December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Exporting cryptographic materials, theory vs. practice
by danisch＠ira.uka.de 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What do I have to do if I want to bring cryptographic equipment _into_ the USA temporary (for use or demo) and want to take it back home after some days or weeks. Since I am in America then I am under american law. The _export_ of my own crypto stuff is not temporary. Does the american law allow me (a foreigner!) to take out any cryptographic material, even if it is my own thing? Hadmut

1 0

Re: Press attack on anonymity.
by frissell＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:51 AM 1/3/95 -0800, James A. Donald wrote: >Yesterday an "opinion" article appeared in the SF Chronicle, >written by some unimportant person who knew absolutely >nothing about the internet. > >Today a similar, but better informed article, appeared in >many newspapers, originating from the New York Times. The later is presumably Peter Lewis' article on anonymity on the nets that appeared in the Saturday Times. It was not that negative about anonymity although it did seem to confuse spoofing with anonymity (since it talked about digital signatures as a response to "problems"). He did not advocate government intervention. Since the Supremes have always supported anonymous speech, it seems unlikely that anonymity could be outlawed. Things like mandatory identification for net access (hard to enforce worldwide) would also seem to be a "government license for publication" which is what the 1st Amendment was specifically written to stop. In any case, using companies as cutouts for such activities is trivial. Mandatory ID of any sort only goes back as far as the first entity which can be a company formed to block tracing. DCF ************************************************************************* ATMs, Contracting Out, Digital Switching, Downsizing, EDI, Fax, Fedex, Home Workers, Internet, Just In Time, Leasing, Mail Receiving, Phone Cards, Quants, Securitization, Temping, Voice Mail.

1 0

Anon penet addresses
by An annoyed user 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To whomever keeps signing up penet addresses of the form "anXXXX" to cypherpunks: Cut it out. I've changed your address from the anXXXX to the naXXXX address. If you don't know why anXXXX is antisocial, I can tell you while flaming you for not understanding what you['re doing.

1 0

Press attack on anonymity.
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yesterday an "opinion" article appeared in the SF Chronicle, written by some unimportant person who knew absolutely nothing about the internet. Today a similar, but better informed article, appeared in many newspapers, originating from the New York Times. Articles written for newspapers are written to survive arbitrary truncation, hence key points first, lesser points later. The interesting thing is that the two articles, despite different authors, had equivalent key points, implying that some single higher authority gave out a list of points to be made, but left the headline and overall spin to the columnist. Indeed, when one reads beyond the key points that were equivalent in both articles, it is as if one suddenly encounters a different journalist. There is an abrupt change of tone and style when one reads from the uniform part to lesser points. The key points in both articles are that the government should do something coercive to stop anonymity on the internet, and that there is widespread support for such a move. Note that since both articles are obviously tentacles, there is a mysterious and anonymous powerful person -- the single higher authority of which I spoke earlier -- who is anonymously attacking anonymity. In my opinion when a mysterious anonymous and powerful voice proclaims that the government should coerce someone, it is usually the government speaking -- a government department with guns is running up a trial balloon. --------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we James A. Donald are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. jamesd(a)netcom.com

2 1

LAW AND ETHICS ON THE "NETS"
by marsha-w＠uiuc.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Looks like more of a push for regulation: Charles Bell thought you all might have something to say about this... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ABA SCI/TECH SECTION, IPPP COMMITTEE LAW AND ETHICS ON THE "NETS" December 8, 1994 The John Marshall Law School's Center for Informatics Law, in conjunction with the ABA Section of Science & Technology Committee on Information Practices, Policies, and Privacy, is undertaking a project entitled, "Law and Ethics on the 'Nets'" (LEON). The development of a national information infrastructure and a global electronic network, of which Internet is the backbone, has presented a multitude of legal and ethical problems involving use and abuse of the networks, nationally and worldwide. Almost on a daily basis, news items announce electronic network transmissions constituting hate mail, profanity, vulgarity, obscenity, child pornography, sexual harassment, defamation and invasion of privacy. The violation of intellectual property rights and information system security are also frequent occurrences. National and international discussions consider such questions as what "rules of the road" ought to apply, who can make them, how can they be enforced, and what will be the legal and political relationships between states and nations regarding cyberspace? It is argued that at present the lawless, the intolerant and the disrespectful seem able to pollute the worldwide information stream with little constraint. Certainly, the current state of anarchy in national and global electronic networks cannot continue if the technology is to achieve the remarkable benefits that have been predicted in terms of communications among institutions and individuals, whether government, business or society at large. The purpose of the CIL/S&T project is to promote a dialogue that can lead to recommendations for treating with the many issues at hand. We solicit the participation of the Sci/Tech IPPP Committee (and interested others!) in addressing the foregoing issues. Please send me your expression of interest -- indicating what specific aspects of the various questions you would like to address, and then I'll organize us into some working groups. PLEASE LET ME KNOW YOUR INTERESTS BY JANUARY 9, 1995, SO WE CAN STRUCTURE THE PROJECT AND PROMPTLY GET UNDER WAY. We plan a program on the project for the ABA annual meeting in Chicago next August, and we hope to generate a publication for the Section concerning the project results. George B. Trubow, Professor of Law Director, Center for Informatics Law The John Marshall Law School 315 S. Plymouth Ct. Chicago, IL 60604-3907 Fax: 312-427-8307; Voice: 312-987-1445 E-mail: 7trubow(a)jmls.edu Marsha Woodbury marsha-w(a)uiuc.edu U of Illinois/Urbana-Champaign FAX 217-356-7050 Home 217-337-0001 Work 217-244-0780 http://www.cpsr.org/dox/global.html

3 2

Re: SAN FRANCISCO EDITORIAL
by mclow＠coyote.csusm.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sandy wrote: >C'punks, > >Here is a guest editorial that ran in Monday's SF Chronicle. It >should make your blood boil. > [ ranting gibberish deleted ] > >Martha S. Siegel is the author of ``How to Make a Fortune on the >Information Superhighway'' and CEO of Cybersell in Scottsdale, Ariz. > Not _the_ Martha Seigel, of Cantor & Seigel, targets of fine cancelbots everywhere? -- Marshall Marshall Clow Aladdin Systems mclow(a)coyote.csusm.edu

1 0

Re: Anonymous payment scheme
by Hal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- From: Brian Lane <blane(a)seanet.com> > I don't see why a debit card couldn't be anonymous, even to the point > of having no name, AND no picture on it. Yes, the bank has the money, but > their only obligation is to dish it out to the vendors/ATMs that you have > used your card with. Why should a bank care who you are once they have > your money in the account. Again, it is unclear here whether you are proposing that you would be anonymous to the bank or just have a blank card. As I wrote, banks are required to get SS#'s for depositers right now, and I wouldn't expect that to change any time soon. If anything, the trend appears to be towards more tightening rather than less. Duncan and/or Sandy have suggested giving a fake SS# when you open your secured account; maybe that would be legal but it sounds questionable to me. > As to avoiding fraud with the card, is it really that huge of a > problem? As long as noone copies the number(could go so far as no > embossed number. Just a gloss black card with a hologram of a Bald Eagle > on the front of it), and you don't lose the card how can someone use your > account? I used my VISA yesterday, and after swiping it through the now-ubiquitous card readers the vendor was required by the machine to manually enter the last four digits on the card. He complained that this was something new and was happening very frequently now (maybe a change with 1995?). I have heard of fraud where people make fake VISA cards (or steal them) and re-program the mag stripe to have a different number than what is on the front. Maybe this is a countermeasure for that. It doesn't sound like a blank card is the direction the industry is going. Does anyone have more info on this change? Hal -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQBVAwUBLwmNFBnMLJtOy9MBAQF4gAH7BgHuNzraGdAujkbnStXf9knBUYCKiJZv zodiYtbEFAKuuPUIT/aqyM1L7IPRbMuNMSW9hmel3k11g9ATHy+doA== =n71e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Re: Press attack on anonymity.
by Dr. D.C. Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Forwarded message: - From dcwill(a)python.ee.unr.edu Tue Jan 3 11:52:23 1995 From: "Dr. D.C. Williams" <dcwill(a)python.ee.unr.edu> Message-Id: <199501031952.LAA04685(a)python.ee.unr.edu> Subject: Re: Press attack on anonymity. To: asgaard(a)sos.sll.se (Mats Bergstrom) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 11:52:15 -0800 (PST) Cc: dcwill(a)python.ee.unr.edu (Dr. D.C. Williams, P.E.) In-Reply-To: <Pine.HPP.3.91.950103194933.7114A-100000(a)cor.sos.sll.se> from "Mats Bergstrom" at Jan 3, 95 08:05:49 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 842 Mats Bergstrom wrote: > Since Joe User doesn't really > care if he can connect anonymously or not, at least not yet, > they might very well succeed in making some aspects of anonymity > 'illegal'. But who cares, if anonymous agents can't be traced? Because then the last, unstoppable act of the State will be to clamp down on anonymous agents. See "How to Boil Live Frogs". You can't dump them into boiling water because they will jump out. Instead, start at a comfortable temperature and turn up the heat a little bit at a time. Eventually, the frogs become unable to escape and are lulled to their unconscious death. I equate "making some aspects 'illegal'" with increasing the water temperature. To paraphrase and oft-seen .sig from this list: "Seldom is freedom of any kind lost all at once." =D.C. Williams <dcwill(a)ee.unr.edu> - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLwm6/ioZzwIn1bdtAQGuRwGAobH2lCXDIHUCitG1mcI0RasjMOWjovT2 xUpa1Xta/mphm/s+2H21f7kuFvY6smcn =wclb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: SAN FRANCISCO EDITORIAL
by Erik Selberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> C'punks, > > Here is a guest editorial that ran in Monday's SF Chronicle. It > should make your blood boil. > > > S a n d y > > * * * > > ANARCHY, CHAOS ON THE INTERNET MUST END Yup, it's the same net-spamming Siegel, arguing for: End of mob rule, so she can advertise everywhere for free; End of anonymous encryption, so we can't send plans for the new stealth basselope to the commies (or I guess it's liberals, nowaways). End of anonymous mail, so she can tell back at all those who yell at her for spamming Terms of surrender for us academic types, who only exist to attack business people (and, if you're at CMU, check out the nudie pics) End of private providers yanking abuser's accounts basicly, a nice editorial which sugar-coats what she wants, which is the ability to send out what she wants, ensure that it gets to everyone she sends it to, and not worry about flames or getting the boot. What's scary is that it's very easy to slide this kind of stuff onto an ignorant and conservative legislature. Big leaders who want to do good see an obvious good side to removing the ability to post anonymously --- law enforcement can track people making drug transactions, and if someone broadcasts a nudie pick found to be obscene in TN, well hey, they can now haul his ass to TN for some jail time. It's going to take a lot of lobbying to ensure that this doesn't happen. work: (206) 543-7798 Erik Selberg play: (206) 517-3039 speed(a)cs.washington.edu I get by with a little help from my friends...

1 0

16 years old hacker arrested ?
by sghahn＠math1.kaist.ac.kr 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

According to AFP(London), The Independent reported on January 3, 1995 that a sixteen years old boy was arrested for breaking into the computer network of US Defense Department. The report also tells that the hacker posted documents about last year's nuclear crisis between North Korea and USA. Does anyone know where can I get a copy of that documents ?

1 0