December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Big Brother is watching
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 9/4/97 12:51 AM, Tim May (tcmay(a)got.net) passed this wisdom: >At 8:28 PM -0700 9/3/97, Sean Roach wrote: >>At 03:43 AM 9/4/97 +0200, Anonymous wrote: >>... >>>>With this wonderful sucess, We can all look forward to this items being >>>>placed in our domiciles in order to further protect us from crime. >>> >>>And I'll give my kids a can of spray paint and a ladder. Maybe I'll offer >>>bonus prizes if they can figure out an inventive, undetectable way to disable >>>the fucker. >>... >>In Altus, it is illegal to sell spray paint to persons under the age of 18. >>That makes two violations of their rights that I know of. >>The curfue which was enacted a couple years ago being the first. >>All because the local politicians are fully aware that they are too young to >>vote. > >In my community, it is even illegal to buy spray paints and give them or >make them available to those under some age (18 or 21...I don't know). > >I like my solution a lot better: anyone can buy the fucking spray paint, >but taggers are shot down by those whose property they're trespassing on. > >Seems consistent with personal freedom and responsibility. I don't know if the law is still on the books, but when I was an undergrad at Univ of Penn in the 60's you could not buy a water pistol/squirtgun of any kind, because there had been some incidents where people were squirted in the face with ammonia bu a couple of miscreants, so the city council took it upon themselves to 'protect' us all! Brian B. Riley --> http://www.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys - Send Email Subject "Get PGP Key" "The more you run over a dead cat, the flatter it gets!"

1 0

Re: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow; Denning on export ctrls (fwd)
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sometimes these guys can still surprise even me. That statement below is about as blatant as it gets: [Freeh] There are a number of ways that that could be implemented, but what we believe we need as a minimum is a feature implemented and designed by the manufacturers of the products and services here that will allow law enforcement to have an immediate lawful decryption of the communications in transit or the stored data. That could be done in a mandatory manner. It could be done in an involuntary manner. But the key is that we have the ability. -------------------------------------------------------------- Let me get this straight: they need *as a minimum* instant access to all cleartext. So what is the "more than minimum" they truly desire? And the two alternatives Freeh proposes to obtain this *minimum* are either "mandatory" or "involuntary". What a choice! --Lucky

2 1

Re: Comparing encryption to airbags: both hurt the public
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

That Subject: line should have been, of course, that airbags and crypto controls both hurt the public. --Declan

1 0

Comparing encryption to airbags: both hurt the public
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 07:38:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Comparing encryption to airbags: both hurt the public ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 09:48:53 -0400 From: Julie DeFalco <defalco(a)cei.org> To: declan(a)well.com Subject: Airbags Actually, the similarity between airbags and encryption is a good comparison. The public will be hurt by encryption controls, just as the public has been hurt by airbags. A few facts: Airbags were promoted by Joan Claybrook in the 1970s and 1980s as a wonderful technology which worked for everybody from large males to little children. She claimed that they would save thousands and thousands of lives each year, and that they would work for unbelted occupants. Claybrook even pressured the manufacturers to use the technologies which she now condemns today (don't get me started on Claybrook's mendacity on the airbag issue. She is a flat-out liar). Well, while airbags have indeed saved some people who otherwise would have died, they have not worked nearly as well as promised. They specifically hurt the weakest people in our society -- small children, short women, and the elderly. They add about six hundred dollars to the price of new cars, which encourages poorer people to keep older, possibly less safe cars longer. Now Claybrook even claims that airbags would work better if people weren't "out of position" -- i.e. if they were wearing seatbelts, even though the entire point of airbags was to provide "passive restraints" because people didn't wear seatbelts. Encryption controls will, like airbags, be far more dangerous to the public than currently promoted. And once given the power, it will be pretty difficult, if not impossible, to take it away from government agencies. Even with airbags documented as killing people, the government won't let us have the choice whether to have them in the car at all. The biggest concession the government will make is allowing car companies to include an on-off switch. This is why CEI will soon publish directions on our website on how to dismantle your own airbags (well, as soon as we square away the legal stuff). Ciao! Julie ________________________________ Julie DeFalco Policy Analyst Competitive Enterprise Institute 1001 Connecticut Ave., NW Suite 1250 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 331-1010 Fax: (202) 331-0640 http://www.cei.org

1 0

NEWS: Re: Big Brother is watching
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:17 PM 9/3/97 -0700, Lucky Green wrote: ... >BTW, just for the record, I believe that we live in a consumer society and >the People choose the government they want. The average person doesn't care >who thinks for them as long as they don't have to think for themselves and >can pretend to themselves that it was in fact they who did the thinking. > >The People desire a master, not a revolution. ... Excerpt from the not so distant future. The FBI, NSA, and all local fire departments merged today in an unexpected congressional action. This merger was supported highly by the good populus of our great nation as it makes it easier for the authorities to keep tabs on those thinkers that keep stirring the people up. Various professors were unavailable for comment. Said one congressman. "We needed this merger and throwing in the fire departments seemed a good idea since everyone knows that all buildings are now fireproofed. We feel that the firemen's experience with containing the blazes will do well for creating controlled fires with which to destroy contraband. It is also noted that the water trucks that they use can readily be converted to carry kerosine. First on the list to be destroyed is every copy of the constitution, which has caused too much grief of late. Everyone has a 14 day leneniency in which to turn in their copies. Please remember that all media is included including, but not limited to, CD-ROM's with the terrible screed, pages in encyclopedias with the infamous words, and handwritten copies.

1 0

Cars Re: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:43 AM 9/4/97 -0500, amp wrote: > >> >> I noticed that strange air bag analogy myself. Clearly, Freeh and his >> puppet masters are trying to skew the discussion towards "public safety". >> Of course, requiring GAK is more like requiring a remote kill switch in >the >> ignition of all new cars so cops can just type a license plate number >into >> their terminal to halt a fleeing car. [BTW, such kill switches will be >> required before long. I trust we all know this]. > >Already implemented actually. All modern automobiles have a rather >respectable amount of computing power that is vulnerable to directed radio >frequency weapons, whose effect to microelectronics is similar to an >electromatic pulse. =This= is what is driving the push to get older >vehicles off the road, not environmentalist's arguments about 'global >warming'. Actually, the current trick is to launch a little rocket-powered cart with some form of electronic measure under the fleeing car from behind. It fizzles the electronics pretty well on contact with the bottom of the oilpan. Anyone know if one of those protectors that you can get for your oil pan would deflect this if it were mounted on rubber washers with teflon screws?

1 0

Re: Di Privacy, Die / Was: Death of Privacy
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- TruthMonger wrote: > Notice that the press reports that the two little princes want to > walk behind the casket. Is it a 'coincidence' that the two innocent > victims who are now under the thumb of the monarchist spin-doctors > are going to be front and center in the coverup of their mother's > murder? > Why are the thousands of death threats against Prince Charles if he > tries to use the funeral to redeem his image *not* news? It seems likely that Something Is Afoot. Let's not assume that it is centered on preserving Charles Windsor's shot at the throne. Most likely those Shadowy People who preserve social order have been concerned about the stability of the Monarchy and are now taking steps to preserve it. A commonly perceived problem with monarchy is the strict rules of inheritance. From time to time a person totally unsuited to the job pops up. Not all societies in all of history have found this problem insurmountable. (Examples: The Man in the Iron Mask, or the peculiar deaths of Queen Hatshepsut's older brothers, or the death of Peter the Great's only son, etc.) Diana, obviously, was unsuited to the job and did not seem to understand it. R.I.P. Diana, for all the trouble she caused, did manage to arouse interest in the Monarchy. Her death has caused millions of people in Britain and elsewhere to become deeply emotionally involved with the Monarchy. This emotional capital is far better than the lassitude which preceded her. While many perceptions of the Royal Family are not positive, this can be easily transformed into adulation of the Monarchy using the vehicle of Diana's sons. Charles is no prize. He's managed to muff an easy job. It is possible that the Monarchy would not survive his accession to the throne. Look for the death of Charles, probably before the Queen dies. An accident would do it, but a "suicide" would add some spice, arouse sympathy, and be less suspicious. (Two fatal accidents would be extremely unlikely, whereas the odds of a suicide under these circumstances cannot be calculated.) A "lone nut" with a gun would also do the trick, although it's getting old. This would pave the way for a smooth handoff of power from the well regarded Queen to one of Diana's well regarded sons. Order will have been restored. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.html "I AM a number! I am a free man!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNA5l65aWtjSmRH/5AQHA+wf+L8wD2sO49jbwkdGDKaMT6V0NYxqS8v6e 6IQXBkVEdhtNBWbgFB647smJ9TOR0Z9TFxcMGi0MDYw4X8CZPKJOzh3Al78S53PA ViseV1nMMFpViOjqSALChK9NtOE2pemAKGBJaTvjGZBzzi0ItSkRhS+JBfaByz3C tzBCwMx99kMnQrUVNHW6aC5hjj47WFSbGLLbLP5g6VJnGVLP/jRl3I/173KoGote VXRXAByWd+EWjYvACe/WIOt4rYiCGCG4WJgDi4UETOfYJoYgjqrjdZ8ljIzw/bL6 Bg2nI7wg//PQXSN/TMq8rWlwauYRLQ9i9EMK4KvuOm3Qq1tMzHGh7A== =0xyT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow; Denning on export ctrls
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Declan McCullagh wrote: > All encryption products sold or distributed in the U.S. > must have a key escrow backdoor "like an airbag in a car," > law enforcement agents advised a Senate panel this > afternoon. Encryption is an airbag for accidents of government. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.html "I AM a number! I am a free man!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEUAwUBNA5bopaWtjSmRH/5AQE69gf42l0E6MUoySn3XNaDKEWoi89XMzloM1NU OpindGVwUg8/G79Z95O398fItTap9Cb1pdTaPpSV7ERNQgSvnXHB6qRyDDOgkQq/ bbpeOrrR8xEz57Jcr20l+hCeGKqgfs/Ghy5Z+0fc/6d0ZxMlMTQcn2z9MR/VsFE4 VS+FqZlaj6od38mXeEx0yhXGbdastEkOITB7LoPuMX27EQswHxVVwa/FEkAh+kSs GJ2W6ZSGJcTXG9/HTp+y1c7QX1c+3wWwfBvim/bfHdF8oasgu79U1/pLZJ226WZr 59DWGY9LZbvb5gqAKF4H9lSv35hGUD8ZhVkAQrbehrX2i+rEaBY7 =ZB1b -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Administration backs away from FBI on crypto, by A.Pressman (fwd)
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 17:06:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship-announce(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Administration backs away from FBI on crypto, by A.Pressman ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 16:55:06 -0400 From: Aaron Pressman <aaron.pressman(a)reuters.com> To: declan(a)well.com Subject: crytpo etc Clinton administration back away from FBI on encryption By Aaron Pressman WASHINGTON, Sept 4 (Reuter) - The Clinton administration's top official on encryption policy on Thursday backed away from a proposal by the head of the FBI to regulate for the first time computer coding products in the United States. "What he proposed was not the administration's policy," Commerce Undersecretary William Reinsch told reporters during a break at a congressional hearing. FBI Director Louis Freeh's comments Wednesday before a subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee sparked strong criticism from civil liberties groups and the software industry. U.S. law strictly regulates the export of encryption products, which can be used to scramble information and render it unreadable without a password or software "key." But on Wednesday, Freeh proposed mandatory controls on currently unregulated coding products intended solely for domestic use. "The administration has been very clear to the director that he has an obligation to tell the Congress what's in the interests of law enforcement, and he did that," Reinsch explained. "That doesn't mean he was speaking for everybody." Freeh said makers of encryption products should include features that would allow the government to crack any message. Without such capabilities, criminals, terrorists and pedophiles could use encryption to hide their communications from law enforcement agencies, Freeh said. But software companies maintain that Freeh's plan would make their products less attractive and make all electronic messages less secure. Civil liberties groups said mandatory controls on domestic encryption might violate constitutional guarantees of free speech and privacy. Under the FBI director's proposal, all encryption products would have a feature allowing government access to coded messages, but users could disable or avoid using the feature. Some senators wanted to go further. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, proposed requiring all users of encryption to enable the back-door access feature. Freeh said such a law would be the best solution for law enforcement but added that he did not think it was politically viable. Reinsch said Freeh's proposal was also unlikely to pass. "If the committee were to report that (bill out), I think that would be something we would look at very seriously," he said. "But I don't expect that to happen. We have not asked them to report that and we are not going to ask them to report that." Thursday, 4 September 1997 16:13:38 RTRS [nN04290412] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Reuters Ltd.

3 2

Re: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow; Denning on export ctrls (fwd)
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 9/3/97 8:30 PM, Lucky Green (shamrock(a)netcom.com) passed this wisdom: >[Freeh] >There are a number of ways that that could be >implemented, but what we believe we need as a minimum >is a feature implemented and designed by the >manufacturers of the products and services here that >will allow law enforcement to have an immediate lawful >decryption of the communications in transit or the >stored data. That could be done in a mandatory >manner. It could be done in an involuntary manner. >But the key is that we have the ability. >- ... hmmmm, immediate *lawful* decryption ... which implies that they plan to end run the Bill of Rights with some law that permits them to walk in and snoop on the spot ... right now to look at my mail which needs no key, just a teakettle, they at least have to stop somewhere and find a tame judge, which removes at least some of the immediacy. Brian B. Riley --> http://www.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys - Send Email Subject "Get PGP Key" "In effect, to follow, not to force the public inclination; to give a direction, a form, a technical dress, and a specific sanction, to the general sense of the community, is the true end of legislature." -- Edmund Burke

5 5