December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Cryptographers Do It With Protection
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Excerpts From: None of Your Business: World Data Flows, Electronic Commerce, and the European Privacy Directive Peter P. Swire & Robert E. Litan >The Tension Between Data Protection >and Modern Information Technologies >On almost any conceivable dimension, we are in the midst of an information >explosion. Data protection rules, by contrast, seek to block flows of >information. Data 'Control' is oppression. Data 'Protection' is our friend. "If putting all information about every individual on the face of the globe in the hands of the New World Order saves the life of a single child..." >Seen another way, the rise of computers and computer networks is undoubtedly >a major reason why countries have promulgated data protection rules in >recent decades. In both the United States and Europe, current debates >about privacy are being driven by fears about how computers pose a threat >to privacy. >That is, computers are the key reason for data protection rules. ... >International flows of data. International flows of information are >climbing rapidly within companies, as they create global Intranets, >and between companies, as they use Extranets with their strategic >partners. And these "data protection rules" are going to be enforced equally for everybody, right? If you and I are fined and imprisoned for violation of these rules, then it will be likewise for owners of megacorporations, government employees, etc. Just like at Waco and Ruby Ridge, Kent State and Tiennachinc Square... Just like murdering dictators at the APEC summit would have been maced and arrested if they carried signs saying "Freedom & Democracy." Get real. While Bernstein has the Dogs of InfoWar set on his ass, RSA is exporting cutting edge encryption technology to Communist China. Bottom Line: Just as is the case today, the "data protection" laws and regulations of the future will apply only to those individuals and corporations who fail to fall in line with the New World Order's desire for all new technologies to contain tools of surveillance and oppression. "Those who have nothing to hide, have nothing to fear." Put a cork in your asshole...the government is going to 'protect' you again. BendOverI'mHereToHelpYouMonger |<----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------->| 6"

1 0

This post is none of your business
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Excerpts From: None of Your Business: World Data Flows, Electronic Commerce, and the European Privacy Directive Peter P. Swire & Robert E. Litan >The Directive's limits on transborder data flows directly confront >organizations' expectations to be able to circulate information freely >inside the organization's firewalls and other security. Operations >in the United States and other third countries will often expect to >exchange data about employees with European operations. >Wherever there is no finding of adequacy, however, sending data to >third countries risks violating the data protection regime. >Organizations thus face a compliance dilemma of whether they can >implement Intranet and other information technologies consistent with >European law. Keep in mind that ignorance of laws written on foreign shores, in foreign languages, will be no excuse. Americans can expect to be indicted as coconspirators of people they have never met, have never seen, and have never communicated with. "Put down that copy of the Constitution, and slowly back away from the keyboard, Monsieur!" >In an era of transnational business, the accounting and auditing >functions of companies require transfer of an increasingly wide range >of information across borders. To carry out these functions, auditors >and accountants must have the ability to examine the underlying >documentation of transactions. This documentation often includes >personally identifiable information. >The Directive thus challenges the ability of transnational firms to >follow accepted and appropriate procedures for audit and accounting. So we can expect to see governments and megacorporations blow off billions of dollars in order to protect Dimitri Vulis' privacy. Right... "None of Your Business" is full of references to "transnational" corporations and organizations, and the development of "Intranet" and "Extranet" webs within and among them. While it addresses many of the issues which will come into play regarding regional laws and regulations in the expanding global InterNet (and does a damn fine job of it), I believe that, in the end, the single issue which will decide the fate of all who use the InterNet will be the right to privacy. Without privacy, freedom and self-determination are not possible. The more things globally change, the more they will remain the same. Individual Bernsteins will find themselves pitted against the bottomless pockets of governments and corporations, while 'transnational' RSAs will be free to engage in activities of momentous proportions which are forbidden to the Bernsteins of the world in even the smallest of instances. 'Data Protection' will be as big a farce as 'News Protection' currently is. It will be a tool for those with money and power to control and manipulate the information that citizens are allowed to access, and the form in which they will be allowed to view it. The 'personal information' concerning the 'guerilla' mothers and babies who are slaughtered by US troops will be 'protected' (and thus 'unavailable), while the 'personal information' regarding the 'men of valor' who died while slaughtering them will be made available for a nation told to mourn only them. The 'personal information' concerning those who get filthy rich selling the government $10,000 toilet seats will be 'protected', while the 'personal information' regarding every small sin in the lifetime of the whistleblower who exposes the thief will be made available to every media souce on the face of the earth. The citizen's answer, "None of Your Business," will inevitably be countered by the government's question, "What do you have to hide?" With the expansion of global laws to cover every action and activity possible to humankind, 'data' becomes translatable as 'evidence.' And "everything" becomes the government's business. Is it my imagination, or are Swire and Litan, as well as all others who write about the current state of development of global technology, society and law, merely providing real-time footnotes to '1984', without providing Orwell's insight into our true future? ~~~~ 1984AnimalFarmBraveNewWorldMonger "Everything not permitted, is forbidden."

1 0

Digital Revolutionaries
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> None of Your Business: >World Data Flows, Electronic Commerce, and the European Privacy Directive > Peter P. Swire & Robert E. Litan > > > B. Some Reasons for Data Protection Laws. >Before plunging into the Directive and its potential effects, >it is useful to understand why laws have emerged in recent decades -- >not only in the United States but elsewhere throughout the world -- >to govern uses of personal data. And perhaps the best, although >admittedly overdrawn, way to do this is by imagining a privacy ^^^^^^^^^ >advocate's worst nightmare -- the presence of an Orwellian, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >all-knowing computer, which contains a complete dossier on >every individual in a society. "Overdrawn?" Methinks Peter and Robert are on the outside, looking in. Forwarded from the London Telegraph: ----------------------------------------------------------- >Daily Telegraph Connected Supplement 16th December 1997 > >A European Commission report warns that the United States has developed an >extensive spying network on European Citizens and we should all be worried, >reports Simon Davies. > >A global electronic spy network that can eavesdrop on every telephone,email >and telex communication around the world will be officially acknowledged >for the first time in a European Commission report to be delivered this >week. Of course, anyone who suggests that they would use this information to compile a complete dossier on everyone in sociey is a paranoid lunatic, just as those who suggested the above *before* it became an open secret were paranoid lunatics. >Briefly consider what sorts of harms might occur if such a computer existed. >If the computer were controlled by the government, then individuals might >feel chilled by constant surveillance. They might fear government would use >the computer to retaliate against its political enemies. They might be >afraid that those who controlled the computer would become an unaccountable ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >elite, whose command over secret files would help entrench themselves in ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >power. ^^^^^ Are Peter P. Swire & Robert E. Litan the *real* Author of 'The True Story of the InterNet'? Is this why no one has ever seen them and TruthMonger together? >The fears hardly disappear if the computer were controlled by corporations >in the private sector. In that case, private actors would gain extraordinary >power vis-a-vis the government. Meanwhile, corporate-controlled computers >can be just as invasive of personal privacy as those controlled by >government. Can you say "Fascism?" Sure you can... >What should be a society's response to these doomsday scenarios of the >all-knowing computer? To the extent the scenarios are plausible, society >should seek ways to prevent and correct the abuses of power that can occur >with centralized control over information by the public and private sectors. "Society?" Is "society" ready and willing to spend five *extra* years in prison for the use of encryption and/or anonymity in the commission of such crimes as exporting strong encryption? Is "society" ready and willing to fight the battles of tomorrow, *today*? "If you meet Dan Rather on the road, kill him." >On the other hand, there may be important reasons why the doomsday scenarios >will not occur, and especially reasons for doubting that information >technologies inevitably lead to centralization of control over information. >As we explain in detail in subsequent chapters, both the United States and >European Union have taken steps to address the perceived risks caused by >individuals' loss of control over their personal information. Excuse me? We can expect to be 'saved' by governments which have already taken away our basic human rights, and who continue to do so in increasing quantum leaps? We can expect to be 'saved' by Jim Bell's government? Or by the Branch Davidian's government? Or by the government which arrested and maced its citizens for possession of signs saying "Freedom & Liberty" during the APEC summit where unelected dictators met with elected dictators to divvy up the world's financial spoils? "We're from Adolf Hitler's government, and we're here to help you..." NEWS FLASH!!! The inevitable forced march to centralized information and centralized power over the face of the globe will be successfully resisted only as it has been done so in the past, through the efforts of Revolutionaries and Warriors. This time, by Digital Revolutionists and InfoWarriors. Who is going to inform the public of what is taking place in the secret war against the citizens? The Desert Storm reportwhores? The mainstream media who whipped the public into being outraged by the sight of the bodies of US soldiers being dragged through the streets of Somalia, while ignoring the stories of Somalian mothers with babies in their arms being slaughtered by those US soldiers? What segment of "society" is going to rise up in protest against the outrages of the future? The segment that watched JFK, RFK, MLK, et al, be slaughtered by the Dark Allies, and slept comfortably with mainstream media visions of lone gunmen and Magic Bullets dancing in their heads? The segment that watched the Iranian hostages responsible for the election of RR and his CIA running mate being released on the same day as RayGun's and BushWhacker's inauguration, and never smelled a ratfucker? The segment that can sleep comfortably after watching their government burn to death the men, women and children of a religious group targeted for persecution? The segment whose best revolutionary efforts have been to make feeble attempts to fight yesterday's battles years after they have already been lost, and the lies, hypocrisy and dark intentions of our government masters begin to become public? The Revolution is Now! Tommorrow's battles are already being won today by secret government agencies and unelected secret commissions who control the reality seen by the citizens through the mainstream electronic opiate of the masses. The tools of encryption and anonymity are the weapons of the Digital Revolution. Software sabotage and backdoors are the secret battles of the InfoWarrior. Warez is the lifeline that provides InfoWarriors with the tools necessary to fight with the latest available weapons. The Clipper Chip is a digital implant. The V Chip is a digital implant. The Save A Missing Child Chip will be a digital implant. Orwell and Kafka saw the Beast. Saint John the Divine saw the Great Beast...the Global Beast. Those who do not learn from the future, are doomed to live it... TruthKidMonger |<---->| 8" "If this is the revolution, why are the drink prices so high?" ~ Patron at New York City guerilla bar

1 0

CRYPTIC WARNING !!!
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SOMETHING small IS GOING TO HAPPEN !!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Little Peter |<--------------------------------------------------->| 2"

1 0

Server Registration
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Server Registration Excerpts From: None of Your Business: World Data Flows, Electronic Commerce, and the European Privacy Directive Peter P. Swire & Robert E. Litan >Consent and jurisdiction, however, may be much bigger problems on the Web. >As for consent, an ordinary user often will not know the identity of the >person or organization that is hosting a web site. The user often will >not know about the site's privacy practices. Does the site keep track >of personal information, and perhaps sell that information to third >parties? >Is a "cookie" being placed on the user's hard drive to track his or her >movements in cyberspace? Even if a site claims to have privacy protections >in place, how can the user verify that the polices are followed? >In addition, the user also has no ready way to determine whether the site >is within Europe, and thus clearly subject to the Directive, or else in >a third country that may lack privacy standards. >In light of all of these uncertainties, there may be little basis for >assuming that an individual has consented to a site's uses of personal >information. In the coming InfoWar, servers will be classified as "munitions" and will be subject to registration, regulation and control. This will, of course, be for the 'Data Protection' of the citizens, corporations and the government. "In the interests of National Security." will become, "In the interests of Data Protection." or somesuch new catchphrase of oppression. >Outside of Europe, U.S. and other web site operators are even less >likely to comply with the Directive, and many of these operators may >remain beyond the jurisdiction of European law. >Web sites will also likely be established outside of Europe precisely >in order to process data in ways that are forbidden by the Directive, >and it is far from clear that technical methods exist to prevent data >from flowing to such sites. Naturally, the InfoWar waged against Data Criminals will have to be a global effort, with the increasing merging of worldwide LEA's described by Reno and Freeh. God help the American who is an international coconspirator of Jaime Belle. God help the American who exports strong encryption developed by RSA in Communist China, and subject to their laws. Face it...any government or corporation that could be guaranteed exclusive access to the Chinese market would send a Strike Force back in time to murder baby Jesus in Bethlehem, if that was what it took. The citizen's ass will soon be global grass... >This legal enforceability will only provide effective protection of data, >though, if there is actual compliance by the many controllers within >Europe, and some legal and practical way to gain compliance from web >site operators elsewhere in the world. "In order to Data-Save the Global Village, we had to burn it." >It is indeed possible that data protection rules will increase consumer >confidence and thus the level of electronic commerce -- if the public >knows about and trusts the data protection rules, and if those rules >inspire more confidence than other approaches to protecting privacy. Bullshit! The sheeple will sell out their human rights birthright for a bowl of instant gratification pottage, and, in the twisted reality of present day 'democracy', will sell out the rights of the rest of us, as well. "If you don't click on the button that states you agree with the loss of all your human rights, you cannot access the "Naked Teenagers Sucking Donkey Dicks" streaming videos." NEWS FLASH!!! The news stories describing how reluctant consumers are to give out their credit card information out over the InterNet never seem to mention that the largest financial transaction base on the InterNet is not fueled by customers who wait a week or so for 'snail mail' payments to "Adult Check" to give them access to hard-core pornography. The sheeple will "trust the data protection rules" when they are 'told' to do so (by the same government officials who told them that there would indeed be jacuzzi's at Aushwitz -- "Now climb aboard, please.") "They came for the encryption, and I had no encryption, so I didn't speak up. They came for the server registration, and I had no server, so I didn't speak up. "Then they came for access to the hard drives, and I had a hard drive, but nobody spoke up." Saving the life of that "single child" is going to be the death of us all. ServerRegistrationMonger #326-A57-IE54876-29

1 0

Re: Civil War Crypto Question... (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 1997 15:35:00 -0500 > From: John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> > Subject: Re: Civil War Crypto Question... > Jim Choate wrote: > > >Myer implimented including a 'cipher disk' whereby the Union was able to > >change their telegraph codes on an hourly schedule. It was apparently very > >effictive in dealing with taps and such. > > > >Anyone know of another source that discusses this disk? > > Myer's code and cipher disk (with illustration) are briefly described > in Fred Wrixon's "Codes and Ciphers" along with an entry on > Civil War crypto with a photo of a Confederate cipher disk. > > We've put the entries and illustrations at: > > http://jya.com/cydisk.htm > > The book is: > > "Codes and Ciphers: An A to Z of Covert Communication, > from the Clay Tablet to the Microdot," > Fred B. Wrixon, Prentice Hall, 1992, paper. $18.00 > ISBN 0-13-277047-4 Thank you, thank you, thank you. I'll order a copy from the local bookstore today! Merry Christmas! ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment
by The Sheriff 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> Where do you get the right to tell others how they can make a living? > >I don't have that right. However, the Supreme Court has said that the >Congress has that right. If you would be so kind as to a) specify that supreme court ruling, and b) identify an online resource where I can obtain the text of that decision, so that I can 1) confirm or deny your allegation, and 2) debate your position intelligently, I would greatly appreciate it. >> I am not allowed to place toxic waste, or noise, where it can affect >> others; I can ingest toxins privately and listen to whatever music I >> like so long as you don't detect it in your backyard. > >Well, racism is hiring decisions is something that is detected in other >people's backyards. That's why its illegal. What if I run a business out of my house? What if I don't need employees (such that I could affort to hire a couple of people, or nobody at all)? If I hire someone who is white because I don't want to hire someone is black, then it is not a loss that is felt within the black community, since I don't *need* to hire anybody in the first place. >>> In a fantasy world, it is mutually consensual. It the real world, it is >>> seldom mutual. > >> You prefer a shotgun or otherwise arranged marriage? > >I prefer a level playing field. The above phrase is something that I hear a lot, and it deeply disturbs me. Regulation is allways seen as the arm of fairness, when the above phrase is mentioned. I am not allowed to choose to hire someone based on skin color, and yet the country is riddled by "affirmative" action programs -- which, in the short and brutal version of the description of "AA" is just a system of RACE-BASED PREFRENCES. I find it very interesting that liberal activists in California, who rabidly insist that racism is wrong, that we must have racial dialogues, that we should all "just get allong," used the court system to fight Proposition 209, which ends affirmative action in that state. The people voted their will, and the activists took to the courts to override the people's will -- in effect, saying that the California voting public is just a bunch of idiots. I don't like someone telling me that I don't know better. When I like is as little government influence in my life as humanly possible, be it in my choice of breakfast cereal, or employees. >> Private behavior is private behavior, and trade is a private behavior. > >Not in this country. If you don't believe me, check out Article I, >Section 8 for one explicit example. I read Article I, Section 8. I shall quote the relevent portion that relate to this discussion: "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes; ... " Now, then. Notice the eighth word -- "amung." As I understand it, this means that the Fed can regulate INTERstate commerce, not INTRAstate commerce. This is why (again, as I understand it) the Fed will inspect meat crossing state lines, but not meat that is moved around within a state. It is for this reason that not all meat is inspected by the Fed. If anybody has refrences to texts that prove me wrong, bring them forward so that I can refine my argument. :) So, back to my home business. Let's say I build computers and sell them around the state. Since I'm not transporting my product from one state to another, the Fed can't constitutionally regulate how I do business. >>> With freedom comes responsibility. Decency is one of them. This is ALLWAYS the case. You earn freedom through being a responsible adult. When you don't infringe on the rights of others, the government has no grounds under which to infringe on yours (through punishment or direct order). >> But obligate decency at gunpoint is not worth it. > >It's called civilization. You should try it some time. No, no, no. To obligate "decency" at gunpoint is definitely NOT anything but facicism (sp?). I remember a time when people were obligated to do the "decent" thing and worship God and Jesus Christ -- and, as the bumper sticker says, "The last time religion and politics were mixed, someone got burned." Decency is a very fuzzy word. After all, the KKK says that white people are the only decent people. The KKK is in the minority. To use your own words: "No majority group has a right to discriminate against a minority." By your own words, the KKK should be allowed to discriminate against blacks when they hire if they want to, since they are in the minority when compared (by numbers) to all of the groups they think are lesser than those of white skin. After all -- does skin color constitute the only minority? Not according to the definition of the word. Best wishes and fresh-roasted peanut taste, The Sheriff. -- ***<REPLY TO: sheriff(a)speakeasy.org>*** --- As kinky as it sounds, finger me to see my PGP key and confirm the signature attached to this message. --- Any and all SPAM will be met with immediate prosecutory efforts. Solicitations are NOT welcome here! --- ----BEGIN INFLAMATORY BLOCK---- Version: 160 (IQ) Comments: Definitely one of their greatest misses. Reporter: "Do you know what Public Enemy is?" --- Citizen: "Public enemy?" [long pause] "Probably somebody in office." -----END INFLAMATORY BLOCK-----

1 1

Request_for_quotation
by cypherpunks＠toad.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Att. Sales / Export Department Re: Request for quotation A RFQ for products which, to the best of our knowledge are similar to those offered by you ,was placed with us by one of our clients. We are a world wide sourcing firm and we are paid by our clients to find them suitable suppliers . To you ,our service is totally free of charge !!! The information we will get from you will not only be immediately sent to this particular client but also to all other clients looking for similar products . To define and advise us the products you are interested to export and/or to get more information about us and our FREE SERVICE , please use our Internet interface at: http://www.thebol.com Best Regards theBOL - Purchasing Department

1 0

Re: Civil War Crypto Question... (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, There is a historical problem w/ the accredation of the various signals in use during the Civil War in the book: > "Codes and Ciphers: An A to Z of Covert Communication, > from the Clay Tablet to the Microdot," > Fred B. Wrixon, Prentice Hall, 1992, paper. $18.00 > ISBN 0-13-277047-4 The author claims (from John Young's cydisk.htm): <B> Myer, Albert</B> (1829-1880), U S. Army surgeon and cryptographer. To finance his medical studies, Myer worked as an operator for the New York, Albany, and Buffalo Telegraph Company. After entering the army, he developed a visual signaling method in 1856 and called it flag telegraphy. (Two British officers, Sir Francis Bolton and Vice Adm. Philip Colomb, independently developed a similar system at about the same time.) Though it was approved for use in 1860, the year Myer became chief signal officer, the system was not fully appreciated until the outbreak of the U.S. CIVIL WAR in 1861. Myer's technique then came to be known as "wigwag," from the motions of its hand-held flags or disks for daytime signaling and torches or lanterns for sending messages at night. This is clearly several errors regarding 'wig-wag' signaling techniques and Myer. These techniques go back to pre-Napoleonic times. Myers was a alphabetic system where arm position denoted the letter, not the arm motion (hence wig-wag). In: The American Civil War and the Origins of Modern Warfare Edward Hagerman pp. 40 "But the primary motive was recognition of the benefits of this technology to tactical and strategic coordination. The increasingly extended lines of large American armies, especially their tactical extension with the rifled musket, as well as the rough terrain, challenged existing technology based on wigwag signals supplemented by couriers." In addition, McClellan didn't appoint Myer to be his signal officer until August 20, 1861. Further, there was *no* signals department in the US Army to be appointed to until *after* March 3, 1863 when legislation was passed bringing the official Signal Corp. into being. I don't have clue what Wrixon is talking about, but it clearly doesn't have anything to do with history in general or crypto specificaly. Cite this Wrixon's book with care. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Cypherpunks IRC Christmas Eve Party
by Eric Cordian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If anyone wants to drop by #Cypherpunks on EFNet this evening, myself and others will be around to chat. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

2 1