December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Building crypto archives worldwide to foil US-built Berlin (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 07:33:32 -0500 > From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> > Subject: Re: Building crypto archives worldwide to foil US-built Berlin > Walls > ==== > > Q: Is it better for the providers of crypto resources to alarm/log > accesses to their websites or not? > > I'd strongly argue not; > Team Despot will disguise itself and we are surveilled as we speak; > Team Legion loses if it creates targets for harvesting. > > ==== >From a security standpoint it is advised to log access and all resource use for about 4-5 days so you can get a sample big enough to look for under_the_radar_hacking. On the flip side you don't want to keep them longer than that because they could be used in an incriminating manner, whether an actual criminal act occured or not. I use the default buffer time (4 days) for my mail package as my ttl value. Once that time is past the files are bye bye. If the security of the site is compromised then it's pretty worthless as an archive. > Q: Is coordinated integrity control (code signing) a Good Thing? > > I'd weakly argue not; > Alternative argument; > ==== The code shouldn't be signed by any of the archive sites, they shouldn't put their butts on the line. The code should be signed by the originators of same. This verifies that ALL the archive sites have the same package and not individualy modified ones. The archive sites should provide some sort of hash to verify successful transfers. > Q: Should requestors routinely avoid surveilled identification? > ==== There isn't any way around this one. If the site is up and it's advertised and publicly accessible then expect to be identified. Either the owner of the domain/network resources you're using or your registration to the relevant domain name authorities will provide ample pointers. Of course there is the strategy of registering the domain for a year only and then each year register a new one. Then you could provide bogus address and owner information. This of course won't slow a packet sniffer down for long. Onion and CROWDS won't help here unless you're connected directly to the anonymizer. If you're that close they'll find you by following the wires. > it. If one of us goes off the air, step into > their place. You so glibly throw people away...it's better to fix a system such that there is a legal ramification (ie resistance) for the LEA's applying the pressure; a fight in court. Beside shutting the sites down another primary goal of LEA's is to keep the conflict off the evening news. There is ample evidence of LEA's dropping charges because the group made it known they were going to use their day in court as a platform for espousing their agenda. ____________________________________________________________________ If I can put in one word what has always infuriated me in any person, any group, any movement, or any nation, it is: bullying Howard Zinn The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Re:
by Mbishop645＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>HaB wrote: ><snip> >> That's a good place to begin, though. "Would you send a letter to >> someone without an envelope?" "Then why not put your email in the >> electronic equivalent of one?" >> >> balance. > >Would I send a letter to someone without an envelope? >One word: postcard. Ahh, but would you tape a check for your phone bill to a postcard? Other than writing a greeting to someone what else do you use a postcard for? --- Paul Weinstein <http://www.weinstein.org> <webmaster(a)weinstein.org> <http://members.aol.com/paulw37280> <paulw37280(a)aol.com> <http://www.waubonsie.com> <pdw(a)waubonsie.com> <http://www.c2.net <pdw(a)c2.net> --- Windows 98(n) - 32-bit extensions and graphical shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor, written by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition. --- Visit LCARS: A Macintosh Reference at http://www.weinstein.org/lcars

2 1

Wassenaar/Crypto News
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A BXA spokesperson said today that the text of the recent Wassenaar agreement had been received yesterday and it is now being prepared for release on the BXA website (www.bxa.doc.gov) maybe by the end of the week but maybe not until next week. She said she expected the US to be the first to publish the doc, after I cited the WA message below from Caspar Bowden. She also said that the Practising Law Institute (www.pli.edu) session on encryption controls yesterday was taped and inquiries should be made to PLI (a continuing legal ed org; ) 1-(800) 260-4PLI. And that Bill Reinsch did not participate in the session, only gave the speech on Dec 7 noted here yesterday: http://jya.com/war120798-2.htm An inquiry to PLI (Betty Gray) has not been returned. >From UK Crypto: From: "Caspar Bowden" <cb(a)fipr.org> To: "Ukcrypto (E-mail)" <ukcrypto(a)maillist.ox.ac.uk> Subject: More from Wassenaar Secretariat Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 09:19:09 -0000 Message-ID: <000401be2355$07529ec0$dc77e4d4@cpsb> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal -----Original Message----- From: Wassenaar Secretariat [mailto:secretariat@wassenaar.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 1998 16:54 To: Caspar Bowden Subject: Re: Attn: Dirk Weicke Mr. Weicke is still away, however, I can assure you that the Secretariat has been recently authorized by all member states to publish the new Lists on the web site. This will be done as soon as possible. Please be patient, we are a very small Secretariat. Glenn Sibbitt Special Advisor WA Secretariat Caspar Bowden wrote: > Dear Mr.Weicke, > > We spoke by telephone on Fri afternoon. > > You mentioned that the text and details of the new agreement would be > published on the Wassenaar website this week. > > I understand that you have been away sick for a few days (my > commiserations), but there have been reports from your colleagues > that there will in fact be no publication on your Website. > > I'd be most grateful if you could just confirm when publication of > details will take place, in particular the "Cryptography Note" detailing > key-length limits, and definitions of categories. > > Kind regards > -- > Caspar Bowden http://www.fipr.org > Director, Foundation for Information Policy Research > Tel: +44(0)171 354 2333 Fax: +44(0)171 827 6534

1 0

Re:
by Joel O'Connor 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

They say education is power abd naybe they were correct. I agree with the fact that more people need to use encryption, the problem (as you stated) is that people do not understand how to use it, or even know it exists. Unfortunate for us, fortunate for big brother. While the only way we can counteract this debate is through empowerment, the question remains, how do you spread the word to up to a million people, enough to get their interest and keep it, enough to take the time to teach them how to use the tools. I work for an IT department and the users I train rank from intelligent to "where the hell did you come from?!" Teaching people who have no want or need is the hardest part, just ask Christians, they know what it's like. Our greatest problems lie within our inability to train and make use of what lies in front of us, if people don't see the need, then why would they? Another point, some people feel that if they have nothing to hide, then why use it. An acquaitance of mine has the same stubborn attitude, what steps do you take to thwart that? That excuse bothers me beyond belief, but it is a common thought that if you need to take the steps to hide something, then it must be wrong. God help us. . . ---Anonymous <nobody(a)replay.com> wrote: > > I think setting up mirror sites of crypto archives > across the world is a great idea. However, I also > think we need to focus on getting more and more > people to use crypto. I would guess that the vast > majority of computer users worldwide see no use > for encryption in their day-to-day lives -- and > even those that do don't also use it. > > If everybody in the world is using encryption, it > is going to be extremely difficult for "democratic" > governments to tell them they can't use it any more. > > Unfortunately, it's easy for governments to blame > crypto for terrorism and a host of other crimes, > simply because the average citizen doesn't understand > the concept of an "electronic envelope". > > > == Ogre bounces like sonar. . .Peace. Ogre _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

5 4

What happened to this NY Times article on STOA and Echelon?
by Ernest Hua 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone have any idea what happened to this article on STOA and Echelon? http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/nytimes.htm I cannot seem to find it in the NY Times archives. Is it really from 1998? Could it be from 1997? Anyone been in contact with the author? Ern

2 1

The politics of crypto archives
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 17:46:37 +0100 > From: Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen(a)stud.uni-muenchen.de> > Subject: Re: Building crypto archives worldwide to foil US-built Berlin Walls (fwd) > Let there be a large number of sites. If part of these fail, there > are others that are successful. (Compare evolution.) But two sites don't reproduce to make a 3rd site, some set of sites don't deny environmental resources to others, etc. etc. Your analogy is flawed on many levels. If the sites go down that often what motive would somebody else have if they know they'll face the same sorts of problems and won't have any additional resources to help them face it? Why would you put up a site if you knew that the 14 others before had failed and that nobody would help with your legal fees when you did go down? It's one thing to put your neck on the block for yourself, it's a whole other issue when you start asking other people to do it for your benefit (they obviously don't need an archive since they have the resources already) when you make it clear that you won't reimburse or otherwise recognize their efforts for YOU. > > > If the 'economies', 'infrastructure' 'religon' and what not of the > > > countries do not (yet) affect crypto laws, why care about them? If > > > > They effect crypto by defintion. > > How, for example, can they affects the functioning of an archive, if > you get the right people and machine? Because those machines have to be available and paid for, their utilities need to exist and need to be reliable, the police need to have some sort of legal boundary to cross, and you need some recognized and guaranteed legal recourse for your own self defence. Those are just a couple of the issues involved in running a archive site. Things don't exist in vacuum. You naively take WAY(!!!) too much for granted. I'll tell you what. Just as an experiment put up a CDR node for 6 months and see what it's like. Keep the box up 24 hours a day, pay the electricity, phone lines, domain name, etc. We're talking less than $500 total if you already own a box. Such an experiment is within the reach of just about any person who has sufficient resources (even students) to surf the web. If you don't have the infrastructure to send the email in the clear then crypto won't effect that one whit. And putting up an archive that nobody can get to is not worth the effort either. > > If they don't have crypto laws it's likely they don't have a lot of other > > sorts of laws and the social and economic structure those laws imply. This > > makes it very difficult to operate a archive with any sort of stability or > > protection. > > It is not true that there are more gangsters in the small than in > the powerful nations. What do you mean by stability (which has plenty > of meanings)? Well of course not, the populations aren't comparable. However, it is clear that smaller 3rd world countries have much more stringent regulations or because the instability causes there to be no standards to regulation and lack many of the protections we in the US take for granted. It makes the continued existance of the archive problematic. Putting up an archive on Monday only to have it go down on Tuesday is pyrrhic at best. I use stability in the commen political meaning. The country has a political and social system that is long-lived, has a well defined mechanism for transfer of power (if they even recognize transfer of power), etc. If you're in a situation where some rebels or other forces start lobbing mortar shells into your immediate area then crypto is the least of your worries. Or as in Columbia where a group drove into town, drug people out into the street and shot them in the head. Consider S. Korea. Even though it's a democracy it's illegal to operate a firewall. The closest place S. Koreans can get in many cases to a firewall and network security (for groups outside of S. Korea) is Australia. Now how do you expect to seriously run a crypto site when the military and police have a legal authority to come rummage in your system at will? And can put you in detention if you deny them that access? Those sorts of places are where crypto is needed but clearly can't do the job for themselves. > > And what about the costs and effects incurred by that person you so glibly > > throw away? > > I suppose that running an archive is a voluntary (self-sacrificing) > act of a benovolent person ready to offer his service to the public. > If his site has to close down sometime later, he has to accept his > bad luck. Why should you care so much minutely for him? (And you > say below that the money problem is trivial!) No, it isn't self-sacrifice. It's sacrifice for the users of that archive. Their motives are not self-centered, they're society centered. As users of those archives you OWE them. I would suggest strongly(!) that you spend more time studying ethics and morality. > So it rests to find people who have the time and (that small) money > and energy to run sites and some countries that aren't going to > have strict cryto laws in the near future. THAT, however, is > difficult, I believe. Duh. I wonder why....(well, actualy I don't) ____________________________________________________________________ If I can put in one word what has always infuriated me in any person, any group, any movement, or any nation, it is: bullying Howard Zinn The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Re: No Subject ( camera nonsense )
by Michael Motyka 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I think we read a message not so long ago from a 'punk who > spotted the prototype of these 'bomb-sniffing cameras' along > a California highway, no? > Don't remember the date but when asked to pinpoint the thing so someone else could actually go take a look there was no response from the original poster. I wrote it off as babbling. There is one device above the westbound section of 580 on the Livermore side of the Altamont pass. About the size of a small SpectraPhysics Laser, the surface appears solid - i.e. no visual sensor. My best guess - radar for either speed measurement or traffic density measurement. Chemical sniffer - NOT. Radiation detector - perhaps, but I doubt it. Best bet - traffic analysis. These counties here are always fighting about population growth and the traffic implications. As if one stinking town owns the entire godamned federal interstate. Little, carpetbagging Napoleans everywhere you look. As for neural systems detecting illegal activity - yeah? what? Two people talking? Looking disreputable? Having their hands *appear* to coincide for a second? This "technology", if detected in a public place, should be zapped and the promoters tarred and feathered*. *Superglue or RTV and polyfill may legally be substituted for the traditional materials. m

4 5

Re: (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 07:26:21 -0800 (PST) > From: "Joel O'Connor" <ogrenivek(a)yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: > They say education is power abd naybe they were correct. I agree with > the fact that more people need to use encryption, the problem (as you > stated) is that people do not understand how to use it, or even know > it exists. Unfortunate for us, fortunate for big brother. While the > only way we can counteract this debate is through empowerment, the > question remains, how do you spread the word to up to a million > people, enough to get their interest and keep it, enough to take the > time to teach them how to use the tools. I work for an IT department I'd say the obvious answer is to buy a spammers mailing list and then use it to send out a one-time-only missive on the issues with a directive of where to go for more information. Mass email letters to newspapers all over the US (or whereever you are). Hit usenet with copies. Buy add space in newspapers and magazines. Hit up the local media for PSA's. Use the local public access television stations. etc. It's not the how that people are having a hard time with, it's the why. ____________________________________________________________________ If I can put in one word what has always infuriated me in any person, any group, any movement, or any nation, it is: bullying Howard Zinn The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Intelligent cameras, a reference
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Scientific American Apr. 1996 Smart Rooms Alex P. Pentland pp. 68 - 76 ____________________________________________________________________ If I can put in one word what has always infuriated me in any person, any group, any movement, or any nation, it is: bullying Howard Zinn The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

LEA Interviews
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is attorney protected information. We've been having discussion with a legal person about being interviewed by law enforcement officials and/or signing a statement. These comments are offered by permission (and might be coupled with DCF's advice of saying only "I Want a Lawyer"): [Begin comments] > What do you mean, that they would use the information to > "impeach" a possible witness? Do you mean that he would not > be called to testify against a defendant? Sorry to be opaque - "impeachment" means, basically, making a witness lose credibility with the jury. The only use I've been able to imagine for wanting a written statement is to make you look bad, in the event that you are called by either side to testify, and end up testifying favorably to the defendant. If you appear to be a "hostile witness", it's even possible that you can be impeached by the attorney/party who asked you to testify. The scenario I see looks something like this - 1. You're called as a defense witness to testify to the effect that you've been on the list for years, messages like the defendants's weren't unique or especially unusual, that you understood them as satire or political commentary and not as actual threats, given the wider context in which they occurred. The general impression conveyed by your testimony is that you're a rational, reasonable, respectable person who the jury can like and trust, that you think the defendant is perhaps weird but basically misunderstood and harmless. 2. The prosecution cross-examines you about your conclusions re the defendant - they're going to ask you how well you really knew/know him, how much you knew about his other behavior (they're likely to try to sneak in information about the defendant's other alleged misbehavior here, if they haven't already), and so forth. To the extent that you say you didn't know him, your direct testimony becomes less and less relevant - and if you start to say that you did know him well, they're likely to produce the document you wrote/signed, and ask you a series of uncomfortable questions about it, designed to create the impression you were lying to the jury earlier during your testimony, e.g., if the statement says "I didn't know that the defendant had done these other creepy things, and they make me question whether or not I know him very well, and I feel differently about his threats now that I know about those creepy things", the prosecutor will make a big production out of pointing out the differences between your testimony at trial and what you wrote during the LEA interrogation. Understandably, you probably wanted to distance yourself from the defendant when the LE agents were in your home, especially after they'd given you a list of creepy things he supposedly did - but they're going to hold you to the same degree of distance from him and his thoughts/actions if you end up testifying at trial. Writing it down and having you sign it serves several purposes - it gives the prosecutor a document s/he can wave around, ask you to read from, and otherwise organize a little production around - it also lets you be impeached with your own words, instead of calling the cops to the stand to dispute your recollection of your conversation, which takes on a "he said/she said" tone, and might make it look like the big mean cops were picking on poor little you. If they can make poor little you eat his own words, they look good, and you look bad. So .. that's what I'm afraid the document is for. I've been trying to think of something else - but especially where the agents asked you to pick out just key bits of your conversation, and assert that they're true, and let the rest of the information be lost to memory and time .. it makes me think the information they selected was important to them. The information they got seems helpful to them only in the context that you end up testifying at trial - I can't think of any other reason it would be useful to them. It sounds like the psychological factors of the questioning were pretty well optimized to make you want (probably partly subconsciously) to distance yourself from the defendant, both to avoid implied guilt by association, and to maintain a common ground of reasonableness with the cops while discussing other things like politics. The current issue of the Utne Reader has a piece by the Unabomber's brother and his wife talking about how the FBI manipulated them into providing evidence against the Unabomber by appearing sympathetic and reasonable, forming a common "us (good people) versus the actions of they crazy guy, who needs us to work together to help him get better" bond which was ultimately used to try to kill the crazy guy, to the horror of the brother/wife. While I do think that they may have pulled a fast one on you, I don't think that reflects badly on you as a person .. it's pretty difficult to tell which cops are actually reasonable people, and which are pretending to be reasonable people in order to further their own agendas. [End comments]

1 0

RE: Encryption for the Masses
by Wilson, Jamie (J.R.) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 We live in a society where freedom is largely an illusion and where Big Brother doesn't fear protest by the general population. In most cases, simply creating a crisis is enough for individuals to not only give their liberties up but to actually plead for their liberties to be taken away in the name of safety and security. What they don't realize is that the sheep are begging the wolves to protect them. It's not the militia guy next door that I'm worried about -- he pretty much tells us what he's up to. What I'm afraid of is the NSA reading my email and listening to my phone calls without my knowledge. So how do we get the masses to realize that we aren't talking about a potential threat, but are actually already living in a Big Brother society with very few secrets. We can continue to bury our heads in the illusion that we really are free, but we have to ask ourselves whether we are more free today than we were ten years, five years or even a year ago. If the answer is no, then there is a serious problem. So excusing my rant, my point is that when the average individual wakes up and realizes that his or her life really is an open book and that every piece of email sent has been filtered through a computer somewhere, that every posting to a newsgroup has been archived and just may pop up and haunt them in the future, when they realize that the only privacy available to them is the privacy that they claim and defend then, and only then, will we see a change in crypto policies around the world. When the citizenry begins demanding accountability by elected officials for the privacy that they've sold, for the chains they've placed on their constituents and for the oaths they have broken then we'll see the tide change for the better. Until then, the rest of us will have to wage the fight to protect the ignorant. ____________________________________________________ J. Richard Wilson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.5 iQA/AwUBNm7BSsDUWXiy5rQXEQJRUQCdEUMFE6kfNz2/hzJmOmiKoAyEKEYAoNtd vAJ/Hc/RTsdDs+F7eLnroqCT =Gxd/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -----Original Message----- From: Joel O'Connor [mailto:ogrenivek@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, 09 December, 1998 10:26 To: Anonymous Cc: Cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: They say education is power abd naybe they were correct. I agree with the fact that more people need to use encryption, the problem (as you stated) is that people do not understand how to use it, or even know it exists. Unfortunate for us, fortunate for big brother. While the only way we can counteract this debate is through empowerment, the question remains, how do you spread the word to up to a million people, enough to get their interest and keep it, enough to take the time to teach them how to use the tools. I work for an IT department and the users I train rank from intelligent to "where the hell did you come from?!" Teaching people who have no want or need is the hardest part, just ask Christians, they know what it's like. Our greatest problems lie within our inability to train and make use of what lies in front of us, if people don't see the need, then why would they? Another point, some people feel that if they have nothing to hide, then why use it. An acquaitance of mine has the same stubborn attitude, what steps do you take to thwart that? That excuse bothers me beyond belief, but it is a common thought that if you need to take the steps to hide something, then it must be wrong. God help us. . . ---Anonymous <nobody(a)replay.com> wrote: > > I think setting up mirror sites of crypto archives > across the world is a great idea. However, I also > think we need to focus on getting more and more > people to use crypto. I would guess that the vast > majority of computer users worldwide see no use > for encryption in their day-to-day lives -- and > even those that do don't also use it. > > If everybody in the world is using encryption, it > is going to be extremely difficult for "democratic" > governments to tell them they can't use it any more. > > Unfortunately, it's easy for governments to blame > crypto for terrorism and a host of other crimes, > simply because the average citizen doesn't understand > the concept of an "electronic envelope". > > > == Ogre bounces like sonar. . .Peace. Ogre _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: The politics of crypto archives (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 20:03:05 +0100 > From: Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen(a)stud.uni-muenchen.de> > Subject: Re: The politics of crypto archives > We were talking about a site that has to be closed because of (new) > crypto laws, not technically down which is seldom with modern hardware. > And also you said that money is no problem! You need to go back and re-read what prompted this. Your responce is completely out of context. > Why you care so much about people who voluteer to run sites? They > certainly know what kind of risks that they probably face, financial > or otherwise. Do you care your neighbour who opens up a new company > and do you feel unconditionally have to give him advices?? Are you > the one who is cleverer than all the others? It depends, do I shop there? I'm done with this discussion. You want to expect people to put their neck on the line and you use their services while owning them nothing then wonder why nobody does it, so be it. ____________________________________________________________________ If I can put in one word what has always infuriated me in any person, any group, any movement, or any nation, it is: bullying Howard Zinn The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: German government press release on Wassenaar (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 9 Dec 98 20:04 +0100 > From: ulf(a)fitug.de (Ulf =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=) > Subject: Re: German government press release on Wassenaar > 1.) Officials point out that "export control" does not mean "export > restriction". Spin-doctor bullshit. There are forms of "export control" (such as the > requirement to notify the Export Office of your exports) that do not > hinder the export of crypto software in any significant way. So it > remains to be seen how Germany and other countries will implement > the new rules. And why should one need to notify them if there is not at least the implied ability on their part to say "NO, you won't either."? > 2.) The government has acknowledged that public domain software > remains unrestricted. This also applies to copyrighted software such > as PGP which "has been made available without restrictions upon its > further dissemination". PGP is NOT unrestrited. ____________________________________________________________________ If I can put in one word what has always infuriated me in any person, any group, any movement, or any nation, it is: bullying Howard Zinn The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

No Subject
by owner-cypherpunks＠Algebra.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Re: News on Wassenaar anyone?
by Ted Rallis 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If cryptography protecting intellectual property is exempt from regulation, my words are now my intellectual property -- all of them. Ted Jan Garefelt <jang(a)pobox.se> on 12/08/98 11:11:33 AM To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com cc: (bcc: Ted Rallis/Certicom) Subject: News on Wassenaar anyone? Does anyone have information on the new Wassenaar arrangement, or information on when official information will be available? I'm only interested in the crypto parts, and I have already read the Aaron/Reuter story found on http://www.crypto.com/reuters/show.cgi?article=912708583 Thanks /Jan Garefelt

2 1

Global Strike to protest Wassenaar
by Ken Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi, "Strike to protest Wassenaar!" URL: http://www.zanshin.com/~bobg/ "This is a global call for computer professionals to strike on Monday, 14 December, 1998 to protest the signing of the Wassenaar Arrangement, an international treaty that imposes new restrictions on cryptographic software technology. The strike is meant to raise awareness about the importance of cryptography, about the U.S. government's wrongheaded attempts to curtail its use, and about the strong-arm tactics used by the United States to pressure other countries into limiting their citizens' rights the way it has limited its own." Regards, Ken Williams Packet Storm Security http://www.Genocide2600.com/~tattooman/ E.H.A.P. Head of Operations http://www.ehap.org/ ehap(a)ehap.org NC State CS Dept http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/ jkwilli2(a)unity.ncsu.edu PGP DSS/DH/RSA Keys http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jkwilli2/pgpkey/ ___________________________________________________________________ Get Your Email Sniffed and Decrypted for Free at http://www.nsa.gov -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNm/VQJDw1ZsNz1IXAQGzygf/Zt/sP419T5dA1gY/Rru7ACtv6xWXWMUA HDBQPFbGV8yviOIU7N2bHndWGtr+hjPcdoudoXlOwYF73/TybNSzs6J/iAF9yhSR UmRKM+suH8FwJ90F+i36W8hCQrkhPYXEwXW4AWDEeGNKjZdRLApS/POMcnTWoTSK iHwDsdE+AevhlcWuC1nk80AlSEVNE/B2zmbWGax12tciM2NxTc4AqtqI3BwXebVq f/04ZC9515dR/XHGhtbmQ08sTNS9eQUG8H626XE58XtE+MOsVEJYjUQFDd9L13T2 dlun/4+U1J9xMmN8uYlUySxKr9XmharSXLJCmpmIaE0bwDwTx7Pkpw== =DaVN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

12 14

No Subject
by owner-cypherpunks＠Algebra.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

[ZKS Press Release] 50th Anniversary of the Declaration of HumanRights a Reminder th at Privacy must be Preserved
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text From: Nicola Dourambeis <nicola(a)zks.net> To: ZKS Press Releases <zks-press(a)zks.net> Subject: [ZKS Press Release] 50th Anniversary of the Declaration of Human Rights a Reminder th at Privacy must be Preserved Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 18:13:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-zks-press(a)zks.net Precedence: normal Reply-To: press(a)zks.net ======================================================== Zero-Knowledge Systems Press Release, http://www.zks.net ======================================================== 50th Anniversary of the Declaration of Human Rights a Reminder that Privacy must be Preserved. Web site launched to allow citizens of the world to protest their loss of privacy. December 9, 1998 (Montreal)--On the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), as well as in protest of the recent changes to cryptography policies worldwide, Zero-Knowledge Systems is spearheading a campaign to encourage governments to loosen newly imposed cryptography restrictions. This campaign, seen on the web site http://www.freecrypto.org, enables citizens of the world to express their outrage and concern at the increasing loss of their privacy. Article 12 of the UDHR states, "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family home, or correspondence...." Yet, decades later, we are witnessing the unprecedented collection of personal information and intrusions into the lives of many. Internet users in particular, confront multiple privacy violations while online. Over 80% of Internet users polled consider privacy be their primary concern. The best defense for online privacy is to use strong cryptography, which allows Internet users to preserve the privacy of their communications and personal information. On December 3, 1998, the Internet community experienced one of the strongest setbacks to their privacy in recent years. The 33 member countries of the Wassenaar Arrangement agreed for the first time to impose export restrictions on mass-market cryptography products. Until December 3rd, the majority of the Wassenaar signatories did not impose export controls over mass-market products that protect personal security and privacy through cryptography. The United States Department of Commerce Under-Secretary has taken credit for convincing all other Wassenaar countries to impose these added restrictions over cryptography designed for average citizens. Barry Steinhardt, President of the Electronic Frontier Foundation believes "The US government has strong-armed the rest of the industrialized world into adopting a policy that will make us less secure and more vulnerable to electronic terrorism. Our critical national and international infrastructures need to be protected by strong encryption. Weak encryption with back doors that will be exploited not just by governments, but by information pirates, will leave us at greater risk." "It is not too late to reverse course," continues Steinhardt. "Wassenaar allows, but does not require, the other national governments to follow the US' foolish lead." "Cryptography is the key to preserving privacy for Internet users," explains Austin Hill, President of Zero-Knowledge Systems. "By limiting the accessibility of cryptography, you are limiting people's ability to protect themselves. Now, more than ever, we have the ability to influence the future of the electronic world; we must ensure that it has the same the basic rights and protections that the UDHR promised us fifty years ago." Hill continues, "We hope that Internet users will be proactive in protesting this human rights infringement to their governments. The freecrypto.org web site provides such a space, where users can learn about the issues and send their government representatives a message expressing their dissatisfaction with the tightening of cryptography controls." The freecrypto.org web site provides a form that citizens can fill out and have faxed or emailed to their respective government representatives. It also provides information and articles on the recently imposed cryptography restrictions. ---------------------------------------------------------------30----------- ---------------------------------------------------- The Electronic Frontier Foundation is one of the leading civil liberties organizations devoted to ensuring that the Internet remains the world's first truly global vehicle for free speech, and that the privacy and security of all on-line communication is preserved. Founded in 1990 as a nonprofit, public interest organization, EFF is based in San Francisco, California and maintains an extensive archive of information on free speech, privacy, and encryption policy at http://www.eff.org. Zero-Knowledge Systems Inc., http://www.zks.net, is a Canadian based software developer dedicated to providing cryptographic solutions for the privacy and security of Internet users. They will be launching their first product called Freedom(tm) in February 1999. For more information, contact: Nicola Dourambeis Alex Fowler, Marketing Associate Director of Public Affairs Zero-Knowledge Systems Inc. Electronic Frontier Foundation Tel. (514) 286-2636 ext. 222 Tel. (415) 436-9333 ext. 103 Email. nicola(a)zks.net Email. afowler(a)eff.org --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 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'

1 0

A server for a crypto CD?
by mgraffam＠idsi.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello all .. Does anyone have a server with a CDROM drive? I have a 500+ meg archive of crypto-related material (crypto, stego, tempest, information theory, etc). Lots of software, applications, and papers (100M or so). I'd be glad to burn out a CD, and send it to anyone who can put the material online. It'll take time to get it ready: I need time to strip out some stuff (non-redistributable Fortezza stuff .. its probably a moot point, now that we have Skipjack, but why risk it for something so dumb?). If you have the bandwidth, let me know. Michael J. Graffam (mgraffam(a)idsi.net) They (who) seek to establish systems of government based on the regimentation of all human beings by a handful of individual rulers.. call this a new order. It is not new, and it is not order." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

2 1

COMMENT: Minimum Security Devices and Procedures and Bank Secrecy
by Max Inux 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A letter someone CC'ed to dc-stuff, we seem to be having the same conversations there and here... Waasenaar and FDIC "Know your customer" -- Max Inux <maxinux(a)openpgp.net> Hey Christy!!! KeyID 0x8907E9E5 Kinky Sex makes the world go round O R Strong crypto makes the world safe If crypto is outlawed only outlaws will have crypto Fingerprint(Photo Also): 259D 59F7 D98C CD73 1ACD 54Ea 6C43 4877 8907 E9E5 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 07:13:55 -0800 (PST) X-Loop: openpgp.net From: KAT in the HAT <katinthehat(a)rocketmail.com> To: comments(a)FDIC.gov Subject: COMMENT: Minimum Security Devices and Procedures and Bank Secrecy Act I would like to state that this is the most Orwellian, privacy-invading, search-without-a-warrant, snoopy regulation I have ever seen. I believe it is a horrible idea that should never be allowed. I am growing so tired of my government trying to monitor it's every citizen's every move just in case there may be a criminal act committed. Every citizen is innocent until proven guilty and has a right to privacy against such causeless searches. As the 4th amendment to the Constitution of the United States says (have you ever heard of it?): "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oaths and affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." What you advocate is a warrantless search of all my financial papers and effects without probable cause or evidence of any sort of crime being committed. This kind of nosy government action is exactly the kind of thing that should never be allowed in a free state. I will fight to keep my nation from becoming a 24- hour-a-day, 7-days-a-week monitored police state until my last breath. I urge you to vote against this ghastly measure and to banish it and any act like it to the trashcan. The citizens of the United States deserve better than to be treated like children watched over by Mother Government. If this act is passed, I know what my response will be. I will promptly withdraw all my monies from any institution that follows these regulations, refuse to do any sort of business with them, and urge all my friends and family to do the same. I know that many others will do the same without hesitation. Try explaining to your member and nonmember banks why there is such a sudden cash shortage and why they are losing customers left and right. This act would undoubtedly trigger a nationwide economic crisis as people withdrew from a banking system that had become a puppet of law enforcement and Big Brother. We must be able to TRUST our banks with our money. WE are the customers and any bank that holds goverment surveillance above my trust is no bank that I will do business with. I will simply take my paychecks each month and cash them in their entirety and then do what I want, when I want, unwatched, with my money. I will not be surveilled by Big Brother under the guise of protecting me against shadowy criminals. I value my privacy highly, not because I am a criminal, but because I am a free American, and such privacy is guaranteed to me by our highest legal document (the Constitution). I recommend the FDIC members read it sometime, because obviously they never have before, or this ludicrous act would have never even been proposed. Simply put, this is the worst idea I have ever heard and strongly urge its defeat and nonadoption. Thank you. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= The masters of technology will have to be lighthearted and intelligent. The machine easily masters the grim and the dumb. --Marshall McLuhan =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Welcome To The Multex Investor Network
by Multex Investor Network 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Jane: Thank you for becoming a member of The Multex Investor Network! We look forward to bringing you the world's best and most complete selection of investment research. We will also be in touch periodically to alert you to new features, partnerships and offerings. We're excited you have become one of the thousands of serious investors who have joined our community. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Your User ID is: cypherpinks Your password is not displayed in this message for security reasons ----------------------------------------------------------------------- To complete the registration process and verify your email address, you will need to activate your account the next time you log in by entering the code below after you log in. Please note, you will not be asked for your activation code until after you have logged in with your User ID and password. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Your Activation Code is: 295085 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- You may want to keep a copy of this E-Mail. If you prefer, you may activate your account immediately by pointing your browser to http://www.multexinvestor.com/login.asp. After you log-in, you will be asked to enter your activation code. We look forward to serving you and welcome your comments. You can reach us at mailto:feedback.min@multexsys.com. Sincerely, Jim Tousignant Senior Vice President

1 0

No Subject
by owner-cypherpunks＠Algebra.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

lots of juicy y2k news
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 13:41:51 -0700 From: Bill Mee <bill.mee(a)lmco.com> Subject: Y2K Alert - San Francisco blackout - Pentagon way behind schedul The following is a free Y2K alert + analysis from Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM. ____________________________________________________________ SPECIAL ALERT SAN FRANCISCO BLACKOUT! Guess what, folks: the power system *is* vulnerable to a domino-effect failure. Earlier today (Tuesday), over one million residents of San Francisco lost power. According to this WIRED story (link below), here's what happened (as described by the WIRED story): "An electrical power substation about 20 miles south of San Francisco failed shortly after 8:15 a.m. Tuesday, causing a chain reaction that tripped the two main power generators in San Francisco and knocked out power to 375,000 utility customers in a 49-mile square area. Pacific Gas and Electric estimated that 938, 000 people were affected by the outage." The story quotes Peter Neumann, author of "Computer Related Risks," as saying, "The entire power generation, transmission, and distribution problem is suffering, because there is very little spare power anymore." The cause of the problem? According to the power company, "The cause of the outage was simple human error, which then triggered a complex sequence of events." That's frightening. If "simple human error" can cause this, what might complex human error (i.e. Y2K) cause? The power outage caused massive problems. The SFO airport suffered a total power failure and was running on generators, and BART, the Bay Area Rapid Transit system, lost 17 of its 57 trains. Elevators were stuck mid-floor and the morning commute was a frenzy. THE SAN FRANCISCO REMINDER This event is a reminder of what can happen when Y2K hits, and it alerts us to the fallibility of the power services. This was ONE little glitch. What happens when the Y2K rollover causes a hundred such problems? Or a thousand? And then you combine those little glitches with other little glitches from the phone system, the 911 system, the transportation infrastructure and the banks. What do you get then? By the way, this little incident is also going to deplete inventories of generators in the Bay Area as people finally get it: Hey, we could lose power! If you live in San Fran and you've been *thinking* about getting a generator, you're now TOO LATE. But it's not too late to move out of the city altogether, which is probably the safest option, considering what might happen if the power stays off for DAYS instead of hours. In this case, power was restored within hours to most customers, but that might not be the case when Y2K hits. Y2KNEWSWIRE encourages people to stock a 30-day supply of food, water, medicine, cash and heating supplies in case a much longer power outage occurs during the 1/1/2000 rollover. Or better yet, distance yourself from any high-density population center. AN OVERVIEW OF THE POWER PROBLEM * There are few backup power supplies available, so some failures that used to have backups no longer do * Failures DO cascade throughout the system. In this case, one small substation caused a power loss to one million people * Power failures almost immediately bring a city to its knees. All transportation is immediately threatened, and few businesses have enough fuel to run generators longer than 24 hours. * All it takes is one simple little human mistake to cause one million people to lose power. What might a complex, unpredictable problem like Y2K cause to happen? * Demands on the power system are higher than ever, and extra power bandwidth is almost non-existent. There is very little "extra" to go around if power stations start to fail. Read the WIRED story at: http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/16710.html Or, an earlier report at: http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/16709.html Fox News reports on it, too, at: http://www.foxnews.com/stage04.sml PENTAGON WAY BEHIND ON Y2K REPAIRS This Union Tribune story (link below) describes the unimpressive status of the Pentagon's Y2K repairs, stating, "...a recent Pentagon report states that the Defense Department is behind its own schedule for rewriting computer software to work after 1999. While 52 percent of the military's mission-critical weapons and computers meet Y2K standards, the Pentagon schedule calls for 100 percent compliance by the end of this month." There's another deadline that won't be met. It's the old December 31, 1998 milestone, remember? So what's going on here, really? "Y2K is taking longer than expected," says John Pike, a military analyst for the Federation of American Scientists. The Army and Air Force are 70% behind schedule and 30% of the Navy's systems are behind schedule. Yet, somehow, the Air Force is promising to have 85% of its systems compliant in the "coming weeks." The story also reports how the NSA (National Security Agency) has only 19% of its systems ready, and some fixes aren't even scheduled to be done until October of 1999. And that's if they're on-time! DENIAL IN ACTION With all this in mind, this story reports that John Hamre, the Pentagon's No. 2 civilian says, "The Department of Defense will be able to defend the United States of America on the 1st of January 2000, no question about it." Then another Pentagon official (unnamed) says *other* countries are still in denial. THE ACCIDENTAL NUKE LAUNCH THEORY The nuke launch theory resurfaces in this story, too, with the following: "Hobbled by a flat-line economy and deteriorating military, Russia's nuclear weapons systems are susceptible to the Y2K Bug, says analyst Kraig. Or, he says, computer glitches in American early-warning systems might falsely indicate a Russian missile launch. He suggests that the United States, Russia and other nations with nuclear weapons stand down their missiles until potential Y2K problems are resolved." Link at: http://www.uniontrib.com/news/uniontrib/sun/news/news_1n6year. html BUT CAN MISSILES REALLY LAUNCH ON THEIR OWN? Yep. South Korea proved it just last Friday. Read this story: CIRCUITRY GLITCH LAUNCHES MISSILE IN SOUTH KOREA While the world debates whether nuclear missiles might be accidentally launched by a Y2K-related computer glitch, last Friday saw a fully-armed anti-aircraft missile *accidentally* fired in South Korea. It killed three people from the raining debris. This Reuters story reports: "The Korean air force said in a statement that a circuitry defect occurred as soldiers turned on a switch which signified that all was ready for inspection. 'Normally the missile cannot be launched with this switch,' the statement said. 'A circuitry problem, not human error, was the cause of the accident,' it added." Obviously, nuclear missile have far more robust safeguards against accidental launch than an anti-aircraft missile, but the comparisons are inevitable. At the very least, this incident proves once and for all that problems with the circuitry (embedded systems) can cause missiles to accidentally launch. Read the story at: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/wl/story.html? s=v/nm/19981204/wl/korea_36.html (Sorry about the extra-long URL link. You might have to reattach the two halves if your e-mail program 'wrapped' it.) WILL GOD PROVIDE? It's fascinating. Here at Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM, we receive about ten remove requests each week stating, essentially, "Take me off this list. I don't need to prepare. God will provide for me." We're guessing these people forgot about the story of Noah. God helps those people who prepare, not those who ignore all the warnings and think of God as some kind of giant FEMA service. Whether or not you think God will help you through this crisis, you *still* need to prepare. Don't let your faith in God be an excuse to do nothing. The people *best* prepared for Y2K, it seems, are those who are spiritually, mentally and physically prepared. MORE DETAILS ON FDIC'S CUSTOMER PROFILING PLAN We've been called frauds and hoaxers for mentioning the FDIC's new "Big Brother" plans that would have banks tracking and monitoring all your private banking behavior and reporting to the "authorities" any time your behavior veers from what's considered, "normal." Some of you didn't believe this was real. You were skeptical. So today we're posting the actual link on the FDIC's site that spells it out. Read it yourself and wake up: the banks and the FDIC are going to play hardball on this Y2K issue. They'll do everything in their power to discourage cash withdrawals while putting a positive spin on it (notice the tame name, the "Know Your Customer" program!). Why? Because they're fighting for survival. Here's some of the text from the FDIC site (link below): "SUMMARY: The FDIC is proposing to issue a regulation requiring insured nonmember banks to develop and maintain "Know Your Customer'' programs. As proposed, the regulation would require each nonmember bank to develop a program designed to determine the identity of its customers; determine its customers' sources of funds; determine the normal and expected transactions of its customers; monitor account activity for transactions that are inconsistent with those normal[[Page 67530]]and expected transactions; and report any transactions of its customers that are determined to be suspicious, in accordance with the FDIC's existing suspicious activity reporting regulation." Notice the words being used here: ...determine the identify... determine customers' sources of funds...monitor account activity.. .report any transactions determined to be suspicious... suspicious activity reporting regulation. These are not the ideas that should be promoted in a free society. These phrases belong in the realm of a Police State, where every person is monitored in order to "root out the criminals." Or, in this case, to root out people wanting cash for Y2K. What happened to the idea of privacy for American citizens? If this FDIC regulation passes, you can forget about it. Not only will federal authorities have the right to dig through your bank records at their leisure, the people working at the bank will be legally *required* to snoop on you. Interestingly, the proposed FDIC Big Brother regulation may actually accelerate the cash demand as people try to beat the "Know Your Customer" deadline and get their cash out early. The FDIC may actually cause its own worst nightmare. Read the text yourself at: http://www.fdic.gov/lawsregs/fedr/98knocus.txt Want to comment on the FDIC's Big Brother plan? Here's the information given by the FDIC: DATES: Comments must be received by March 8, 1999. ADDRESSES: Comments should be directed to: Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary, Attention: Comments/OES, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20429. Comments may be hand-delivered to the guard station at the rear of the 550 17th Street Building (located on F Street), on business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. In addition, comments may be sent by fax to (202) 898-3838, or by electronic mail to comments(a)FDIC.gov. Comments may be inspected and photocopied in the FDIC Public Information Center, Room 100, 801 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C., between 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., on business days. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol A. Mesheske, Special Activities Section, Division of Supervision, (202) 898-6750, or Karen L. Main, Counsel, Legal Division (202) 898-8838. But wait! The FDIC e-mail address given here *doesn't even work! * It appears the FDIC doesn't really want your comments. We dug up the right address: commentsoes(a)fdic.gov WIGGLE ROOM Don't ya love these Year 2000 "compliance statements" put out by banks? Here's one sent in by a reader. It shows *lots* of wiggle room: "California Federal Bank has already anticipated these problems. Our Year 2000 Project Team has conducted a comprehensive review to determine the changes we need to make to our systems. Some of the modifications are currently being made, and we expect to test and have the majority of the modifications functioning by December 31, 1998. I hope that I have been able to address all of your concerns. If you have any further questions, written inquiries may be mailed to our Year 2000 Project Team..." With this kind of statement, even missing the December 31 deadline means you're still "on track" because you can claim that you never promised ALL the systems would be done on time. Here's our favorite phrase: "comprehensive review." If you've ever been part of any committee, you're fully aware of the meaningless of this phrase. RIGHT ON TIME, CNN USES THE WORD, 'HOARDING' Just as Y2KNEWSWIRE warned, some media outlets are going to start bashing those who are smart enough to prepare for Y2K. Right on cue, CNN publishes this AP story entitled, "Worry over Y2K sparks hoarding of dried foods." See it at: http://www.cnn.com/FOOD/news/9812/07/y2k.hoarding.ap/ WATCH CAREFULLY! Watch for the gerund "hoarding" to metamorph into a plural noun: "hoarders!" It will happen, and when it does, that's a sign that the mainstream is beginning the attack on those who prepare. We predicted it months ago, and you'll see it soon enough, because the people who waited until the last minute are going to be angry when they can't find the supplies they want. And who will they blame? Those who prepared early, of course. That is, unless the folks in Washington show some leadership and actually encourage people to take some common-sense, basic preparations. In fact, just today, Y2KNEWSWIRE issues a nationwide press release urging John Koskinen to take some action on this. Read our statement at: http://www.y2knewswire.com/koskinen.htm DETAILS ON THE POSTAL SERVICE? There's one government agency we haven't heard much from on Y2K yet: the postal service. If you work for the USPS and you'd like to tell us what you know about its Y2K preparedness, give us a shout at tips(a)y2knewswire.com We'll keep you anonymous, of course, so you don't get fired. MISSOURI DEPT. OF HEALTH DEMANDS DOCTORS PROVE THEIR COMPLIANCE The Missouri Dept of Health is getting Missouri doctors hot under the collar. A recent letter sent to all Missouri-based health practitioners commands them to present detailed descriptions of the steps they've taken to make their computers Y2K-compliant. These must be returned by December 24th of this year, and those who are late will receive stiff penalties. Our guess is the Mo. Dept. of Health isn't even compliant yet. More importantly, this brings up a critical Y2K point: you can't just DEMAND everything be fixed on time. That doesn't mean it will be fixed. China is trying this right now, threatening criminal sentencing for companies that don't get compliant in time. (Wow, neat trick.) The state of Florida is trying something similar, although probably without the China-style imprisonment. It's hilarious to see bureaucrats beat their heads against the wall on this. They're so used to passing laws to change peoples' behavior, they think it applies to Y2K as well. They think they can just *regulate* the results of Y2K repairs, actually causing things to be fixed by simply demanding so. If anything, Y2K is going to laughingly demonstrate the futility of over-legislation. If you criminalize "not being compliant," you don't solve the problem, you just end up with LOTS of criminals after 2000. FCC WORRIED ABOUT PLANES HITTING TOWERS As often as the Y2K skeptics refer to, "planes falling out of the sky," they almost never give it the serious thought it deserves. There are, in fact, a dozen or more ways planes can actually "fall from the sky," all related to Y2K. The FCC recently revealed yet another one we haven't thought of yet: planes hitting unlit radio towers. In fact, this scenario has the FCC so worried, they recently issued an "Antenna Structure Lighting Responsibilities" statement. Their summary of the problem leaves nothing to the imagination. They say, "Y2K-related problems could cause a structure's light systems to fail, which will create a hazard to air navigation. Computer-controlled devices, such as those found in automatic monitoring and control systems used for antenna structure lighting, are vulnerable to Y2K-related malfunctions, and may fail. Commercial electric power sources may also fail, leaving antenna structures vulnerable to blackouts." The statement goes further, saying, "The Commission considers all light outages and malfunctions as extremely serious situations. We therefore expect antenna structure owners (and licensees, who are secondarily responsible in the event of default by the owner) to become aware of the ways in which Y2K-related problems may affect their light systems, and to be prepared to promptly report and remedy all outages and malfunctions." Can you say, "Y2K lawsuit?" We already know that at least *two* planes are going to be in the sky that night: one carrying Jane Garvey and the other carrying John Koskinen. Suppose one of these hits a radio tower (because the lights mysteriously went out). Major lawsuit time. The FCC has already warned the holders of the FCC licenses they are, "secondarily responsible" for such events. In lawyer-speak, that means KA-CHING! Pass the bankroll, buddy, you just bought yourself a 747. To review some of the many various ways planes can actually fall out of the sky: 1) Ground control radar could fail, causing the planes to run out of fuel. 2) Electronics in the plane itself could fail, causing the pilot to lose control of the aircraft, resulting in a crash. 3) Navigation electronics could fail, sending the plane into a mountain or straight into the ground. 4) Faulty air traffic control could result in a mid-air collision, taking out *two* planes at once. 5) Problems with refueling systems or fuel indicators could make the ground crew or the pilot think the plane has more fuel than it does, causing a mid-air depletion of fuel (doesn't seem likely, but it's one more potential scenario). Read the FCC details at: http://www.fcc.gov/cib/Public_Notices/da982408.html THE Y2KNEWSWIRE MAIL BAG (Actual e-mail sent from readers.) "Greetings. I had quite a disturbing reality take place today. I live in Seattle, WA and I bank with Seafirst, a northwest bank owned by Bank of America. I went to my local bank with the intentions of withdrawing my menial savings account of approximately $3,000. I walked into my bank, filled out a withdrawal slip, and approached a teller. When the young woman behind the counter saw the amount that I was trying to withdrawal, she literally began to panic. She had a brief conference with a few of her co-workers and then informed me that the bank did not have the cash to give to me! They were literally "out of money" as she told me. "You could try and come back later today and we MIGHT have enough then" she told me. I began to think what a scary situation we are going to be witnessing when 10 people try to withdraw just $3,000 each from their accounts! Y2KNEWSWIRE ASKS FOR YOUR HELP Have you recently received a notice from your bank designed to limit your access to your own money? If so, we'd like to hear about it. One reader sent in this notice: "In accordance with Federal Reserve Regulation D, [bank name] will continue to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice on the withdrawal of funds in any money market or savings account." We suspect banks are quietly taking action to place limits on your ability to get cash. If you have evidence of this at *your* bank, you can e-mail us at tips(a)y2knewswire.com - - - Webmaster _____________________________________________ Get ready for Y2K, read the Y2K Sourcebook Get the inside sources for stocking up now http://www.y2ksupply.com/index.asp?pageid=sourcebook _____________________________________________ Tell a friend about the free Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM e-mail alert: http://www.y2knewswire.com/tellafriend.htm _____________________________________________ Sign the banking crisis petition, help save the banks! http://www.y2ksupply.com/bankpetition.htm _____________________________________________ This e-mail message is subject to the following disclaimer: http://www.y2knewswire.com/Index.asp?pageid=disclaimer All statements made herein, and made since August of 1998, are Year 2000 Statements and are retroactively protected as Year 2000 readiness disclosures under the Good Samaritan Act _____________________________________________ This message brought to you by: Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM Feel free to forward this e-mail to anyone. This may be posted on any web site if credit is given to: http://www.y2knewswire.com _____________________________________________ To be removed from this e-mail list, simply go to the following web address: http://www.y2ksupply.com/u.asp?E=bill.mee@lmco.com Or forward this section to removes(a)y2knewswire.com _____________________________________________ Join the "believers-only" free Y2K e-mail newsletter: http://www.y2ksupply.com/believers.htm _____________________________________________ HOW TO REACH US: If you have a hot tip for us (anonymity assured): tips(a)y2knewswire.com If you have a compliment: compliments(a)y2knewswire.com If you want to be added to the subscription list (free!), visit http://www.y2knewswire.com and enter your e-mail address in the sign up box located at the upper-left corner of the page. If you have a complaint: complaints(a)y2knewswire.com For questions about ordering: service(a)y2knewswire.com For any other comments: comments(a)y2knewswire.com - - --------------0220774A6B2AF7E94E7A812F-- - ------- End of Forwarded Message ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

No Subject
by owner-cypherpunks＠Algebra.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

RE: Wassenaar summary (and a funny new loophole)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Are items freely exportable between countrys that are party to this agreement? >Systems that do not meet those conditions are export-controlled if they >use symmetric encryption with more than 56 bit keys, algorithms based >on factorization or on logarithms in finite fields with more than 512 >bit keys (e.g. RSA, DH) or on discrete logarithms in other groups (such >as elliptic curves) with more than 112 bits. They may be exported for >personal use.

1 0