December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

INFO: Pro-CODE testimony available now online at democracy.net!
by Shabbir Safdar 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

========================================================================== _ _ __| | ___ _ __ ___ ___ ___ _ __ __ _ ___ _ _ _ __ ___| |_ / _` |/ _ \ '_ ` _ \ / _ \ / __| '__/ _` |/ __| | | | | '_ \ / _ \ __| | (_| | __/ | | | | | (_) | (__| | | (_| | (__| |_| |_| | | | __/ |_ \__,_|\___|_| |_| |_|\___/ \___|_| \__,_|\___|\__, (_)_| |_|\___|\__| |___/ Enhancing Participation in the Democratic Process Through the Internet _________________________________________________________________________ Update No.2 http://democracy.net/ March 20, 1997 _________________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents - democracy.net Cybercast draws Thousands to Interactive Hearing - Upcoming Events - Volunteering for democracy.net - About democracy.net ___________________________________________________________________________ DEMOCRACY.NET CYBERCAST DRAWS THOUSANDS TO INTERACTIVE CONGRESSIONAL HEARING democracy.net, a project designed to explore ways of enhancing citizens participation in the democratic process via the Internet, held its first live, interactive cybercast of a Congressional hearing on Wednesday March 19th, 1997. Thousands of Internet users joined this historic event by listening to a live audio feed from the hearing (cybercast over the Internet via RealAudio), submitting questions and testimony for the hearing record, reading information about the hearing, and joining a simultaneous online discussion forum to discuss the hearing with Congressional staff and policy experts. The hearing was held by the Senate Commerce Committe to consider S. 377, the Promotion of Commerce online in the Digital Era (Pro-CODE) Act and this issue of US encryption policy -- a critical issue to the Internet user community. Some statistics from the event. * 6,019 individual Internet users visited the democracy.net web site containing information about the Hearing, links to both sides of the issue, and other relevant information in the 24 hours preceding the event. * 703 individuals listened to the hearing live online via Real Audio throughout the 3 hour event. The actual Senate hearing room (Russell 253) where the event took place only holds less than one hundred people when filled to capacity (as it was for this hearing). * Throughout the event, between 20 - 50 people joined the simultaneous live chat discussion where Commerce Committee staff and encryption policy experts fielded questions and discussed the hearing. The audience included individual Internet users, reporters, advocacy groups, and Congressional staff. * Twenty-three Internet users submitted formal comments for the hearing record via the democracy.net web page, including IETF chair Fred Baker. The democracy.net cybercast was promoted on the front page of Netscape's World Wide Web site (one of the most popular destinations on the entire Web) on March 18 - 19. The site is also featured at Progressive Networks WebActive Site of the Week for the week of March 17-21. Despite some technical bugs early on (par for the course for a cutting-edge Internet event such as this), the cybercast went even better than we anticipated. We are grateful to Brett Scott, Mike Rawson, Matt Raymond, Mike Inners, and Pia Pialorsi of the Senate Commerce Committee staff for their help and support of this effort. Archives of the hearing are posted http://democracy.net/events/03191997/ democracy.net is a new project of the Center for Democracy and Technology and the Voters Telecommunications Watch designed to explore ways of enhancing citizen particpation in the democratic process via the Internet. democracy.net is made possible through the generous support of Webactive Panix, Digex, and the Democracy Network. Visit http://democracy.net/about/ for more details. ______________________________________________________________________________ UPCOMING EVENTS * April 10, 8:30PM EST - Online town hall meeting with Rep. Rick White (R-WA), Co-Founder of the Congressional Internet Caucus * April 16, 8:30PM EST - Online town hall meeting with Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA), Key Representative from California's Silicon Valley and leader on Internet Policy issues. * Additional events are in the works -- please visit http://www.democracy.net for more details, and sign up for our event announcement mailing list. democracy.net town hall meetings will be moderated by Todd Lappin (Cyber Rights Editor for Wired Magazine). The town hall meetings are designed to bring interested members of the Internet community and key members of congress together to discuss current Internet policy issues. ____________________________________________________________________________ VOLUNTEERING FOR DEMOCRACY.NET A volunteer is needed to help index the RealAudio transcript of the hearing. If you would like to help, please do the following and mail the results to webmaster(a)democracy.net. To index the RealAudio transcript, please listen to the transcript and watch the time counter at the bottom right of the page. Please note the following beginning and ending times: -whenever a new witness begins their prepared testimony and, -whenever a question and answer section begins. Mail them to us at webmaster(a)democracy.net with the start and stop times of each section. Thanks! ____________________________________________________________________________ ABOUT DEMOCRACY.NET The democracy.net is a joint project of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and the Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) to explore ways of enhancing citizen participation in the democratic process via the Internet. To this end, democracy.net will host live, interactive cybercasts of Congressional Hearings and online town hall meetings with key policy makers. democracy.net is made possible through the generous support of WebActive, PANIX Internet, the Democracy Network, and DIGEX Internet. More information about the project can be found at http://democracy.net/about/ To receive democracy.net announcements automatically, please visit http://democracy.net/ _____________________________________________________________________________ end Update No.2 03.20.97 =============================================================================

1 0

Re: American Registry for Internet Numbers?
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:23 AM 3/24/97 -0800, Robert Cannon <cannon(a)DC.NET> wrote: >Does anyone know anything about ARIN (see www.arin.net) This is a >proposal to make IP numbering allocation seperate from domain name >registration. Currently NSI is paying for IP numbering paid for with >its domain name fees. Thus NSI is a big advocate of getting rid of this >work which it is not receiving profit from. But I find it difficult to >discern from the ARIN web site how credible this proposal is. I'm not sure how credible it is. However, a proposal to pay for IP addresses now would be really bad timing. The reason is that sometime soon the net is going to change to IPv6. It's not clear when, given some of the stopgap measures to get by with existing IP space, but it will probably be within the next 2-3 years. There are three main differences between IPv6 and the current IPv4 1) It's different, so you need to upgrade your routers and machines, which is expensive and annoying. 2) IPSEC security feature support is mandatory, so various government agencies are footdragging 3) Addresses are 128 bits long instead of 32 bits. 32 bits is 4 billion, which would be enough for almost everybody on the planet to have one (except that the addressing structure wastes part of the space.) 64 bits is almost enough for everyone on the planet to have a network number with a host number for everyone else. It's almost enough for every human neuron on the planet to have an address. 128 bits is far, far larger than that. Even if we waste lots of space by using an inefficient structure, which we will to make routing easier, there's still mindbogglingly more space than anyone needs. There are two reasons to charge for Internet numbers: 1) Even if you've got nearly infinite supplies, somebody still needs to coordinate it to prevent collisions, and this has non-zero cost. 2) Today, numbers are in short supply, so charging for them can help reduce waste and bring in revenue for the lucky contractor, especially if you charge by the address or size of address block. Tomorrow, there are so many numbers that charging by the number doesn't make sense - all you need is an initial coordination cost. So if you want to make big bucks on this business tomorrow, you'd better get the market locked in today. There are alternative approaches that don't even require a registry. For example, divide the address space into a 48-bit host part (Ethernet numbers are unique) and an 80-bit network part, and just pick a random network part. On the average, the probability of collisions is very low unless 2**40 other people are playing, and you can put all the machines you want on that network. If that's not guaranteed enough for you, you could use an Ethernet board number as the network number (even if your network isn't Ethernet based, you can buy a $50 board :-) To put costs in perspective, the last time I checked, the Ethernet industry charged manufacturers $1000 for a 24-bit chunk of numbers, and there are 2**23 chunks available; there are very few manuacturers who'll ever need to buy a second chunk, and not many manufacturers, so this relatively high price is reasonable. On the other hand, if somebody wanted to set up a web-based registry of IPv6 numbers, they could dole them out for a few dollars per chunk, most of which would be spent on billing. Perhaps the Ethernet folks could sell IPv6 registry space for $1000/registry? A bit of initial coordination can set aside different parts of the number space for different strategies, and let the market settle it. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

1 0

Re: Analysis of proposed UK ban on use of non-escrowed crypto.
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:51 AM 3/24/97 -0500, "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin(a)law.miami.edu> wrote: >It may be that in the UK/EU usage has moved (been moved?) to the point >where TTP => escrow. If so, this is as unfortunate as the term "escrow" itself. The UK folks who introduced the term TTP did it in the context of escrow. > I prefer "key bailment" myself. > It more closely captures the legal relationships. What a great term! It does sound like it covers the legal relationship, and it sounds like something the average person would rather avoid, as opposed to escrow which is has a neutral-to-positive sound, or "Trusted Third Party" which drips saccharine "We're from H.M.Government, and we're here to help you" # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

1 0

[Proposal:] Revolving Web Mirrors
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi, I am working on a system of a revoloving web mirror. The basic operation would be as follows: 1. The Server - ------------ The would be a server that would contain a colection of web pages that have been "baned" or blocked due to their content by various countries. I addition to this their would be a form that users could fill out to subscribe to mirror a web page (details under User). The server would mail out periodicaly to the users different web pages for them to mirror off of their web pages. 2. The Forms - ------------ The Web Form for the user to fill out would give the user the options of size/# of pages, general content type, and how often to change. 3. The User - ---------- The User would be able to offer some of his web space to mirror web pages that due to their content have been blocked. The users should have a choice of different catagories of web pages: political, sexual, crypto, ...ect. (since they are donating the web space they should have some say in what web pages they mirror). The User should be able to determin the amount of web space / # of web pages he is willing to host. The User should be given the option of hosting HTML pages and/or binaries. If he selects to host binaries he should have some selections as to what binaries he is willing to host. 4. Links - ------- Some users may be unwilling or unable to mirror webpages. That may be willing to provide links to baned web pages and/or to the web mirror servers. A collection of links should be made available to the user so they can be integrated into their web pages. 5. Notification - ------------ Users that have subscribed to the Mirror service should be sent e-mail with a list of web pages that meet the options that they filled out in the form. The should be given URL's of where they can download the pages along with the orriginal web pages URL's so they can make the final determination of what web pages they wish to mirror. This is just a rough outline. If you have any thoughts or comments on this please let me know. If anyone has server space they could donate for such a project please let me know. Thanks, - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- 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. Finger whgiii(a)amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: What I like about MS is its loyalty to customers! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv Comment: Registered User E-Secure v1.1 ES000000 iQCVAwUBMzccE49Co1n+aLhhAQEvJAP9Edh72M0adX5ZXcKPo6qQvuvbLG/1u6Vo CrPU8mMtRxbgBptRZgJ+fzCB98nEMASTUb/vkWx4He/sS5xs3Tjy5kS/fdxs9z4W pNwoau9YsOJOOx8EMUIWJNU08x011kREqxFMP2M7ds+LHsO9HuVy/fvNPVJuXDOV g7q/tEodJNc= =+ixR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

No Subject
by Mix 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Many forgeries are traceable with mathematical certainty to feebleminded Tim C[rook] May's poison keyboard. ( )( )________ Tim C[rook] May /00 \ _ O_\\--mm---mm /_______)

2 1

No Subject
by Mix 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timmy C[rook] Mayonnaise's abysmal grammar, atrocious spelling and feeble responses clearly identify him as a product of the American education system. ___ ./_ -\. q| o O |p -oOOO--~U~--OOOo- Timmy C[rook] Mayonnaise

4 3

Reps. White and Bliley: requesting comments on crypto policy
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 19:33:39 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship-announce(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: FC: Reps. White and Bliley: requesting comments on crypto policy Reps. Rick White (R-Washington) and Tom Bliley (R-Virginia) have been busy sending out letters requesting comments on encryption policy -- and asking pointed questions. The letters have gone to: Lieutenant General Kenneth Minihan, Director of the National Security Agency Secretary William Daley, United States Department of Commerce Director Louis Freeh, Federal Bureau of Investigation Ambassador David Aaron, U.S. Special Envoy for Cryptology Robert Holleyman, President of the Business Software Association Ken Wasch, President of the Software Publishers Association Kathy Kincaid, Director of I/T Security Programs at IBM Attached is the one to the NSA. -Declan ******************* March 21, 1997 Lieutenant General Kenneth A. Minihan Director National Security Agency/Central Security Service 9800 Savage Road Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-6000 Dear General Minihan: The Committee on Commerce has jurisdiction over all matters relating to interstate and foreign commerce, including commerce transacted over electronic mediums. One vehicle for interstate and foreign electronic commerce, the Internet, has experienced unexpected and exceptional growth. Our Committee has an obligation to ensure that the growth of electronic commerce over the Internet and other networks is not stifled by unnecessary or harmful regulation or policies. Thus, the Committee will be discussing what policies best promote electronic commerce over the Internet and other networks. The growth and success of the Internet and the World Wide Web as both a communications tool, and a medium for electronic commerce is unprecedented. Leading industry estimates indicate that the number of people using the Internet is increasing at the rate of more than 100% per year -- few technologies have had such quick acceptance into the daily activities of Americans. However, the full potential of the Internet as a means for conducting business transactions, or electronic commerce, has yet to be achieved. Most leading experts agree that a developed Internet, and corresponding intranets, have the capability to be engines for economic growth for those offering services over the Internet, and also have the capability to be a means for transforming business operations from one of paper-intensity to one conducted solely through electronic communications and transactions. Unlocking the full potential of the Internet and thus, promoting the use of electronic commerce has been difficult, in part, because of existing and perceived barriers, e.g., many consumers and businesses are concerned with the security and privacy of transactions that would occur over the Internet. A belief in the security of information passed over the Internet and through on-line services that use the public switched network will foster the continued growth of electronic commerce. Fortunately, the use of cryptography or encryption, either hardware or software, may provide a technological aid in the promotion of electronic commerce. We believe, however, that a sound encryption policy for both interstate and foreign electronic commerce must balance users= privacy interests with society=s interest in legitimate law enforcement and investigative needs and the needs to preserve national security. As you know, the U.S. has export restrictions on certain encryption products that may or may not interfere with the development of encryption products designed to secure communications and transactions. These restrictions have been the subject of recently proposed legislation in committees in both the House and Senate. Because of our responsibility over electronic commerce, we seek to have your views on a number of the issues related to the various bills. Therefore, we request that you provide written answers to the following questions by April 25, 1997: (1) With the understanding that there are no domestic restrictions on encryption products, please provide examples where national security may be jeopardized by the relaxation of current American export restriction policy, as incorporated in Executive Order 13026 and implemented, in part, in the corresponding Bureau of Export Administration rules of December 30, 1996. Are there remedies other than export restrictions that would provide the United States government the access it needs to encrypted communications, e.g., increased funding for new advanced computers? (2) How significant is your agencies= consultive role with the Department of Commerce within the current export restrictions? Should this role be strengthened or is it even necessary? How much additional application process time does your agencies= consultive role add to the Department of Commerce=s procedures? (3) It is commonly accepted that current encryption export restrictions imposed by the Administration will delay the proliferation of advanced encryption products, but that it is inevitable that advanced encryption products will be developed world-wide. In your opinion, do export restrictions prevent the development and distribution of advanced encryption products? (4) Are foreign import restrictions consistent with the Administration=s policy? Please identify the countries that have import restrictions and those that have stated their intent not to have any import restrictions. If the United States relaxes its export restrictions, do you anticipate that foreign nations will increase their import restrictions? In addition, we request that your staff analyze and submit their comments on the following: (1) the current export restrictions; (2) the congressional bills introduced that would alter export policy (H.R. 695, S. 376, S. 377); and (3) any other analysis related to encryption export policy your organization has prepared. Please have your staff contact John Morabito or Tricia Paoletta of the Commerce Committee staff at (202) 225-2927 if you have any questions regarding the above request. We thank you in advance for your assistance. With kindest regards, we are Sincerely, Tom Bliley Chairman Rick White Member of Congress ------------------------- Time Inc. The Netly News Network Washington Correspondent http://netlynews.com/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is public. To join fight-censorship-announce, send "subscribe fight-censorship-announce" to majordomo(a)vorlon.mit.edu. More information is at http://www.eff.org/~declan/fc/

1 0

Re: Analysis of proposed UK ban on use of non-escrowed crypto.
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Timothy C. May" <tcmay(a)got.net> writes: > (I could go on and cite dozens of examples. Did ASCII need the "force of > law" to make it a better standard? Did the government have to certify, > license, and regulate the makers of various implmentations of computer > languages? And so on.) Bad example, Timmy. I used to hang out with the standards people and yes, a lot of government purchases (both US and non-US) are mandated to comply with ANSI and ISO standards, which is why vendors push so hard to have their implementation declared the standard. Yes, U.S.Gov't does buy certified ANSI C, Fortran, etc compilers, not to mention ADA. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Announce: list-abuse mailing list
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 15:12:13 +7 From: "John Buckman" <jbuckman(a)shelby.com> Subject: Announce: list-abuse mailing list To: listmom-talk(a)skyweyr.com Precedence: Bulk Sender: "ListMom-Talk Discussion List" <listmom-talk(a)skyweyr.com> Reply-To: "ListMom-Talk Discussion List" <listmom-talk(a)skyweyr.com> On the list-managers list, I suggested that a mailing list discussing how to prevent mailing list abuse might be useful. Based on the strongly positive feedback I received about the idea, I've gone ahead and created a "list-abuse" mailing list. I apologize to members of "list-managers" who have already received this announcement. General instructions about joining "List-Abuse" are available at: http://clio.lyris.net/list-abuse/ Alternatively, you can send email to: join-list-abuse(a)clio.lyris.net About LIST-ABUSE: LIST-ABUSE is an Internet discussion group working to stop abuses of Internet mailing lists. In particular, we aim to stop mail bombs, spoofed-subscribers, denial of service attacks, and other forms of "Mailing List Terrorism". Mailing list administrators, authors of mailing list software, and others interested in mailing list abuse are welcome to join. John John Buckman <jbuckman(a)shelby.com> Shelby Group Ltd., http://www.shelby.com/ Developers of Lyris Email List Server --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by stupidity." -- Jerry Pournelle The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/

2 1

[IMPORTANT] Forgery detection
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timmy C[rook] May's mother attempted to pro-choice the unwanted little bastard by fishing with a coat hanger in her giant cunt, but failed miserably to pull the rabbit and succeeded only in scraping out the contents of little Timmy's fetal cranium (not much to begin with). _ / ' | /><oo><\ Timmy C[rook] May //[ `' ]\\

2 1