December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

RFC 2144 on CAST-128 Encryption Algorithms (fwd)
by cpunks＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

----- Forwarded message from Adam Shostack ----- >From cpunks(a)manifold.algebra.com Thu May 22 13:12:34 1997 From: Adam Shostack <adam(a)homeport.org> Message-Id: <199705221736.NAA17266(a)homeport.org> Subject: RFC 2144 on CAST-128 Encryption Algorithms (fwd) To: coderpunks(a)toad.com (The Coderpunks list) Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 13:36:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL27 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk I hadn't seen this mentioned. This is to coderpunks, bcc'd to cypherpunks & cryptography. Adam ------ A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 2144: Title: The CAST-128 Encryption Algorithm Author: C. Adams Date: May 1997 Mailbox: cadams(a)entrust.com Pages: 15 Characters: 37532 Updates/Obsoletes: None URL: ftp://ds.internic.net/rfc/rfc2144.txt There is a need in the Internet community for an unencumbered encryption algorithm with a range of key sizes that can provide security for a variety of cryptographic applications and protocols. This document describes an existing algorithm that can be used to satisfy this requirement. This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. ----- End of forwarded message from Adam Shostack -----

1 0

For Adults Only!
by Gina＠vol.it 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We would like to give you Free Live Sex! See my sexy friends & I -Totally Nude- on your computer screen - doing whatever you tell us to! It is absolutely live and we love to interact with you to satisfy all your desires! We will put on whatever kind of show you want, just tell us what you would like to see! It is FREE to preview! ---CLICK HERE For Instant Access!

1 0

The Natives Are Getting Restless (was Wine Politics Again!)
by Blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Attila T. Hun wrote: > as for the great fairweather liberal bigot Blanc's passing it off > as tcm's drunken ramblings, I doubt it. war is hell, and > "innocents" get wasted --but, a society at war has no innocents. > blow 'em all away. scorched earth is inadequate; burnt earth is > more effective. if there are no prisoners, there are no > complainers. ............................................................... If we were out in the field, you'd get fragged for calling me that. <g> If this society is at war, it is a Civil War, fighting against itself. In fact, there are many groups fighting against each other, on many different levels: racial, gender-based, religious, economic, philosophical, not to leave out political. Companies are fighting each other "tooth & nail" for survival in marketing turfs, races are still exchanging vicious barbs, homosexuals are under verbal & physical attack by the socially "normed", the poor still envy & disparage the rich, women & children seem more than ever to be at risk to attacks from roving sex perverts, the liberals would love to put the libertarians under, religious groups lecture against the moral depravity of all those "other" people, and half the country is either stocking up for a National Disaster or forming into militia groups or other Think Tanks to fight some sort of government encroachment (even the health food stores where I shop are always posting sign-up sheets to vote against something or another the government wants to ban or some right-of-choice that is being threatened by proposed legislation). There are little battles raging on all around us, not only the fight for privacy-by-encryption which you all are aware of. Some cpunks have stated that "society doesn't know or care what is happening". Some of youall don't know the kinds of battles or other people/groups are having, either with government or with some opposing members of this same society. There is a lot of information out in the world competing for attention and resources - on the net, on the intranet, in the TV, in the newspapers, in magazines, in major newsletters, local newspapers, in posting on kiosks ("Get the US out of Nicaragua! " (sure, when I have a few free minutes and a couple of extra bucks")). How can one keep up with/contribute to all of these? So many times, I will happen to read accounts of people who have got into trouble of some kind, or down on their luck (they lost their job and don't have skills, they need a heart transplant, they got jailed by mistake, the car dealership gave them a bum deal), and they decide that society doesn't really know what is happening and complain that it is unsympathetic and lament "when will society wake up and realize that something needs to be done", etc.. Well, jeez, there's only so much time to spend on everybody else's problems. All these people with their problems would like everyone one else to be aware of their plight and sympathetic to their rights and to contribute to their cause, and get disturbed about being "marginalized". As far as I'm concerned, everyone is "marginalized". But people are behaving as expected: the Waco religious group acted as expected, the BATF acted as expected; government employees behave as expected. The cpunks, who know so much about government, in particular the NSA & certain luminaries related to privacy&encryption, should expect that things will go on as they do - even if they bomb D.C. out of existence. And this is because, apparently, people of this type & kind simply haven't evolved enough to expect anything different. Now, crypto was supposed to allow for the possibility of not having to deal with these people directly; it was supposed to usher in the new technological era whereby one could "route around" and generally avoid messing with Government Mongers, from negotiating for the right to breathe on one's own Maintenance Schedule. Well, so much for an anarchic life of Independent Means. I must say, from the posts I've been reading these past several days, I haven't seen very imaginative ideas for dealing with the problems which dull governments create. It is typical of dull governments that when pressed to the wall they resort to desperate, mediocre ways of dealing with problems - like obfuscation, exaggerated charges of evil intent, physical violence; all signs of a limited intellectual capacity for coming to terms with the facts of reality (the problems they face as Protectors of Goodness & Justice (tm) ). I would have expected newer, more creative ("evolved") ideas from scientists, mathematicians, physicists, computer-savvy members. .. Blanc .. Blanc

2 1

Re: The Natives Are Getting Restless
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Blanc wrote: > If this society is at war, it is a Civil War, fighting against itself. In > fact, there are many groups fighting against each other, on many different > levels: racial, gender-based, religious, economic, philosophical, not to > leave out political. Companies are fighting each other "tooth & nail" > for survival in marketing turfs, races are still exchanging vicious barbs, > homosexuals are under verbal & physical attack by the socially "normed", > the poor still envy & disparage the rich, women & children seem more than > ever to be at risk to attacks from roving sex perverts, the liberals would > love to put the libertarians under, religious groups lecture against the > moral depravity of all those "other" people, and half the country is either > stocking up for a National Disaster or forming into militia groups or other > Think Tanks to fight some sort of government encroachment (even the health > food stores where I shop are always posting sign-up sheets to vote against > something or another the government wants to ban or some right-of-choice > that is being threatened by proposed legislation). Second only to Miss Piggy among deep thinkers, Mrs. Wiggs, the one with the cabbage patch, said this: "In the mud and scum of things ... Something always always sings." I am grateful that there is at least one female on the list who is capable of stepping into the middle of the "Dick Wars" on the list and reminding the men that the "targets" they talk about have names, faces, and children. I am aware that there is a human cost inherent in every conflict, and I accept that it will always be so, but I cannot accept the idea that one can leave their conscience clear by "criminalizing" their target and discounting their target's humanity. I am an anarchist and a realist. If I had a button that would nuke D.C., I might well push it--but I am also a thinking, feeling human, and I would cry a river of tears, as well. When I estimate a "body count", I never fail to count the children. Blanc's aim is true when she speaks of the growth of reactionary posts to the list which fail to include a foundation of creative thought. Anyone can return fire when attacked and turn the situation into a firefight where a random volley of ammo decides the outcome of the battle. However, a good squad leader already has his defences in place to deal rationally with situations that can easily be forseen before they arise. When "they" come for your neighbor today, will you be surprised when they come for _you_ tomorrow? When I first heard of Jim Bell's arrest I began composing a reply to Hallam-Baker's coming post. It may be vocal and emotionally charged, but it is not done solely out of blind reactionism. God bless Blanc. TruthMonger -96

1 0

Re: Why I think Jim Bell is getting railroaded
by TruthMonger #-96 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hallam-Baker, whose posts always seem to read as if they were written by a government disinformant, wrote: > Alan Olsen wrote: > > I think that the Government is trying to make an example of Mr. Bell. I > > think that much of the charges reported in the news are false. > I would not depend on Bell to any extent in any circumstance to > be reliable. That's right. We should not support "wrong" people. So first H-B needs to demean Jim Bell personally. > > 3) The suspected crimes list keeps changing. How many times has the > > "official" story changed? Each time it gets more and more lurid. > > Expanding is the word. Put someone under a microscope and you > are liable to find out quite a bit about them. And we should not support "bad" people, so H-B also needs to criminalize Jim Bell by vague innuendo. > Bell is not the kind of loon to stick one's neck out for. Why risk your own neck supporting a loon? > It may > well be that he did not explicitly advocate murder but he danced > awfully close to that line. Sure, maybe he didn't actually commit a crime, but he pushed the envelope, so he made his own troubles. > Before charging to the rescue its a good idea to make sure > that you are rescuing the right person. It's best to do nothing, because it's not you. It's a loon. It's someone who probably did something illegal, even if it wasn't what he was charged with (because we're all guilty of something). So now H-B has given the individual cypherpunks "reasons" not to support Jim Bell, or to protest his persecution. So what if Jim Bell is a cypherpunk to the core? So what if he is being prosecuted for speaking of things that many of us have spoken about and debated on the list? There are sounds of gunfire coming from our neighbor's house. Let's just close the window and hope that the trouble doesn't come our way. TruthMonger #-96

1 0

Key Recovery / The True Story
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

When Key Recovery and Key Escrow schemes become a fact of life, there will be abuse and fraud of the nature that some on the cypherpunks list have expressed concern about. The grandmother who is arrested for plugging a parking meter will have her computer confiscated so the authorities can search for evidence that her plugging of the meter was pre-planned. Some $20,000/year clerk is going to dip into someone else's funds to support their drug habit. And some government spook is going to break into a church's computer to find out if they are secret terrorists because they oppose this or that government policy. The fact of the matter is, the government is perfectly happy with the citizens' vocal opposition to these possibilities because it provides a convenient smokescreen for the greater import of Key Escrow. They will occasionally pop a Jim Bell, or a "pornographer" to justify their "need" for Key Escrow, but they will let nature take its course until their capacity to monitor everyone, everywhere, all the time, is an accepted fact of life. The real reasons for the push for Key Recovery and Key Escrow are centered on global concerns. World power is acquired and maintained by acquiring and manipulating information and opinion. Countries and companies are helped to rise and fall from prominence. One is supported, another is sabotaged. One politician has his sins covered and another has them exposed. The rich and the powerful have always ruled, no matter what form the government of the day takes. It has always been so. When the government disinformation specialists incite the citizens to fight over pennies, it is to distract them while the rulers steal their dollars. The chaos of the citizen is the friend of the government, so they work to promote a chaos that will meet their needs. They allow us to have our Saviors, but if our J.F.K.'s and our Martin Luther Kings get too powerful, then they are removed. The allow us to have our victories, but there is always a 'rider' attached that takes away yet another of our rights and freedoms. While we fight battles, the government fights wars. Anyone who believes that the attack on Jim Bell is not aimed at the CypherPunks is a fool. While we fight battles, the government fights wars. TruthMonger

1 0

Re: Spam IS Free Speech
by Mark Grant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Spam is interfering with the *real* victim's (the sendmail operator's) > ability to provide customer service; in a very real and fiscally > damaging way. It's worse than that; some asshole has just sent out a spam with a forged return address at $$$$(a)unicorn.com. There is absolutely nothing I can do to stop people sending such forgeries, yet my mailbox is about to explode with megabytes of complaints and mailbombs. I hate to think what kind of mess I'll have to deal with when I get back from my holiday next week. Anyone know how to track down the owner of 1-800-322-6169 EXT 2561, the only contact information in the spam? I'm not in the US so I can't call them to complain. Is there any way I and the spammees could take legal action against them without spending vast amounts of money? Mark P.S. Privtool 0.90 is just out at utopia.hacktic.nl; I'll send a proper announcement soon. Privtool is a PGP-aware mail program for X-windows, see details at http://www.unicorn.com/privtool/privtool.html.

5 10

Re: "You have the right to remain silent"
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May wrote: > The latest example being the Ramsey case in Boulder ("Home of PGP"). Much > is made of the fact that the Ramseys, not being under arrest, are not > required to *say anything* to the police. (Left unanswered is why innocent > parents whose daughter has been brutally murdered would choose to say > nothing to the police...even I, a skeptic about much that modern cops are > involved in, am suspicious of the Ramseys for their noncooperativeness.) The noncooperation of the Ramseys does not reflect on their guilt or innocence, but on the fact that they have an excellent lawyer. People who have average lawyers, or even good ones, have a much greater chance of being convicted of a crime that they did not commit. When the police interview you, they have information or evidence that you and your lawyer aren't aware of. Their job is to get you to make statements that can be used against you in the future if you are charged with a crime. They attempt to lead you into making an innocent statement such as, "I eat eggs sometimes." and the next thing you know you are in court with a prosecutor repeating it and pointing at you accusingly. The fact of the matter is that guilt or innocence is no longer decided on real evidence, for the most part. *Circumstantial* evidence rules the roost, and it has been perverted to become a battle of which lawyer can spin the most convincing tale around indefinite evidence. So you go to jail because you drive a red truck, smoke camels and own a pair of brown socks (despite the fact that all of the witnesses described someone who was a foot taller and a hundred pounds heavier). How is this crypto relevant? It is yet another symptom of why we are losing our privacy and our freedom. The Ramseys should live in a world where they can put trust in their government and tell them everything that might remotely help find their child's murderer, instead of unjustly ending up on the chopping block themselves. Cypherpunks should live in a world where they can share their logs with the government to help them catch a child murderer and know that their cooperation will not be used to abuse themself or others who use the remailers. What about the cooperation of Jim Bell's friends. The newspapers report that his friends say they talked about this or that in a joking manner (or somesuch innocuous way), but you can bet your bottom dollar that this is not mentioned on the application for an arrest warrant. When the police interview you and ask you if you plan to kill the president, answer, "Yes. When pigs fly." Which part of your statement will they neglect to mention when they file the charges against you? (Take a wild guess on this one.) If you have joined in the discussion of the AP Bot, then I hope that you saved *all* of your posts, because the government will be introducing the ones where you described a possible implementation but not the posts where you described the system as unfeasible and unrealistic. If Jim Bell and his friends had the Ramseys' lawyer they wouldn't have been so quick to supply information which can be twisted and perverted to support Bell's persecution. TruthMonger

3 2

AW: Good book on stegano?
by Hartmut Korth 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Von: Chevreau Sylvain Gesendet: Freitag, 16. Mai 1997 02:37 An: stegano-l Betreff: RE: Good book on stegano? Hi everybody, hi Deepa, 1) Maybe the tutorial/review is being written in some university or company, e.g. for the planed 2nd Int. Workshop on Information Hiding or other publications or internally. Who knows? Because there have been several seperate publications and first compilations in various media in '96 and I haven't yet found any technical paper about steganography published in 1997. Has anybody? My feeling is everybody is reviewing right now! 2) Actually there are already at least 2 BOOKS dedicated to steganography: - "Disappearing cryptography" by Peter Wayner (pcw(a)access.digex.net) the review of which can be found in the CIPHER newsletter #19 (or was it 18?) & #20. [How to get first contact with Cipher, "Newsletter of the IEEE Computer Society's TC on Security and Privacy" : BACK ISSUES: There is an archive that includes each copy distributed so far, in ascii, in files you can download at URL http://www.itd.nrl.navy.mil/ITD/5540/ieee/cipher/cipher-archive.html There is also an anonymous FTP server that contains the same files. To access the archive via anonymous FTP: 1. ftp www.itd.nrl.navy.mil 2. At prompt for ID, enter "anonymous" 3. At prompt for password, enter your actual, full e-mail address 4. Once you are logged in, change to the Cipher Directory: cd pub/cipher 5. Now you can request any of the files containing Cipher issues in ascii. Issues are named in the form: EI#N.9612 where N is the number of the issue desired and 9612 captures the year and month it appeared. ] - "Information Hiding", edited by Ross Anderson, Springer Verlag Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop held in Cambridge, U.K., in May/June 96 Infos at URL http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14 (see section 'Privacy and Freedom issues'). 3) To answer your question anyway, I would advise you to take a look at this nice page I've discovered recently (NEW: it's 1 month old!) : http://www-nt.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de/~hartung/watermarkinglinks.html Thanks to Frank Hartung by the way. Here you will find easily several links to past BIBLIOGRAPHIES for past years, and also have on overview of what's the hell is happening !!! Good readings, Sylvain Sylvain Chevreau ChevreauS(a)tce-rdf.fr for now, ChevreauS(a)thmulti.com from June on.

1 0

New Chip Verifies Fingerprints (fwd)
by decius＠ninja.techwood.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Veridicom, a spinoff of Lucent Technologies, just demoed (at > CardTech/SecurTech '97) their chip that can perform fingerprint > recognition/authorization. They plan on selling them for $300 each > (same cost as this face recognition system Gregory's mentioned). The > article doesn't say when they will be available. > > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/chronicle/article.cgi?file=BU41045.DTL& > directory=/chronicle/archive/1997/05/22 I am mailing this to cypherpunks and BCCing the original list because it is not nearly as open. I am putting on my cypherpunk hat here, and although this is not a general discussion list I think this warrants comment. (I would also like to see what the cypherpunks have to say.) Eric Hughes said that "Cryptography is about economics." When I am designing a system, I weigh the cost of securing the system verses the expected loss that will be incurred if the system is not secure. The cellular phone industry decided that it would cost them more to secure their system than it would to swallow the losses. They were wrong, but I will not digress into that. The point here is clear. Security is an economic choice. It is a business decision. Furthermore, if I decide to secure a system, I need only use enough security such that the cost to break that security is equal to the value of that which is being secured. Any additional security is a waste of money. When I am breaking a system I will always attack the weakest link (unless I am doing this for intellectual challenge but that is not really the point here). This is obvious. Lets take a look at a sample Biometric security system: Fingerprints are used to replace the pin codes on an ATM. I am being very general here, but there are four main peices to this system. The banking network itself, which is DES encrypted, the ATM, the biometric system and the human being. Note the contrast with a non-biometric system, which consists of the network, the ATM, and a pin code. Biometrics pull the human into the equation. Cracking DES would cost more than a million dollars. I can't put a value on cracking the ATM, but they are designed to be difficult to open up and most are in places where they are very visible, so the cost is very high. I have not seen anyone present a method for attacking a biometric security device. If you assume that you will have to develop one you are again talking about millions. How about "cracking" the human... How much does a good sturdy knife cost? Less than $20. If I get mugged and the mugger wants access to my bank account all he has to do is chop off the relevant finger. Don't laugh. This *WILL* happen. Biometrics create an general economic incentive for maiming or murdering people. I will take you one further... *When you implement a biometric system you are deciding that the value of that which is being protected is greater than the value of the lives of the people who have access to it.* This is obvious if you look at the trade-offs. You are securing the system such that the easiest way to break it is to kill a person. Obviously this will reduce your instances of fraud, as killing a person is more messy then hacking a pin code. However, because the cost of killing someone is smaller than the value of the object being protected, there are going to be losses. You have to decide that you are capable of swallowing those losses. You have to decide that the value of the decrease in fraud over a non-biometric system is greater than that of the lives of the people who are lost when fraud does occur. This is a despicable situation, but don't think you won't see it. It is probably inevitable now. One additional point. The possibilities for surveilance inherent in biometrics are fearsome. If I managed to compile a large database of people's names, social security numbers, and face prints; I could set up a closed circuit camera system in my store which would provide me with the name, home address, credit, and other information about every person who enters my business, AUTOMATICALLY, without the customers even being cognisant that this is going on. The marketing people will be going nutz over this possibility. I'm going to the drug store for some Pepto... -- */^\* Tom Cross AKA Decius 615 AKA The White Ninja */^\* Decius(a)ninja.techwood.org "If the economic, social and political conditions... do not offer a basis for the realization of individuality, while at the same time people have lost those ties which gave them security... powerful tendencies arise to escape from freedom into submission." -- Erich Fromm

3 2

Re: Why I think Jim Bell is getting railroaded
by Mix 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Before charging to the rescue its a good idea to make sure >that you are rescuing the right person. Government agents >also have the right not to be threatened with murder. Threats are illogical. --Sarin

1 0

Re: SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS
by winsock＠rigel.cyberpass.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Paul Bradley <paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk> wrote: >(Tim wrote) >> Notable example: the Malibu doctor suspected--wrongly, it turns out--of >> growing pot on his ranch. He and his wife were startled by the ninjas >> bursting into their bedroom. The doctor reached for a handgun in his >> nightstand and was sprayed with 9mms from the Heckler and Kock MP-5s of the >> raiders. The estate of the doctor is currently suing the LA County >> Sheriff's Department and other agencies, but you know how those things go. >> I know I shock a lot of people by saying this, but I think those involved >> in the raid should be tried on murder charges and, if found guilty, >> executed promptly. And if the court system won't do this, which it >> obviously won't, then the alternative is <CENSORED CENSORED CENSORED >> CENSORED>. > >This is quite right, the police had no right to be in his house as he had >commited no ethical crime, therefore he merely attempted to defend >himself against people who had broken into his house. If they then shot >him they are guilty of murder, no question about it. The interesting thing is that the envirocrats wanted the land, and the sheriff (who is, BTW, not in jail) got an appraisal on it BEFORE the raid. This case, and not Ruby Ridge, Waco, or The Reichsta...um.. OK City, radicalized me. This man (Donald Scott) did NOTHING to deserve his murder, and the crooks who killed him deserve death. >If the government want a "war on drugs" they can expect a real war, where >the enemy fight back. > >All of those fortunate enough to be living someone where they are legally >entitled to obtain defensive weapons, Lock and load. Yes, and buy components. These will be outlawed before they go for guns as such, in the hope that wear and tear will do their grab for them. Mystrey man

3 2

News about Sun and Elvis
by Kent Crispin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----Forwarded message from "Judas, Roland" <rj(a)medos.de>----- From: "Judas, Roland" <rj(a)medos.de> To: "'firewalls(a)greatcircle.com'" <firewalls(a)GreatCircle.COM> Subject: News about Sun and Elvis Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 09:36:44 +0100 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: firewalls-owner(a)GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk --- White House Reviews Sun's Encryption Initiative --- By John Fontana, Communications Week WASHINGTON-The Clinton administration said it is reviewing the relationship between Sun Microsystems and a Russian company that produces a strong encryption product, which Sun is licensing for worldwide distribution. The White House issued a statement last night, saying, "We are reviewing our regulatory posture with Sun to ensure that their arrangement with the Russian encryption company is in compliance with U.S. export controls." The Department of Commerce, which is responsible for export regulations on strong encryption, stressed that the administration was reviewing the relationship and not conducting an investigation, a spokesman said. Last week, Sun, in Mountain View, Calif., told Communications Week that it had licensed an encryption product from Moscow, Russia-based Elvis+ Co., which offers 128-bit keys and would resell it worldwide under the name PC Sunscreen SKIP Elvis+. Sun has approximately a 10 percent equity stake in Elvis+, whose product is based on Sun's Simple Key Management for IP (SKIP) protocol. The specification was published nearly two years ago. Humphrey Polanen, general manager of Sun's security and electronic commerce group, was confident the government would find Sun "in full compliance with the letter of the law." He said a key factor was that Sun offered no technical assistance in the development of the software. U.S. law bars the export of encryption over 56 bits without government approval. Companies seeking to export 56-bit products must also have a system in place within two years for key recovery. Netscape Communications, also of Mountain View, has followed that path with its browser software, but Sun has neither government approval nor a method to recover keys. The administration wants access to keys in cases of criminal investigations. It is concerned that strong encryption products could fall into the hands of terrorists, even though similar products are available from nearly 30 foreign companies. The statement from the White House also said it had not evaluated the product and could not comment on it. If found in violation of export controls, Sun could face civil and/or criminal penalties. Criminal penalties, which would be handed out by the Justice Department, could mean Sun executive officers would spend time in a federal prison. At press time, Sun had not seen the announcement and would not comment. "The administration may have to go after Sun to protect the integrity of its policy," said Marc Rotenberg, the director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "You might see the ,Zimmerman effect,' which would be tremendous public sympathy." Rotenberg is referring to Phillip Zimmerman, who won a battle with the government over his Pretty Good Privacy encryption product, which was distributed free over the Internet. "The White House is at risk by going after a U.S. company for making a good product," Rotenberg said. "This is one more reason to think the administration's cryptography policy is not long for this world." Three bills attacking the administration's policy are being discussed on Capitol Hill, but only one, the Security and Freedom through Encryption Act, has made it out of committee. The bill, which was authored by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va), would prohibit mandatory key recovery. President Clinton is opposed to the bill in its current form. -----End of forwarded message----- -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent(a)songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html

1 0

Re: Compelling a key (fwd)
by tzeruch＠ceddec.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Why does everyone still have cypherpunks(a)toad.com in their Cc: list, or how can I get it to work so I don't have to edit the headers (back to the procmail manual...) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 13:17:04 -0400 (EDT) From: tzeruch(a)ceddec.com To: Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net> Cc: Jim Choate <ravage(a)EINSTEIN.ssz.com>, cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: Compelling a key (fwd) On Wed, 21 May 1997, Tim May wrote: > At 4:45 PM -0800 5/21/97, Jim Choate wrote: > > >> In practice, I think the Washington, D.C. doctor, Elizabeth X, the woman > >> who refused to say where her children were, was held for about 2 years, and > >> that this was the all-time record for a contempt case. She was ultimately > >> released when the court concluded she had no intention of cooperating. > > > >Exactly! It is ENTIRELY up to the individual judge who issued the contempt > >citation. If they are pissed enough 2 years will be nothing. As far as I > >have been able to find there are NO statutes, other than that of a statute > >of limitation for a particular type of crime, that limit how long you can > >sit in jail on contempt. One correction. She was released by a special law passed by the house of representatives after a media blitz about her case. The law only let her go and did not generally limit the period of time people could be held in contempt. It was not the judge, but a legislature trying to quell some outcry without doing any real reform

3 2

Re: spam is a good thing (was Re: Spam IS Free Speech)
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On or About 22 May 97 at 13:11, William H. Geiger III wrote: > If given the choice between 2 evils of receiving Spamford > Cyber-momo's crap or going to a metered rate INet I choose Spamford > as the second will not get rid of him. There we go! The all American strive for compromise. Yet, very few people are willing to compromise on this issue, for some reason. I'd like for more people just give it up and come to the realization that the INet is going to be commercial, and no laws can stifle the commerce that goes on here. Or stop Spam. Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: (408) 259-2795

1 0

from BoS: News about Sun and Elvis+
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From the "other shoe" department... Cheers, Bob Hettinga --- begin forwarded text X-Authentication-Warning: jekyll.piermont.com: [[UNIX: localhost]] didn't use HELO protocol To: cryptography(a)c2.net Subject: from BoS: News about Sun and Elvis+ Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 12:58:06 -0400 From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry(a)piermont.com> Sender: owner-cryptography(a)c2.net I thought this would be of interest. ------- Forwarded Message From: "Judas, Roland" <rj(a)medos.de> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 09:36:44 +0100 To: best-of-security(a)suburbia.net Subject: BoS: News about Sun and Elvis - --- White House Reviews Sun's Encryption Initiative --- By John Fontana, Communications Week WASHINGTON-The Clinton administration said it is reviewing the relationship between Sun Microsystems and a Russian company that produces a strong encryption product, which Sun is licensing for worldwide distribution. The White House issued a statement last night, saying, "We are reviewing our regulatory posture with Sun to ensure that their arrangement with the Russian encryption company is in compliance with U.S. export controls." The Department of Commerce, which is responsible for export regulations on strong encryption, stressed that the administration was reviewing the relationship and not conducting an investigation, a spokesman said. Last week, Sun, in Mountain View, Calif., told Communications Week that it had licensed an encryption product from Moscow, Russia-based Elvis+ Co., which offers 128-bit keys and would resell it worldwide under the name PC Sunscreen SKIP Elvis+. Sun has approximately a 10 percent equity stake in Elvis+, whose product is based on Sun's Simple Key Management for IP (SKIP) protocol. The specification was published nearly two years ago. Humphrey Polanen, general manager of Sun's security and electronic commerce group, was confident the government would find Sun "in full compliance with the letter of the law." He said a key factor was that Sun offered no technical assistance in the development of the software. U.S. law bars the export of encryption over 56 bits without government approval. Companies seeking to export 56-bit products must also have a system in place within two years for key recovery. Netscape Communications, also of Mountain View, has followed that path with its browser software, but Sun has neither government approval nor a method to recover keys. The administration wants access to keys in cases of criminal investigations. It is concerned that strong encryption products could fall into the hands of terrorists, even though similar products are available from nearly 30 foreign companies. The statement from the White House also said it had not evaluated the product and could not comment on it. If found in violation of export controls, Sun could face civil and/or criminal penalties. Criminal penalties, which would be handed out by the Justice Department, could mean Sun executive officers would spend time in a federal prison. At press time, Sun had not seen the announcement and would not comment. "The administration may have to go after Sun to protect the integrity of its policy," said Marc Rotenberg, the director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "You might see the ,Zimmerman effect,' which would be tremendous public sympathy." Rotenberg is referring to Phillip Zimmerman, who won a battle with the government over his Pretty Good Privacy encryption product, which was distributed free over the Internet. "The White House is at risk by going after a U.S. company for making a good product," Rotenberg said. "This is one more reason to think the administration's cryptography policy is not long for this world." Three bills attacking the administration's policy are being discussed on Capitol Hill, but only one, the Security and Freedom through Encryption Act, has made it out of committee. The bill, which was authored by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va), would prohibit mandatory key recovery. President Clinton is opposed to the bill in its current form. ------- End of Forwarded Message --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/

1 0

Jim Bell accused of "spamming"
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I find it symptomatic that the enemies of free speech use "spam" as a generic term for any kind of speech they don't like. I don't think the following piece needs much commentary, but it probably will. Path: altavista!news1.digital.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!192.108.254.3!news.teleport xtm!kelly.teleport.com!jh From: Jack Hammer <jh(a)teleport.com> Newsgroups: or.politics,wash.politics,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.tom-leykis Subject: IRS SAYS INTERNET SPAMMER SABOTEUR (fwd) Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 17:15:35 -0700 Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 Lines: 155 Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.970521171344.16635E-100000(a)kelly.teleport.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: kelly.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Xref: altavista or.politics:25633 alt.rush-limbaugh:79911 alt.fan.tom-leykis:5 xt Subject: IRS SAYS INTERNET SPAMMER SABOTEUR Government affidavit says an Internet author plotted to sabotage an Oregon 9-1-1 computer and poison city water with botulism. VANCOUVER, Wash.- Is there any truth to the rumour that Assassination Politics (AP) author Jim Bell, who was arrested here Friday by the Internal Revenue Service, plotted with Portland, Oregon 9-1-1 overseer Greg Daly to poison the Bull Run resevoir with botulism made from green beans, and shut down the 9-1-1 emergency center's computers by dumping carbon fibers into the air vents? The IRS is accusing Vancouver resident James Dalton Bell, 38, of conspiring to overthrow the U.S. government. He appeared Monday afternoon in U.S. Distict Court in Tacoma and was accused in an 18-page affidavit. AP is a Murder Inc. like plot about a risk-free way of rewarding assassins through a lottery. Bell was seen frequenting local Libertarian functions and a so-called common law court. The murder conspiracy was applauded by some high ranking Libertarians. The plot has circulated widely on the Internet. An April search warrant accused Bell of directly soliciting others to murder. AP would supposedly protect the identity of the murderers. The strategy, which Bell says he wrote and posted solely for speculation, involves uses of encryption to predict and confirm assassinations and electronic digital cash to pay for the gruesome killings. Criticism of AP predicted a reign of anarchy and terror should the plan be allowed to develop. Bell responded to criticism personally and with vehemence. Federal agents raided Bell's Vancouver home April 1 and then accused him of obstructing government officers, and employees, and using false Social Security numbers. Bell is far more dangerous than the charges suggest, the affidavit filed by IRS Inspector Phillip G. Scoff said. Scott's affidavit said Bell, who has a chemistry degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, had discussions about using carbon fiber particles to attack computer systems with Greg Daly, a friend who is an electronics specialist overseeing Portland's 9-1-1 communications center. "Daly stated that he and Bell had 'laughed' about attacking the 9-1-1 center with the fiber," the affidavit said. The affidavit went on to say that Daly also told IRS agents that he had hypothetical discussions with Bell about contaminating water supplies and about making the botulism virus from green beans. In the April 17 and 18 intertiews with IRS agents, Daly admitted he had keys to Portland's pristine alpine watershed and direct access to the Portland water treatment facilities. Daly tried to defend himself Monday by saying that the conversations he and Bell had were "merely intellectual fun-and-games discussions" between old friends who enjoy technical things. But Daly also described his friend of 15 years as "bit of an odd unit". And during the interview Daly appeared to crack and turn state's evidence when Daly offered to "rat (Bell) out in a heartbeat." The investigation had been expanding Thursday when IRS agents searched the home of another friend of Bell's, merchant marine radio man Robert East. Among items seized in the East address raid was a three foot length of carbon fiber. The IRS affidavit reported that East told agents he and Bell had discussed "the possibility of putting the fibers down the air vents of a federal building" to its computers and about using the fiber against the IRS. Bell was recently published in The Oregonian daily newspaper where he appeared to avoid an explanation of his plan, writing mostly of what he predicted would be AP's positive impact. Bell did not say in the article how exactly AP would be implemented, who could be killed by it or even why it was called Assassination Politics. But the Internet version, repetively posted for more than a year on libertarian e-mail lists and newsgroups, revealed a darker vision. Some recipients of Bell's complained of the excessive "spamming", others of AP's ethical lapses. The Oregonian seemed to accept Bell's story without question, and Bell's idea was defended by some Libertarians. Responding to the arrest, Tonie Nathan, the first woman and only Libertarian to receive an electoral vote for Vice President, appeared to endorse Bell's assassination plan. "I find them basically rational, mind-opening, intellectually stimulating," she wrote Tuesday. She went on to say that AP "should be considered." Found inside what the IRS reports was Bell's car were documents from the Multnomah County Common Law Court (MCCLC), a group that elects themselves the case judges and purports to administer "common law." Bell was seen at a court meeting held in a Portland pizza parlour back in February. Bell has denied ownership of the car. The self-appointed court met in an all-you-can-eat buffet where it put Attorney General Janet Reno, IRS Commisssioner Margaret Richardson and other IRS officials on trial. The mock trial was the result of a complaint by Oregon resident Louis Wispell, one of the MCCLC "Justices." It has been observed in this "court" that complainants can select their judges from the buffet line, some who confessed to stealing food, having snuck past the cashier on the pretense of being on the camera crew. The judges have also been observed to switch places with complainants in other meetings of the MCCLC in trhe basement of a Russian church. The MCCLC has recently been in the news in regards to charges of its clerk, Richard Lancial, and his son, Thor Lancial, of simulating court process. Charles Bruce Stewart is the Chief Justice of that court and also the owner of an e-mail list, nwlibertarians(a)teleport.com, on which Bell posted much of his material. Stewart insists his court is constitutional. The IRS says Bell has a history of tax disputes with them and reportedly has a large, outstanding, unpaid balance. Friday was set for Bell's detention and preliminary hearing. The government has asked that Bell be held without ball because he is a danger to the community, and reportedly is seeking a grand Jury indictment. From your friend, Your best friend, Your only friend, Jack Hammer ;-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

4 3

Spam complaints 14 times worse than Spam.
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This was from: Tasty Bits From The Technology Front Your Host: Keith Dawson This issue: <URL:http://www.tbtf.com/archive/05-22-97.html> ..Mailing-list spammers.. Email spam is the favorite gripe of most Netizens, excepting the spammers. Congress is considering legislation [25] to limit the practice of sending unwanted commercial email in bulk. Not everyone thinks this is a good idea. See [26] for a thread from an ongoing debate on Declan McCullagh's fight-censorship mailing list. George Matyjewicz <mosaic1(a)ix.netcom.com> did a modest experiment on a week's worth of his email -- he is on 56 mailing lists and gets around 200 messages a day -- to gauge how widespread the problem actually is. Matyjewicz posted these results: week avg/day Total messages 1,354 193.4 Spam messages 10 1.4 < 1 % Spam complaints 189 27.0 14 % Mailing-list owners share information on the addresses from which commercial spam messages originate. Recently Alexander Verbraeck <A.Verbraeck(a)duticai.twi.tudelft.nl> posted a particularly compre- hensive list of purported spammers. I have taken the liberty of preserving a snapshot on the TBTF archive [27], sorted both by email address and by "virulence" -- the total number of messages sent by each spammer over a given time period to two of Verbraeck's lists. Thanks to Tom Parmenter <tompar(a)world.std.com> for the tip. [25] <URL:http://www.news.com/News/Item/0%2C4%2C10875%2C00.html> [26] <URL:http://www.tbtf.com/resource/to-ban-spam.html> [27] <URL:http://www.tbtf.com/resource/spammers.html> =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: (408) 259-2795

2 1

Western Union & IRS
by Ray Arachelian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I donno if this is news or not, but having just visited one of these places, I noticed prominently place warning signs that transfers over $3K are reported to the IRS including your SSN, effective May 28 of this year or something... =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "Boy meets beer. Boy drinks Beer, |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder(a)sundernet.com| Boy gets another beer!" |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ | |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die. |..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================

1 0

Spam laws threaten remailers?
by nobody＠hidden.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

See http://www.senate.gov/~murkowski/commercialemail/ My bill merely provides a means for Internet users to filter out e-mails that they do not wish to receive by requiring that senders of unsolicited e-mails to include Advertisement as the first word of the subject line and that the real street address, e-mail address and a telephone number be contained within the body of the message. Routing information that accompanies the message must also be accurate. Could this be the end of remailers?

2 1

Re: "You have the right to remain silent" (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 15:08:27 -0400 > To: "Willaim H. Geiger III" <whgiii(a)amaranth.com>, cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Subject: Re: "You have the right to remain silent" > they can't order you to talk to them. They can arrest you with probable > cause > and detain you briefly for purposes of investigation. They can arrest you at will w/ or w/o probable cause. If they can't produce probable cause at your hearing then a writ of habeas corpus comes into play. They can't CHARGE you without probable cause, minor but important distinction. As I understand it, the charges that are recorded when you first go to the police station are not 'official' until your hearing and a judge signs the paperwork. The police can even arrest you as a witness or for 'protective custody' and then even the habeas corpus gets murky because no charges are filed. If they can convince a judge to go along they can even hold you in communicado. > They can ask you for > your name and you may have to supply it, According to the 5th(?) Federal District you don't even have to do that unless you are driving a vehicle or otherwise operating under a public license. > Since cops are not judges, This particular point if kept in mind changes the interpretation of the Constitution considerably. It also puts such actions as making it illegal for citizens to own assault weapons but the police can questionable since the constitution does not draw a distinction between law enforcement and the citizenry, as it does with the judicial, legistlative and executive bodies. It therefore follows that if I as Joe Citizen can't do it then a police officer can't either since they have no constitutional rights that I don't and the 10th Amendment prohibits expansion of federal power (and by extension of the 14th, states) by anything other than that proscribed in the constitution. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

1 0

Use a cipher, go to jail
by Michael Wilson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Follow the link: http://www.nando.net/newsroom/ntn/info/052297/info24_9595.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FBI says hacker sold 100,000 credit card numbers --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright ) 1997 Nando.net Copyright ) 1997 The Associated Press SAN FRANCISCO (May 22, 1997 9:13 p.m. EDT) -- A clever hacker slipped into a major Internet provider and gathered 100,000 credit card numbers along with enough information to use them, the FBI said Thursday. Carlos Felipe Salgado, Jr., 36, who used the online name "Smak," allegedly inserted a program that gathered the credit information from a dozen companies selling products over the Internet, said FBI spokesman George Grotz. ---- Said hacker used a sniffer to gather the numbers, and as part of the process, he encrypted the database he sold to an undercover agent. Anyone care to take any bets on whether he shows up as a case for the 'use a cipher to commit a crime' argument?

1 0

Re: "You have the right to remain silent" (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Forwarded message: > From: "Willaim H. Geiger III" <whgiii(a)amaranth.com> > Date: Thu, 22 May 97 08:46:56 -0500 > Subject: Re: "You have the right to remain silent" > 1) Under the 5th Amendment one is not required to give any assistance to > the police in a criminal investegation. Not exactly true. The police can take various body samples and other 'physical characteristics' (eg hand writing) for determination of issues involved in a case without you being able to refuse under the 5th. Also, if you are not being accussed of any crime then the 5th can't protect you, unless you want to admit tacit involvment in some criminal activity. Which I am sure to some mindsets is sufficient probable cause. In many states, such as Texas, citizenry are required by law to report any commission of a felony. Not doing so can itself be a felony. Most swords cut both ways... An interesting aspect of the 5th and physical sample taking is the way the line is drawn between what is permitted and what isn't. Historicaly it has been just fine for a cop to shove his finger down your throat to grab that black molly but verboten to pump your stomach. It is generaly felt that pumping your stomach is 'too' invasive. What I would like to know is what is the record since that ruling of the farthest down somebodies throat evidence has been legaly removed from and beyond which its legitimacy is consistently denied. Interesting issue regarding fingerprints for drivers license and the 5th that has to my research remained untested is that the fingerprints were taken while under no suggestion of wrongdoing and with no Miranda. Yet these can be used as evidence in criminal cases even at the federal level. Now it might be argued that if not explicitly stated there is an implicit contract with the state government and the individual regarding the use in criminal proceedings. But since the 14th does not work in reverse there can not be any implicit federal contract. Can the interstate commerce clause be extended to this? > 2) That the Ramsey's were prime suspects after 48hrs and no suspect was > found. They were prime suspects the moment the operator answered the 911 line. > 3) That this was SOP for the LEA's to go after family members/friends of a > murder victim even though, on average, 1/3 of murders in the US are > commited by strangers and this figure is incresing. Meaning that 66% of the time they will get the culprit. Sounds like a good strategy to me for clearing 66% of the cases quickly. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

1 0

"You have the right to remain silent" (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 19:03:11 -0800 > From: Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net> > Subject: "You have the right to remain silent" > >The 5th is meant to apply ONLY to persons being accussed of a crime, it is > >not nor was it ever meant to protect non-accussed persons from turning over > >evidence of criminal acts. > > So you are saying the police may compel any and all information from > someone just so long as that person has not been formally accused of a > crime? If they ask you questions regarding the commission of a crime the 5th will not protect you unless you were involved. The flip side to this that protects this 'hole' from being catastrophic is that you don't have to talk to the police at all unless accussed of a crime. They most certainly can take physical evidence from 3rd parties (ie hostile witnesses) which they believe are involved in some manner with the crime (ie entering your apartment to track the path of a bullet in the hopes of retrieving it). Refusing to answer the questions of the prosecutor while under oath has its own consequences. What really keeps it from getting out of hand is the cost of interviewing and calling all possible witnesses to some crime. Just imagine calling everyone on the floor of a murder as SOP. > The Miranda precedent ("you have the right to remain silent...") > establishes that someone under arrest may remain silent. And someone _not_ > under arrest is under no obligation to cooperate, unless subpoenaed, right? As I understand it that is correct. > The latest example being the Ramsey case in Boulder ("Home of PGP"). Much > is made of the fact that the Ramseys, not being under arrest, are not > required to *say anything* to the police. (Left unanswered is why innocent > parents whose daughter has been brutally murdered would choose to say > nothing to the police...even I, a skeptic about much that modern cops are > involved in, am suspicious of the Ramseys for their noncooperativeness.) If they are truly innocent, what could they possibly have to say other than "Please find the killer of our daughter" and "We didn't do it." Innocent people have little to say, the guilty need to convince us of their innocence. "Me thinks he protest too much." I have no idea Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

1 0

Re: Spam laws threaten remailers?
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On or About 22 May 97 at 15:25, Greg Broiles wrote: > Both of the anti-spam bills that I've seen (CAUCE and Murkowski's) > are poorly drafted - they're both overbroad and underinclusive. I > don't think they're necessarily constitutionally "overbroad", but > they haven't been written by people with a good understanding of the > technical issues. > > As I read both bills, they'll prohibit behavior pretty universally > considered legitimate - e.g., including a link to a web site in your > .signature which happens to sell a product or service, for example. This is really going too far!!! I was told, when I first got on-line, that this was a "polite" way to get your product or service out there, without spamming. By posting on-topic replies to usenet and high traffic mailing lists, like this one... Shit, I hate this "one bad kid gets the rest of the class in trouble" mentality. I am really pissed at this whole issue and the goverment trying to get it's grubby paws on the net any way they can! I am also irked at the public's desire for this government intervention. > I think it'd make more sense to solve this problem technically, > and/or carefully think about the legal framework appropriate for > governing the flow of data between computers. (There are also sticky > First Amendment issues here.) You got that right. > Ugh. > Arrrrgh. Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: (408) 259-2795

1 0