December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: [WAS xs4all.nl] Terrorists
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:35 AM 9/9/96 -0500, Adam Shostack wrote: >Stephan Schmidt wrote: > >| One thought : How many of you would support terrorist >| web server (say Oklahoma, TWA, Iran, Lybia, RAF, IRA, ...) ? > >I've given support to at least two terrorist organization, probably >closer to five in the last year. I can't see supporting one more >would do any more harm. > >Adam And I support a terrorist organization (the US Government) every year whether I want to or not. The US was convicted of a major violation of international law (akin to terrorism) in the International Court of Justice back in the '80s for air sowing mines in Nicaragua's main harbor. DCF

2 1

CATO terrorism conference -- tomorrow @ 8:30 am, free
by declan＠well.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

More info on tomorrow's terrorism conference at CATO is at: http://www.cato.org/events/calendar.html This is especially timely given the report that the Aviation Safety and Security Commission (chaired by Gore) sent to Clinton with 20 recommendations. One is to enact "automated passenger profiling" of all domestic travellers, which would include airline access to FBI/CIA databases. This $10 million project bans anonymous air travel and, needless to say, raises significant privacy questions. -Declan >Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 12:23:13 -0400 >Mime-Version: 1.0 >To: declan(a)well.com (Declan McCullagh) >From: Solveig Bernstein <sberns(a)cato.org> >Subject: Terrorism Conference > >Cato's Conference, *Combatting Terrorism, Preserving Freedom," scheduled for >Tuesday, September 10, 1996 is now > > >* FREEEEE* > >That's right, the registration fee of $50 has been WAIVED!!! > >Come listen to Nadine Strossen, Dorothy Denning, David Kopel, and many >others discuss terrorism, foreign policy, civil liberties, and the >telecommunications infrastructure. > >Please redistribute freely. > >Conference begins at 8:30 at 1000 Mass. Ave. > > >- Solveig >********************************************************************** >Solveig Bernstein, Esq. >(202) 789-5274 >(202) 842-3490 (fax) > >Assistant Director of Telecommunications & Technology Studies >Cato Institute >1000 Mass. Ave. NW >Washington, DC 20001 >

1 0

Re: Kiddie porn on the Internet
by Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn wrote: > > "News" stories are now circulating on radio about child pornography on > the Internet, and how an organization called "Save The Children" is > working very hard to identify the trafficers and their accomplii. > > Save The Children is complaining that they can't find all of the dirty > dealers of kid-porn, since much of the traffic is encrypted! > > So who is Save The Children? First, since they're an international > organization raising funds in the U.S., they obviously operate at the > pleasure of the State Department. Ho hum. Remember the incidents at the > Denny's restaurant chain where Denny's was sued for discrimination > against minorities? Did it seem a little bizarre for the 1990's? I'm trying to work out just what sort of confused idea is going on here. Save the Children is an international charity that is based in the UK. It is ultra respectable, Princess Ann being its president and very active in that role (ie not merely titular). Its also a-political which it has to be for tax reasons and because otherwise the royals couldn't have anything to do with it. Their main mission is sending food to Ethiopia and other famine areas, development work etc. It is ultra-worthy stuff. I think that a more rational explanation of the Dennys case is that being weasels the Dennys management decided they needed some good PR before the judgement brought them bad PR. >*** The recievers of the porn should not be punished for the photographers >action, the same as if I would complain that someone burglarized my home becuase >i left the door open. It was their ignorance that caused their loss. Its the consumers who create a market. If someone burgals your house and I knowingly buy the stolen goods its a crime. Phill

1 0

Re: [WAS xs4all.nl] Terrorists
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:49 AM 9/9/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >I don't worry overmuch about a few thousand or even a few million people >dying as a result of something we have had an influence on developing, >anymore than the developers of many technologies need to worry about how >others use their technologies. > >And the net effect of crypto anarchy is to destabilize and marginalize >central governments, which is a net positive effect. If some eggs get >broken in the process, the biological imperative will generate more eggs. >No big deal. Particularly since governments murdered 160 million in the last 100 years while we civilians have only managed to murder a paltry 20 million or fewer. A savings of 160 million deaths leaves a lot of room for a non-harmful increase in private murder. We could increase the private murder rate by 8 to 10 times and still break even. Note too that most terrorism is aimed at governments (even if practiced on civilians). In the absence of government, terrorist incentives may be reduced. DCF "I don't know if we ought to trust governments with the Net, they might use it to nuke Hiroshima or conquer Europe or something."

1 0

L.A. Times articles, etc.
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm sure everyone is familiar with how newspaper articles are not necessarily "pure" news, i.e., they're often slanted toward a particular point of view. Go back a few years, maybe 20 or more, and look at the front page of the L.A. Times (or probably any big-city paper). Many or most news pieces written by UPI, AP, etc., now 100% are written internally. What y'all might want to think about is not just slanting and bias, but how certain people and organizations can actually *plant* a phony story on page one of a major paper like the L.A. Times. Go back a few months and check out the front-page article on real estate prices in the Calif. "Ventura Keys" area. Totally false. Story alleged that prices were "skyrocketing"; prices actually were absolutely flat, after having fallen by 35% or more in the previous couple of years. Whoever authorized this story, if they didn't get a big kickback or gain some points for some future operation, then I can't imagine why they would print such a thing. I hate to suggest anyone become more cynical than they already are, but, the front page(s) of a big-city newspaper are some of the most valuable real estate in western civilization, so do the math....

1 0

Re: Test...sorry about this - Reply - Reply
by Barbara Gamble 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I subscribed just once, real name. Yep, the Welcome msg is ReallyTrulyFine[M]. I reallytrulyread it. High-traffic, though, is relative. In light of Z.B.'s post , I thought that maybe I , too, had a mail probem. Seriously, thanks for the info. >>> Jean-Francois Avon <jf_avon(a)citenet.net> 09/09 2:26 pm >>> On 9 Sep 96 at 11:10, Barbara Gamble wrote: > I got it too. And since I am a new subscriber, I thought it might > be the normal traffic. The Welcome msg *did* say the list is > high-traffic. Still, I was aghast--300 all at once, another 100 > just in the last hour. Is that typical? (Please forgive such a > question from a newcomer to the list.) Usually, between 35 and 100 posts a day, most of which I delete. Did you subscribe twice or three times under slightly different names (but identical e-mail adresses)? RTFine Welcome Message, it explains everything you have to know Hope you'll stay with us. Jean-Francois Avon, Montreal QC Canada DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee Limoges porcelain, silverware and crystal JFA Technologies, R&D consultant physicists, technologists and engineers PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891

1 0

Re: Court challenge to AOL junk-mail blocks
by Will Rodger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >If you know a valid email address on the spammers system you can always >bounce each message back to them. If enough people turned the messages >back on them it might give them the opportunity to experience first hand >what its like to receive tons of mail you don't want or need... > Ah, but they never do. Why not? Because spammers _invariably_ forge the return addresses to keep exactly that from happening. Indeed, Cyber Promo claims it "had an understanding" with AOL that it could use AOL boxes or bogus adresses to keep bounced messages from coming back at them and crashing their server. Deliberatlely forging addresses, Cyber claims, is entirely legal. AOL says it's fraud. Interesting footnote: AOL, of course, is able to trace a lot of the spam it gets. It has sent back thousands of messages at once to Cyber which, in turn, has gotten it bumped from several ISPs once their servers crashed as a result. Tough business, huh? Will Rodger Washington Bureau Chief Inter@ctive Week -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMjSGvTqp6Cc7rRIJAQHCEQP/fZwhp/GTSwj9Emusgh9QFnAlafpOL2qI ces6RqwSoZfmbAmhREh836sakjS2d+mHdYK84FH7WdXWnuzMlDAPCls7OO8AU4t8 oMN7koLM3cpgwlavt/Lw8NJp3wC5OnRnrqNeunkBvNEBs8aaJ+C6isH/zrErgbt5 0QL9cYlEyq8= =EW/y -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Hettinga Plays Horseman, Gets the Last Word...
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It seems the former Office of Technology Assessment, now called the Institute for Technology Assessment (Go, Newt!), had a need for a horseman on their law-enforcement panel tomorrow. Anyone know where I can get a riding crop? :-). I'm scheduled, anyway. I'm in Cupertino at the moment (the Mac-Crypto conference was, er, insanely great; more on that later), and I haven't received the plane tickets yet (Bob Hettinga: You Buy, I Fly), though they're supposed to show up today. We'll see when I get home tonight. Oh. Any former Pac-Man addicts remember the name of the ghosts? I think there were four, right? Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- The Institute For Technology Assessment ITA INSTITUTE FOR TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP DIGITAL MONEY AND PUBLIC POLICY SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 US House of Representatives, Cannon Office Building, Room 121 A Workshop on Public Policy and New Technology: "Digital Money" is a rapidly evolving financial/communications technology. It is important that government, industry, and the public fully understand the unique characteristics and potential benefits and costs of this radically new technology, so that benefits may be fully realized and costs avoided through early, judicious attention to public policy issues and concerns. This workshop brings together the stakeholders and interested parties -including the public and their government representatives-to consider the issues that may be posed by this emerging technology. In this workshop, attention will be focused on three questions: What issues need to be resolved now if development of digital money is to proceed with minimal social costs and institutional risks? Where is there general agreement about needed actions, or about reasonable solutions to recognized problems? Where are there true uncertainties that must be monitored, solved empirically, or objectively researched? The workshop will consist of three sessions. Each will begin with invited presentations, followed by open discussion among presenters and participants. Moderator: Dr. Wayne Boucher of Strategic Futures International 10 a.m. Greetings and Introductions Keynote Address: The Honorable Michael Castle Chairman, Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy House Committee on Banking and Financial Services 10:30 a.m. Session I : Digital Money Systems, Today and Tomorrow - Industry Perspectives Who are the players in developing digital money -and what new players will emerge? What are the potential benefits -and costs-for banks, credit card companies, telecom companies, software vendors, or others? What has been learned from early pilot systems? What are the relative advantages-and risks-of smart cards vs. network-based systems? What older payment systems lose ground to electronic money and smart cards? Is the playing field level with respect to regulation and legislation? Specific issues that may be raised include questions about state licensing, Bank Secrecy Act coverage and financial privacy, protocols for payments of different sizes, clearinghouses, and multiple mints. PRESENTERS: Roger Applewhite, Benton International, Inc., Torrance, California William Barr, Bellcore, Basking Ridge, N.J. Electronic Funds Transfer Association, Reston, Virginia Kawika Daguio, American Bankers Association, Washington, D.C. 12:30 p.m. Buffet lunch 1:15 p.m. Session II. Government's Role in the Development of Digital Money How may existing laws and regulations impede the development of digital money? Does the possibility of future regulations or restrictions threaten to drive development in sub-optimal directions? Do banks or other potential developers need firmer assurances about regulatory intentions? Does existing legislation and regulation adequately protect property and contract rights with regard to digital money? What might be the effect of European data protection initiatives, and what steps can the US government take to circumvent international friction over this issue? What are the major risks imposed by digital money, including risks of devaluation of US currency? Could private insurance buttress against network failure, electronic runs on money, or other sources of catastrophic risk? To what extent could a failure in digital money systems contaminate or threaten the traditional banking system, or the integrity of traditional money systems? Who will set standards with respect to risk management and capital adequacy of clearing systems? Should smart cards and small internet transactions be exempt from Regulation E and EFTA protections against consumer liability? Would -or should Representative Markey's On-line Privacy Bill cover digital money transactions? Would non-bank digital money mints be covered by the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 and the Electronic Communications Act of 1986? Which party would bear the risk of loss in case of hard-disk crashes, counterfeiting, network failure, etc.? PRESENTERS: Melanie Fein, Arnold & Porter, Washington, D.C. L. Richard Fisher, Morrison & Foerster, Washington, D.C. Professor Sarah Jane Hughes, Indiana University Law School 2:45 p.m. Session III: Law Enforcement Issues Will anonymous instantaneous digital money create the possibility of new crimes, or new versions of old crimes -theft, money laundering, insider trading, etc.? How would the flow of invisible, non-traceable money affect law enforcement and the administration of justice? Do benefits of encryption outweigh the possible harm to law enforcement capabilities? Does digital money threaten the new focus of law enforcement on seizing the proceeds of criminal enterprises? Considering the lessor of the Digital Telephony Act, can early cooperation between digital money providers and law enforcement avoid the heavy costs of retrofitting systems to accommodate the needs of law enforcement? What is the appropriate role of government in assuring the security of digital money systems against breaches by insiders, or criminals, or terrorists? To what extent would digital money threaten the ability of the IRS to collect taxes or to prosecute tax dodgers? PRESENTERS: Roger Weiner, Deputy Director, FinCEN, U.S. Department of the Treasury Scott Charney, Chief, Computer Crimes Section, U.S. Department of Justice Robert Hettinga, Boston, MA 4:00 p.m. Adjournment Conference Organizers Steven Bonorris, Vary Coates (ITA) 202 686 0693 ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender." -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard, for Bart Simpson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

SPL -- Suspicious Persons List
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Digitaltronics Corporation V.P of Human Relations: "Joe, thanks for coming in this morning. I'm sure you're busy, so I'll make this as short as possible. OK with you?" Joseph Shlubsky, Programmer: "Uh, sure." <nervously> Digitaltronics: "Joe, we have a problem. We understand that on your last two business trips you've been flagged for Special Processing at airport security. We checked, and it seems you're on the Suspicious Persons List. As you know, this causes problems for your fellow travellers (no pun intended, eh Joe <laughs>). And, Joe, it undermines the corporate image for one of our people to be on the SPL. I'm sure you see our problem?" JS: "Uh...." Digitaltronics: "Joe, we're not sure what you've been doing to get yourself put on the SPl, and we're forbidden by the Fairness in Employment Act from even asking you about your interests and affiliations, but we really can't have representatives of Digitaltronics being pulled aside for SPL processing, now can we?" JS: "But I told them I was only carrying a briefcase, and that they could search it all they wanted to, and--" Digitaltronics: "Joe, I'm sorry, but we're going to have to let you go. You know how these things are. Nothing can be done. Not our decision, when you think about it. The government has their ideas of who should be on the Suspicious Persons List, and there's just nothing we can do about it. We just can't have our corporate image linked to persons on the SPL. Now, Joe, you'll get a generous 6 weeks of severance pay, and Daphne will assist you with your outplacement processing. Of course, Joe, you will have to go through an inspection every morning until you're fully processed...there's that SPL matter, you know." <laughs> JS: "Uh..."

3 2

Re: ... subversive leftists
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:57 PM 9/9/96, William H. Geiger III wrote: >In <Pine.LNX.3.94.960909125148.16761A-100000(a)blau.pin.de>, on 09/09/96 at >12:53 PM, > Stephan Schmidt <schmidt(a)pin.de> said: > > >>I hope this one was ironic. > >>> The Democratic People's German Reich is fully justified in cutting off >>> contacts with subversive radical publications in Jew-dominated nations like >>> Holland. >>> >>> As Reichskommander Schmidt points out: "The citizen-units who access >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>But this one is tasteless and insulting even if it was >>meant ironic. > >If the boot fits....... > I don't know why Stephan waited so many days to make his comment. It was my noticing that I had "collided" with his name, Schmidt, when I made my facetious post that caused me to almost immediately issue a clarification that I was not thinking of him when I made my first post. To be clear, again, I was not basing my "Reichskommander Schmidt" line on Stephan Schmidt. That was just a coincidence. As to the "Reichskommander," in our country, and on the Net, such jokes are not illegal. I rather suspect they are in Germany, either the DDR or the Western side. As to "tasteless and insulting," a matter of personal perspective. I find it helpful to call a spade a spade, and others apparently do as well. --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I 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, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1