far different from your assertion that minors (everyone under 18) should have no access to any information that their parents do not pre-approve. > I'm not competent to assess that nor, I assert, are you; I > suggest it varies with the child and it's up to the > individual parent to make those subtle distinctions, issue > by issue, child by child. Nothing subtle about it David. Once young people have passed through early childhood, the burden of proof is on anyone who suggests that they should be insulated from social and political reality to provide a convincing reason why. Parental capriciousness doesn't qualify. > As I parse the above sentence it says limiting is often > justified but it might not be. Parse the sentence again. What it says is that although "protecting children" is often the excuse used to limit older childrens' access to controversial material, the reality is that it is usually an effort to control their thinking on certain issues by making sure they have only one viewpoint, that of their parents. > If so, it's up to the parents to figure ou where THEIR kid > is on the scale--nobody else has as much time, motivation, > or opportunity to observe. As is usual with Statists, the argument is seen as a debate over who should be doing the controlling, the notion that everyone needs to be controlled being a foregone conclusion. Perhaps it's time to take Perry's pledge. :) -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd(a)netcom.com $ via Finger. $

4 5

Re: pledge status
by Chris Adams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 20 Jul 96 23:12:20 -0800, alanh(a)infi.net wrote: >One recalls the Russian novelist (can't think of his name, the one who >wrote _Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch_), who stated that if even 1% Solzhenitsyn? (Spelling may be wrong) Very good, BTW. >of all of the Cheka/KGB's arrest-in-the-middle-of-the-night victims had >put up some resistance, and maybe have killed a Chekist before being >gunned down..... the whole damn system of Stalinist terror would have >unraveled, from the lack of police willingness to die for the greater >glory of Mr Stalin. >I think this has > relevance to the >black-ninjas-pretending-that-they're-in-a-Hollywood-script thread about >cops making unanounced search warrant services at 4am. > >I have tremendous admiration for my local LEO's. It's the federales that >are the problem, usually. I'm thinking of Waco, where, I've heard, more experienced SWAT-types tried to talk their bosses out of a certain infamous mistake... // Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> - Webpages for sale! Se habla JavaScript! // Automatically receive my resume or PGPKEY by sending email with a subject // of 'send PGPKEY' or 'send resume'. Capitalization counts so be careful!

1 0

Re: Netscape
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:24 PM 7/19/96 -0700, Rich Graves <llurch(a)networking.stanford.edu> wrote: >On Fri, 19 Jul 1996, Anonymous wrote: >[on hacktic] >> netscape-fts2-hp10.tar.gz Fast Track Server 2.0 for HPUX10 >> netscape-fts2-nt.exe Fast Track Server 2.0 for WinNT >> netscape-hpus-30b5.tar.gz Navigator 3.0b5 for HP-UX >> netscape-linux-30b5.tar.gz Navigator 3.0b5 for Linux >> netscape-ssl30-src.tar.gz SSL 3.0 source code >> netscape32us-30b5.exe Navigator 3.0b5 for Win95/NT > >And thus it begins... I think it's a bad idea to provoke the TLAs like this, >but I suppose it's inevitable. (But doesn't anyone use Macs or Suns?) Appears that they don't use Windows 3.1 16-bit versions either. BTW, the executable is _huge_ - over 3MB, and that doesn't seem to include all the plugins from previous versions. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs # Confuse Authority!

1 0

Re: Netscape
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:10 PM 7/20/96 -0400, "Mark M." <markm(a)voicenet.com> wrote: >On Sat, 20 Jul 1996, Tom Weinstein wrote: >> Why not consider what the consequences will be? Do you seriously >> believe that this will make the government stop enforcing ITAR? > >The government has yet to enforce ITAR. The only thing they have been doing >is threatening companies who make products with strong crypto. If anyone was >ever actually put on trial for a violation of ITAR, it would almost certainly >be found to be unconstitutional. First of all, the goverrnment _has_ enforced ITAR; I've seen references (ummm, on the net...) to a few cases of things like exporting TV decryptors, as well as all the enforcement about illegal trafficking in guns and such. But second, if you're threatened with jail and large fines, and have to pay your lawyers lots of money to avoid being railroaded, that's enforcement even if it's not the full-scale due process type. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs # Confuse Authority!

1 0

Re: ITAR's 40 bit limit
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:45 PM 7/20/96 -0400, "David F. Ogren" <ogren(a)cris.com> wrote: >Another paradox of the US export regulations. >The NSA is allowing 40 bit crypto exports. So as a hypothetical example >assume that I write a crypto program that uses 40 bit RC4 to encode data >(licensing from RSA). I then get an export license using the accelerated >process for 40 bit RC4. ....... >However, what if she runs the program three times with three different >passwords. (Ignore the problems of Inner-CBC and Outer-CBC for now.) Now >the file is triple RC4 encoded with the equivalent of 80 bit security. Not always possible. The rule isn't just "40 bit crypto" it's "permission, which you won't get with over 40 bits unless you're very cooperative." Applications like Netscape's SSL don't give you the ability to feed your data through it three times; they process your stream of data and send it. Also, some 40-bit systems put known plaintext at the beginning of their output (e.g. a magic number saying that this file is in FooBar40 format) which means that even if you quintuply encrypt them, you still only have several layers of 40-bit encryption that you can peel one at a time. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs # Confuse Authority!

2 1

Re: Game Theory and its Relevance to Cypherpunks
by Arun Mehta 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 21:57 20/07/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: > >Fortunately, the goal of MAD was to >not have to be used, and it appears now to have worked quite well (albeit >at high cost). My problem with applying game theory to complex situations like the competition between powerful nations is that it is too simplistic. IANAE, of course, though I have done some control theory, and know how complex the modelling of any system becomes if it contains non-linearities, delays, etc. In a closed-loop system, i.e. with feedback, trying to predict behaviour without the foggiest notion of how to quantify the impact of Kennedy's grandstanding on the Kruschev mind (for instance) is questionable. To suggest that MAD worked well on the basis of the limited tryout we gave it has little validity. If it hadn't, we wouldn't be here, would we? We are trying to draw general conclusions based on a biased sample of one. Reminds me of this committee of the British Royal Air Force, trying to find ways to protect its planes better against German anti-aircraft guns. Someone proposed putting an extra layer of armour on those areas that received the most shelling, and most people seemed to like the idea. One upstart suggested the exact opposite: putting extra armour on those areas which had received the least shelling. "Remember," he said, "we can only examine the planes that came back." I also have a problem with the cost you mention. What is "winning" in the context of nations? The arms race wiped out the Soviet Union, and arguably seriously hampered the competitiveness of American industry (which was No.1 at the end of the war), allowing countries like Japan and Germany, with far smaller defence budgets, to overtake industrially. >Useful sources: Thank you for the tips: I will check them out. Game theory is fascinating -- I'm just not sure how applicable it is in formulating policy. Didn't work too well in Vietnam... Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta(a)cpsr.org http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/ finger amehta(a)cerfnet.com for public key

2 1

Re: Game Theory and its Relevance to Cypherpunks
by Llywarch Hen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timothy May wrote: >Game theory is terribly important to Cypherpunks. Definite agreement here. Wait ... it gets better. > . . . Creating a terrifying image, >an image of crazed indifference, is a useful thing. Certainly the S.S. >understood the power of their frightening uniforms and the "myth" of their >bloodthirstiness. (Note: I am not saying their bloodthirstiness was a myth, >but that they deliberately cultivated this image. Intimidation works, >game-theoretically.) What Timothy May espouses is not the appearance of craziness but actual insanity itself. > . . . Even the "MAD" policy of "mutually assured >destruction" has game-theoretic justification. (Indeed, this is virtually a >truism, given the role game theory and the RAND Corporation played in the >devising of the MAD strategy.) While humanists and liberals may cluck at >the admittedly horrible consequences of MAD, were it ever implemented, it >is solidly grounded in these "games." Fortunately, the goal of MAD was to >not have to be used, and it appears now to have worked quite well (albeit >at high cost). Recall that during the time MAD supposedly worked that both of Reagan and Brezhnev were comatose much, if not all of the time. The crazies were out of the picture. Who was in charge? Let's suppose it was the generals. Who would know better their systems were shit? Recall on the day that Reagan was shot that Alexander Haig appeared on national TV and announced 'I am in charge here.' Haig was not constitutionally in charge of anything. Did he mean 'we' not 'I'. Who would that 'we' be? The twentieth century is drawing to a close as the world's most bloodthirsty by far: 40 mil under Stalin, 25 mil under Mao, 8 mil under Hitler, and so on. There are no heroes. Timothy May suggests that we continue to play his stupid game. Much of the cold war for public consumption was predicated on the notion that ends do not justify means. It was rather profitable for some interests however. The numbers speak for a strong info-war capability. But what we are asked to do is to refight the last war with grandpa, who we find out stayed home and watched it on TV but gets off on all this scary shit. Especially the uniforms. Perhaps Timothy May through luck, manipulation and hard work has made it up toward the head of the line to feed at the public trough and then declare to the rest of us that we have a free and competitive market. He will cite Hudson, Heritage, RAND, ... AEI, and Cato whose shining lights best understand who it is that is signing their paychecks. These are the folks that bought us Vietnam, did not pay for it in lives or money, but profited immensely. He cites Kahn whose best game is the consulting game. Wanna buy a hot stock? Buy Steven Emerson -- guy's gonna take off. -- Llywarch Hen

4 3

Devil's Bargain
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The New York Times, July 21, 1996, WIR, p. 5. The Devil's Bargain of a Better World By Tim Weiner Washington. The arc of the burning plane falling into the ocean, the fire glowing on the dark waters, shed light on how vulnerable we are. When a jumbo jet falls from the sky, technology has failed or terrorism has succeeded. In the hours after Flight 800 went down off Fire Island, everyone in officialdom said there was no reason to believe it was a terrorist attack. Nearly everyone else instinctively believed it was. However the facts turn out, it is revealing that Americans thought first of a bomb borne by angry men on a mission from God. There was no more evidence to blame it on it was close enough to truth, given the absence of facts, Americans' shared fear of terror and their faith in technology. In any event, if the crash turns out to have been an accident -- horrible but still an act of God -- the relief may be fleeting. "It doesn't matter whether it was a bomb or not, in the way we think of it -- it's what we expect," said Ronald Steel, professor of International relations at the University of Southern California and author of "Temptations of a Superpower" (Harvard, 1995). "We know it's going to happen somewhere --if not this airplane, then the World Trade Center, Lockerbie, the bombs in Saudi Arabia and Paris and London. This is a part of our life. If for some reason this wasn't a bomb, we better get ready for one tomorrow." [See Steel's NYT Op-Ed today: http://jya.com/rsteel.txt.] High-Tech Freedom With the doubled-edge sword of technology, Americans have carved a world of gleaming aircraft and guided missiles. The airplanes that transport them, the cell phones and television cables and computers that link them, define how they live, how they work, how they take their pleasure. They are right up there with freedom of speech and religion, freedom from want and fear. They make America rich, powerful, and free. But Americans cannot control technology; increasingly, it controls them. And when the people Americans fear get their hands on it, the fear is accelerated and amplified by 500 channels of interwoven media hype. The airlines and telephones and E-mail that connect Americans connect those other people too: a computer disk is the crucial piece of evidence in the current trial of Ramzi Ahmed Yusef, accused of planning to blow a fleet of commercial planes from the sky (and in a pending case, of leading the World Trade Center bombing). The subway rider poisoned in Tokyo and the American soldier blown out of bed in Dhahran share a common knowledge: High technology may make a fine sword, but it is a flawed shield. It cannot stop every nut with a grudge. Americans are slowly getting used to the idea that one can no longer go through the world without passing through security. They are learning to live with terror and the technology of counter-terrorism, as people have for years in Tel Aviv and Cairo, Belfast and Berlin, Karachi and Algiers. They all visit those cities now; they enter them every time they walk through a metal detector. So life feels more and more like an international airport: identity checkpoints and security zones in concrete and glass buildings, pretty flowers planted in concrete barricades outside, robot voices delivering warnings. The fear means they arrive early to spend more down time waiting in line to pass through security. So they adapt, thinking: That's not a barricade, it's a flowerpot. They give up a little freedom in exchange for feeling safe, "all watched over," as the late poet Richard Brautigan wrote, "by machines of loving grace." Visitors The people who hate, love, envy and fear America's prosperity and power, also pass through that international airport. The United States needs their oil for fuel; it needs their sweat for work Americans don't do any more. They are woven into America, traveling through open lines of trade and telecommunications and technology. So everybody learns to live with the fear of the bomb in the cargo bay: you have to catch that plane if you have business abroad. If the United States were determined to buy machines that could sniff out the Semtex in the boombox, it could have done it -- the cost is perhaps $2 billion, or slightly less than one Stealth nuclear bomber. But that is not the war Washington prepared to fight after Vietnam. Generals today want wars they are sure to win. We -- the United States -- have the smart bombs, built with the billions that bankrupted Moscow and made America Number One. They -- the furious and the powerless -- have the dumb bombs, made from fertilizer and fuel oil, ignited by rage and religion. But the United States can't stop them all, not with its ever-tightening laws, not with its trillion- dollar military, not with its weapons and warheads. So the thinking goes. On the simplest level, terrorism works: it terrifies. It can increase the technology of control and erode the edges of the Constitution. That can fuel the fear of Big Brother, make people paranoid -- and in turn promote the homegrown madness that exploded last year in Oklahoma City. Terrorism cannot destroy the United States, but it has the power to wound, outrage, sadden and change it. When Iranians took Americans hostage and controlled the nation's politics from half a world away, when a suicide bomber blew up 241 American soldiers in Beirut and drove the Marines from Lebanon, when the World Trade Center shook, when the Dhahran barracks went up in smoke, it expressed a burning anger in the world, the anger of the poor and the powerless and the God-mad and the stateless. The Method Through repetition, Americans are slowly coming to recognize the method in this madness: These attacks are meant as blows against the global dominance of American culture, money, power and technology. Mr. Steel says the United States' stature as the one surviving superpower and the architect of the new world order is the very thing that makes it a target. "Terror," he says, "is the weapon that the powerless use against the powerful. We don't have any conception of what an ideologically threatening power we are to people who have different beliefs. Globalization and modernization are truly threatening to people. They're even threatening to the working class in this country because they drive down wages. The very faith in technology that we spread is something that runs head-on into another faith based on tradition, asceticism and authority. We're the alien ideology now." [End] ---------- The New York Times, July 21, 1996, p. 25. Top F.B.I. Investigator Is Known for Bluntness James K. Kallstrom the head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation s New York City office, is a technical wizard who has bugged, wiretapped and generally bedeviled mobsters, terrorists and other criminals for more than two decades. The crash investigation is the first major, high-profile investigation of Mr. Kallstrom's tenure of a year and a half. Since Wednesday night, Mr. Kallstrom has spent most of his time shuttling, in a Blackhawk military helicopter, between the F.B.I. command center, at 26 Federal Plaza in Lower Manhattan, and the crash site, where he has held two press conferences a day with a top official of the National Transportation Safety Board. Mr. Kallstrom is known for a no-nonsense, blunt approach with his colleagues. He also never passes up a chance to express some strongly felt opinions, they say. Often, Mr. Kallstrom has offered his long-held view that Congress is not doing enough to help Federal law enforcement in its fight against criminals who use new technologies, such as the Internet. Since the crash Wednesday night, Mr. Kallstrom has had a strong suspicion that it was tied to a bomb or missile. "You have a lot of things that look like terrorism," Mr. Kallstrom said at a press conference Friday afternoon. "At some point in time, we're going to reach critical mass and then we're going to be prepared to say exactly what we think it is." As late as last night, he said he had not seen anything to make him change that opinion. But publicly, at least, Mr. Kallstrom has been reluctant to declare that the crash was caused by a bomb or missile until physical evidence, enough to reach a "beyond a reasonable doubt" threshold, is found. By selecting Mr. Kallstrom as assistant director in charge of the New York Office in February 1995, the F.B.I. Director, Louis J. Freeh, chose one of the bureau's most respected surveillance experts, a man whose techniques played a critical role in the arrests of every major organized crime leader and terrorist in New York in the last 20 years, including those involved with the World Trade Center bombing in 1993. [End]

7 10

New Cypherpunks, New Danger
by Simon Spero 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

paranoid rants have their place; however, if they keep bursting into cypherpunks without knocking first, there could be an accident. Lithium.... it's not just for watch batteries anymore.

1 0

Re: Firewall Penetration
by Frank Willoughby 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:18 PM 7/20/96 -0700, Jerome Tan allegedly wrote: > Is it possible to penetrate a firewall? Absolutely. (Having done so a time or two) FWIW, of @70 firwalls on the market, only @5 are adequate to protect a company from the hazards of the Internet. Before anyone asks, Fortified Networks is a vendor-neutral InfoSec Consulting company and doesn't sell firewalls or other security products. Best Regards, Frank Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature. -- Rich Kulawiec <standard disclaimer> The opinions expressed above are of the author and may not necessarily be representative of Fortified Networks Inc. Fortified Networks Inc. - Information Security Consulting http://www.fortified.com Phone: (317) 573-0800 FAX: (317) 573-0817 Home of the Free Internet Firewall Evaluation Checklist

3 2

CDT Policy Post 2.28 - FBI Director to Testify at Senate Crypto Hearing; Join Cybercast of Hearing
by Bob Palacios 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- _____ _____ _______ / ____| __ \__ __| ____ ___ ____ __ | | | | | | | | / __ \____ / (_)______ __ / __ \____ _____/ /_ | | | | | | | | / /_/ / __ \/ / / ___/ / / / / /_/ / __ \/ ___/ __/ | |____| |__| | | | / ____/ /_/ / / / /__/ /_/ / / ____/ /_/ (__ ) /_ \_____|_____/ |_| /_/ \____/_/_/\___/\__, / /_/ \____/____/\__/ The Center for Democracy and Technology /____/ Volume 2, Number 28 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A briefing on public policy issues affecting civil liberties online ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CDT POLICY POST Volume 2, Number 28 July 21, 1996 CONTENTS: (1) FBI Director to Testify at Senate Crypto Hearing; Netizens Can Participate in Hearing Live Online (2) How Will the Cybercast Work? (3) Submit Your Comments for the Hearing Record (4) How to Subscribe/Unsubscribe (5) About CDT, contacting us ** This document may be redistributed freely with this banner intact ** Excerpts may be re-posted with permission of <editor(a)cdt.org> ** This document looks best when viewed in COURIER font ** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) FBI Director to Testify at Senate Crypto Hearing; Netizens can Participate in Hearing Live Online, Submit Testimony for the Record On Thursday July 25 the Full Senate Commerce Committee will hold a hearing to consider S. 1726, the 'Pro-CODE' bill designed to relax export controls on encryption. FBI Director Louis Freeh and other high-ranking Administration officials are scheduled to testify. A second panel of computer industry leaders, including Netscape CEO Jim Barksdale and others, will also give testimony for the committee. In an effort to ensure that concerned Internet users can participate in this important policy debate, the Senate Commerce Committee has arranged with CDT, VTW, HotWired, and DIGEX to bring the hearing live online. Netizens will also be able to submit testimony for the record. Details on the cybercast can be found below, or by visiting: http://www.crypto.com/events/072596/ This full committee hearing represents another important step forward towards passage of legislation designed to make encryption more widely available to computer users. Sponsored by Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Larry Pressler (R-SD), Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS), Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), and others, the Pro-CODE bill is designed to encourage the widespread availability of strong privacy and security technologies for the Internet. The bill was the subject of two hearings held on June 12 and June 26 before the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Science, Space, and Technology. The June 26th hearing was the first Congressional hearing ever to be cybercast live on the Internet. (Details about that cybercast can be found at http://www.crypto.com/events/062696/) For more information, including the latest list of witnesses scheduled to testify at the July 25th hearing, background on the Pro-CODE bill, and other encryption issues, visit: Cybercast Information: - http://www.crypto.com/events/072596/ - http://www.hotwired.com/wiredside/ Background on the Encryption Debate: The Encryption Policy Resource Page - http://www.crypto.com/ The Internet Privacy Coalition - http://www.privacy.org/ipc/ Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) - http://www.cdt.org/crypto/ Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) - http://www.eff.org/ Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)- http://epic.org/ Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) - http://www.vtw.org/ ________________________________________________________________________ (2) HOW WILL THE CYBERCAST WORK? The Cybercast has several components which combine to provide a unique opportunity for Netizens to participate in the democratic process and to encourage communication between Members of Congress and the Internet Community on critical Internet policy issues: * Live Audio Simulcast: Using RealAudio software, the audio portion of the hearing will be available live online. Audio transcripts of the hearing will also be archived online. * Simultaneous Interactive Discussion Forum: During the hearing, Senate Commerce Committee Staff and a representative of CDT will participate in an interactive "chat room" from inside the hearing room. Anyone with a telnet application can join the chat room, ask questions of the Senate staff, and discuss the issues with fellow Netizens. Participants will also have an opportunity to provide questions to the Committee Chairman to ask of the Witnesses. * Still Video Images: Video images from inside the hearing room will be uploaded to http://www.crypto.com/events/072596/ throughout the course of the hearing. HOW TO JOIN THE HEARING LIVE ONLINE On Thursday July 25 at 9:30am EDT (6:30am PDT/1330 GMT), point your web browser to: http://www.crypto.com/events/072596/ The Audio URL will be posted here, along with live pictures from the Hearing and a link to the online discussion forum. Additional information is also available at: http://www.hotwired.com/wiredside/ WHAT YOU WILL NEED TO PARTICIPATE: * RealAudio (available free at http://www.realaudio.com/) * Membership at HotWired (Membership is free. Visit http://www.hotwired.com/ for details.) * A World Wide Web Browser * A Telnet Application ________________________________________________________________________ (3) TELL CONGRESS WHY ENCRYPTION IS IMPORTANT TO YOU - ADD YOUR VOICE TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Just like the previous hearing, you will be able to submit testimony online for inclusion in the Committee Record. Please be sure to visit http://www.crypto.com/ and add your voice to the debate over encryption policy on Capitol Hill. Responses will be tabulated and the results, along with selected statements, will be included in the Committee Record by Senator Larry Pressler. To add your voice to the crypto debate in Congress, visit: http://www.crypto.com/events/072596/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (4) SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION Be sure you are up to date on the latest public policy issues affecting civil liberties online and how they will affect you! Subscribe to the CDT Policy Post news distribution list. CDT Policy Posts, the regular news publication of the Center For Democracy and Technology, are received by nearly 10,000 Internet users, industry leaders, policy makers and activists, and have become the leading source for information about critical free speech and privacy issues affecting the Internet and other interactive communications media. To subscribe to CDT's Policy Post list, send mail to policy-posts-request(a)cdt.org with a subject: subscribe policy-posts If you ever wish to remove yourself from the list, send mail to the above address with a subject of: unsubscribe policy-posts ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (5) ABOUT THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY/CONTACTING US The Center for Democracy and Technology is a non-profit public interest organization based in Washington, DC. The Center's mission is to develop and advocate public policies that advance democratic values and constitutional civil liberties in new computer and communications technologies. Contacting us: General information: info(a)cdt.org World Wide Web: URL:http://www.cdt.org/ FTP URL:ftp://ftp.cdt.org/pub/cdt/ Snail Mail: The Center for Democracy and Technology 1634 Eye Street NW * Suite 1100 * Washington, DC 20006 (v) +1.202.637.9800 * (f) +1.202.637.0968 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- End Policy Post 2.28 7/21/96 -----------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: American People the relation to the Police
by Seth Oestreicher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:34 AM 7/21/96 +0600, you wrote: >At 08:56 20/07/96 -0400, you wrote: >> Why >>is foreign aid allowed to continue when it is not allowed by the >>Constitution? (I could go on and on.....) > >Isn't there a gap between "not allowed" and "disallowed"? The >Constitution couldn't possibly have foreseen the problems of >today, and the global role the US plays (or seeks to). >Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta(a)cpsr.org >http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/ finger amehta(a)cerfnet.com for public key That's like saying the Bible is outdated because it was written several thousand years ago. If the law must change debate it, vote on it, and implement it. Don't circumvent it! I mean should we take away free speech because more people lie today than ever before in history? Or should we take away our religous rights because of the David Koresh's of the world? Should we take away the guns of the people because less than 30,000 people a year die of gunfire? (less than .01% of the nation!) Should we take away the double jeopardy clause just because O.J. Simpson *IS* guilty? Seth

2 1

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids
by David Sternlight 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:10 AM -0700 7/20/96, Vinnie Moscaritolo wrote: > On 19 Jul 1996 19:51:39 Hallam-Baker wrote >>It is no coincidence that the Tree of Liberty needs to be watered with >>blood on occasion. > >As a native Bostonian, I have to tell you that the original "Tree of >Liberty" was cut down many many years ago and in it's place now stands a >storefront, if you look up onto the second floor you will notice a frieze >of a tree. This is all that stands to commemerate the "Tree of Liberty". > > >oh btw that storefront is in the comabat zone of boston, and the last time >I checked that store was called either the "Naked I"or the "Pussycat >lounge", can you guess what they sell? > This is too good to pass up. The modern version, then is: "The tree of liberty must be titillated with the money of sex-seekers." David MIT '54

2 1

Re: Firewall Penetration
by Erle Greer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:29 PM 7/19/96 +0800, you wrote: >Is it possible to penetrate a firewall? > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Without professional knowledge of firewalls, a simple and true answer is obvious. Of course they are penetrable; that's what they are for. They permit users to penetrate, while attempting to keep out intruders. If it were impossible to penetrate firewalls, then they would pretty much be useless to those with authorized access. How could they get in themselves? Maybe 'feasibility' is the question. That answer would depend on some variables on the intruder's end. If permissions and rights are allocated to regular users with authorization, then an intruder with adequate resources, knowledge, time, etc. should be able to get in. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2i iQEVAwUBMfJ1H3ychImXHmeJAQH5XQf8DtJ+6W+NZGqm9Af9QVBzz73TbmJVqYB5 dZstXkk8tEyRd1LTG5hgIfXH8qKMl0a5tXoEdu72/UXbIvTyJapXcRgMZ0EctKJl hzfSvAGwNPzy5VUubUMOzsl4BId09KfB1+cpffAWa1rCyGsf6UOC7dftGLTlPVaf M1DG1pt1ruxLhc8hLdso86gP+q68sEBDFykIRCI0z6kTZj/U1W0MHtFLxkR1rkqX R/VqZ5LrvhRKYXVUD8iHMyPdyvvLDstddC3NcOf9mMDGqYp1LOGTJAKYT4mxhkEy 2ABfAISU+c4USl4C01RmgXni6gKDceWKHeTUvsBHAR6EUmUHso8Jng== =PVGa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- vagab0nd(a)sd.cybernex.net http://ww2.sd.cybernex.net/~vagab0nd/index.html Visit web page for public key.

1 0

Tom Broken interviews Pres Scrotum [NOISE]
by Vinnie Moscaritolo 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

INTERVIEW OF THE PRESIDENT BY TOM BROKAW OF MSNBC The Roosevelt Room, July 15, 1996 MR. BROKAW: .... You and I have been looking at another question from the Internet: Does Chelsea net surf and, if so, how do you protect her from inappropriate material? Does she use the computer pretty handily? THE PRESIDENT: She does. I don't think she net surfs a lot, simply because, at least during the school year, she has too much homework at night, for several hours every night. But she does some. And, honestly, I can't protect her in that sense because she knows so much more about it than I do. But one of the things that we're trying to do -- I think with the support of everyone -- is, first of all, get a case up to the Supreme Court so that they can define what the First Amendment requires us to do and not to do in terms of legislation here. And then we need to find some sort of technological fix. During the break you said that Mr. Gates, Bill Gates, said that there's at least a possibility of developing a log -- MR. BROKAW: Yes, they've got a log built in now that you can go in and check on. THE PRESIDENT: Yes, so the parents can see what's been called up. And, of course, we're working on this V-chip with television and with the entertainment industry supporting us with the rating system. So there probably will be some sort of technological responses here. But then parents like me are going to have to assume the responsibility of becoming literate enough with the technology to work with our children and make sure that we and they make responsible choices. Vinnie Moscaritolo "Law - Samoan Style" http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/ Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A

1 0

Length of passphrase beneficial?
by Erle Greer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Feel free to skip to 'Actual Question:' below. I am one to succumb to the assumed benefits of overkill. I like the fact that everyone's use of crypto can cause each individual transmission to become less suspicious to prying eyes. I would love knowing that the govt. spent billions of CPU cycles on one of my transmissions only to find my softball schedule. We could lure them by making our subject lines 'Fertilizer-Bomb Recipe' or 'CHILDPORN.GIF Attached', not condoning either, of course. I have a 2048-bit PgP key and pseudorandom a/n character generator, from which I chose a large passphrase similar to: f4VnI1G1mGcwTZ1vGoyPwN4NLojF8Ee9ff1aicOGn87x0nwwHhJUo6XSYKEawRne (Yes, cut-n-paste, but my only in-house threat is my wife.) Actual Question: Does the length and randomness of a passphrase contribute at all to the overall security of a cryptosystem? Thanks in advance! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2i iQEVAwUBMfJn0HychImXHmeJAQFpeQf/cLkFsELVEOquVseK7m6Ze+R1zFzkrM8G T8M4NTdoOALSQKY5Xjj/YHPt9iGY28U5FAPJt/v77YFsewiLxskcJn5fd6G2wX2j gneSXat0ExIMdLkUuIFDZl2tUny7bBgj2AimIK2Pd0BVlYT8RXPaDhpeWjmHKZpg vbZaS4yuSSFBy8oucfjO7ivShcraRwIG0Rq6/GCXuhT6Oi0EOaCUWJ+ofYVSqMkb Jsz9ElMVVVFc+caPwYn5mSVy8Xj3u9UxKOPPoXOpEpJ3gGPsuoiemcwcB/F1VQ34 +uC1YtdndAAu5jRU5JCWYbqYA+BiWY4K/vl9jaJ29BKjLiVfKrU+wA== =W00K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- vagab0nd(a)sd.cybernex.net http://ww2.sd.cybernex.net/~vagab0nd/index.html Visit web page for public key.

5 4

Re: pledge status
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:09 AM 7/21/96 -0800, Chris Adams wrote: >On 20 Jul 96 23:12:20 -0800, alanh(a)infi.net wrote: >>I think this has relevance to the >>black-ninjas-pretending-that-they're-in-a-Hollywood-script thread about >>cops making unanounced search warrant services at 4am. >> >>I have tremendous admiration for my local LEO's. It's the federales that >>are the problem, usually. >I'm thinking of Waco, where, I've heard, more experienced SWAT-types >tried to talk their bosses out of a certain infamous mistake... Subsequent to the initial Waco raid, the government was claiming that the Davidians were "ready" for them. I think it was easy to tell that this was a lie: Had they actually been READY, far more than 4 agents would have been dead. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Credit Card to eCash
by Myers W. Carpenter 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What would be the problems in setting up a web site to make a charge to a Credit Card/ATM card number and return Cash, like an ATM for the net? I belive this would be a easy tool to promoat wider use of eCash. Not everyone wants to go through setting up an account at Mark Twain or whereever, just the advantages of a more cash like system. With a few sites like this around, and hopefully therefore more eCash in the wallets of the public this could help to add to a critical mass to eCash and so on. I don't think it would create the critical mass nessary for eCash's success, but at least another log on the fire. anyway... myers

3 2

Re: Netscape
by Mark M. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sun, 21 Jul 1996, Bill Stewart wrote: > First of all, the goverrnment _has_ enforced ITAR; I've seen references > (ummm, on the net...) to a few cases of things like exporting TV decryptors, > as well as all the enforcement about illegal trafficking in guns and such. I haven't heard of anyone ever being indicted for exporting cryptography. I should have made it clear that I was refering to ITAR as it applies to crypto, and not other items that would fall under ITAR. > But second, if you're threatened with jail and large fines, and have > to pay your lawyers lots of money to avoid being railroaded, > that's enforcement even if it's not the full-scale due process type. Quite true. I was just refering to someone actually being tried and found guilty of violating ITAR by exporting cryptography. I'd be very interested in any references to companies or individuals being prosecuted for exporting crypto. - -- Mark PGP encrypted mail prefered Key fingerprint = d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348 http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBMfJsOrZc+sv5siulAQHs1wP7BVKtK4HLcNR3oEAPL1k/5zCYVRy7q7wu gQZqsM+lwKkIGnPuhu16+Cp/AIyMfokuW4y2qyJ9vOQiS7+ikVgwPB2neB0PmpXM mpBMjOXhWPoqVS8jOxC85/lutsf7TZpxEDgV9eev2iyY/v4c5/BZJD7onN/qJYVV P9gOv+Oyki8= =NpZS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: The Orchid Ring of (Probable) Child Pornographers
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:43 PM 7/17/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: > As such, potentially powerful ammunition for > those who would like restrictions placed on crypto. (Especially if it turns > out that law enforcement learned of the Orchid Ring through non-encrypted > communications.) Fortunately they were caught by much lower tech methods. One of their models changed her mind and complained to her parents, the cops grabbed the guy and pursuaded him to spill the beans. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: Netscape
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:27 PM 7/20/96 -0700, Tom Weinstein wrote: > Why not consider what the consequences will be? Do you seriously > believe that this will make the government stop enforcing ITAR? Yes: Widespread politically motivated disobedience forces the state to either demonize the disobedient, (as with drug users) or give up enforcement. This is a standard and effective method of forcing the repeal of laws, a method which has had a long record of success for several hundred years. The states cohesion derives from its legitimacy, and threats to legitimacy and cohesion are treated very seriously by government officials. Threatening the states legitimacy is arguably more effective in influencing government behavior than blowing up federal office buildings. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

7 11

Re: Length of passphrase beneficial?
by Erle Greer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:51 PM 7/21/96 -0400, you wrote: > >Erle Greer writes: >> I have a 2048-bit PgP key and pseudorandom a/n character >> generator, from which I chose a large passphrase similar to: >> >> f4VnI1G1mGcwTZ1vGoyPwN4NLojF8Ee9ff1aicOGn87x0nwwHhJUo6XSYKEawRne >> (Yes, cut-n-paste, but my only in-house threat is my wife.) >> >> Actual Question: >> Does the length and randomness of a passphrase contribute at all >> to the overall security of a cryptosystem? > >The passphrase only does one thing for you, which is protect your >keyring in case someone gets it. Since you keep the passphrase on >line, you are actually less secure than if you used a memorable >phrase. > >BTW, since the passphrase is used to hash into an IDEA key, more than >128 bits of input entropy would be wasted. > >Perry > Good point. Another bad thing about keeping the passphrase on-line is that I would have to trasport the passphrase on floppy if I required portability. Depending on how important my information may be, I could possible be carrying my whole life on a floppy. I see now that it is better to just memorize a phrase. Thanks! vagab0nd(a)sd.cybernex.net http://ww2.sd.cybernex.net/~vagab0nd/index.html Visit web page for public key.

1 0