December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Photo IDs (Re: A Libertine Question)
by Chris Adams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 31 Jul 96 14:27:54 -0800, tcmay(a)got.net wrote: >>was allegedly requiring *two* pieces of ID for flights. If they are talking >>about two pieces of photo -- government-issued ID, I wonder where the 80% of > >Yeah, this "two photo IDs" is strange, given that: >a. many ordinary people have only one form of photo I.D., namely, their >driver's license (and many don't even have that) >b. terrorists and other such persons are _very_ likely to have multiple >forms of I.D., though of course not in their "true name." > >Hence, the policy looks ineffectual and just a sop to public relations. And who really thought a response just days later would be anything else? >And just what is a "true name" for the purposes of this law, anyway? Birth >name? And what is that? What about people who marry, change names, etc.? >Given that there is no "standard" for photo I.D.s, will my Official >Cypherpunks Card count? Now *that* might be another way of generating Cypherpunks revenue! (1 card per FPGA paid for the DES cracker... Or maybe every $15 toward the CPLDF or PRZ) # Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> - Webpages for sale! Se habla JavaScript! # Automatically receive my resume or PGPKEY by sending email with a subject # of 'send PGPKEY' or 'send resume'. Capitalization counts so be careful! # Web site: http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htm

1 0

"An who shall guard the guardians?"
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Latin maxim "And who shall guard the guardians?" has some relevance to the headlong rush into converting the U.S. into even more of a security state than it is now. The investigation in Atlanta is now focussing on a rent-a-cop who may have planted the pipe bomb and then "discovered" it. Check the usual Web news sources for more details. Whether he is the bomber or not is not the point, which is, "who watches the cops?" A string of arsons up and down the north-south highways of California was finally shown to correlate with the travels up and down those highways (at those same times) by a Glendale arson investigator! And cases where cops have planted evidence, drugs, and guns are almost too much a part of our culture to even notice anymore. My point is not that all cops are corrupt. Indeed, I suspect that they are no more corrupt proportionately than is the general population...which is not too reassuring to me, though. ObClipper: "Who shall guard the guardians?" While the various Clipper proposals have putative safeguards to limit access, think of Craig Livingstone, a rent-a-cop the Clintons hire to work on their Enemies List. And think of the dossiers of J. Edgar Hoover. And think of Nixon. And think of what President Pat Buchanan would do with Government Access to Keys. No thanks, I'll lock my own doors. I have no plans to "voluntarily escrow" my door keys with the local cops. "Secure in one's papers and person" rings a bell, doesn't it? --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

4 3

Re: fbi, crypto, and defcon
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> Okay, so their boss is part of the law making process, subject to the checks >> and balances that exist between the three branches of US government. They >> are in a position to supply their boss with data and I am personally >> impressed with their grasp of some of that data (it sounds to me like they >> are telling their boss that hackers like the ones at Defcon are not the >> problem). It was interesting how the Agent made the point that the FBI was there to enforce laws, not make policy. Then his Boss's role in the law making process was brought up, the Agent said "but any of you can do the same thing, you all have a voice" etc etc. Then he refused to answer political questions based on the fact that he was there as a representative of the FBI, failing to see that his Boss is also a representative of the FBI when recommending legislation. (Again, I realize he was "under orders" not to discuss it, I wish he wouldn't try to justify it with obviously faulty logic.) > I think what they are really saying is that they would love to >bust most hackers, but since they can't they might as well use some of >them to catch the bigger fish. If they truly did believe in the laws they >are supposed to uphold they wouldn't associate with hackers (who commit >computer crimes) at all. A more cynical view is that they are there to protect some of the biggest institutions of "organized crime" (ie: Congress, At&t, Microsoft, etc) who are ripping people off on a daily basis from the other organizations who refuse to play by their rules. //cerridwyn//

1 0

Re: A Libertine Question
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Most demands for ID and conformations with police involve the operation of >motor vehicles. I have never been "IDed" except at border crossings and >when I was operating motor vehicles. Clean and dressed up people are rarely >IDed on foot. Maybe you should mention some of the specific practices in >Seattle that disturb you. I was downtown Seattle at night time (early morning), walking around, minding my own business. Probably not actively maintaining public decorum, but certainly not doing anything unorderly. A cop approached me and asked what I was doing, I told him none of his business. He asked me for my ID, I said why, am I under arrest? He said no, but he needs to see my ID. I told him he has no right to ask me for my ID, especially when I've been doing nothing wrong, if I wanted to live in those conditions, I'd move to Iraq or China or something. I got out my handy pocket tape recorder, and asked him to state his name and repeat his request for the benefit of my lawyer who'd be contacting him. At this point the few other people on the street had sort of gathered a few yards away, and the cop decided he wasn't gonna win this one, so asked me to return to my home and left before I could respond. You are right, "Clean and dressed up people are rarely IDed [read harassed] on foot." I'm not concerned for the clean and dressed up people (with regards to police abuse), I'm concerned about the majority of people who aren't. (For the record, I'm generally clean, but *rarely* dressed up. =) ) >Or flying on a commercial flight. So far, prosecutions for "failure to >possess ID" have not succeeded. You *can* be prosecuted for failure to >identify yourself (which is *not* the same thing). The Philadelphia airport >was allegedly requiring *two* pieces of ID for flights. If they are talking >about two pieces of photo -- government-issued ID, I wonder where the 80% of >Americans without a Passport (x the 90% of Americans who are not government >employees) get the second piece of ID. [Is it a violation of something if >you Heil Hitler od Sieg Heil the airline clerk when they ask to see your ID. >It's not a threat, it's an expression of honor.] When I flew from Philadelphia about a year ago, they required one picture ID and one other ID, just like most stores when you want a check cashed. I still don't like it, but I have less of a problem presenting ID when I am seeking a service of some kind. It is unacceptable to be asked for ID when I am merely walking around a public street.

1 0

Re: "And who shall guard the guardians?"
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:57 PM 7/31/96 -0700, Martin Minow wrote: >This question is also relevant to escrowed encryption: how to >prevent misuse of escrowed keys by file clerks and other people >who need access to the keys as part of their legitimate duties. >Since these keys will protect a very large amount of money (consider >the encryption keys used for interbank clearing) and since we >know from the Aldrich Ames case that $3,000,000 can buy a >high-ranking CIA employee, there are significant problems that >need to be addressed. I would suspect that a Baysian analysis >would indicate that the risk of holding (and losing) a key is >greater than the risk of not holding (and needing) a key. However, even that is a somewhat skewed analysis. Most of us realize that the kinds of advanced surveillance systems that are being promoted these days have nothing to do with crimes that are, statistically, the most common and feared among ordinary citizens. Will a wiretap ever solve a burglary? Rarely. Will a Clipper-type decrypt bring a rapist to justice? Fairly unlikely. How about a carjacking? A strong-arm robbery? An arson? Sure, it's always possible, but we know what's really going on. Governments are afraid that technology will not only replace the protections we've traditionally been told only came from government (and thus make them unnecessary), but also that technology will allow us to force those governments to shrink and possibly to disband. In other words, to a government-type most of the benefits of a Clipper system are to the government itself, certainly not to the person who owns the phone and not even to society as a whole. That's one reason, I suspect, why those secret talks given to various people to convince them to support Clipper "usually" work if the person is a government-type, but will almost never work to an unbiased private citizen. That's also why the lecture is secret: That way, the government can push two different stories without a contradiction being obvious to the rest of us. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: A Libertine Question
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:01 AM 7/31/96 -0700, Greg Broiles wrote: >Which is a long way to say that street cops >don't usually torment people with nice cars and/or houses, so those folks >don't need to be so concerned about making sure their "papers" are "in >order". Most demands for ID and conformations with police involve the operation of motor vehicles. I have never been "IDed" except at border crossings and when I was operating motor vehicles. Clean and dressed up people are rarely IDed on foot. Maybe you should mention some of the specific practices in Seattle that disturb you. >So the unconstitutional and oppressive character of the various laws >Mike Duvos refers to is mitigated by their lack of evenhanded enforcement. >If a cop can demand ID from someone who "looks like he doesn't belong here" >he can demand it from you. (modulo driving, this isn't legal. But give >Justice [sic] Rehnquist and Clinton and random congressional maniacs a few >more years and see where things stand.) Or flying on a commercial flight. So far, prosecutions for "failure to possess ID" have not succeeded. You *can* be prosecuted for failure to identify yourself (which is *not* the same thing). The Philadelphia airport was allegedly requiring *two* pieces of ID for flights. If they are talking about two pieces of photo -- government-issued ID, I wonder where the 80% of Americans without a Passport (x the 90% of Americans who are not government employees) get the second piece of ID. [Is it a violation of something if you Heil Hitler od Sieg Heil the airline clerk when they ask to see your ID. It's not a threat, it's an expression of honor.] >with guns or other weapons. And just as some people "don't have a right to >live in Seattle" if they won't toe the line, other people may find they >"don't have a right to live in the United States." * The Supremes outlawed exile as a punishment in a case during the 1950s. Said it was cruel and unusual punishment. Guess it's OK to execute people but not deprive them of having a government. DCF "If the security guard did it in Atlanta, that will be the second US Olympics in which the only 'terrorist incident' was perpetrated by a security person. I guess we should outlaw security at such gatherings to prevent terrorism."

3 2

Re: A Libertine Question
by John Brothers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:01 AM 7/31/96 -0700, Greg Broiles wrote: >At 04:50 PM 7/30/96 -0700, Mike Duvos wrote: >>Alan Horowitz writes: >>> On Mon, 29 Jul 1996 jbugden(a)smtplink.alis.ca wrote: >>> >>> > Think of how many of our laws are being enacted that tacitly make being >>> > poor or indigent a crime. >>> >>> Horseshit. This is a poorly-disguised re-tread of one of the standard >>> lines of the Patrice Lumumba University brand of leftist agitprop. >(* Other people (apparently not "strong libertarians") buy into all of that >suspicious crap about the Bill of Rights and people being allowed to be >themselves even if other people find it upsetting or non-decorous. Speaking as a strong libertarian, I can assure you that Alan Horowitz is completely off-base. My gut feeling is that he is trolling this entire thread, so I will attempt to make my response as civil as possible. Strong libertarians recognize that my right to walk the street is in no way superior to anyone elses right to walk the street. Strong libertarians recognize that it is not against the law to smell bad, or to have rotten teeth, or in other ways be un-appealing. "They have no right to live in Seattle, they should move somewhere they can afford". That statement is ridiculous. No one has a 'right' to live in a certain place. In fact, Mr Horowitz, you don't have a right to go to downtown Seattle and not be accosted by the homeless. If you don't like it, move to somewhere the homeless ain't, and don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. Apparently Mr. Horowitz is one of the tiresome "legalize everything that doesn't offend me, ban everything else" libertarians. Here's a clue to a true libertarian thought process: You offend me, Mr. Horowitz. Your attitude by itself is enough to make my throat clench in distaste, but the fact that you call yourself a libertarian is exceptionally galling. From your e-mail, you show no understanding of what it means to be a libertarian, and libertarians are extremely ill-served by your preposterous claims. But I will defend to the death your right to make them. --- John Brothers Do you have a right not to be offended?

2 1

Re: crypto CD source
by Alex de Joode 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In article <16689.9607301944(a)exe.dcs.exeter.ac.uk> you wrote: : Some time ago on the list there was some discussion of putting : together a CD full of cryptographic software and reference material. : Nothing came of it, but I think several people expressed an interest, : for those of you who were interested, take a look at: : http://www.sevenlocks.com/ [..] : They have a large supply of crypto software available on-line as well. : (No mention of ITAR on their software down load pages (78 Mb of : security related software they claim), and it looks you could download : the lot even if you weren't in the US). ftp.replay.com has 220 Mb of crypto software available for download at no charge .... bEST Regards, -- Alex de Joode | Replay IP Service & Web DZign -- The Netherlands usura(a)replay.com | http://www.replay.com mailto:info@replay.com

2 1

Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The security guard Jewell is now confirmed to be the prime suspect. While NBC News is reporting that no evidence _directly_ links him to the bombing, the evidence against him is overwhelming: 1. He is overweight. With the exception of The Unabomber, most perps in cases like this are fat. 2. They found a _shotgun_ in his cabin. 3. He had an interest in guns. (Back issues of "Guns and Ammo" are bad enough, but possession of even a single issue of "Combat Handguns" is sufficient to convict in 39 of the 50 states.) 4. News sources are reporting that authorities who searched his apartment and his cabin "came up empty," which surely implies that he planned this crime with the help of others. --Tim May (P.S. I, too, was convinced Jewell was the guy. But in recent hours it is looking like a "rush to judgment" could be involved. There is strong pressure to "solve the crime" by the close of the Olympics on Sunday.) Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

4 3

Re: VISA Travel Money
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> It's not as anonymous as cash, but it might draw a lot less >> attention in my circumstances. I think it has a place in one's >> aresenal of privacy enchancing technologies. > > This card has the value "written" when you "purchase" it right? > > Any one wanna bet on how long it will take the "Hacker" Community >to figure out how to "refill" it? Otherwise all you have is a >debit card. Interesting related story about DefCon: for those of you who have been to Las Vegas, you know that many casinos have mag stripe cards that are issued for a variety of reasons, that are just as good as cash in the casino, but can't be used anywhere else. Many use them as a sort of debit card for slot machines. The story goes that a few DefCon attendies acquired a few of these cards from the Tropicana, and re-wrote the stripe to read that they had over 60,000 "points". I guess they discovered that the card was re-written each time it was used. Unfortunately for them, what they didn't discover was that the system also kept track on a computer somewhere, and the large difference between the computer's tally and the card's value set off numerous red flags, they found out relatively quickly when two Casino Security guards escorted them to the police station. Oops. I can't help but wonder what would've happened if they only made the difference like 10 points instead of 60K? These two people were not too bright, as they were staying at the Tropicana, and probably had all the equipment in their rooms. If they were of age, I believe (depending on what they found in the room) they can each get multiple 15 year federal sentences. Moral of the Story: Mag Stripe cards are never secure by themselves (the credit card companies mistakenly relied on security by obscurity and are feeling the painful effects still today), but have the potential to be secure if backed up by that kind of system. However, it would only really be practical in a closed environment like a Casino. Thus, for the sake of all the lovely banks I know and love, I hope they either A. choose something other than mag. stripes, or B. use them only as debit cards that are checked against a bank account when used. //cerridwyn//

2 1