December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

PGP 5.0 source shipped to Europe!
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Unknown Cypherpunks shipped the PGP 5.0 source to Europe. http://www.ifi.uio.no/pgp/pgp50.shtml See the source books! Read the shipping label! Trace the package! --SourceMonger

1 0

Re: INFORMATION
by David Downey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

----Original Message Follows---- >From owner-cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net Wed Jun 18 23:17:57 1997 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) id WAA08563 for cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:25:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cpunks@localhost) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) id WAA08541 for cypherpunks(a)infonex.com; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:25:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rigel.cyberpass.net (root(a)rigel.infonex.com [206.170.114.3]) by sirius.infonex.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA08529 for <cpunks(a)sirius.infonex.com>; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:24:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by rigel.cyberpass.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA29918 for <cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net>; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:23:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA09031 for cypherpunks-unedited-outgoing; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 21:30:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kim.teleport.com (kim.teleport.com [192.108.254.26]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA09026 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 21:30:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kluge (ip-pdx38-11.teleport.com [204.202.160.13]) by kim.teleport.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA07841; Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:17:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19970618221325.01cf2b00(a)mail.teleport.com> X-Sender: alano(a)mail.teleport.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.2 b4 (32) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 22:13:25 -0700 To: twinsvideo(a)infosel.net.mx From: Alan Olsen <alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com> Subject: Re: INFORMATION Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com In-Reply-To: <Chameleon.970618185549.twinsvideo(a)infosel.infosel.net.mx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Alan Olsen <alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com> X-List: cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net X-Loop: cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net At 06:46 PM 6/18/97 PDT, twinsvideo(a)infosel.net.mx wrote: > >donn't think that i'm lame or somthin' but i realy need information on how to hack so, could you please tell me how to hack >and what do i need in order to hack. I suggest really strong turkish cigarettes. Smoke them constantly and soon you will be hacking before you know it. >don't worry i won't get into trouble. Depends on the age of tobacco purchace in your state. You might have to get into High School before trying the above method. >please hurry it's urgent. That is what they all say... =================================================================== Hacking is something that you learn on your own. While there are a few folks that will show you the ropes, you have to learn on your own. Knowledge is precious, and even more so when you gain it through your own bllod sweat and tears. I hope you really mean hacking, and NOT cracking. There are many of us in the hacking community that are ticked off because the media and the government have lumped us hackers in with the Crackers. Crackers are folks that enter systems for no other reason that malicous damage of systems and vital infromation. These folks are usually punk kids out to romp around Cyberspace doing damage for kicks. There are professional crackers but are usually hired by governments and major corporations for either "NAtional Security" reasons or plain old Corporate espianage. Hackers on the other hand, are folks that believe in the free exchange and flow of information, and yearn for knowledge. While they occationally do break into systems, it is usually only for the challenge of doing so and NOT with the intent of causing damage. Most hackers that enter systems, will usually clean up after themselves after merely looking around the system for awhile just to see what is there with no intent to cause harm, only making modifications to logs and passwd files to clear traces of their entry. They NEVER damage files intentionally and that is a MAJOR no no with most folks in the real hacking community. Some hackers even go so far as to tell they System Administrators of the systems they enter that they did so, and how they did it so the Admins may plug the holes. Unfortunately, the government and the media have placed us within the same catagories as the Darksiders. I, for one, do hope you are a hacker and not trying to become a cracker. --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Recipient Anonymity
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Matt Ghio wrote: > A group of servers collects messages of equal length for anonymous > recipients. All servers exchange messages so that each has copies of all > messages. > > A recipient wishes to retrieve a message from the servers without any > server knowing which message he is receiving. The recipient selects a > group of n servers. From each server, S_1...S_n-1, he requests a random > selection of messages, with a 50% probability that any particular message > will be selected. The server returns the xor of all messages requested. > He sends the final server a request which is the xor of all the previous > requests and the one single message that he wants. > > The xor of all the responses is the desired message. It is impossible to > determine which message was received unless all servers collude. So what you're saying is: - Messages - A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Server 1: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Server 2: 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Server 3: 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 So server 1 sends back the xor of messages A,C,D,F...Z; server 2 sends back the xor of B,C,E,F,G...etc. The xor of all of that cancels out everything except Message Q. But as long as at least one of the servers doesn't keep logs then nobody will know that except the person who downloaded it. Clever. It sure beats reply-blocks. :)

1 0

Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 13:48:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Courts strike down New York and Georgia Net-censorship laws Two Federal courts ruled today in separate decisions that state laws in New York and Georgia restricting speech on the Internet are unconstitutional. In a 62-page ruling, Judge Loretta Preska of Manhattan's Federal district court struck down a New York state Net-censorship law that restricted online material that might be "harmful to minors," saying that a single state couldn't pass laws that apply to the entire Internet. "The Internet may well be the premiere technological innovation of the present age," Preska said. "Judges and legislators faced with adapting existing legal standards to the novel environment of cyberspace struggle with terms and concepts that the average American five-year old tosses about with breezy familiarity." In Georgia, Judge Marvin Shoob ruled that a state law forbidding anonymity online is unconstitutional since it violates free speech and free association rights. The law is so broadly written, the judge indicated, that even America Online screen names could be considered illegal. This represents a stunning victory for the American Civil Liberties Union (http://www.aclu.org/) which filed both lawsuits. Judge Shoob "understood clearly the very strong need for our plaintiffs to communicate anonymously," the ACLU's Ann Beeson says. Both judges issued preliminary injunctions barring the state attorneys general from enforcing the laws. But the rulings differ in important ways. Manhattan's Judge Preska did not answer whether the New York law violated the First Amendment, saying she was going to wait for the U.S. Supreme Court's to rule on the Communications Decency Act. She said, however, that she didn't *need to answer* that question to strike down the law since it violated the U.S. Constitution's ban on states attempts to regulate commerce outside their borders. This is an vital point: The court ruled that no state, no matter how hard the legislators try, generally can regulate "indecent" or "harmful to minors" material online. "I cannot stretch enough the importance of this conclusion," Beeson says. These rulings mean that the ACLU's attempts to strike down other state Net-censorship laws -- and around two dozen states have passed or are considering such measures -- will be a virtual slam dunk. Georgia's Judge Shoob, in a shorter 21-page opinion, ruled that the law -- that the Democrat-controlled legislature passed in haste last year to muzzle a dissident Republican representative -- violated the First Amendment. This echoes a recent Supreme Court case, McIntyre v. Ohio, in which the justices ruled that the right to anonymity extends beyond political speech; that requiring someone to add their name to a leaflet is unconstitutional; that writing can be more effective if the speaker's identity is unknown. Next stop: The Supreme Court, which is almost certain to rule on the CDA next week... -Declan More info on the Georgia lawsuit: http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,590,00.html More info on the New York state lawsuit: http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,532,00.html http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,811,00.html

3 8

Re: E-Cash
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May is another loser who pays for got.net because he lacks the mental capacity to gain net access as a perk of either employment or academic achievment. ((__)) Tim May (00) (o__o)

3 2

Crypto-compromises in Washington: Burns offers ProCODE II
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Rocke Verser's announcement couldn't have come at a more embarrassing time for the White House. At 3:46 pm yesterday, after five months of painstaking work, the Colorado computer consultant fired off an excited message to the DES challenge mailing list: "WE FOUND IT!" Verser was talking about his group's successful crack of a message scrambled with the 56-bit DES encryption standard. When subjected to the massive computing power of thousands of machines around the globe, the enciphered message finally yielded the secret phrase, "Strong cryptography makes the world a safer place." That's exactly what the Clinton administration didn't want to hear. For years top government officials have argued the opposite, that strong cryptography makes the world a less secure place where criminals and terrorists can scheme with impunity. The White House has long wanted to ensure that it can listen in to all electronic communications through schemes like "key escrow" or the Clipper Chip. Today the Senate Commerce committee is scheduled to vote on two competing crypto-bills, one backed by the White House and one backed by industry and some privacy groups. And now, I've learned, some of cryptography's most loyal supporters on the Hill are talking about cutting a deal... --- I ran into Jim Bidzos, head of RSA Data Security (which sponsored the DES challenge), at a party in the Watergate last night. "Export regulations are a dinosaur," he said. "But it's a dinosaur that'll take out a lot of the city during its death struggles." Bidzos is testifying before a House Science panel today and plans to stress the problems of 56-bit DES; only 128-bit DES is generally regarded as reasonably secure... --- Washington is a city of complexity, painful complexity, when it comes to encryption. Three different lawsuits are challenging the constitutionality of last year's Federal crypto-regulations. This year's Commerce Department regulations add up to an eye-straining 16,000 words. Four different bills are moving through Congress, and the legislative jockeying is even more abstruse. But throughout this muddle, one point remains clear: The Clinton administration wants to hold on to the status quo as long as possible. That means no judicial or legislative tinkering -- and, above all, no general lifting of export controls on encryption products. Even as officials admit privately that attempts to prop up these Cold War rules are eventually doomed, they argue publicly that removing the rules would be catastrophic. "The proliferation of unbreakable encryption would seriously and fundamentally threaten... critical and central public safety interests," FBI director Louis Freeh said earlier this month. For Freeh, the best way to stall for time was to take the battle to Congress. Earlier this week Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) and Sen. John McCain introduced a bill that included everything Freeh and the White House desired: sections creating new Federal crimes for some uses of crypto and an all-but-mandatory key escrow infrastructure. The goal: to facilitate government access to any private data. Privacy advocates leaped to savage it. "The bill threatens any prospect of privacy and security in electronic commerce and on the Internet by opening a huge window of vulnerability to the private data and communications of encryption users," the Center for Democracy and Technology cried. EPIC's Dave Banisar told me it was a "poison pill strategy designed to kill" pro-crypto legislation. The many problems with the bill normally would be bad enough, but it's zooming through Congress at an almost supersonic velocity. Thanks to the sponsorship of McCain, the powerful Senate commerce committee chair, the committee is scheduled to vote on it today, without even holding hearings. This could mean the death of a bill introduced last year, then reintroduced this year by Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.). Called "ProCODE," privacy advocates say it's the best of all the crypto bills in Congress (but then again, that's not saying much). --- In Washington politics, perhaps the worst thing that can be said about you is that you're unwilling to compromise. So it should come as no surprise that the McCain-Kerrey bill prompted Burns himself to offer a substitute ProCODE bill that will be unveiled at the markup session today. "People would say Burns hasn't moved on this issue and he's not willing to compromise. He needs to put something on the table so he can credibly say he has a compromise too. Otherwise it seems like he's not willing to play the game," one Hill observer told me yesterday. "ProCODE II" would allow the export of up to 56-bit DES -- yes, the very same bit length that was cracked yesterday -- only in some circumstances and give the FBI and the CIA more of a say on an encryption panel the bill creates, sources say. (For their part, Burns' staff characterizes it as having only "slight differences" from ProCODE I.) This legislative jockeying takes place against a backdrop of rivalries between Burns and McCain that stretch far beyond encryption. Burns introduced an amendment on a spectrum auction bill that gutted McCain's proposal. A recent National Journal story played up the rift, and only resulted in widening it. McCain's insistence on endorsing the administration's -- and thus the national security establishment's -- position shouldn't be surprising, even if McCain was one of the original sponsors of ProCODE last year. He told Wired Magazine's Todd Lappin in March that "we need to find a middle ground" on crypto: "It's pretty clear that the administration's crypto proposals will have a harmful effect upon the industry. But we can't completely ignore the warnings we get from the heads of the FBI and the National Security Agency... If the president of the United States vetoes a crypto bill we pass, I doubt we'll be able to override his veto." Then there's the Senate Judiciary committee. Its chairman, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), said last week that he may introduce an alternative bill to relax export controls on encryption technology. But he's also talking about requiring key escrow in certain circumstances. Judiciary is holding a hearing next Wednesday on key escrow; the FBI's Freeh is scheduled to testify. For his part, Hatch has control of a crypto bill introduced by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Ver.) and could block legislation that other committtees report. --- Now the focus is on today's scheduled vote in Senate Commerce. Sources say Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) is planning to introduce amendments to the McCain bill that would weaken it. They would delay the implementation of some portions by a year. They would also require that NIST, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Defense publish guidelines on key recovery. Today senators will be faced with a series of unpleasant choices: approve the McCain-Kerrey bill (sponsored by the chair), approve the original ProCODE bill, or approve ProCODE II. Certainly some senators would be wary of endorsing a measure that they haven't had time to read. The buzz, however, on the Hill is that McCain doesn't have the votes for his bill and may postpone the vote after all. What all this legislative turmoil means is exactly what McCain predicted in March: for a bill to get out of committee, there has to be a compromise. As I wrote in a recent Netly News column, members of Congress are driven by a fierce, desperate urge to compromise. The drive is primal: legislators are compelled to find a middle ground. But to their chagrin, crypto doesn't offer one. Either you keep a copy of the electronic keys to your files or someone else does -- which is exactly what the White House wants. Either you're free to speak privately over the Net using PGP, or you're not -- which is exactly what the White House also wants. That's why the only sane answer to the encryption struggle might be to wait for the courts to strike down export controls as unconstitutional. They're moving forward: a Federal court yesterday heard arguments in the Bernstein case. (Sure, it would put would-be crypto lobbyists out of business overnight, but that sounds like a good thing to me.) Congress can't be trusted not to compromise away fundamental liberties, and any bill that makes it past McCain, Hatch, and Kerrey -- not to mention their counterparts in the House -- is almost certain to include some key escrow provisions. A veteran lobbyist told last night that this could indeed happen -- but only if high tech firms and their Washington lobbyists sell out our privacy by accepting relaxed export controls in exchange for domestic controls on the use of encryption. Businesses might make money, but American consumers would be the ultimate losers... Additional articles: http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,931,00.html http://pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1022,00.html -Declan

1 0

Where to get your RC5 crackers
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It seems that the RC5 cracking effort had no idea about the loads their web server would be subjected to once thousands of DES crackers moved over to cracking RC5. Their NT based webserver (bad idea...) collapsed. While it recovers, you can still get the client software from ftp://ftp.distributed.net/rc5/ Cypherpunks crack cyphers, --Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56. http://rc5.distributed.net/

3 2

Re: Crypto-compromises in Washington: Burns offers ProCODE II
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan McCullagh wrote: > > Rocke Verser's announcement couldn't have come at a > more embarrassing time for the White House. At 3:46 pm > yesterday, after five months of painstaking work, the > Colorado computer consultant fired off an excited > message to the DES challenge mailing list: "WE FOUND IT!" After the DES challenge began, didn't someone on the cypherpunks list predict that the key would be cracked at a time that was opportune for RSA, et al, and that the key would be found by "c2Nut testicles?" I can't find my printout of the post but if my memory serves me correctly then (s)he predicted more than a few of the events surrounding the DES challenge. The timing of the find is certainly opportune and there is no doubt that the company that found the key is closely connected to c2net (not to mention the spooks the company fronts for in Costa Rica and South America). Also, the Genx effort was plagued with internal and external sabotage, as predicted, and several other efforts were chilled before they ever got off the ground (by government and corporate legal consultants who all seem to have close connections to Colorado DoD agencies). I am not suggesting that RSA and their cohorts would put the fix in just because their is a tremendous amount of money and power surrounding this issue (both corporate and political) but I have certainly noticed that there doesn't seem to be any area of the crypto community where I don't find the same dark figures flitting through the shadows (and they all seem to have agendas linked to secret government labs and unelected government regulatory comittees). I was a bit skeptical of some of the rather paranoid claims I saw on the cypherpunks list at times but I can certainly vouch for the fact that there were more than a few computer admins in the New York area who were told from on high that using their company's computers in the DES challenge would not bode well for future government contracts. I am beginning to wonder if I shouldn't have majored in nuclear physics since there seems to be less political intrigue in that arena than in the crypto arena these days. Chauncey Gardner

1 0

DES: Thank you!
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Well Done! My congratulations go out to Rocke Verser, Mike Sanders, and all of the other people who developed code and/or ran clients for the DES challenge. The crack comes roughly at the time I predicted when I first proposed the challenge, and at a very opportune moment to influence action in the US Congress. I first proposed the challenge on Oct 1, 1996, in a posting to the cypherpunks mailing list: "Can we kill single DES?". Later that month, at the suggestion of Ron Rivest, I approached Jim Bidzos of RSA Data Security Inc. with the idea. From the start, RSA was enthusiastic, and sponsored the challenge to the tune of $10,000. I wrote some of the earliest key search routines, and invented a technique to reduce the key schedule generation from 80% of the total work to less than 5% - a technique which was universally adopted by key search engine writers. I and others also worked on the other major part - the DES round. My initial version was substantially faster than any previously existing Intel version, but later Sven Mikkelsen of Danemark found substantial improvements over my code. Sven, Rocke, and others also invented techniques to speed up the search by reducing the number of DES rounds which needed to be performed; I had reduced the original 16 to 14, but they got it down to under 12. The upshot of this was that searching for keys became faster than straightforward encryption or decryption with a single key. --------------------------- What does this tell us? What do we tell the public? --------------------------- Single DES can be cracked for under $10,000. Any system in which a single DES key protects more than $10,000 in assets is inadequate. Thus, one $10,000 message, or even 10 bank cards with $1000 in their accounts, becomes a tempting target (some banking systems use the same DES key for many cards). Future cracks can only get faster. Processor speeds continue to climb, and the number of available computers increases similarly; thus, the number of available cycles more than doubles every year - and the cost of a cracked key halves. This was probably the *least* efficient way to crack DES; Wiener and others have shown that machines can be built that will crack DES far faster and cheaper, but the method used won because it used existing resources, with no significant upfront development costs. No enterprise which wishes to use or offer security should consider single DES from this point on. If this crack does anything, it demonstrates that the US Government's offers to permit the export of single DES are worthless. Even without formal organization, distributed computing on the Internet can muster awesome cpu power - I estimate about half a million MIP years were used (see below). ------------------------------- How much cpu was actually used? ------------------------------- The following is a very rough calculation, there are lots of assumptions. 1. DESChall searched 25% of the keyspace - other efforts got about the same, so we checked roughly 2^55 keys 2. I'm assuming that most search engines used roughly the same number of operations per key checked, regardless of processor. 64 bit machines could do better, especially with bitslice algorithms. 3. The Pentium code is highly optimized, and thus is executing roughly 2 instructions per clock cycle. Lets do the numbers. from the DESChall benchmark page: Dual Pentium 200 MHz ......... 2.003M keys per second = 200MHz is roughly 400MIPs, due to Pentium's dual pipelines. -> 1 Mkey/sec = 400 MIPs, or roughly 400 instructions per key. (this sounds about right, from my own DES Intel assembly work). 2^55 keys = 3.6*10^16 keys * 400 = 1.44*10^19 instructions = 1.44*10^13 million instructions. = 457,000 MIP years used in the calculation. Lenstra has stated that, in the factorization of RSA-130: "we would have spent about 500 mips years (i.e., 10% of the computing time spent on the 129-digit QS-record) if we had done all the sieving on average workstations with at least 24 megabytes of memory" (from http://enigma.ncsa.uiuc.edu/~dun/rsa-130.shtml) This suggests that cracking DES used roughly 2 orders of magnitude (ie, 100x ) more CPU than RSA-129, which I suspect makes it a record for the largest calculation ever performed. ---------- What next? ---------- Two targets suggest themselves: 1. 56 bit RC5. 2. RSA 135 1. 56 bit RC5. The earlier efforts on 40 and 48 bit RC5 suggest that keysearch for RC5 is substantially slower than DES - perhaps 5-10 x slower. It's probable that the clients have not been fully optimized. RSA has another $10,000 prize for this crack. 2. RSA 135 We used about 1000x the cpu needed for the RSA 130 factorization. I'm not sure how the best current factorization systems scale with the modulus size (Rivest, Lenstra?) but I suspect that it's less than linear. If this is so, then RSA 135 may be doable. RSA135 is roughly comparable to a 448 bit key. RSA also has a prize for this factorization. Peter Trei trei(a)process.com DISCLAIMER: The above represents my opinions only, not neccesarily those of my employer.

1 0

FYI: Who owns Sen. Kerrey (LONG)
by geeman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Actually the profile doesn't look too evil. One wonders who's pushing him on this, since he doesn't come across asa crypto expert ;) Below is from the Project Vote Smart pages... Senator J. Robert 'Bob' Kerrey Performance Evaluations by Special Interest Groups How to Interpret These Evaluations These evaluations are in percentage form. They represent the percentage of time that the incumbent voted with that organization's preferred positions on a number of votes that they identified as key in their issue area. Remember, by definition, these r atings by special interest groups are biased. They do not represent a non-partisan stance. In addition, some groups select votes that tend to favor members of one political party over another, rather than selecting votes based solely on issue concerns. However, they can be invaluable in showing where an incumbent has stood on a series of votes over a year's time, especially when ratings by groups on all sides of an issue are compared. Descriptions of the organizations offering p erformance evaluations are available. Project Vote Smart collects performance evaluations from ALL special interest groups who provide them. If there is a group you that feel is missing from our database, either they do not compile performance evaluations, they would not allow Project Vote Smart to distribute them, or we are unaware of the fact that the group does ratings. Please let us know if you think we are missing a group's ratings and we will contact the group immediately. A final note: The clearest way to read these percentages is, "In [year], the X YZ organization gave Senator/Representative X an 80% rating. That means that on votes they identified as key in their issue area during that time period, he/she voted with the group's preferred position 80% of the time." The exception to this is the evaluation done by the National Taxpayers Union, which represents how often a representative or senator voted to decrease, or not increase, spending. Performance Evaluations by Special Interest Groups Issue Area Year Percentage Evaluating Organization ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Abortion/FamPln 1991 20 Justlife Education Fund (Abortion) Abortion/FamPln 1993-1996 100 Planned Parenthood Abortion/FamPln 1996 0 National Right to Life Committee Abortion/FamPln 1996 100 National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action Business 1995-1996 41 National Federation of Independent Business Business 1996 10 Business-Industry Political Action Committee Business 1996 23 U.S. Chamber of Commerce Children 1995 89 Children's Defense Fund Chr.Fam. Issues 1991-1992 9 Christian Voice Chr.Fam. Issues 1995-1996 8 Christian Coalition Civil Rts/Lib 1991-1992 55 National Gay & Lesbian Task Force Civil Rts/Lib 1993-1994 80 Human Rights Campaign Fund Civil Rts/Lib 1995-1996 67 National Association for the Advancement of C Civil Rts/Lib 1995-1996 90 Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Civil Rts/Lib 1996 47 American Civil Liberties Union Conservative 1995-1996 21 Conservative Index Conservative 1996 5 American Conservative Union Consumers 1996 79 Consumer Federation of America Contractors 1995 17 Associated Builders & Contractors Crime 1995-1996 60 Citizens United for Rehabilition of Errants Defense/Foreign 1991 60 JustLife Education Fund (Arms Reduction) Defense/Foreign 1991 62 Professional's Coalition for Nuclear Arms Con Defense/Foreign 1993-1994 30 American Security Council Defense/Foreign 1995 60 Campaign for U.N. Reform Defense/Foreign 1995 92 Peace Action Defense/Foreign 1996 82 Council for a Livable World Economic Policy 1991 80 JustLife Education Fund (Economic Policy) Economic Policy 1994 20 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Totals) Economic Policy 1995 20 The Libertarian Party - Economic Freedom Economic Policy 1996 23 The Republican Liberty Caucus Education 1993-1994 73 American Federation of Teachers Education 1995 83 National Education Association Education 1995-1996 91 U.S. Student Association Env./consumer 1995-1996 67 U.S. Public Interest Research Group Environment 1994 11 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Environment Environment 1995-1996 74 League of Conservation Voters Environment 1995-1996 100 Fund For Animals Farm 1991-1992 50 National Farmers Organization Farm 1993 56 National Farmers Union Farm 1993-1994 67 American Farm Bureau Federation Farm 1994 100 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Agriculture Gun Issues 1993-1994 0 National Rifle Association Gun Issues 1993-1994 100 Handgun Control, Inc Health 1995-1996 89 AIDS Action Council Health 1996 93 American Public Health Association Immigration 1996 30 American Immigration Control Immigration 1996 50 Federation for American Immigration Reform-Se Labor 1989 100 Machinists Non-Partisan Political League Labor 1989-1990 100 National Federation of Federal Employees Labor 1991 67 American Postal Workers Union Labor 1994 90 United Food & Commercial Workers Labor 1995 30 Transportation Communications Union Labor 1995 62 Communications Workers of America Labor 1995 62 The Teamsters Labor 1995 75 AFL-CIO Labor 1995 85 United Auto Workers Labor 1996 75 American Federation of Government Employees Labor 1996 100 American Federation of State, County & Munici Liberal 1995-1996 81 Public Citizen's Congress Watch Liberal 1995-1996 85 National Committee for an Effective Congress Liberal 1996 85 Americans for Democratic Action Libertarian 1995 35 The Libertarian Party - Combined Score Populist 1995 30 Liberty Lobby Poverty 1996 100 Bread for the World Property 1995-1996 20 League of Private Property Voters Regulation 1994 29 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Deregulatio Seniors 1995 80 National Council of Senior Citizens Seniors 1995-1996 30 The 60 Plus Association Seniors 1995-1996 80 National Association of Retired Federal Emplo Seniors 1995-1996 86 National Committee to Preserve Social Securit Social Policy 1991 40 National Association of Social Workers Social Policy 1995 50 The Libertarian Party - Personal Freedom Social Policy 1995 87 Network Social Policy 1995-1996 77 Friends Comm. on Nat'l Leg. (Senate) Social Policy 1996 44 The Republican Liberty Caucus Social Policy 1996 100 Zero Population Growth Taxes/Spending 1991-1992 17 National Tax-Limitation Committee Taxes/Spending 1994 0 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Taxes) Taxes/Spending 1994 14 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Budget) Taxes/Spending 1994 15 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Spending) Taxes/Spending 1995 28 Citizens Against Government Waste Taxes/Spending 1995 35 National Taxpayers Union Taxes/Spending 1995 60 Concord Coalition Trade 1994 50 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Trade) Veterans 1989-1990 50 Vietnam Veterans of America Women 1989-1990 95 National Women's Political Caucus Women 1993 100 The Woman Activist (Senate) Women 1995-1996 25 Concerned Women for America Women 1995-1996 86 American Association of University Women Senator Kerrey | Nebraska Directory | 105th Congress Directory Project Vote Smart 129 NW 4th Street, Suite 204, Corvallis, OR 97330 Phone 541-754-2746 Fax 541-754-2747 Comments? Questions? E-mail us at comments(a)vote-smart.org Senator Bob Kerrey Sources of Campaign Funding The information in this section was provided by the Center for Responsive Politics and the National Library on Money and Politics. You can read a summary of the laws and procedures governing campaign financing which comes from their book Open Secrets. Another good reference is Supporting Federal Candidates -- A guide for citizens from the Federal Election Commission, July 1994. On-line at PoliticsUSA. FULL CYCLE DATA - 01/01/1989 - 12/31/1994 Net Receipts: ..................................... $5,006,236 Net PAC Contributions: ............................ $1,556,633 Net Individual Contributions: ..................... $3,290,334 The figures below represent Political Action Committee (PAC) contributions by industry and sector. Agriculture: ...................................... $268,605 Agricultural Services & Products........ $84,180 Crop Production & Basic Processing...... $63,425 Food Processing & Sales................. $43,000 Dairy................................... $27,000 Tobacco................................. $22,500 Livestock............................... $17,500 Poultry & Eggs.......................... $11,000 Commodity Brokers & Dealers............. $0 Forestry & Forest Products.............. $0 Miscellaneous Agriculture............... $0 Construction & Public Works: ...................... $20,850 Home Builders........................... $16,100 Construction Services................... $3,500 Building Materials & Equipment.......... $1,250 General Contractors..................... $0 Special Trade Contractors............... $0 Communication & Electronics: ...................... $113,600 Telephone Utilities..................... $65,300 Cable TV................................ $20,000 TV & Movie Production/Distribution...... $14,000 Telecom Services & Equipment............ $6,300 Printing & Publishing................... $4,000 Recorded Music Production............... $2,000 Computer Equipment & Services........... $2,000 Electronics Mfg & Services.............. $0 Misc. Communications & Electronics...... $0 Defense: .......................................... $87,720 Defense Aerospace....................... $49,500 Defense Electronics..................... $28,720 Miscellaneous Defense................... $9,500 Energy & Natural Resources: ....................... $62,005 Electric Utilities...................... $25,755 Oil & Gas............................... $23,250 Waste Management........................ $8,500 Miscellaneous Energy.................... $3,500 Mining.................................. $1,000 Environmental Services & Equipment...... $0 Nuclear Energy.......................... $0 Fisheries & Wildlife.................... $0 Commercial Fishing...................... $0 Hunting................................. $0 Finance, Insurance & Real Estate: ................. $250,060 Insurance............................... $87,050 Securities & Investment................. $65,925 Commerical Banks........................ $57,475 Accountants............................. $20,150 Real Estate............................. $8,710 Miscellaneous Finance................... $7,000 Savings & Loans......................... $2,750 Credit Unions........................... $1,000 Finance & Credit Companies.............. $0 Miscellaneous Business: ........................... $62,905 Retail Sales............................ $20,931 Beer, Wine & Liquor..................... $12,474 Food & Beverage......................... $8,500 Business Services....................... $8,000 Casinos & Gambling...................... $3,500 Miscellaneous Services.................. $2,000 Miscellaneous Business.................. $2,000 Textiles................................ $2,000 Chemical & Related Manufacturing........ $1,000 Misc Manufacturing & Distributing....... $1,000 Lodging & Tourism....................... $1,000 Business Associates..................... $500 Recreation & Live Entertainment......... $0 Steel Production........................ $0 Health: ........................................... $171,049 Health Professionals.................... $79,500 Hospitals & Nursing Homes............... $52,000 Pharmaceuticals & Health Products....... $33,799 Health Services......................... $5,750 Miscellaneous Health.................... $0 Lawyers & Lobbyists: .............................. $63,476 Lawyers & Lobbyists..................... $63,476 Transportation: ................................... $76,850 Air Transport........................... $33,500 Railroads............................... $26,850 Automotive.............................. $7,000 Sea Transport........................... $6,500 Trucking................................ $3,000 Miscellaneous Transport................. $0 Labor Union: ...................................... $250,050 Building Trades & Industrial Unions..... $111,500 Transportation Unions................... $68,000 Public Sector Unions.................... $52,050 Miscellaneous Unions.................... $18,500 Ideological/Single-Issue: ......................... $120,963 Pro-Israel.............................. $73,000 Democrat/Liberal........................ $15,500 Human Rights............................ $10,500 Abortion Policy......................... $10,000 Leadership PACs......................... $4,653 Miscellaneous Issues.................... $3,500 Foreign & Defense Policy................ $2,810 Gun Rights/Gun Control.................. $1,000 Republican/Conservative................. $0 Womens Issues........................... $0 Other: ............................................ $2,000 Other................................... $1,000 Education............................... $1,000 Civil Servants & Public Officials....... $0 Non-Profit Institutions................. $0 Retired................................. $0 Unknown: .......................................... $0 Unknown................................. $0 Homemakers/Non-income earners........... $0 No Employer Listed or Found............. $0 Generic Occupation/Category Unknown..... $0 Employer Listed/Category Unknown........ $0 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PARTIAL CYCLE DATA - 01/01/1995 - 06/30/1995 Net Receipts: ..................................... $116,890 Net PAC Contributions: ............................ $43,500 Net Individual Contributions: ..................... $21,175 Net Candidate Contributions: ...................... $0 Net Other Contributions: .......................... $52,215 Net Spent: ........................................ $125,359 Ending Cash: ...................................... $7,834 Debts Owed: ....................................... $0 This information is brought to you by Project Vote Smart Senator Bob Kerrey | Nebraska Directory | 104th Congress Directory | Vote Smart Web

2 1

Crypto foes have day in court
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11674,00.html Crypto foes have day in court By Alex Lash June 18, 1997, 5:45 p.m. PT SAN FRANCISCO--Both sides of a landmark court battle over the use of encryption made their final arguments here today before a federal judge, who now will decide if the government's restrictions on encryption exports go too far. The case focuses on Daniel Bernstein, a University of Illinois math professor who sued the government two years ago as a graduate student when he was not allowed to publish his Snuffle encryption program on the Internet without an export license. But the case extends to the all Internet users, who are coming to rely more on privacy and security for electronic correspondence and transactions. Strong encryption is considered necessary to provide that security. On the other hand, law enforcement officials are worried that the unchecked spread of strong encryption will make communications by criminals impossible to track and decode. U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn Patel has already proven sympathetic to Bernstein's case. In April 1996, she ruled that software code is free speech and therefore protected under the First Amendment. From that, she said in December that the government's regulations created unconstitutional "prior restraint" of free expression, meaning the creation of an atmosphere that made the free exchange of protected ideas difficult, if not impossible. Patel can now take as much time as she wants to hand down her decision. She must decide if the government regulations violate constitutional or statutory standards. The judge must also decide what type of relief to grant Bernstein and if that relief--in the form of unimpeded export of encryption software--should extend to everyone. Since her December ruling, the federal export rules have been switched from the auspices of the State Department to the Commerce Department's Bureau of Export Administration. Patel called the lead attorneys for Bernstein and for the government together today to determine if she should reconsider her December ruling in light of the shift. "We think [the issues] are fundamentally the same," Cindy Cohn, lead attorney for Professor Bernstein, told the judge. "All the things you found wrong before are still up in the air." Government attorney Anthony Coppolino essentially agreed, although he claimed the new rules, which were mandated by a presidential executive order, cleared up some of the confusion caused by the State Department rules. "The president's order of transfer made clearer that we want to control the encryption function, not the ideas," he said. Despite Judge Patel's differing perspective, Coppolino maintained that the government's rules, which require publishers of strong encryption software to apply for a government license, were aimed at controlling the unimpeded spread of "easy-to-access, easy-to-use" encryption but not the spread of intellectual expression. Coppolino nonetheless seemed resigned to yet another "adversarial" decision, as he called Patel's previous rulings, and argued that if the judge rules in favor of Bernstein--which seems likely given her remarks today--her interpretation should be as narrow as possible. Coppolino said that a national injunction on the regulations would be overkill. "You can clearly fashion relief [for Bernstein] without throwing it open on a nationwide basis," Coppolino contended. Cohn, who has argued the case pro bono with the help of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, countered that Bernstein's job requires not just his own free expression but free communication in general. "We think that everyone else should be protected," she argued to Patel. "There's no way that Bernstein can speak freely if no one else can speak back." The encryption battle is also being fought in Congress, where several bills aim to strike down the same federal export rules that Bernstein is challenging, while one bill, sponsored by Senators John McCain (R-Arizona) and Bob Kerrey (D-Nebraska), seeks to impose domestic controls for the first time. Introduced yesterday in the Senate, McCain-Kerrey seeks to mandate the use of key recovery--a system that allows law enforcement officials to intercept and decode encrypted electronic communications--for all government products and government-funded networks. It also aims to tie the domestic use of digital certificates--a type of electronic ID card that verifies the legitimacy of an electronic transmission--to key recovery. Under the plan, users will not be able to obtain a digital certificate from a government-licensed "certificate authority" unless they make their private encryption keys available to law enforcement when necessary.

1 0

Party on IRC
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Much happened this week. If you feel like a conversation, join me on #cypherpunks on EFnet. --Lucky, who was going to go to a party, but who's clutch gave up. --Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56. http://rc5.distributed.net/

8 8

New crypto bill clears committee
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11693,00.html The fix is in... New crypto bill clears committee By Alex Lash June 19, 1997, 11 a.m. PT just in Just two days after it was introduced, a bill that seeks to impose restrictions on the domestic use of encryption sailed without hearings through the Senate Commerce Committee. The bill, sponsored by Commerce Committee chairman John McCain (R-Arizona) and Bob Kerrey (D-Nebraska), originally was a proposal floated by the White House as an alternative to other bills that aim to lift most restrictions on the use and export of encryption software. The Commerce Committee passed the bill on a voice vote. Unless it is diverted to another committee, the bill will be scheduled for a full Senate vote. Privacy advocates viewed the success of the McCain-Kerrey bill, known formally as the Secure Public Networks Act of 1997, with great concern. "This is majorly bad news," David Sobel, legal counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said today. "It basically mandates use of key recovery encryption in any federally supported network, including universities. It also muddies the waters for the prospects of liberalizing encryption policy, and it's directly at odds with the SAFE bill that is moving through the House." Both the SAFE bill in the House and the Pro-Code bill in the Senate seek to ban federally mandated key recovery. Pro-Code had early success after its reintroduction this year but has stalled in the same committee that just passed the McCain-Kerrey bill. Like the White House proposal, the McCain-Kerrey bill seeks to impose for the first time mandatory key recovery within the United States on top of the White House's crypto export regulations. Despite implementing tight domestic controls on encryption, the bill leaves open a window for looser export controls. It gives the Commerce Department secretary leeway to approve the export of strong encryption software without key recovery if similar products already or soon will be available. The bill slams the door, however, on the possibility of challenging a crypto export denial: "The secretary's decision on the grounds for the grant or denial of licenses shall not be subject to judicial review." The struggle over encryption policy has centered on law enforcement access to private information transmitted electronically or stored on computers. The government argues that criminals will use unregulated strong encryption to keep their plans secret. The use of key recovery requires users of encryption software, such as secure email programs, to store their keys in a place where the government can quickly access them without the users' knowledge. The McCain-Kerrey bill would make key recovery mandatory for all products purchased by the government and for any product used on a network that is even partially funded by the federal government. The bill also states that law enforcement would require only a subpoena to access private keys, whereas current federal regulations require a court order. The new bill would also link digital certificates to key recovery and grant government the authority to license digital certificates. These certificates, which establish and verify the identity of the sender of an encrypted communication, are considered a critical element of electronic commerce. However, if McCain-Kerrey becomes law, users won't be able to obtain a government-approved certificate without storing their keys with a third party. Current regulations administered by the Commerce Department allow software makers to export encryption up to 56 bits in strength without a license or key recovery mechanisms. That limit seems less secure, however, after yesterday's announcement that thousands of people linked their computers over the Internet to crack a 56-bit DES code from RSA Data Security. In a report released last year, a group of leading cryptographers recommended a minimum key length of 90 bits to ensure secure communications. Senior writer Janet Kornblum and reporter Courtney Macavinta contributed to this report.

1 0

e$: Fickle Fingers of Fate...
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Sender: e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:47:32 -0400 From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> To: Multiple recipients of <e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com> Subject: e$: Fickle Fingers of Fate... At 11:00 pm -0400 on 6/18/97, Tim May wrote in cypherpunks: > Not that it matters. Face it, our words in print vanish without a trace, > and are remembered by nobody except ourselves. Yeah, but every once in a while the ideas stick in the head of someone else, which is good enough for me, and, ironically, where my aforementioned "aspirations to lethargy" regarding getting "credit" for the quote comes from. Sometimes having people think about something is much more important than them knowing who gave them the idea. On the other hand, I get e-mail from people all the time for stuff I've written or said (with attribution) in the press and on the net, and most of those people are excited about all this new stuff they haven't heard of before. I get quite a great kick out of that. Sometimes, though, speaking of kicks, I do feel like I've got a "kick me" sign on my back or something. I just got a copy of the NHK video about Sameer, (and cryptography ;-)), and FC97 is talked about there a lot, but, unfortunately, no real credit given to Ray Hirshfeld as conference chair for organizing the program, or, for that matter, for myself as the the guy whose idea FC97 was in the first place. Also, while not having read the July Wired yet, I have heard from other people that the article reads like FC97 was Vince Cate's idea and not mine. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that the reason that Vince got front and center was because I didn't jump out there steal it from him. ;-). Any "fault" for not making sure proper "credit" was given is primarily my own, as the, um, promoter, of FC97, anyway. So, maybe we should have a press conference or something next year and put out the "official" story, just to further complicate matters. Frankly, since Vince actually *did* do all the *work* on Anguilla itself, as well as helping to sholder whatever financial risks there were, along with running the money, and the transaction processing on offshore.com.ai, and lots of other important stuff, and, since Ray and I *really* want to do it there again next year, Vince can have all the 'credit' he wants. :-). Especially if I get to go to Anguilla for free once a year, and, like I did last time, walk around like I own the place. (My needs are simple, you see...) I do think my own powers of hucksterism are improving, though. A banking conference organizer called yesterday, and she wanted me be a speaker at a series of conferences in London, San Diego and Malaysia. I figured I'd do the old digital bearer certificate "book-entry settlement is dead" bit and scare them all a little. We'll see if she still wants me after she sees the e$ home page and my nonexistant credentials for outraging the financial status quo. As usual for these things, of course, I'm not getting paid anything but travel and room and board expenses. (Now, where's that 'kick me' sign, again? I *know* it's back there somewhere...) On the same terms, but for nice people anyway, Dave Birch from Hyperion is having me fly out to London to do an electronic money conference in October, and I'm supposed to speak at MacWorld Boston in August. In addition, I'm going to be on a national talk radio network again pretty soon, and I'm in the process of cranking out another rant-for-publication, if I can just keep the thing from getting bigger every time I sit down to work on it. Somebody's also talking about recording me doing some of my rants for audio tape. Finally, the FC97 proceedings are just about ready, and Springer-Verlag will have them later this summer. Since I get to edit the introduction, I at least get to make sure they spell my name right. :-). And, of course, the process of organizing FC98 is just starting to get, um, organized, and that's fun to think about. (The dates for the conference next year will be February 23-27, in case people want to save the date.) So, while I still haven't quite cultivated the ability to create that completely sterile no-man's land between me and a TV camera just yet (I heard someone say on cypherpunks that the most dangerous place in the world was between Phill Gramm and a TV camera...), I'm having an enormous amount of fun, attributed or not. Oh, and I forgot e$lab. I've gotten mail from about 50 people in response to the initial pair of rants, and we're in the process of preparing some, er, collateral information (can't call it a business plan, really, because whatever management team we put together will actually have to write their own plan from scratch), to hand to people who happen to wander in too close to Hettinga's Patented Reality Distortion Field (tm). Yeah, I know, Jobs has one too, but mine's patented and trademarked. Something I learned from a fellow Universalist, P.T. Barnum. Besides, the knob on my *my* reality distortion field goes to 11. So, I suppose, when all that 'credit' is passed around some day, I'll be getting my share. My next trick, though, is to get some money in the door for all this fun I've been having. I'm starting to feel like Stephenson's Hiro Protagonist, at the moment, though not nearly as cool. (Heck, I can't even write code.) Nonetheless, I suppose I'm lucky I get to do what I love, though I can't exactly describe it to people very well. Most people don't get that chance very often. To do what they love to do, I mean. Now, where *is* that "kick me" sign... Cheers, Bob Hettinga, (currently suffering rotator cuff injuries from trying to swipe at his back all the time...) ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 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/ ---------- The e$ lists are brought to you by: Intertrader Ltd: "Digital Money Online" <http://www.intertrader.com/library/DigitalMoneyOnline> Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion http://www.hyperion.co.uk info(a)hyperion.co.uk Like e$? Help pay for it! <http://www.shipwright.com/beg.html> For e$/e$pam sponsorship, mail Bob: <mailto:rah@shipwright.com> Thanks to the e$ e$lves: Of Counsel: Vinnie Moscaritolo <mailto:vinnie@webstuff.apple.com> (Majordomo)^2: Rachel Willmer<mailto:rachel@intertrader.com> Commermeister: Anthony Templer <mailto:anthony@atanda.com> Interturge: Rodney Thayer <mailto:rodney@sabletech.com> --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 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

No Subject
by William Casperson (Compaq) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In the end, it was child pornography that derailed encryption legislation in the U.S. Senate and dealt a bitter defeat to crypto supporters. Spurred by the chairman's denunciations of cyberporn, a majority of the Senate Commerce Committee rejected ProCODE II this morning -- and instead approved a bill introduced earlier this week that creates new Federal crimes for some uses of crypto and an all-but-mandatory key escrow infrastructure. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), committee chair and chief sponsor of the measure, led the attack, saying Congress must "stop child pornography on the Internet and Internet gambling. These legitimate law enforcement concerns cannot and should not be overlooked or taken lightly." He warned that allowing encryption to be exported would permit child pornographers to use it. "If it's being used for child pornography? Are we going to say that's just fine? That's it's just business? I don't think so." Then Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Tex.) chimed in, saying she doesn't want "children to have access to pornography or other bad types of information." Sen. John Ashcroft (R-MO) tried to disagree. "It's like photography. We're not going to [ban] photography if someone takes dirty pictures." (At this point, one of the more deaf committee members asked, "Pornography? Are we going to ban pornography?") Between the child-porn attack team of senators McCain, Hollings, Kerry, and Frist, ProCODE sponsor Sen. Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) didn't stand a chance. Hunched over the microphone, Burns was outmaneuvered, outprepared, and outgunned on almost every point. Nevertheless, he introduced ProCODE II -- a so-called compromise measure -- and was defeated 8-12. The changes from ProCODE I gave the NSA, FBI, and CIA oversight over crypto exports and permitted only the export of up to 56-bit crypto products without key escrow. Products of any strength with key escrow could be exported freely. That's hardly a pro-privacy, pro-encryption bill, says the ACLU's Don Haines. "The ProCODE vote shows the political bankruptcy of the pro-business agenda. Even in the Commerce Committee, commerce arguments didn't work," he says. The committee also approved amendments proposed by Kerry that would give jurisdiction over crypto exports to a nine-member "Encryption Export Advisory Board." The panel would "evaluate whether [a] market exists abroad" and make non-binding recommendations to the president. Frist also introduced amendments to the McCain-Kerrey bill that were accepted: * Requiring that not any Federally-funded communications network, but only ones established "for transaction of government business" would use key escrow -- thereby jumpstarting the domestic market. * "Requirements for a subpoenas [sic] should be no less stringent for obtaining keys, then [sic] for any other subpoenaed materials." * Key recovery can mean recovering only a portion of the key "such as all but 40 bits of the key." * NIST after consulting with DoJ and DoD will "publish a reference implementation plan for key recovery systems;" the law will not take effect until the president tells Congress such a study is complete. After the vote, advocacy groups tried to put a good face on the devastating loss -- and an expensive defeat it was. After 15 months of lobbying, countless hearings, backroom dealmaking, and political capital spent, ProCODE is gutted and dead. "There's another day. We have confidence in the system," said BSA's Robert Holleyman. CDT's Jerry Berman said, "What is encouraging is that unlike the CDA other committees are getting involved." Of course, the involvement of other committees is only likely to add more key escrow provisions and limitations on crypto-exports. ProCODE's replacement -- the McCain-Kerrey bill -- now goes to the Senate Judiciary committee, and its chairman has already been talking about mandating key escrow in some circumstances... -Declan ------------------------- Declan McCullagh Time Inc. The Netly News Network Washington Correspondent http://netlynews.com/

7 10

It ain't just crypto they're screwing with....
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

People sometimes wonder why I'm moving toward the "just kill them all" position, meant rhetorically, of course. (I would never, never suggest that anyone actually kill the criminals McCain or Kerrey, or the other 533 criminals, but they have surely all richly earned whatever befalls them.) Besides the blizzard of new crypto laws, some proposed, some passed, similar nonsense can be found in almost every other area of life. Here in Kalifornia, not even the cops and district attorneys seem to know what's happening with gun laws, knife laws, insult speech laws, and so on. And here in my little piece of Paradise, a recent law made it illegal to "discriminate" against those with rings through their noses, studs through their tongues, etc. (Some of you, being "punks," may actually be so adorned. I hope you understand the deeper point that what I do with my property, including who I hire, is my business, not the "Committee Against Appearance Discrimination's" bussiness.) The real problem is that the thousands of professional politicians, the organized crime families of politics, and the hundreds of thousands of cops, narcs, judges, bureaucrats, drones, and other criminals keep on writing more laws, trying to patch the broken aspects of society with more and more laws. Anyway, one of my occasional interests is following the knife community. After recent warnings that the knife laws in my area may make it illegal to carry a folding knife either in my pocket ("concealed") or clipped to my belt ("brandishment"), I started paying close attention to what the clowns in Sacramento are doing to resolve this situation. As might be expected, they are screwing things up further. As with crypto, the laws keep getting more and more complex, with layers upon layers of cruft making nearly any interpretation a DA (District Attorney, or Prosecuting Attorney) might want to push possible. As the famous saying by a corrupt (as most of them are) DA went, "I could get an indictment against a ham sandwich if I wanted one.") Here's an insight into the knife laws in California. It makes me want to climb a tall tower and start shooting. (I won't, of course, but I am confirmed in my view that the politicians in Sacramento and D.C. ought to be disposed of as quickly as possble. Hang the bastards.) > From: James & Toni Mattis <jkmtsm(a)earthlink.net> > Newsgroups: rec.knives > Subject: Re: California cuttery enthusiasts, support AB 78 > Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 20:52:41 -0700 > > BUD LANG wrote: > > > > I am publishing an article in the October 1997 edition of Knives > > Illustrated, written by Chris Micheli, the gent in Sacramento who is > > fighting the battle for Buck Knives. The Calif DA's association and the > > Sheriffs are seeking to have that bill changed again. Why? They claim > > everyone and his cousin is now on the streets using these knives in > > combat. We all know this is bull pucky, but they want to change it back. > > Bud > > Latest news on AB78: After another conference with law & order types, > they've removed from the bill the part that says it's OK to carry a > fixed blade knife in a container like a backpack, toolbox, purse, > etcetera. The part that decrminalizes folders is still there, but if you > buy a chef's knife in the mall, you can't carry it to your car in a > shopping bag. You'll have to carry it openly through the mall and scare > lots of people instead. > > This isn't a stretch. The Los Angeles public defender's office has a > pending case where they busted a homeless guy for having a steak knife > in his backpack. Unofficial word is that he's a little too crazy to > stand trial, but I can't get it in writing that they'll only do that to > crazy poor people, and crazy poor people need to eat, etcetera, too. > > The law is an ass. I've squawked to the lobbyist, and my squawk to some > other people goes out tonight. > > James K. Mattis > http://home.earthlink.net/~jkmtsm > "If the law supposes that . . . the law is a ass, a idiot" - Dickens -- There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

ping
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM6mgxo9Co1n+aLhhAQGL6AQAixZikrODaTGvexNLkLn9N1Ccj6udj8xU OnVHZ9Czqymic7za4Y+1xFiFL+93SBlZDe9lGwu6Dlj6mA7W7uje17Wszfb6+NLO aG9p8bqp2bFD+MD6UIGSDntlTL0LiRc//0PfHCzR1ABgtEOfDRLX0Aq5JgcYL/tl zY3VBlF4n1w= =ALs+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
by John Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Frist also introduced amendments to the McCain-Kerrey >bill that were accepted: > >* Requiring that not any Federally-funded > communications network, but only ones established "for > transaction of government business" would use key > escrow -- thereby jumpstarting the domestic market. Will this narrow the bill so it no longer applies to researchers, students and others who happen to use subsidized networks? If so, that would take out the worst part of it. Key escrow when you're sending to the government isn't so bad, since the government can read your message anyway. "John --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------

2 1

"We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it."
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The current round of bills on crypto are going to be far worse for the net than the congresscritters can possibly understand. Here are the questions I have not seen answered... What will this do to the MIT distribution of PGP? I expect that it will make it illegal. How does this affect the security software distribution sites at University and US government sites? I expect that it will shut them all down. If the Kerry bill passes (and I expect it will) it will make many of the US sources of free security software unavailable and/or illegal. And this is to make the net more secure? For who? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBM6n0YeQCP3v30CeZAQG+/Qf9HHHWEzqRQIIlLS+FcxDEXSIJlPmMM5iA T+Th8qbTBEJmlCpwV9WS9R6ZPy8LeqWy3HKkROPGsnbNdvr/GfkZpoRNAES1eNt7 X1SWs0qIoSmcyK4DAuGs1v5gHme3P+nxOJq3eIuAx1W5Ar8+UIYN6DcCYIsrll2n daa+0aU/ExiP2uTN/0v69mTz1BGSR5b8qPv5+7PPqp+xZxSmfWcMqLj4Lz0Bhr4v mJF+Zg3z4GEKg7eMWqa4MXM7VmkOTJXkSaHubi55BXvZdkhy0d1ctx9XosfAC0/d JFj6Vw4UplgaRdr8QxBULpU5/2XFQftqeJv1yPocmfRh7lJOgqjBfg== =QA+I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- | "That'll make it hot for them!" - Guy Grand | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com|

1 0

Fw: Advance Bank launches ecash
by Wayne Clerke 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Seen this? Another bank braving the Digicash ecash waters: ---- From: Edward Breese x1364 <edwardb(a)executive.advance.com.au> To: ecash-merchant <ecash-merchant(a)advance.com.au> Date: Friday, 20 June 1997 11:50 Subject: Advance Bank launches ecash > >Hi everyone, > >Thank you for being so patient. ecash is now available from our web site >at: http//www.advance.com.au/ecash > >You will find plenty of information to help you set up your ecash purse and >configure a web site to accept ecash. You can download our latest Internet >Banking program (version 6), the ecash purse software and ecash merchant >software. You will also find some examples of real merchants who accept >ecash. > >We will be launching a shopping mall in the coming weeks and invite you to >become involved either as a user, merchant or systems integrator. > >We are also keen to get your feedback so please if you have time fill in the >feedback forms on the web. > >Have fun setting up your shops, > >Thanks, Edward >

7 6

Feinstein Amendment Passes
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Feinstein Amendment to S.936, the Defense Authorization Bill, just now passed 94 to 0. Among other provisions it prohibits the teaching of bombmaking for criminal purposes, in line with recommendations of a recent report by the Justice Department on the availability of information on bombmaking on the Internet: http://jya.com/abi.htm

1 0

new money systems
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've written frequently on ideas about money here. not too long ago I suggested that stocks are actually becoming a kind of a currency, and that a diversity of currencies is actually preferrable to a uniformity. after a lot of research, I've come across some neat new technology that cypherpunks might be interested in. the use of money lies at the root of social interactions. what kind of properties does that money have? those properties are likely to influence the social interactions that ensue. in this country, our money supply is controlled by the federal reserve, which is actually a private banking system. there are some people who claim that key parts of it are being kept secret from the public, such as the controlling interests. there is definitely little doubt that board meetings of the fed are held in the strictest of secrecy. in the computer industry, all software and hardware is moving toward open standards. could this ideal translate to our money system as well? I suspect it can. some very reputable people are beginning to reexamine our money system and conclude that it is not that we are competing for scarce resources via money, but that we are competing for scarce money utilizing resources in the process. this involves the problem of creating money and then charging interest on this fictitious entity, as opposed to charging interest on money that is actually backed by energy and not debt. after a lot of study I've concluded that the entire money system functions like a massive electrical circuit. this is related to ideas presented in a mysterious document called "silent weapons for quiet wars" which I highly recommend to anyone on the list. some will claim it is fraudulent, but I've decided the ideas it presents are extremely genuine, regardless of the source or motives behind the writing. in an electrical circuit, you have the problem of resistence gumming up the works. engineers spend their entire lives trying to squeeze electrical efficiency out of their devices. yet the largest electrical circuit of all, of the greatest importance to the health and well-being of the entire planet, I believe has gone largely unexamined. quite possibly the electrical circuit that comprises our world economy has large amounts of undesirable resistance. this manifests in a very subtle way-- not direclty as inflation, not interest rates, but as a difficulty in obtaining money. in a system with less resistance, money would actually be easier to obtain. and in fact many have reason to believe the world economy has been intentionally designed/manipulate to have undesirable properties, such as creating an invisible and undetectable slavery. imagine that I have a rat on a wheel, and I am using its power to drive my machines. part of the energy the rat expends goes into moving food pellets into its box. but the remaining energy I siphon off for my own ends. the rat does not realize that it doesn't in theory have to expend as much energy as it is doing to live, and does not question its existence as long as it lives. but I can use this energy for my own agenda. would it be possible to create such a system using money? are *we* the rats on the treadmill? is all our money energy going toward feeding ourselves, or is some of it being siphoned off? others who have written intelligently on the subject are suggesting exactly that-- that a system of invisible slavery is now in existence and actually pervades our culture. it is involved in the way the fed creates money and manipulates interest rates, charging interest on money that isn't truly backed by energy. consider these questions: 1. why is it that even as our economy becomes "more productive", we have to work harder? families now require more than one wage earner when before they did not? 2. there are statistics that show in earlier times, it took [x] farmers to produce the food for the population, such that the ratio was something like 1 to 2 or so. now the ratio is nearly 1 to 60 or greater. why does this not translate into more free time for everyone? could it be there is a means by which some entity can siphon off our spare energy and time? 3. if someone is siphoning off energy from *everyone* simultaneously, could it be detected in our system? how? == what's the solution? some are looking toward "alternative" or "local" currencies. there are some cases such that local communities experienced more efficient economies when they resorted to local currencies out of desperation. this has extreme relevance to the cypherpunk ideals of trying to extricate oneself from the "powers that be" and be a sovereign individual, particularly using technical means. it is possible that new kinds of digital currencies will flourish, and that will not be tied to what appears to be a very sinister system involving the federal reserve. some interesting ideas in new money, including digital cash, can be found at www.transaction.net also, there is a system called "LETS" (local exchange transaction system) that is getting more exposure and acceptance. I believe that in the future there will be more and more propaganda relative to money systems, and I hope that those here will have a head start in understanding the secret agendas of others. I hope others will post on this subject in the future. as I say, I believe it is of extreme cypherpunk relevance.

3 5

"how washington is strangling america"
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message From: chasm(a)insync.net (Schuetzen) To: ADVISORY.LIST(a)insync.net, .(a)insync.net, snetnews(a)world.std.com, .(a)insync.net Subject: SNET: (fwd) piml] GOOD BOOK Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 21:38:23 GMT - -> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List X-No-Archive: Yes FORWARDED On Sun, 15 Jun 1997 19:17:32, RoxanneJohnson <alphashewolf(a)proaxis.com> wrote: TO ALL PATRIOTS AND OTHER CONCERNED CITIZENS: Here is an excellent book to read if you haven't read it already. You can acquire a copy thru Waldenbooks or Dalton Books or at your library (if they carry it). It is called A CALL FOR REVOLUTION---HOW WASHINGTON IS STRANGLING AMERICA--AND HOW TO STOP IT by Martin L. Gross. Below is a brief synopsis of the book. WE THE PEOPLE ARE ANGRY! All across the nation, Americans are gasping for breath, waking up to find the tentacles of Washington wrapped firmly around their necks--and pocketbooks. In his NEW YORK TIMES bestseller, THE GOVERNMENT RACKET: WASHINGTON WASTE FROM A TO Z, Martin L. Gross exposed the wasteful practices of Washington. Now, in A CALL FOR REVOLUTION, Gross digs far beneath that waste to uncover the startling but undeniable truth: the core of government is rotten. WE'RE BEING STRANGLED BY: * TAX LAWS THAT DESTROY THE MIDDLE CLASS: In 1950, a middle-class family living in Long Island had a total tax burden of 12 percent of its income. Today, that same family has a tax burden more than three times as much. * THE WELFARE PROGRAM, A NATIONAL DISGRACE: The welfare system costs the taxpayer more than $300 billion a year -- but if Uncle Sam wrote annual checks for $14,700 to all 7.7 million poor families, if would cost only $113 billion a year. * THE TWO PARTY DICTATORSHIP: The Majority Leader (not elected by voters!) has twenty-six PARTY workers on his staff -- all on the federal payroll. The total party tab in Congress is $20 million a year -- all paid by taxpayers. * A POWER-MAD WASHINGTON: Our cities and states are continually subjected to unfunded mandates from the government. Anchorage, Alaska, was forced to pollute its waste water with fish guts, then treat the organic material in order to comply with federal regulations. Washington's rules will cost that small city -- not Uncle Sam -- $428 million. * A BLOATED AND INDIFFERENT CONGRESS: Congress operates at a price tag of up to $2.8 billion a year, or some $5 million a member. What does that get us? In 1991, the House passed a $151 billion highway bill -- at a cost of $2,300 for each family of four -- without ever reading it. Scathingly honest and crammed with investigative reporting, A CALL FOR REVOLUTION takes us through the treacherous waters of government, offering direct ways to correct the corruption, end the inefficiency, and tighten the belt around the Beltway so that the federal government -- and democracy - -- can truly be "for the people." TAKE BACK YOUR GOVERNMENT! Including the cold, hard facts about Vice President Al Gore's NATIONAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW. A CALL FOR REVOLUTION -- HOW WASHINGTON IS STRANGLING AMERICA -- AND HOW TO STOP IT, by Martin L. Gross Ballantine Books, New York Libary of Congress Catalog Card Number: 93-73731 ISBN: 0-345-38773-2 Yours in Freedom, alphashewolf(a)proaxis.com Running with the pack!! QUOTE: "This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!" -- ADOLPH HITLER, 1935 PLEASE NOTE: Myself, a friend and his contacts at JPFO are currently researching the above quote for authenticity. Any leads on said quote will be greatly appreciated. Thanks....ASW _______________________________________ Charles L Hamilton (chasm(a)insync.net) Houston, TX X-No-Archive: Yes - -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com - -> Posted by: chasm(a)insync.net (Schuetzen) ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Extremely Disappointing: Political Cryptography
by Benjamin Grosman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear All, I have been an advocate of strong cryptography since my first haphazard experiments with my own pitiful encryption schemes. Upon gaining a little more knowledge on the subject, I have become an even stronger advocate. The right for one to think what one likes is supposedly "gratis", but this right is almost useless if the ability to communicate one's thoughts to others _in a private and secure manner_ is burgeoned by those who would grant not only to assumedly trustworthy government departments but anyone with enough will the ability and the permission to not only control the manner in which we communicate our thoughts with others, but to also listen in. And yet this is not the worst part of it all. We are reliant upon politicians, most of whom one would be encouraged to believe are there only due to such qualities as charisma and "political nouse", a term unto itself really, to make decisions on that which they really have very little idea. This decision by the U.S. Senate to endorse an action that will only repress the whole world's ability to communicate in private (the US being the leader by far in matters of technology, especially the Internet) is yet another example of those ill-educated in a particular matter succumbing to either a knee-jerk political reaction, or a knee-jerk personal reaction. Or, as in this case, a combination of both. > Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), committee chair and chief > sponsor of the measure, led the attack, saying > Congress must "stop child pornography on the Internet > and Internet gambling. These legitimate law > enforcement concerns cannot and should not be > overlooked or taken lightly." "Child Pornorgrapy and the Internet" - in my opinion it is "The Phrase that Pays" in practically every situation to do with the Internet, politically speaking. I am sure that you could put forward a very good argument as to why practically any facet of the internet should be controlled, repressed, and spied upon, simply by mentioning the "phrase that pays" in the company of Politicians. It engenders the aforementioned knee-jerk reactions, encourages them, and stokes their fires to a new level. Over here in Australia it is generally accepted that most Australians have a general disdain of politicians and politics in general. Naturally, the young are at times passionately ideological, particularly arts students with too much time on their hands, and they always have faith in "the new vision", the new guard of politicians - the young politicians, who will lead them in their struggle. Little do they realise that this "new guard" had to get to their positions somehow - usually by gaining favour with the "old guard". And in doing so they effectively kneecap themselves : always chained to pleasing those who got them there, they are never able to actually do anything they themselves passionately believe (or believed) in, and they themselves end up becoming the "old guard", sucked into a vicious circle. If indeed they ever believed in what they claimed to be aiming to do. > He warned that allowing encryption to be exported > would permit child pornographers to use it. "If it's > being used for child pornography? Are we going to say > that's just fine? That's it's just business? I don't > think so." Such narrow-mindedness and short-sightedness is something we would probably have all hoped to not have seen, particularly in "leaders" of such stature. "The Phrase that Pays" seems to only be so applicable to the Internet: these same politicians would no doubt scream to all reaches of the globe the right for all to free speech, and yet would they repress the export of printing presses? Computers? Paper? Pencils? I am sure that these tools are far more crucial to the business of Child Pornographers than strong cryptography. It seems ridiculous to try and control or at least impinge upon the business of child pornographers by controlling the export of something that will only affect the ability of those outside of the United States to view or obtain such material. But then again, where the Communications Decency Act, a law of sheer repression, failed, systems such as Government Key Escrow might succeed. A later part of the article summarised this beautifully: > Sen. John Ashcroft (R-MO) tried to disagree. "It's like > photography. We're not going to [ban] photography if > someone takes dirty pictures." (At this point, one of > the more deaf committee members asked, "Pornography? > Are we going to ban pornography?") > I guess that the whole idea of children's uncontrolled access to information had to follow: > Then Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Tex.) chimed in, > saying she doesn't want "children to have access to > pornography or other bad types of information." I am also an advocate of freedom of information, as strange as it might sound to combine that with advocacy for privacy and security. In my opinion there is a time and a place for everything, and it is also so with information: certain things should remain private, and justifiably so (e.g Credit Card numbers, bank account details, Social Security details), but most other information can only lead in the long run to the enhancement of our ability to learn about ourselves, and the world in which we live. Attempting to generally control access to information is the next step in the progression of repression of freedom. First you repress the ability to communicate thoughts privately, as mentioned before, and then you try and control the thoughts of the current and next generation by restricting access to information that does not fit a personal model. The next generation will thus have grown up accepting this as normal, and the world is safer place. And so we have a model society...a society that reflects the views of a past generation's society. Every "Condition" Perpetuates Itself, Due To Every "Condition's" Fear Of Change. Perhaps I am being a bit alarmist. Perhaps I have been influenced too greatly by George Orwell's "1984". Or perhaps I am seeing something here that others have known for ages, and I have only just seen it. I am not sure of that, but I am sure of this: I am just of voting age now in Australia, and if I could add my voice to those trying to convince politicians of the obvious truth here in the USA then I would. But Australia always has and probably always will continue to follow the path of the United States. Perhaps the only way for me to be able to share my thoughts with others will be to remain so unimportant that nobody could possibly be interested in me. Benjamin Grosman ------------------------------- Apologies to those who were forced to read a very rambling diatribe against this whole situation. I have tried to formulate my thoughts upon reading the news of the defeat into something at least slightly coherent. I will try at a later point to polish this up...

5 7