December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Cypherpunk Cause
by msattler＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 17:05 93/10/09 -0400, A1 ray arachelian (library) wrote: >But hey, if there was, it would be easy to remove those who want abortion >to be illegal, or strong crypto, etc. Your presentation is interesting, but I believe your conclusion is based upon a majority sharing your beliefs. You are in good company. The architect of our country, Thomas Jefferson, based his plans on an informed and educated citizenry. What we have, however, is a poorly-educated, easily-swayed populace that considers TV Guide a magazine, makes Married With Children a hit, and only voted Ronald Raygun / George Bush out of office only because they saw all their jobs dissapearing (and not even then understanding it's because of unrestrained spending). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael S. Sattler msattler(a)netcom.com +1 (415) 358-3058 Digital Jungle Software Encrypt now; ask me how. (finger for PGP key) All that is required for evil to triumph is for {wo}men of good will to do nothing.

2 1

Kiss My Elbow!
by John W. Redelfs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To those obnoxious codeheads who flipped me off with a suggestion that I do my own port of PGP to the Atari and/or VAX: Kiss my elbow! Anyone ignorant enough to write code before doing a search to see if the code is already available deserves to take your brain dead advice. Foolishly thinking that the cypherpunks were interested in spreading encryption technology on the Internet, I logically assumed an inquiry on this list would be part of such a search. Maybe the cypherpunks are a government front organization set up for _preventing_ the spread of encryption technology on the Internet. Stranger things have happened. --------------- John W. Redelfs, tsjwr(a)acad1.alaska.edu ----------------- --------- All my opinions are tentative pending further data. -----------

1 0

The Bank of the Internet!? (fwd)
by zeek＠IO.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

No, I didn't read this entire message, but I thought it may be relevant... Forwarded message: *> From dummy Wed Feb 29 12:12:12 1990 *> X-EB: ------------------------------ *> Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1993 16:01:46 -0700 *> From: Arthur Chandler <arthurc(a)SFSUVAX1.SFSU.EDU> *> Subject: The Bank of the Internet!? *> *> Yesterday I went to hear a very interesting talk by Eric Hughes, one of *> the founding members of the Cypherpunk list/organization. Unlike most *> encryption pop journalists, who seem to limit themselves to PGP, this *> fellow brought up several boggling ideas: *> 1) "Cryptography is all economics." *> In other words, all encryption schemes come down to: how much $ am I *> willing to spend to keep you from getting into my secret info, and how *> much $ are you willing to spend to get it?" *> 2) There are two methods to keeping secrets on the NET (or IRL): trust *> some one, or trust an algorithm. And, in general, human trust is cheaper *> than technology. *> 3) The US government classifies encryption schemes as munitions, and is *> accordingly places all encryption technology under export restrictions *> controlled by the state department. *> 4) Claude Shannon's two basic principles of encryption: confusion and *> diffusion. *> *> He also mentioned something called a "blind signature" -- a special form *> of digital signature that keeps users unknown (through encryption) to both *> the bank they deposit with and sellers they transact with. I didn't *> understand this "blind digital signature" idea. Can anyone out here explain? *> *> But the real boggler is that this fellow Eric is, with the backing of *> the Electronic Frontier Foundation, going to start a Credit Union based on *> up-to-date encryption schemes and using the Internet as the monetary *> highway! It involves using something called digital money -- a system of *> encrypted data that expires over time, but that a highly flexible ability *> to purchase quantities or services. The data itself will be located *> over several nodes, so that no one site has all the info about your *> account, but that any "quorum number" of bank nodes can reconstruct the *> whole picture of your assets. Anyone trying to crack the system would *> have to crack, not just one or two nodes, but a quorum number. Such nodes *> will be distributed internationally, though favoring nations with *> encryption-favorable legislation. *> ************************************** *> I'm oversimplifying all this. But the whole notion of a Bank of the *> Internet, backed by the EFF and running encrypted international monetary *> transactions seems... well, this is Future Culture: what do you think? *>

9 13

PGP misunderstanding
by M. Strata Rose 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi Hal & others, this is Strata, author of the Virtual City (tm) Network "faq" (which raises more questions than it answers, rev 1.1 will be more customarily faq-like.) Someone forwarded me your posting re the faq and I thought I would take a moment to reply. Please direct any correspondence to me directly, I am only on cypherpunks-announce and not the list itself. I had a misunderstanding about the PGP key servers, not realizing they existed to register your keys with and not to generate them. I have planned from the beginning to include serious privacy technology in the Virtual City, up to and including objects in the master database which can only be decrypted at runtime by those who have keys for them. I have been talking with Hugh Daniel about making his ideas on NYM's an integral part of the infrastructure and plan to include Digital Cash as soon as a version is ready to go. I was at today's Cypherpunks meeting to get more info on PGP and discuss details of the infrastructure with folks. I will be posting a slightly revised 1.0.1 faq which corrects some minor mistakes and also gives correct info about PGP key generation in detail. I will be writing up details of how I am thinking of implementing some of the privacy structure mentioned in the faq and above and posting it here for people to shoot at. I am very interested in doing this "right". In the last 48 hours since I posted the faq a number of messages from folks asking how they can get a public key, so I want to head them in the right direction. If I were to admit something seditious in public, which I never do, I might say that one of my many goals for the Virtual City (tm) Network was to get Joe & Jane Undergrad or Salaryperson casually using privacy tech in a matter of fact way-- they'll use it to protect their identity and privacy in the VC environment and to perform commercial transactions online. I think that people are not using the privacy tech that's out there simply because they feel they have no compelling reason to do so. If people start needing to use it to get at things they think are interesting or cool they will become familiar with the use of the tech and begin to use it casually elsewhere. That would seem to be the Right Thing. To spread usage out beyond Virtual City (tm) Network, I've also been thinking that later on when the service is established I should start an encrypted "vcn" news hierarchy. This will get randoms using PGP to read the news feed. I'm not familiar enough with the most recent news control mechanisms to feel certain that I can somehow "bounce" cleartext posts to these groups, I might have to make it unidirectional and gatewayed solely through a hacked mail filter that requires encrypted text. My worry is that sites that do satellite feeds might balk at carrying it, thinking it might violate some FCC regs about non-cleartext data over public airwaves. They might be right, I need to learn more about possible legal ramifications before doing that. Cheerfully educable, _Strata PS- I will support folks choosing their own encryption on data envelopes, but after seeing Arthur's presentation today I think I'd better make it abundantly clear that we can in no way be held liable if they insist on DES M. Strata Rose Unix & Network Consultant, SysAdmin & Internet Information Virtual City (TM) Network strata(a)virtual.net | strata(a)hybrid.com | strata(a)fenchurch.mit.edu

1 0

Re: PHONE PRIVACY
by George A. Gleason 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Re. wiring two payphone lines together: uh, NO. From a practical standpoint, it will probably drop trouble cards at the CO. From a legal standpoint, it's theft of service, and especially with red boxes etc.; again, a dumb place to make your stand in court. Again, I want to suggest that the best thing to do is get a group of folks together to establish a PBX which can be used as a concentrator/diverter. -gg

2 1

Re: PHONE PRIVACY: real-time billing with digital postage
by swc＠uc1.ucsu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am presently looking into leasing fiber plant to set up a secure net with some of the attributes Nick Szabo mentions. Without enhancements to his scheme, however, I do not see how my cuso tomers can be sure that I am not recording traffic routine g, even if I claim that I am not. Furthermore, what is to prevent third parties from taping my ping my trunks and decoding the signalling which is used to direct the route switching? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stuart W. Card, Consultant, Card & Associates -- Research & Development Box 153 RR 1 Newport Rd Utica NY 13502 315-735-1717 / FAX -8469 swc(a)uc1.ucsu.edu or cards(a)top.cis.syr.edu "Who is John Galt?"

1 0

Criminal GIF's "Offshore" Data Haven
by anonymous＠extropia.wimsey.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Charles Morgan said: Look around there everywhere In fcat those are not so bad L8r Charles Charles and anyone else who has examples of these "criminal GIF's" please send copies to a good home WhiteBeard 77308D <pool0(a)extropia.wimsey.com> As you might expect from "pool0", this is a pool address; all messages received at this address are remailed to a "pool" of subscribers, including WhiteBeard. Please encrypt your "criminal GIF's" with public key Type bits/keyID Date User ID pub 1024/77308D 1993/08/05 WhiteBeard 77308D <pool0(a)extropia.wimsey.com> -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.3 mQCNAixg1V4AAAEEAK7+65Tb+IlceOkXbYr8KegFqJBsATfvHn0jWDhLomU1Bu9a N4QnUA7O7EA4klVjOkvFsizN+Ex94aAzSeEr2YEKA08wdCcDnOupTy5sGRcvJL3i e17y3/HS5zRq9bUrw/zVFWnF5XFaa0WXqEJF0mKNmIhQoUS0GWSPDqT/dzCNAAUT tC5XaGl0ZUJlYXJkIDc3MzA4RCAgPHBvb2wwQGV4dHJvcGlhLndpbXNleS5jb20+ =KKxu -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Note that the pool0 remailer does NOT attempt to conceal the identity of the SENDER. If you don't want your own identity attached to your message or file, send it through a remailer. Also, of course, you probably want to encrypt but NOT sign with PGP. WhiteBeard is also looking for the "politically incorrect" (and illegal outside the USA) program "Concentration Camp Commander". WhiteBeard will keep your "criminal GIF's" safely encrypted on diskettes. Should your own copies ever be lost or confiscated, just send WhiteBeard a call for help and he will send your GIF's (and any others he's collected you might want) to your anonymous remailer address. WhiteBeard already has a small collection of "interesting" GIF's dealing with beastiality and scatological domination. If you want a free sample, send WhiteBeard a request with an anonymous return address and pseudonymous public key. Please feel free to post this announcement to other mailing lists and newsgroups.

1 0

PHON PRIVACY
by Matthew J Miszewski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Our favorite Corporate entity, McDonald's, actually attempted a play on Mr. Szabo's idea. Here in Wisconsin, a while back, they distributed 3 minutedsErase they distributed 3 minutedsErase Erase Erase Select Mail Erase Erase Erase Extract/Mail Extract/Mail Help Erase ______________________________________________________________________________ "This new technology (the printing press) threatened the Crown, which shuddered at the thought of widespread dissemination of works advocating religious heresy and political upheaval. The Crown's solution to the problem was a system of regulation designed to control this "dangerous" art." -From my Copyright Law Text (refrencing the Statute of Anne - the first Copyright Statute) (c)1993 ______________________/___________________________________mjmiski(a)macc.wisc.edu

1 0

oops
by Matthew J Miszewski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anyways. As i was saying.... McDonalds distributed 3 minute long distance cards that came with your favorite value meal. Completely anonymous when used from a payphone, and the same service as regular LD. --Matt ______________________________________________________________________________ "This new technology (the printing press) threatened the Crown, which shuddered at the thought of widespread dissemination of works advocating religious heresy and political upheaval. The Crown's solution to the problem was a system of regulation designed to control this "dangerous" art." -From my Copyright Law Text (refrencing the Statute of Anne - the first Copyright Statute) (c)1993 ______________________/___________________________________mjmiski(a)macc.wisc.edu

1 0

The rubber and the road
by ferguson＠icm1.icp.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Grady, If this is a silly question, then chastise me later -- but when do you actually appear in court? I noticed PRZ's statement dated 12 Oct. Does your appearance fall shortly? Cheers and Support.

1 0

PHONE PRIVACY
by Sandy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT Reply to: ssandfort(a)attmail.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Punksters, Ron McCoy asked about the 1-900 number I posted some time ago. The number is 1-900-STOPPER. Though I originally mentioned STOPPER, I would recommend that the better solution is to use a pre-paid calling card. Several companies offer them, including AT&T (buy them at AT&T Phone Stores) and Western Union (buy them at authorized Western Union agents). They both charge you about sixty cents per minute for US domestic calls (more for overseas). They come in various denominations ($5, $10, $20, etc.) To use them, you dial a special 800 number. When you get a beep, you dial in the card's unique serial number. When you get a second dial tone, you dial the area code and phone number you wish to call. Depending upon the card you have, there will be some method for determining how much time/money you have left after each call. Since I have not yet found out whether or not the issuers retain *your* phone number (captured by ANI), or for how long, it would be prudent to use the cards at payphones for any highly sensitive communications. S a n d y >>>>>> Please send e-mail to: ssandfort(a)attmail.com <<<<<< ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

[META] [LIST] Let the market decide
by paul＠poboy.b17c.ingr.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I write this in the hope that it'll finish off the list/newsgroup discussion and with the fear that it will make it worse. "Let the market decide." If you feel that a newsgroup is the right way to go, then start one. If it offers something valuable to current cypherpunks subscribers, they'll read it. Likewise with alternate mailing lists. If you want a crypto-politics list, start one. If it offers valuable material, people will subscribe. Do not presume to dictate to the folks like Eric and Tim who created, and have since nurtured, this list. Build a better mousetrap, and all that. -Paul -- Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG | "Change the world for a better tomorrow. But perobich(a)ingr.com | watch your ass today." - aaron(a)halcyon.com Intergraph Federal Systems | Be a cryptography user- ask me how.

1 0

Bank of the Internet
by Mike Ingle 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"arthurc(a)crl.com" "Arthur Chandler" wrote: > It jarred me to see someone so blithely planning to enter into the world >of international finance from an essentially "outsider" frame of >reference. As impressed as I was by the range and depth of Eric's >understanding of the technical aspects of encryption, I have the feeling >that setting up such a revolutionary scheme -- which would threaten both >traditional banking enterprises and the governments that monitor and tax >them -- is bound to encounter opposition much more massive and >sophisticated than he indicated. > To be fair, he could only talk about the high points of his plans in >the context of the afternoon talk. But I kept having flashbacks to the1960s >and 70s, when counterculture groups laid intricate plans to overwhelm or >endrun "the system." > Put bluntly, any plans to enter international finance without a >substantial component aimed at lining up political and traditional >financial clout seems to me to be doomed to the dustbin of visionary >schemes. After the smoke clears, we are far more likely to see Chase >Manhattan with a platoon of hired cryptologists than EFF or Cypherpunks >wheeling and dealing on a global scale. The reason such "counterculture" plans didn't work is because they are hard to do. They are a pain. People may talk about them, but they aren't that anxious to actually "live underground." They are also hard to coordinate. It is easier to just get a job and live a normal life. Even with PGP, more people talk about it than use it on a regular basis. I've even been flamed for sending people PGP messages, even when those people promote their PGP keys in their .sigs! All we have to do is make it technically easy. We are tool makers. Make the tools and it will happen. As for opposition from governments and the banking establishment, governments are right now being held hostage by capital. If they don't do what capital wants, capital gets up and leaves. East Germany used the Berlin Wall to contain its capital. When the wall came down, the capital left. The forces against us may seem overwhelming, but we have one huge advantage. They are limited to a specific region, or at least to one country. International collaboration is difficult and slow for those who enforce the status quo. Data crosses borders with impunity, and short of cutting all the wires and turning a country into Albania, there isn't much the governments can do about it. --- MikeIngle(a)delphi.com

1 0

Virtual City (tm) and Virtual Capitalism (fwd)
by szabo＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Arthur Chandler: > Any system of monetary exchange that would involve manipulating quotas, > or translating them into a kind of tradeable commodity would, I think, be > vigorously resisted by most MOO wizards. Great! One of the main strengths of Virtual City seems to be to that its gets rid of the fascist heirarchy of "wizards", the virtual equivalent of factory managers in the old Soviet Union. (Caveat: these are just my impressions of the V.C. project, I'm not personally involved in it). Also the quote is "information _wants to_ be free", not "should be". Alas, it is easy to bottle up information by restricting it to small cliques of wizards. On the other hand, many of the world-wiser wizards may be able to use their MUD building skills to become Virtual City tycoons. There are probably plenty of wizards pissed off by politically-dominated MUDs, where access to resources has increasingly become a function of sharing beers with the "god" and less a function of contribution to the MUD. Wizards who are better MUD builders than beer buddies have incentive to jump ship and carve themselves out nice niches in a free-enterprise MUD. I suspect Virtual City, and net commerce in general, will evolve to where people buy and sell some information as services, and exchange other information freely. The distinguishing feature between valuable services and free information will likely be that services will be hard to copy, the end result of obscure, logically deep computations, providing information unique to each customer order or dependent on hard-to-duplicate phyiscal hardware. Freely copyable information typically will be sellable only a few times, and even then the sale price will depend on it being hot/unique news, uniquely valuable to a specific customer or temporary situation, or conveniently located. Old news, educational material, etc. will be free, barring fascist patent/copyright enforcement, but the customers will often pay for more convenient methods of distribution (eg smart filter services). Content _per se_ will want to be free, so one will not be able to generate revenue simply based on popularity of content. Content generation will not pay and will not dominate the economy. A good example is the distinction between the freely copyable GNU and X-Windows, and the for-pay consultation, customization, porting, help desks, etc. that have sprung up around them. Most of the effort goes into the latter: since people like to make a living, most of the economic effort will go into services rather than the exchange of free information. As bandwidth becomes cheaper the free info exchange will expand, but the incentive for creation is limited to self-sacrificing efforts or side-effects of government or consulting businesses or corporate charity (eg GNU, X, PGP). I look forward to something like Virtual City providing a free-market alternative to the heirarchical control of information (crypto key authorities, Unix file permissions model, MUD Wizard model, ad nauseum); I do not see it replacing the GNU free software model. Nick Szabo szabo(a)netcom.com

1 0

Cypherpunks Cause
by DON_HENSON＠delphi.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ferguson(a)icm1.icp.net writes: --> > >There is no cypherpunks cause. Neither is there a cypherpunks > >movement. Get these delusions out of your head. There is, however, > >cypherpunks software. > > > >I repeat, the cause and movement are in your own head. > > <-- > > If there is no cypherpunks cause or movement, please let me know What the hell are you talking about? <-- Well, I thought I was pretty clear in the first place so if you don't know what I am talking about, I guess I don't know either. Don Henson PGP key on server or on request

1 0

Cypherpunks Cause
by DON_HENSON＠delphi.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Eric Blossom writes: --> > If you believe there is a cypherpunks cause and you believe in it, > please post a short note to that effect to the list. > Anyone who is interested can keep count. What difference will any of this make? It is completely off topic for the list. Cypherpunks write code. <-- This was pretty typical of the response I got to my question about the cypherpunks cause. Apparently, I misinterpreted the intent of the list. Thanks for clearing it up for me. Goodbye. Don Henson PGP key avail on server or on request

1 0

Re: The Bank of the Internet!?
by habs＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perry >> I don't care for the Government, but I suspect that Chase Manhattan >> has a much better idea of the problems involved in cash transfer and >> accounting systems than you guys do. People who've never worked for >> financial institutions rarely understand where the real problems are. >Douglas Barnes >I worked for First City National Bank in MIS for three years... I'm >sure Chase has the drop in terms of experience, but you need to realize >that these institutions are the IBMs of the financial world. How >much truly innovative tech do you see out of IBM, despite all the >centuries of experience locked up in meetings? (I went to work for >them after First City, so I got to see it frist hand.) There is a huge difference between the back office transactions at a brokerage house and those in a small bank/credit union. A point of reference, in 1990 Shearson Lehman brokerage services used 18 gigabytes of data for client records (PER Month). Unable to keep all that data on disk (they were planning to go optical), they had huge costs in microfilm, esp. in paying folks to retrieve data by hand. A major problem with Brokerage back office is physically keeping track of where stocks are and where they are going (they can be sold, bought, held, borrowed and lent). Other rules, as Perry mentions, include suffering economic loss at certain points if you are unable to document certain transactions. I don't, however, see how any of this could impact a simple credit union type bank opperated over the Internet. Such a back office should be far simpler. The trick will be growing such a enterprise into a business that can offer any degree of sophisicated financial services. A major plus is that if digital signatures can be used, and strorage space allows, little if no paper records need be kept, which will allow the entire operation to exist in "cypherspace." I do agree with Perry in that it will be a full time activity, and that much learning will have to take place. I am more optimistic than Perry in feeling it can be done. >From Jan of 1988 to March of 1990 I worked in the Advanced Technology and Office Systems Consulting deptments of Shearson Lehman Brothers (now Smith Barney Shearson). I was involved in their efforts to implement optical storage systems for both data and images. -- Harry S. Hawk ON Vacation

1 0

Identity Tracking through Databases (fwd)
by L. Detweiler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

from PRIVACY Forum Digest Sunday, 10 October 1993 Volume 02 : Issue 32 Moderated by Lauren Weinstein (lauren(a)vortex.com) Vortex Technology, Woodland Hills, CA, U.S.A. ===cut=here=== Date: Sun, 10 Oct 93 16:52 PDT From: lauren(a)vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein; PRIVACY Forum Moderator) Subject: Personal Privacy vs. the "Digital Detective"? Greetings. This is going to be a somewhat complex message, but I feel that it's an important one, so please try to bear along with me. Also, I must ask that anyone who wishes to forward any information from this message please forward the entire message and keep it intact and complete with all attributions--any further excerpting from this material could be extremely confusing, to say the least. A few days ago, in my capacity as PRIVACY Forum moderator, I received an e-mail submission from Patrick Townson, politely asking if I would consider publishing it in the digest. (Pat is moderator of the TELECOM digest; we have various communications regarding digest matters from time to time.) The submission was essentially an ad promoting a new service he is offering. I informed him that my policy is not to run ads, though particular products and services may be mentioned in the context of informational or discussion messages submitted to the Forum. However, the particular ad in question is potentially of significant importance to readers of PRIVACY Forum, and brings to a sharp focus a number of issues which we've had bouncing around for sometime, with seemingly little action. So, I asked for and received permission from Pat to publish excerpts from his ad, as well as excerpts from our private communications that occurred after I read his original submission. I've attempted to keep these excerpts in context, and I'll have additional comments as we go along. Once again, I'm sorry about the complexity of this message. ---- EXCERPTED MATERIAL BEGINS BELOW. Omitted material is indicated by "..." in the text. The original complete message was widely distributed on Usenet, as indicated by the "Newsgroups" field below. *************** From: ptownson(a)telecom.chi.il.us Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy,alt.privacy,misc.consumers, misc.legal,misc.misc,chi.general Subject: Digital Detective At Your Service Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1993 15:35:00 CDT DIGITAL DETECTIVE ... I wish to announce my recent aquisition of some databases which are primarily used by skip-tracing, investigative and government agencies to locate people, any assets they may have, and other pertinent and personal details of their lives. These databases are being made available to anyone who wishes to have access to them. The charges are simply being passed along, 'at cost' based on what I am paying. ... SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER TRACING: =============================== You provide an SSN. I will advise you of all the names which have been used with this SSN, and the addresses which go with each. Or it can be the other way around: you supply an exact name and address (it can sometimes be a former address), and I will supply you with the SSN used by that person. Cost for each lookup, either direction is $60.00 PEOPLE FINDER: ============== You provide a name. Any name okay, but very common names will render a useless list. Middle initials and last known address is requested if possible. You'll receive a listing of every person who has that name, along with other data: New address if they moved; Telephone number provided the number is published; Residence type; Length of residence; Gender; Date of birth; Up to four other household members and their dates of birth. For additional information, People Finder also can provide a neighbor listing which includes up to ten neighbors, their addresses, phone numbers and residence types. ... It can be searched by telephone number only: You provide the phone number, I will respond with the person's profile and neighbor listing. Or it can be searched by address only, with the same results. ... Cost for each lookup is based on how extensive the search is. ... Both address/phone trace $90 ... CONSUMER CREDIT REPORTS: ======================== Consumer Credit reports availale from one bureau, $60 Consumer Credit reports available from three bureaus, $100 I need two things: 1. The name and address of the person, plus SSN if possible. 2. A *signed* statement that your request is for bonafide, legal reasons, i.e. you are considering an extension of credit to the person, or possibly employing them, etc. I cannot proceed without this signed statement. ... Has someone ever filed bankruptcy? The database will tell you if they have or not. Not all federal districts are yet installed but for those that are in the database, I can get you the details: ... Criminal History records available at $75-100 per jurisdiction you request searched. Want to know if someone has ever been in prison? Want to know if someone has ever been sued, or been a defendant in a criminal action? ... Death Records can be provided in various formats: By SSN only - is the holder of that SSN deceased or not? $30 By name - a more detailed account of their demise $40 Drivers Records can be pulled but the exact name and DOB is essential; otherwise if you have the full driver's license number, the search can be reversed, providing a name and DOB plus address. (Then use People Finder address trace on them.) $65 [ Various other information types listed omitted. -- MODERATOR ] ... Information should be available to everyone, not just the lawyers and bankers and government agencies. I'll provide information to anyone, at anytime from the categories above. Hope to hear from you soon with your requests. Here's to successful snooping! Get the goods on your friends and enemies alike. An imposter/fraud/con-artist on the net? Expose them in a detailed message with stuff you get from the database. Patrick Townson for DIGITAL DETECTIVE *************** >>> End of excerpted material from original submission <<< After reading the original ad, I had a number of exchanges with Pat regarding the possible negative reactions to this service among the PRIVACY Forum readership. Here are some excerpts from that discussion. ----- Excerpts from followup messages begin below ----- >From Pat: Say whatever you like. I would ask that you point out a couple of pertinent things however: 1. All the information is gleaned from public sources. You'll find very few non-pub phone numbers for example unless the person used it someplace. And *yes* there are public sources of SSN's ... I know where, you don't know where, so you pay me to tell you where or at least produce the results. 2. All information is available free of charge to anyone who wants to go to the sources and get it himself. I'm placing myself in the middle as the 'gopher' ...I'll go fetch the information if you pay me. When I say 'free of charge if you get it yourself' I am not including the occassional cost of making copies, etc. That much is assumed. Regards criminal histories for example, if someone does not like the information being given out, then their real beef is with the concept of free, open to the public trials in the USA. In every courthouse in America, anyone is free to walk in, sit down and observe a trial going on. We do not have secret trials in the USA. So I am free to observe you on trial, and you are free to observe me on trial. It should follow then that we are free to exchange information with each other about trials we have observed. About 85 percent of the counties in the USA gladly supply transcripts and summaries of judgments regards criminal cases in their jurisdiction to anyone who asks for them (plus again, the copy costs etc). It is not feasable for you to come to Chicago and visit our courthouse, nor for me to visit the courthouses in California. So we cooperate with each other by you looking up things for me there and me looking up things for you here. It then should follow that a logical next step is to put it all on a computer; all researchers contibute their data to the common database. And so it goes. All I do is fetch the records you have created about yourself as a service for people who don't want to go to the trouble of fetching them for themselves. 3. Regards credit bureaus: Anyone can be a commissioned sales agent for the credit bureaus as long as they sign up with the bureaus to do that. You'll note I refuse to pull bureau files without your signed statement saying that you have a lawful purpose, ie an extension of credit or possible employment, etc. This puts the burden on you. In fact the bureaus themselves say in their contracts that they release information to their clients making the assumption the client has a lawful right to the information. If not, its your ass .. not theirs. If a bureau is pulled on you, you later find out and ask me why, I refer you to the person who purported to be lawfully inquiring. Doing so, I've met the requirements of the law. It is all public information except for the consumer credit reports, and for those the people who own the data base which I use absolutely insist on meeting all legal requirements. 4. Finally, it is only because we have computers that we can keep records in the prolific way we do. Do you also object to manual record keeping? Or is your complaint only that because it is computerized it has become so much easier for the average person to obtain? Remember, YOU are the person who gave out your SSN (I do not do the trace from government records but from public collections) ... YOU are the person who registered your telephone number in a directory of same with your address, etc. If you don't like people collecting information, don't give them any to collect, and get the law changed so that like in Russia you can be tried in secret and taken away in the middle of the night. Then there won't be any information for the public to look at regards what you were convicted of. Please summarize the above as my response to negative comments. Pat [ Below, text after ">" is from Lauren, other text is from Pat ]: Lauren: > I'm not disagreeing with your statements that it's all (presumably) > public information. In effect, that's what needs to be stopped! Pat: Well, then you better go to work on getting the First Amendment repealed or greatly modified addressing the issue of what people are permitted to say to other people, etc. If you feel I should be forbidden to speak about your SSN, so be it. Get the law changed and make sure it is constitutional. > In any case, publicizing your service may well have the effect of helping to > foster efforts to pass pending and future legislation to control the reuse > and distribution of such info, simply because so many people would get so > irate that such a service existed with such simple access. I want people to see how easy it is. I want enough people doing it that the cost of accessing the databases comes down from sixty dollars for an SSN to sixty cents! I want getting all sorts of info on your neighbors, enemies, employers and employees to be as easy as pushing a few keys on your keyboard. ... Nope, won't affect business at all because people have a short attention span. They will read it, cluck their tongues and by next week have forgotten. At my former employment I used to give seminars on how to collect bills. I gave these to employees of companies working collection. Afraid it would cut back the business they sent to our firm? Not at all. For a week or two, yes .. then they forget and go back to their old ways. Same thing here. ... Big firms, lawyers, bankers, law enfocement; they all get into the same information I use. Why shouldn't you be able to get into it also? You think if the laws are changed the lawyers won't somehow exempt themselves anyway? <grin> ... And as my ex-employer used to say, there is plenty of money to be made in collections and investigations by staying one hundred percent within the law ... no need to hack government data bases, no need to steal files from the credit bureau, no need to break into computers ... Someone wrote me and said getting into the NCIC was illegal (they were referring to my criminal histories database) ... hell, I get no where near NCIC .. I just use the combined efforts of researchers all over the USA who visit their courthouse daily to pull the new files for review; ditto with the Real Property transactions, tax records, voting records, etc .. ... but bear in mind if you try to censor the information you are treading dangerously into First Amendment stuff ... ... I thought it would make for great fun. Other than yours, the only letters I am answering on this are the ones which contain credit card numbers or EFT instructions ... and orders are coming in already. The neat thing about public information is you cannot be guilty of libel or slander when you distribute it as long as you do not embellish upon it. And my answers to inquiries go out ALWAYS as follows: "In consulting the XXX database, I noted the XXX database made the following statement(s) and/or allegation(s): (then the record) "If what was recorded in the XXX database is not correct, then the subject of the inquiry made at your request should notify the XXX database management of the error(s) and take appropriate action to correct the database record." It is never me claiming or alleging anything.... just telling you what I found out when I read the record. Same as the old credit bureau routine. Since I dont personally keep the rcords like the credit bureau does, it is not even within my power to correct the records. Obviously, that old First Amendment needs to be greatly modified, eh? Pat ----- End of excerpts from followup messages ----- Lauren here again. I think the above should give the flavor of the discussion and the related issues. We had some other discussions where I pointed out that the First Amendment wasn't really the issue, since it was not absolute, and that I felt some form of required "informed consent" (e.g., requiring firms to get written permission from customers from whom they obtain SS#, etc. before making it available to any commercial databases) would be a big help. But here's the *real* issue. If we assume that Pat is right in his statements that all of the information to which he has access is legally distributable, it goes far to pointing out what an utter disgrace the state of privacy and privacy laws in this country have become. Pat is certainly correct that many organizations already apparently have access to all of this data. All he's doing, seemingly, is trying to make a buck by providing "broader" access to the info. While one can argue that this is a very unfortunate thing to be doing, due to the range of new abuse that could potentially occur, it is also true that many crooks *already* have access to all this info, and that the information is already widely abused. Pat also suggests that there won't be any sustained opposition to such information releases--that most people have a very short attention span, will just read the message, and promptly forget about it. Is he right? The real problem is not with Pat's service, of course. The problem is that what should be private information is flowing around with such utter lack of sensible controls. If there were reasonable controls, it would be impossible for Pat's service, or many other similar services that cater to other customers out there, to be operational. There is certainly a philosophical underpinning to all of this. By analogy, Pat's view that everyone should have access to all the information available on everybody seems similar to the view that the way to solve the violent crime problem is to make sure that everyone in the country is carrying a gun at all times and is provided with plenty of ammunition. While some will no doubt agree with both of these concepts, hopefully many of us do not. It should now be crystal clear that the privacy situation in this country is in shambles. You can't just sit there, read this, and then file it off and forget it. Sooner or later, and most likely sooner, *you* are going to be affected. And just exactly what, my friends, are we going to do about it? --Lauren--

1 0

Clipper Q&A (fwd)
by L. Detweiler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

from PRIVACY Forum Digest Sunday, 10 October 1993 Volume 02 : Issue 32 Moderated by Lauren Weinstein (lauren(a)vortex.com) Vortex Technology, Woodland Hills, CA, U.S.A. ===cut=here=== Date: Thu, 30 Sep 93 14:31:41 EST From: "Tom Zmudzinski" <zmudzint(a)cc.ims.disa.mil> Subject: Key Escrow Panel at 16th NCSC 21 Sep 93; 14:00-15:30; Room 317 of the Baltimore Convention Center Track "E" (Tutorials & Presentations) -- KEY ESCROWING ISSUES { This is an incomplete "transcribble" of what was said, a personal precis if you will, not a court-ordered wiretap. ;{D } Cast: Mr. Len McNulty (National Security Standards & Technology), Dr. Clinton Brooks (Advisor to the Director, NSA), Mr. Al MacDonald (Special Assistant to the Assistant Director of Technical Services, FBI), Dr. Dorothy Denning (Georgetown University), Mr. Miles Schmidt (Manager of Security Advisory Group, NIST), Mr. Daniel Weitzner (Senior Staff Council, Electronic Frontier Foundation) { Transcribbler's Note: I've done the best I can with what I heard, but cross-checking against the Preliminary Participants List proved to be useless so there may be some misheard/spelled names & titles. } McNulty chaired the panel and gave a background briefing on the "Clipper Chip/Skipjack Algorithm" broughaha. Bottom line: NIST saw a requirement for high grade encryption for voice and data throughout the private sector but also saw the need to retain the ability to wiretap under court order. { Transcribbler's Note: Anyone needing background details (1) hasn't been paying attention to the media or fora and (2) can get them there. } Brooks gave the NSA side -- NIST came to NSA in search of help with the encryption. The policy folks wrangled long and hard over installing a backdoor, but concluded that any such weakening would be self-defeating. Brooks went into detail about the workings of the key escrow process. Bottom line: The algorithm HAS to be kept secret other wise someone could reverse-engineer a box that would interoperate with an escrowed Clipper. This box could then "lie" in the LEAF (Law Enforcement Access Field) and thus be invulnerable to court-ordered breakback. MacDonald gave the FBI's version -- Wiretap is a rarely used, last ditch technique necessary to protect the country and the private individual. MacDonald cited the use of wiretap in a "kiddy porn" kidnap/murder case. Unfortunately, he presented NO hard data on the pros & cons, just opinion. Bottom line: Wiretap is too useful a tool for Law Enforcement to give up without a fight, so they're fighting. Denning gave a synopsis of the work to date on breaking Skipjack. (The interim report is available on the Internet.) Bottom line: Recognizing that the analysis was done under considerable time pressure, it bears out NSA's claim that Skipjack is high quality (comparable to military grade) encryption. Weitzner presented the EFF position -- The EFF Electronic Privacy Working Group shares the Government's goal of providing the users with choice as to how (or if) they would protect their privacy. A truly voluntary, well functioning escrow system is appropriate to look at and test as one of the many alternatives that people who need security and privacy have to work with. They are not taking the position that no escrow system should be implemented at all (although there is an EFF faction that doubts that the government is the appropriate escrow agent). For the EFF, the critical test will be whether or not the US export restrictions on cryptography are relaxed. Bottom line: EFF wants to make certain that it is a truly voluntary system, not mandated by law. ( Various questions from the floor to the panel ) (Someone questioned the academic rigor of the Skipjack Analysis.) A: Analysis was as good as could be done in the time available. (Cliford Ockersmith, Intel, wanted to know why Intel had been excluded from manufacturing the Clipper chip.) A: They haven't been. (There IS an issue because Clipper is a hardware standard, and Intel doesn't want to retool to meet this standard.) (It appears that the only time Clipper is vulnerable is when it is being keyed.) A: The various parts of the Skipjack keys are NEVER in the clear outside of the box that does the keying, even during a legal breakback. (What happens to a chip once it's been brokenback?) A: The wiretap process includes notifying the chip owner that it has been wiretapped. (What about a gift certificate for a new chip in the letter?) A: [ laughter ] (Someone asked again about making the algorithm public.) A: [ see above ] Also, this is a voluntary standard, you don't have to use it. (Question about terrorists voluntarily using other high grade encryption.) A: No change from today. (Question about identifying with whom one is securely conversing.) A: Not part of Clipper. (Phone companies market Caller-Id.) (Unidentified person handed out "A Scientific Statement on Clipper Chip Technology and Alternatives" at the exits.) A: Thank you. [ adjourn ] ----------- The preceding has the legal status of hearsay, so don't quote anybody.

1 0

Re: Virtual City (tm) and Virtual Capitalism (fwd)
by doug＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Er...there are a *lot* of different kinds of mu*'s, and at least as many different definitions of "wizard". In some worlds they call people wizards who would simply be players elsewhere; in other worlds "wizards" have godlike status. Similarly with "programmer"; it can mean an advanced builder, or it can mean somebody who actually hacks the C underpinnings. You'd have to be a hardcore afficionado of the whole range to have basis for sweeping statements. (The kind that I'm least familiar with is apparently the most common, where people earn wizard status by advancing in some kind of game, but there's endless variation. When people create their own worlds, they tend to create ranks to suit their own tastes, too. Gonna legislate world creation? ;-) Doug -- a sometime but partially cured mu* wizard and programmer

1 0

Walk ME thru PGP por favor...
by loki＠convex1.TCS.Tulane.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Cypherpunks, Ok I have been interacting now with the list for 2 months now in order to have circumvented what I am about to ask. I figured if I just pay attention to what all the chat is about I could figure out how to "casually" implement PGP and anon remailers into my daily routine..which is one of the objectives of the list or is it?? I have read the documentation, and I tried to compile the pgp2.3a on the convex but then I decided I had better keep all the secret stuff at home and not on the remote time share computer. HOwever I need to know some practical answers before I get going...and please respond as a layman please...I am not holding a contest for elliptical jargon users to show off. Having created a military grade secret key, where do I go from there. 1. I need public keys....how to get them? How to have them certified? How to certify the certifications? 2. I use PC DOS ( I have the Beta version of PGP2.3a for windows but it does not seem to work well if at all...). So with my pgp23a for DOS I want to write a letter....use a text editor? probably. So how should Save as the file ? Do I need a suffix especially for PGP? 3. Uploading is a bitch as our Kermit (yes we do not have zmodem and the server sports a 9600 baud top speed...what a pile of crap but it is PHREE.) ... as our Kermit server glitches most things sent. Hence the letter will be worthless by the time it gets to its destination. I hear about emacs and mime and other other goodies....how can I use these or should I bother? 4. Given that I have successfully encrypted how do I know it worked? I mean is it at all possible that my copy of pgp was tainted such that it looks encrypted but someone tacked on a backdoor to my downloaded version of PGP? 5. Now then given a successful upload how do I mail it? I use elm and vi is the default editor (VI=vile for novices) how do I pull up the file into the mailer via VI? Ok. 6. to recieve a letter just tell me the reverse...by the way I do not have problems downloading only uploading...everyone on our host who uses a modem instead of the newly installed campus LAN (which means anyone who has a life and needs more room than a shoebox sized dormroom). EXTRA note : The dorms at Tulane University got rewired for the new school year. It almost makes me want to go back to school _and_ live in the dorms. You see they put coax to all the rooms which has integrated the library catalog,cablevision with 32 channels (a hack infiltrated already and gave everyone PLAYBOY channel for 2 days...just imagine all the freshmen glued to the set.), and on the same cable we have IP access to the net though if you set up your ownnode it can only be temporary,,,they figured out a way to enforce this. Kind of makes drool as I am stuck with copper wire phone lines in a 100 year oldapartment building with my 2400 baud modem...the kids today get all the breaks! LOKI PS send all responses to me privately please loki(a)convex1.tcs.tulane.edu subject:LOKI:USE YOUR PGP COPY!!!

1 0

Re: Weak RSA keys?
by cme＠ellisun.sw.stratus.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 93 14:35:52 -0700 >From: hughes(a)ah.com (Eric Hughes) >Message-Id: <9310072135.AA01702(a)ah.com> >Out of curiosity, does anybody here know how to calculate any >expectations for gcd(p-1,q-1) for, say, 2^n < p < q < 2^(n+1) ? I >don't know enough number theory myself. Eric, I don't think it's number theory you want so much as probability theory. I'm going to look at this to get the answer to the problem as you formulated it, but for values of n large enough (or, for values of 0 greater than (2^{-n}) :-) there's a simple form for that expected value. You can take it as an upper bound for the actual one: [note: I haven't verified this more than once...] E = sum_i sum_m p_i^{-m} where p_i is the i-th prime. - Carl

1 0

E[gcd(p-1,q-1)]
by cme＠ellisun.sw.stratus.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just wrote: > > E = sum_i sum_m p_i^{-m} > >where p_i is the i-th prime. That didn't take into account that p and q were knwn to be odd. So, assuming p and q are randomly chosen odd numbers: E[gcd(p-1,q-1)] < 2.5 + sum_j 1/(p_j - 1) where p_j is the j-th odd prime. It's "<" because this doesn't take into account that there are (relatively small) values of m such that p_i^m > min(p,q). It also doesn't take into account the second order probability effects from depeltion of range. - Carl

1 0

Re: The Bank of the Internet!? (fwd)
by msattler＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 16:14 93/10/10 -40962758, Douglas Barnes wrote: >At the moment we are beginning the process of surveying members of local >groups and employers in the high tech field to see if they are interested >in being part of the field of membership of a fully digital Credit Union. >We had our first Austin cypherpunks meeting yestereday, and it's clear that >they will be the core of the new CU. And when you look further... I'm ready! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael S. Sattler msattler(a)netcom.com +1 (415) 358-3058 Digital Jungle Software Encrypt now; ask me how. (finger for PGP key) All that is required for evil to triumph is for {wo}men of good will to do nothing.

2 1

Breaking DES
by an41418＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

My understanding of how an exhaustive search on the key space can be used to break DES is that for every key, K, D(K,Cipher) is applied until the output matches something legible. Say that some random string, to be thrown out, is added to the beginning of the plain text, and that DES is applied in cbc mode, then how could such an attack work? My point, I don't see how DES can be broken if the initial block is a grabage block, and cipher block chaining is used. Please enlighten me (gently). One other point... is the decision to encrypt - decrypt -encrypt when applying triple des arbitrary? Why not just encrypt with k1 and then encrypt with k2. Isn't the effect the same? Thanks a lot, Wonderer ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi.

4 7