December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

privacy trade war
by Attila T. Hun 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

FUD: Forwarded at 980219:171500 +0000 by Attila T. Hun <attila(a)hun.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Europe, U.S. try to head off privacy trade war _________________________________________________________________ BRUSSELS, Belgium (Reuters) - U.S. companies doing business in Europe are nervously counting the days to what they fear could be a new trans-Atlantic showdown. Oct. 24 is the deadline for the 15 European Union nations to implement a tough law designed to protect citizens from computer-age invasions of privacy. The law gives individuals broad rights to know, and in some cases control, how information about their buying habits, credit ratings, health, political affiliations and other characteristics is used. The problem, which has been consuming increasing amounts of attention in Brussels and Washington, is that it also allows governments to block exports of personal information to third countries that do not provide "adequate" protection. The United States is scrambling to show that it does not fall into that category even though it prefers industry self-regulation to strict government controls. "It's clear that the EU has a law with a sort of centralized government-led approach that they have to follow," a U.S. official said. "We don't have such an approach and we're not going to be taking such an approach." Washington argues that industry codes of conduct are an effective way to guard against misuse of data -- a stance that critics say does not appreciate the historical reasons Europe wants the right to privacy enshrined in law. "The difference between the United States (and Europe) is that the smell of fascism is still thick in the air in Europe," said Simon Jones, founder of the British-based global coalition Privacy International, which supports the EU approach. The conflict has raised fears that the two sides are heading for confusion at best and a bruising trade battle at worst once the EU law takes effect. "Every time we meet this comes up because the potential risk is quite large," the U.S. official said. The EU data protection directive, adopted after much controversy in 1995, aims to protect information traveling over electronic networks including the Internet from abuse by potential "Big Brothers." It also aims to ensure that public agencies, banks, mail order firms, multinationals and others can send data across Europe without fearing it will be blocked by differences in national privacy laws. It gives individuals the right to know what data has been collected, to prevent details from being handed over to third parties such as direct marketers, to file complaints about the misuse of data with a national authority and to win compensation for damages. The sticking point for Washington is Article 25, which requires governments to bar organizations from transferring personal data to third countries that do not "ensure an adequate level of protection." Since U.S. law does not mandate the controls required by the EU directive, companies fear the country will be blacklisted. "This disruption of trade would have an enormous impact on data flows required for electronic commerce," the EU Committee of the American Chamber of Commerce, which lobbies for U.S. business on EU issues, said in a policy paper. Washington has responded to the threat by pushing its business sectors to draw up codes of conduct with teeth. It has set a July 1 deadline for assessing whether that approach will work, the American official said. Industry sources say government officials have urged them to draw up codes bolstered by consumer notices, effective enforcement and outside audits -- or face continued pressure from the EU and home-grown privacy activists. "The hope is there will be a self-regulatory solution strong enough to give the U.S. the opportunity to say, 'Look what we've done' and the Europeans to say, 'They've complied, we can back off,"' Mark Kightlinger, a lawyer at Covington & Burling in Brussels who is following the issue, said. Many U.S. companies already have privacy policies and some sectors have been forced to strengthen their protection under pressure from the Federal Trade Commission. For example, a group of leading American computer database companies that was under fire for releasing Social Security and other information drew up a privacy policy in December. The American Electronics Association says it is among industry groups that are debating how to formulate a code of conduct. The European Commission, the EU executive said, has assured the United States that it does not envisage a blanket ban on data transfers to the United States, even under the status quo. Commission President Jacques Santer said in a letter to the EU Committee that the law allowed for "ad hoc solutions" and a "case by case" approach. But he said codes of conduct alone were not enough. "There is a need for sanctions and individuals must have guaranteed access to their personal data and a means of redress if their rights are violated," he said. A working party of EU national regulators echoed that message when it issued a paper in January outlining criteria for effective self-regulation in third countries. "Self-regulation as such is not a very explicit term," a commission official said. "Does it mean self-regulation, we don't do anything? Or do we inform consumers about our privacy policies and provide a right of access and rectification?" Some say the EU-U.S. conflict highlights the need for a global approach to data privacy. Some international organizations have already taken up the question such as the 29-member Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the International Chamber of Commerce. Santer argued in his letter that the Geneva-based World Trade Organization was the appropriate forum. _________________________ NOTICE ______________________ In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. _______________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: No safety this side of the grave. Never was; never will be iQBVAwUBNOxqILR8UA6T6u61AQFcdgIApku3mtLjUenuYQV9tPwev/dbZrcDEeKa Lp/tOlfU5psEeHmcTtA2ltSLwFgZX9dD//41Cll9txi7BfbDOC0YQg== =8FJW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Anthrax--The Horsemen are Riding
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CNN is reporting a news flash, with few details, about two men being arrested in Las Vegas for making or possessing or planning to make anthrax. Details should be emerging, but I have a hunch it's a witch hunt, an invocation of the Four Horsement, to drum up support for Clinton's Dirty Little War. Now, just what are the chances of such an arrest *exactly* as the USG is rattling sabers over Saddam's alleged anthrax and other CBW items? It seems highly likely that the word went out to local FBI offices to "beat the bushes" to produce some news headlines. "Find us some jimbells we can show to the American public as proof that an undeclared, unsupported war with Iraq is justified." Expect more raids on "terrorist cells." Expect more coincidental findings of chemicals and supplies which _could_ be used to make banned items. Expect the usual suspects, like Fineswine, to call for limits on free communications ("which are being used by terrorists") and cryptography. Meanwhile, expect no Congressional vote for Clinton's War with Saddam. Why won't Congress declare war, as is its responsibility (clearly stated in the Constitution)? The last time around, in 1990-1, there was a six-month buildup to the start of the war, there was apparently overwhelming public hatred of Saddam, there was a clear goal ("liberate Kuwait"), and there was clear support by other nations, other Arab states, the United Nations, etc. And yet the vote in Congress was very close...the Congress came very close to not issuing a statement of support. (Of course, this was still not a declaration of war, as the Constitution calls for, but it's about as close as we ever get in this post-WW II "Executive" government, where Congress never declares war, not even in Korea, Viet Nam, the Gulf, etc.) And this time around the public's interest in Saddam is ho-hum, the support of other nations is lukewarm to nonexistent, the goals of a war are completely unclear, and Congress appears unwilling to vote support. And yet the war will probably happen. Clinton, the draft dodger and antiwar activist (factual statement, not a judgement on his actions in the 60s), _needs_ a Nice Little War. But I predict it will backfire. He'll kill ten thousand Iraqi women, children, and other innocents, he'll incinerate some underground bunkers holding terrified residents of Baghdad, and he'll bomb some pesticide facilities. But in a region as vast as Iraq is, does anybody think he'll destroy all of those shock-resistant flasks and Thermos bottles carring whatever biological goodies he's already made? When Clinton's minions stood and held up bags of sugar and said "This much anthrax could kill everyone in Washington," why, after the cheering stopped, didn't the obvious question get asked: "And bombing Baghdad stops this bag of sugar from being used in just _what_ way?" If a couple of guys in Las Vegas can get busted for doing Illegal Experiments, regardless of whether actual anthrax is ever found, then why do we think Iraqi, Libyan, Sudanese, and other such nations have not long, long had the means to disperse anthrax in nations which bomb them, kill their children, and tell the U.N. to boycott them? Like I always say, avoid "soft targets." Avoid the Schelling points for attacks, the sites any self-respecting terrorist, freedom fighter, or patriot would attack first. When Washington, the president not the pesthole, advised us to "avoid foreign wars," we should have heeded him. America has become Amerika, Policeman to the World, ready to inject herself into foreign wars in Bosnia, Haiti, Ruwanda, Somalia, Viet Nam, Korea, El Salvador, Kuwait, and on and on. "Pouring out the phials" may be rough justice for Amerika. --Tim May Just Say No to "Big Brother Inside" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^3,021,377 | black markets, collapse of governments.

3 3

PLO censoring pro-Iraqi sentiments
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The PLO ("Palestinian Authority") has banned pro-Iraqi demonstrations and has seized the offices of newspapers and radio stations with an editorial bent against the upcoming War with Saddam. (Last time around, of course, the PLO supported Saddam.) So much for any pretense of freedom of speech and the press. (Not that I ever held the PLO, or the State of Israel, or Iraq for that matter, as any kind of exemplars.) Just something to remember when considering the implications of these foreign wars. No doubt Madelyn Albright, William Cohen, and Sandy Berger would love to have had such press controls yesterday in Columbus, Ohio, when their policies were booed and heckled, and when the questions asked were the common sense questions many of us are asking..... I chortled to see tapes of this event being replayed over and over again in Baghdad. But not in Israel. At least not in PLO-controlled areas, now that Washington is their New Master. --Tim May Just Say No to "Big Brother Inside" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^3,021,377 | black markets, collapse of governments.

3 3

FBI Claims Germ Attack Foiled
by Eric Cordian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here's an interesting little story that just floated by on AP. ----- NEW YORK (AP) -- Two members of the Aryan Nation have been arrested in Nevada and accused of plotting a bacterial attack on the New York City subways, an FBI source said today. The source, who spoke in New York on condition of anonymity, provided no other details. The Aryan Nation is a white supremacist group. The FBI in Nevada said that two men were taken into custody in a luxury car outside a doctor's office in Henderson, Nev., near Las Vegas. FBI spokesman Aurelio Flores in Las Vegas said only the matter was ``serious.'' He said different teams from around the country are ``coming in to look at what we have.'' A news conference was set for late morning Las Vegas time. Flores said the FBI has secured the area where the car was found and had ``made everything safe.'' He said the agency was not looking for explosives. The New York source said the suspects allegedly planned to release a ``dangerous bacterial substance'' in the subways. In Washington, a federal law enforcement source said agents were investigating allegations that the two men arrested in Las Vegas possessed anthrax. The source stressed that the tests were not complete and that there have been unfounded instances in the past involving allegations of anthrax. Anthrax is an infectious disease that usually afflicts only animals, especially cattle and sheep. But Anthrax spores can be produced in a dry form suitable for weapons and can be fatal to humans even in microscopic amounts. New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani was briefed on the case by FBI Director Louis Freeh and was told ``there is no reason for alarm,'' said mayoral spokeswoman Cristyne Lategano. She would not confirm what the alleged threat was. Giuliani, speaking generally about the threat of terrorism, said: ``Every part of America, every part of the world, is vulnerable to terrorism. ... There is no way to make an open society, a democracy, invulnerable to terrorism or to criminal acts. Short of closing down America and closing down the city of New York, it would be impossible to do that.'' The mayor added, ``It is impossible to have a police officer every place. That would be unrealistic, and it would change the nature of a free society. Short of that, I think New York City is doing everything it can do to try to reduce the risk.'' -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

1 0

Opticom.com is *not* the Opticom that makes the TB chips...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi all, Someone mentioned in private mail that 'opticom.com' was a valid webpage. True, but it isn't the Opticom that is making the tera-byte chips that we have been discussing. I did a whois on them and called the admin contact number and they very quickly made it clear there was no connection. So, if anyone knows how to get in touch with the company on the other side of the big pond please pass that info along to me. I am most interested in getting data sheets, etc. on the devices. Thanks. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | When a man assumes a public trust, he should | | consider himself public property. | | | | Thomas Jefferson | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Mainframe solution (fwd)
by D'jinnie 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I do not know where this was published but it seems interesting... --- Reality leaves a lot to the imagination. jinn(a)inetnebr.com ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 13:13:20 -0500 From: "Labry, Phillip" <Phillip.Labry(a)CWI.CABLEW.COM> To: intp(a)jubjub.wizard.com Subject: Mainframe solution,Lengthy but interesting... Resent-Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 10:14:27 -0800 (PST) Resent-From: intp(a)jubjub.wizard.com > Got this interesting article from an old friend of mine.........the > best approach seems to be to build GUI-based applications on the > front-end and use mainframes as big servers. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > By Martin J. Garvey > > The mainframe, once the IT backbone for many enterprises, is > regaining that stature. Next month, several large companies will lead > the charge back to big iron in an attempt to rescue unwieldy or > stalled client-server projects. Mainframes, these companies say, > provide better price/performance and return on investment than their > sleeker Unix and Windows NT systems, while delivering proven security, > scalability, and reliable centralized management. > > GTE Data Services, Motorola Semiconductor, University Health > System, and others are at the cusp of a trend toward leveraging the > mainframe to back out of costly or unmanageable Unix and Windows NT > client-server implementations. Brian Jeffery, an analyst with > International Technology Group, an IT consulting firm in Los Altos, > Calif., says about 70 sites worldwide are porting Unix or NT > applications back to IBM OS/390-based mainframes. By fall, he > estimates, as many as 300 sites will convert Oracle, SAP, and > PeopleSoft projects to OS/390. "By 1998, there will be thousands of > these accounts," predicts Jeffery. > > "It's a brand new life for the mainframe," says Cal Braunstein, a > consultant with Robert Frances Group, an IT market research firm in > Westport, Conn. "It's far less expensive to tie Unix and client-server > information into mainframes than it is to spread it out across much > smaller systems." > > University Health System, a 450-bed hospital in San Antonio, hopes > to begin in August to move data-intensive applications, such as > patient accounting and discharge, to the IBM Parallel Sysplex > mainframe. The project is expected to be completed by year's end. "We > can't go in a direction of more and more resources for a nonending > distributed environment," says Tim Geryk, director of technical > services for University Health. "We need to turn it back the other way > for a better scale of economy." > > Currently, University Health's enterprise has 2,500 desktops > attached to LANs, 100 RS/6000 Unix servers, about 600 other Unix > machines, 2,000 dumb terminals, an IBM ES/ 9000 bipolar mainframe, and > an IBM 9672 CMOS mainframe. "It's time-intensive to keep so many > workstations and servers up and running when so many different things > can go wrong," says Geryk. "We can't put our hands around it anymore." > > The company is installing an IBM Parallel Sysplex architecture > that supports Unix applications to provide a single-platform image > across its enterprise. Bill Tudor, director of systems product > management for mainframe maker Hitachi Data Systems in Santa Clara, > Calif., says it's not uncommon to see multiple racks with 200 Unix > servers in the data center. "It's just cheaper to run that same > information on the mainframe," he says. > > According to Jeffery of ITG, it's cheaper and easier to > increase network bandwidth for integration between Unix servers and > the mainframe than it is to add more Unix servers. Also, customers are > demanding that systems management, as well as enterprise data itself, > be centralized. > > And according to the Clipper Group, a consultancy in > Wellesley, Mass., Unix's security hasn't caught up to the mainframe's. > Some intrepid IT users aren't just migrating some applications to > mainframes. They're also consolidating client-server architectures > onto big iron. One financial services company reportedly is > consolidating as many as 600 Unix servers onto one mainframe, sources > say. > > The hidden costs of Unix servers may be the final incentive to > push many customers back to the mainframe. For example, CMOS > mainframes may cost three times more than Unix servers, but management > costs for distributed Unix servers are 20 times greater than those for > supporting a mainframe, according to Giga Information Group in > Cambridge, Mass. > > IT managers can port Unix applications to the OS/390 mainframe > operating system for acceptable performance in a production > environment. Moreover, enterprise applications, including those from > Oracle, PeopleSoft, and SAP, are available on OS/390. And the CMOS > processor architecture, the heart of IBM's Parallel Sysplex mainframe > cluster that scales to 32 processors, is for the first time as > powerful as older bipolar mainframes. > > Motorola's $7.9 billion semiconductor business unit in Phoenix > will begin moving all of its SAP R/3 data to the mainframe in the next > four months. > > Its architecture will then include PC clients, Unix servers as > application servers, and an IBM OS/390-based Parallel Sysplex > mainframe as host for about 500 Gbytes of data. The company says it is > one of five pilot sites for SAP's R/3 on the mainframe. Before taking > on the pilot, the semiconductor manufacturer evaluated multiple Unix > servers and databases. The Unix systems lost to the mainframe because > they lacked the power and manageability Motorola was looking for. "It > was the best way to keep the database in one place," says Patrick > Horrigan, corporate VP and IS director for Motorola's SPS division. > "And it's 40% cheaper than the Unix solutions." > > 'Tons Of Unix' > At GTE Data Services in Temple Terrace, Fla., shifting its > distributed applications to the mainframe conforms to the division's > motto of "right data, right device." The group is consolidating six > systems into three or four. "With our so-called distributed systems,we > have tons of Unix out there, but it's really not even distributed," > says operations director Pat Remick. "We're just piling a lot of Unix > boxes on raised floors next to the mainframes, so we decided to look > at the better reliability and scalability of the mainframe." > > Analysts point out that server consolidation isn't relegated > solely to mainframes. HP and Sun Microsystems recently both announced > enterprise-class servers that many say will suffice as Unix > consolidation servers. "There is increasing value in consolidating > Unix servers and PC servers separate from mainframes," says John > Young, VP of enterprise systems planning for the Clipper Group. > "People are realizing the savings behind the re-emergence of the data > center. It's the place for consolidating processing, management, > accountability, and data storage." > > The pioneers in the migration back to mainframes say they > aren't ready to dismiss Unix. "Our client and application server tiers > of R/3 will remain distributed with Unix," says Motorola SPS's > Horrigan. However, distributed computing could benefit from greater > reliability, availability, and scalability. "Downtime from distributed > systems costs too much in management, and I know a lot of processing > is on Unix," says GTE's Remick. "But some transition must happen. > Something has to be done." > > > > SIDEBAR:Reasons For Returning > * Mainframe security is at least two years ahead of Unix or Windows > NT > * OS/390 can run Unix, NT, and enterprise applications such as SAP > R/3 > * Mainframes have the capacity to store a database of 500 Gbytes or > more without splitting it up > * Parallel Sysplex configurations have no single point of failure > and are easy to update and maintain while the system is running > > Data: > InformationWeek > > > > -- > > > > > > > > >

1 0

No Real Debate Yet on the War
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

By the way, for those of you not living in the U.S., and who haven't been here to see the way the debate (or lack of it) has been developing in the U.S., let me make a few points: * the preparations for a new war have been going on for several weeks * Congress has taken no votes one way or the other about this imminent war * Congress, in fact, is not in session, and has not been called back into session to debate and discuss and ultimately vote on a Declaration of War (or what passes for it these days, a "vote of moral support") * the American public has shown a lukewarm response at best to the plans, such as they understand them * speaking of plans, the plans are very vague. The public does not know what the goals of a war might be, what the endgame options are, how many Americans are likely to die, what the likely counterpunch will be (hint: think terrorist attacks), and just how the U.S. plans to fight a war without clear goals and clear support. * essentially no one thinks a bombing campaign will either kill Saddam, who moves around a lot to highly secret locations (including houses of peasants), or will destroy all of those small cannisters of anthrax and sarin and the like...when asked, Albright and Cohen are vague and dissembling. * meanwhile, scare reports of terrorists in Las Vegas are making the headlines...a perfect "give us some jimbells to scare the nation" scenario. (With the usual scary stuff about his "survivalist" books, his membership in Christian Identity, and his links to Aryan Nation. Throw him jail!) In short, where is the debate about this upcoming war? Is Congress now so ineffectual that its main power, the power to declare war, is no longer "operative"? Amazing. --Tim May, posting before his own home gets raided for having supplied PGP to Christian Identity and Aryan Nation. Just Say No to "Big Brother Inside" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^3,021,377 | black markets, collapse of governments.

5 5

Mainframe solutions
by Roger J. Jones 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Having looked at this path I suggest that the article is misleading. No one moves SAP to a mainframe. What you do is move the DBMS from Oracle under UNIX (the normal implementation for 1000 concurrent users or less) to Oracle or more likely DB2 on the mainframe. Also curious about how mainframe security is 2 years ahead of Unix and/or NT. There is almost no security on a mainframe unless you add a package such as ACF2 or TopSecret. Neither are easy to administer, easy to audit, nor do either have anything to do with application security. They monitor use of files, terminals and the like. As far as I know, there is no package that can intercept the PSW being returned after a system call in the System (vice User) state. (Being in system state on a mainframe is like being root in UNIX) I assure you that in the millions of lines of code, much over 25 years old, in the typical mainframe operating system you don't have to wait long for the "right word"

1 0

Congress getting involved in crypto this year
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm in the CFP computer room listening to CDT's Alan Davidson finish his comments on a panel discussion about crypto: "Congress is getting involved in the crypto debate. Bad things may happen, good things may happen. It depends on all of you." Anyone want to bet on the possibility of Congress doing a "good thing" on crypto? Remember, there's no bill being considered in either house of the Congress that does *not* have domestic controls on encryption: the crypto-in-a-crime penalties. Now Jason Mahler, from the Office of Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif), is speaking. He stressed that the House Commerce committee "resoundingly" voted down the FBI's bill last September -- but neglected to say that the panel approved included a *doubling* of crypto-in-a-crime penalties. He says Lofgren's plans are to push crypto legislation this year: "Hopefully if we get it [passed] in the House in the spring we'll move to the Senate." What about a presidential veto? "We're going to put pressure on the administration." Now Mahler is talking about how much support the SAFE bill has in the House (yes, the version of SAFE with crypto-in-a-crime penalties) and how it's a good thing. True, a majority of members of the House were at one point cosponsors. But this is a misguided way to look at the situation. Some of these "cosponsors" and "crypto supporters" voted for the FBI's bill. Others, like the late Sonny Bono, ended up speaking out against it. Lobbyists are about to find out that the support for crypto freedom in the Congress is wide but very, very shallow. -Declan

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Lately, anonymous messages sent to the list with Replay's Web-based remailer have not been getting through - anyone know if one or more of these remailers (efga, replay, ml, obscura, cypherpunks.ca) are down? In case my last message doesn't get through, I'm looking for info on how one can create and use a persistent Nym. I looked and can't find info on how to do this anywhere (besides the creation of a "free" email account somewhere). Can any cypherpunks help? Thank you.

3 2