December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

fbi wiretapping law runs into friction
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message From: jackdoolin(a)earthlink.net Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 14:56:59 -0400 Subject: SNET: Phone firms resist FBI wiretap gear - -> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Published Wednesday, July 16, 1997, in the San Jose Mercury News Phone firms resist FBI wiretap gear New York Times Asserting that the FBI is trying to force the development of wiretapping equipment that goes beyond the law, telephone industry executives said Tuesday they would petition the Federal Communications Commission to resolve a dispute over the limits of digital surveillance in the information age. Industry executives are expected to ask the commission to step in today after more than two years of negotiations with law enforcement authorities over standards for advanced digital telephone switching gear intended to permit the police and FBI agents to listen to suspected criminals. The two sides failed to reach an agreement at a meeting last week in Boston. ``We've come to an impasse and only the FCC can resolve it,'' said Stewart Baker, a Washington lawyer representing the industry. FBI officials said Tuesday they were still confident that disagreements with the industry could be worked out. Another negotiating session is scheduled for next week. ``We're still committed to the negotiating process,'' said Edward Allen, section chief in the Information Division at the FBI. The Communications for Law Enforcement Act, which was signed into law by President Clinton in 1994, calls for spending $500 million to modify the nation's telephone network for wiretapping and specifies a standard-setting process to redesign the equipment. Telephone industry officials have warned that the cost of making the modifications requested by law enforcement might run into the billions of dollars. They also contend that the FBI has overstepped its mandate and is trying to control the process of setting standards. The law, they say, specifies only that the agency will be consulted in setting the standard. Industry executives say their companies will be at risk of being sued by civil liberties groups over privacy invasions. Law enforcement is asking for the ability to maintain a wiretap in a conference call even after the individual who is the object of the court- authorized wiretap drops out of the phone call. Such a capability would require costly modifications to the telephone network, industry officials said. ``We're taking this action out of monumental frustration,'' said Thomas Wheeler, president of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, a trade group in Washington. The telephone industry is facing an October 1998 deadline to comply with the law. Wheeler said the members of his association were growing increasingly concerned that in the absence of a standard they would have insufficient time to develop new products that comply with the law. The legislation provides for $10,000 a day in penalties for companies that fail to meet the requirements. - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBM85q+qNGQSu3SfxnEQKGXwCg/g2blX0utPaIZU8RX0zkTIQY1jQAni8E jpaUHWxH5/mlmkPbtN3oU1Z6 =25h5 - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com - -> Posted by: jackdoolin(a)earthlink.net ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

PGMedia Comments on the Failure of the NSI-Controlled DNS System
by pgp＠pgmedia.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: NATIONAL DISTRIBUTION: _____________________________________________ PGMedia Comments on the Failure of the NSI-Controlled DNS System (New York, New York) The breakdown of the Internet's Domain Name System ("DNS") yesterday, purportedly caused by human error at Network Solutions, Inc. ("NSI") as well as NSI's antiquated hardware, brought internet traffic to a crawl. This and other recent troubles that NSI has experienced in its operation of the Internet's Domain Name System are textbook examples of a monopolist's inertia in developing new and more secure systems to preserve and protect the integrity of the central facilitator of the Internet. The end-users of the Internet demand and deserve better. In NSI's desire to protect its monopoly profits, particularly in view of its stated intention to offer public stock based on that artificially inflated cashflow, NSI has placed the entire Internet at risk. NSI's intransigence to the change demanded by PGMedia, Inc. d/b/a name.space in the antitrust litigation commenced in Federal Court in New York has also led to the recently reported investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice for NSI's alleged antitrust violations. PGMedia, through its name.space service (http://namespace.pgmedia.net) has developed and implemented a rationalized Top-Level-Domain system that allows for registration under unlimited TLDs such as ".art" "news" ".cameras", ".inc" ".sports" and ".weather". The name.space service is housed on a state of the art network with thirteen root servers located in five countries. The name.space system has been fully operational since August 1996, and was not affected by the "human error" which ground NSI's system to a halt yesterday. If end-users of the Internet wish to secure for their own use, and at no cost, a far more reliable DNS system, all they need do is access the above-referenced URL and follow the simple steps therein to redirect their default TCP name server addresses to the name.space network. In addition, PGMedia believes that the name.space shared product and service oriented TLDs, when fully resolvable, will open up the Internet to far greater commercialization and render the wealth of information on the Internet far more accessible to the end-user. PGMedia's demand for access to the central root zone file exclusively controlled by NSI which would render PGMedia's TLD's and the domain names registered thereunder universally resolvable is currently pending consideration by The Honorable Robert P. Patterson, Jr., U.S.D.J., in Federal Court in New York. PGMedia also wishes to stress that it has no affiliation with and does not support the anticompetitive approach propounded by the loose group of purported registrars known as "eDNS." For more information, please contact the PGMedia, Inc. legal counsel at mjd(a)pgmedia.net; the Amended Complaint in the above-referenced Federal Antitrust Action may be viewed and downloaded at http://namespace.pgmedia.net/law

1 0

index.html
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CNN logo Navigation Infoseek/Big Yellow Pathfinder/Warner Bros Tech banner Click here to play IBM's virtual tennis @ www.wimbledon.org rule DATABASE PROBLEM SLOWS SOME INTERNET TRAFFIC July 17, 1997 Web posted at: 9:53 p.m. EDT (0153 GMT) (AP) -- A problem with the database that keeps track of all Internet addresses slowed network traffic for several hours Thursday morning, effectively blinking some Web sites out of existence. The problem appeared to be resolved by midafternoon. During the trouble, computers couldn't always find someaddresses ending in .net and .com, sometimes e-mail didn't go through and attempts to look up some Web sites came up empty. A user seeking an address ending in .com, for example, wouldhave received an error message that read "Could not resolve DNS," said Aggie Nteta, a spokeswoman for Network Solutions Inc., which runs the main registry of Internet addresses, called InterNIC, under an arrangement with the U.S. government. Every morning at 2:45 a.m. EDT, the files listing all Internet addresses for North America are updated and sent out through the network. On Wednesday morning, two of those files somehow became corrupted, setting off error alarms. However, the system administrator on duty chose to release the files anyway, creating a situation in which many Web sites effectively blinked out of existence, at least in the eyes of browsers. "The big effect was that our site became invisible," saidChris Caldwell, chief engineer at NDA, a Web site design company in Woburn, Massachusetts. Problems with addresses The files were corrected and re-released about four hours later, although it may have taken several more hours for the corrected information to spread throughout the network, Nteta said. The problem is the latest in a series of addressing glitchesover the past few days. Last weekend AlterNIC, an InterNIC rival, briefly took over InterNiC's address on the Web. AlterNIC described this on its Web site as a form of protest over InterNIC's current monopoly on distribution of Internet addresses. InterNIC has also encountered numerous problems with badinformation on its database. Some businesses have been double billed, while others have had their Web sites dropped from the address lists by mistake. Dave Crocker, a computer consultant and founder of theInternet Mail Consortium, said it was a problem of qualityassurance. "The fact that they are growing quickly is not an excuse forthis. The rate of errors they are having would not be tolerable for any other professional organization doing a technical task," he said. Copyright 1997 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. rule Related site: Note: Page will open in a new browser window * Welcome to the InterNIC External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive. Search for related CNN stories: ________________________________________ ______ [Help] Tip: You can restrict your search to the title of a document. Infoseek grfk Example: title:New Year's Resolutions rule Watch these shows on CNN for more sci-tech stories: CNN Computer Connection | Future Watch | Science & Technology Week rule Message Boards Sound off on our message boards Tell us what you think! You said it... [INLINE] Click here to play IBM's virtual tennis @ www.wimbledon.org rule To the top © 1997 Cable News Network, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you.

1 0

Government and Whom we Trust
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There are some striking similarities between the "certificate authority" (CA) and PICS/RSACi/rating issues. Not really surprising, as they both involve "certificates" of slightly different types. The larger issue in both cases is that the government is interjecting itself, or seeking to, in matters of trust and believability. It's as if the government felt movie and restaurant reviewers needed to be licensed, regulated, inspected, detected, refected, and maldicted. The CA issue, which shows up in the UK "trusted third parties" proposal and in various other European and American proposals, essentially rules out independent, "anarchic" signature signers. If the UK form becomes law, for example, one could not even _sign_ another's key or whatever without automatically becoming subject to the law. (Whether something like this will become law in the U.K, not to mention the U.S., is unclear. But of course this is the plan being discussed.) The "Web rating" proposal is somewhat similar, in that those who provide PICS/RSACi ratings would be bound by certain laws. Sounds reasonable, being bound by certain laws, right? To some it does. Here's why they're wrong: signatures on keys and statements of ratings are just OPINIONS or EXPRESSIONS OF BELIEF. "I believe this is the key of Phil Zimmermann." "I believe the material I saw at this Web site when I looked is suitable for children under the age of 9." "I believe Szechwan Garden has fine food." "I believe "Contact" is a good movie." "I believe that giving all your money to the Church of Scientology will help you go clear." All are opinions, however expressed. There is no government role in any of these issues. Whether people are "misled" by stated opinions is not a matter for governments in free societies to intervene and limit speech. (Sure, there are a few fringe issues, such as variants of falsely shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater and the Usual Suspects when it comes to free speech. But the Net is no different from other outlets when it comes to even these fringe issues.) In the cases we are so preoccupied with recently, the government is seeking a role in establishing a hierarchy of true statements, a system for determining who is making legitimate statements and who is not. The government is seeking to be the arbiter of truth, telling us whom we can trust. All unaccepable, of course. On some very basic grounds. Talk of compromise is terribly wrong. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

court order required for keys?
by rschlafly＠attmail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Posted online news accounts of the McCain-Kerrey bill have implied that the a court order is required under the bill to get keys. Eg, from recent postings, [AP, 07/09/1997] As with wiretaps, authorities would have to obtain court orders to make the keys available for law enforcement. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ... Sponsored by Kerrey and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., that bill would set up a key recovery system to give computer companies strong incentives to make keys available to investigators who obtain a court's permission. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [Wired, 11.Jul.97] Law enforcement could then access that copy of your key through a court order. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I find this distressing, because I have read the bill, and a court order is most emphatically NOT required. Only a form specified by J. Reno. This is a tricky point in the bill, but notice that: (1) Court orders are not required for wiretaps in the US. While it may be true that court orders are used most of the time when wiretap evidence is used in a criminal trial, there are a number of exceptions. (2) There is no restriction in the bill to getting keys to decipher communications covered by the wiretap laws. It lets cops get keys to many other communications. Part of the point to using encryption is to use public networks where access to the encrypted data need not be hidden or withheld from the public. Under S.909, if the cops can get access to the data, then they can get the keys without any court order. (3) Even if there is a court-ordered wiretap, there is no obligation to notify the judge that keys will also be seized. While it may seem obvious that if a judge is willing to order a wiretap, he is willing to order key seizure, I don't think this is necessarily the case. When a judge orders a wiretap, he is supposed to be balancing the possibility of getting incriminating evidence against the invasion of privacy of innocent parties. If the keys of innocent parties are being seized as well, it may affect the judge's balancing. (4) In S.909, all of the requirements on law enforcement officials can be lifted by executive order. Am I wrong, or are all the news accounts wrong? Please let me know if there is any flaw in my analysis. Roger Schlafly rschlafly(a)attmail.com (Please CC me on any followup, as I only occasionally read this list.)

1 0

A.Jensen doesn't like Sympatico.ca
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What do Timmy May and A.Jensen have in common? They hate Toto's ISP: From: pavanas(a)meridio.ccia.com (pavanas abludo incusus) Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email Subject: Re: Addresses for sympatico.ca and netcom.ca Date: 16 Jul 1997 00:02:54 GMT Organization: Aragorn Asteria Lines: 45 Message-ID: <slrn5so3sq.jr.pavanas(a)meridio.ccia.com> References: <5qfv4p$ce3(a)camel3.mindspring.com> <33CBE926.495E(a)swva.net> <33d6f xt.36276030(a)news.erols.com> Reply-To: pavanas(a)bbs.mpcs.com X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.4.2 UNIX) Path: altavista!news1.digital.com!data.ramona.vix.com!sonysjc!sonybc!newsjunki xtns.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!portc02.blue.aol.com!bignews.mediaways.net!news-han xtfn.de!newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de!baghira.han.de!news.rz.uni-hildesheim. xtfu-berlin.de!nntprelay.mathworks.com!infeed2.internetmci.com!newsfeed.intern xtci.com!news.alt.net!pavanas On Tue, 15 Jul 1997 22:07:46 GMT, Roswell Coverup <Majestic7(a)ALIENcryogen.SPAMcom> mused and hath written: > >On Tue, 15 Jul 1997 17:18:30 -0400, while digesting the latest ration >of Spam & UCE "Patricia A. Shaffer" <ramsa(a)swva.net> wrote: > >> >>I've(a)Enough.Of.It wrote: >>> >>> Anyone have complaint addresses for these? I can't seem to find any that w xt. >>> >>> btw, Anyone noticed increasing spam from Canada? >>> >>> ...... >>> :)avid >> >>Yes, sir ... about a half-dozen in the last week. One complaint sent to >>sympatico's Administrative Contact bounced back "user unknown". I had >>sent to postmaster as well, and that didn't bounce ... I'm learning ... >>but no response, yet. >> >>Patricia > >I have never received a response from sympatico - they are a spam >factory. > > And then some... Despite repeated attempts I have never managed a response of any kind from anyone at sympatico. Consider them a write off. >-------- >JOWazzoo..aka Roswell Coverup >BlueLister Tracker Downer - Robert. whatcha gonna do when they come for you?? >Very Disturbed Nerd,InterNUT BlueList,NetScum & NJ Swearer List >Fight spam, support Rep. Chris Smith's TCPA extension by joining >CAUCE: http://www.cauce.org cheers -- IHS pavanas We are but dust and shadow. Quintus Horatius Flaccus --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

3 2

Something of Interest
by IRS Inspection 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

United States Attorney Western District of Washington FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 18, 1997 JAMES D. BELL PLEADS GUILTY TO OBSTRUCTING THE IRS AND USING FALSE SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS United States Attorney Kate Pflaumer announced that JAMES DALTON BELL, 39, pleaded guilty today in the federal court in Tacoma to two felony charges. BELL, a resident of Vancouver, Washington, pleaded guilty to obstructing and impeding the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and to falsely using a social security number with the intent to deceive. United States District Court Judge Franklin D. Burgess presided over today's proceedings. The charges stem from an investigation initiated in October, 1996 by IRS Internal Security Inspectors into reports that BELL was gathering the names and home addresses of IRS employees. In previous court hearings, IRS Inspectors testified that BELL had obtained the names and home addresses of 70 IRS employees as part of "Operation LocatIRS." In the eight page plea agreement signed by BELL, he acknowledged that he had gathered the names and addresses of the IRS employees in order to intimidate them in the performance of their official duties. During the course of their investigation, IRS Inspectors discovered that BELL was advocating a scheme called "Assassination Politics", whereby persons would be rewarded with "digital cash" for killing certain undesirable people. BELL identified these undesirables as government employees, such as IRS employees, who would be intimidated from enforcing internal revenue laws for fear of being assassinated. In the plea agreement, BELL admitted that he suggested using "Assassination Politics" as an enforcement mechanism for the "Multnomah County Common Law Court", and that this was part of his effort to obstruct and impede the enforcement of internal revenue laws. In affidavits previously filed in this case, IRS investigators identified BELL as a participant in the "Multnomah County Common Law Court", which was described as a self-appointed anti-government extremist group which purports to hold "trials" of IRS and other Government employees for the performance of their official duties. The affidavits indicated that in January, 1997 the "Multnomah County Common Law Court" held a "trial" of IRS and other Government officials. In the plea agreement, BELL also admitted that on March 16, 1997, he conducted a chemical "stink bomb" attack on the IRS office in Vancouver, Washington, using the noxious chemical mercaptan. In affidavits filed with the Court, IRS Inspectors tied BELL to two previous mercaptan attacks against non-government targets: one being a lawyer's office in 1984, and the other a vehicle in 1989. The IRS investigators also linked BELL to two purchase orders for noxious chemicals, one in 1994 and one in 1996. According to the plea agreement, the attack on the IRS office resulted in a cost to the government of $1,359, and caused a number of IRS employees to have to leave work. In an affidavit previously filed in this case, IRS Inspectors indicated that the mercaptan attack may have been linked to the February 20, 1997 seizure of BELL's vehicle by the IRS for unpaid taxes. As part of the plea agreement, BELL also admitted that he used several different social security numbers in order to hide assets from the IRS and thus to impede the IRS's ability to collect taxes he owed and to prevent the IRS from levying his wages. Federal agents had previously executed two search warrants on BELL's residence. On April 1, 1997, IRS agents seized computers, documents, and firearms during a search. In a follow-up search, the Environmental Protection Agency seized a variety of dangerous chemicals which had been discovered during the execution of the IRS warrant. BELL was arrested by IRS Inspectors on May 16, 1997. BELL continues to be held in custody based on a May 23, 1997 ruling by Magistrate Judge J. Kelley Arnold that BELL posed a danger to the community and was a flight risk. BELL faces a maximum sentence of three years in prison and a $250,000 fine for the obstruction charge, and five years and a $250,000 fine for using a phony social security number. The IRS received assistance in the investigation of BELL from the Portland Police Bureau, Oregon Department of Justice, Oregon State Police, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Vancouver, Washington Police Department.

1 0

Something of Interest
by IRS Inspection 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

United States Attorney Western District of Washington FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 18, 1997 JAMES D. BELL PLEADS GUILTY TO OBSTRUCTING THE IRS AND USING FALSE SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS United States Attorney Kate Pflaumer announced that JAMES DALTON BELL, 39, pleaded guilty today in the federal court in Tacoma to two felony charges. BELL, a resident of Vancouver, Washington, pleaded guilty to obstructing and impeding the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and to falsely using a social security number with the intent to deceive. United States District Court Judge Franklin D. Burgess presided over today's proceedings. The charges stem from an investigation initiated in October, 1996 by IRS Internal Security Inspectors into reports that BELL was gathering the names and home addresses of IRS employees. In previous court hearings, IRS Inspectors testified that BELL had obtained the names and home addresses of 70 IRS employees as part of "Operation LocatIRS." In the eight page plea agreement signed by BELL, he acknowledged that he had gathered the names and addresses of the IRS employees in order to intimidate them in the performance of their official duties. During the course of their investigation, IRS Inspectors discovered that BELL was advocating a scheme called "Assassination Politics", whereby persons would be rewarded with "digital cash" for killing certain undesirable people. BELL identified these undesirables as government employees, such as IRS employees, who would be intimidated from enforcing internal revenue laws for fear of being assassinated. In the plea agreement, BELL admitted that he suggested using "Assassination Politics" as an enforcement mechanism for the "Multnomah County Common Law Court", and that this was part of his effort to obstruct and impede the enforcement of internal revenue laws. In affidavits previously filed in this case, IRS investigators identified BELL as a participant in the "Multnomah County Common Law Court", which was described as a self-appointed anti-government extremist group which purports to hold "trials" of IRS and other Government employees for the performance of their official duties. The affidavits indicated that in January, 1997 the "Multnomah County Common Law Court" held a "trial" of IRS and other Government officials. In the plea agreement, BELL also admitted that on March 16, 1997, he conducted a chemical "stink bomb" attack on the IRS office in Vancouver, Washington, using the noxious chemical mercaptan. In affidavits filed with the Court, IRS Inspectors tied BELL to two previous mercaptan attacks against non-government targets: one being a lawyer's office in 1984, and the other a vehicle in 1989. The IRS investigators also linked BELL to two purchase orders for noxious chemicals, one in 1994 and one in 1996. According to the plea agreement, the attack on the IRS office resulted in a cost to the government of $1,359, and caused a number of IRS employees to have to leave work. In an affidavit previously filed in this case, IRS Inspectors indicated that the mercaptan attack may have been linked to the February 20, 1997 seizure of BELL's vehicle by the IRS for unpaid taxes. As part of the plea agreement, BELL also admitted that he used several different social security numbers in order to hide assets from the IRS and thus to impede the IRS's ability to collect taxes he owed and to prevent the IRS from levying his wages. Federal agents had previously executed two search warrants on BELL's residence. On April 1, 1997, IRS agents seized computers, documents, and firearms during a search. In a follow-up search, the Environmental Protection Agency seized a variety of dangerous chemicals which had been discovered during the execution of the IRS warrant. BELL was arrested by IRS Inspectors on May 16, 1997. BELL continues to be held in custody based on a May 23, 1997 ruling by Magistrate Judge J. Kelley Arnold that BELL posed a danger to the community and was a flight risk. BELL faces a maximum sentence of three years in prison and a $250,000 fine for the obstruction charge, and five years and a $250,000 fine for using a phony social security number. The IRS received assistance in the investigation of BELL from the Portland Police Bureau, Oregon Department of Justice, Oregon State Police, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Vancouver, Washington Police Department.

1 0

Re: court order required for keys?
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Roger Schlafly wrote: > Posted online news accounts of the McCain-Kerrey bill have implied > that the a court order is required under the bill to get keys. > [AP, 07/09/1997] > As with wiretaps, authorities would have to obtain court orders to make > the keys available for law enforcement. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > [Wired, 11.Jul.97] > Law enforcement could then access that copy of your key > through a court order. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > I find this distressing, because I have read the bill, and a court order > is most emphatically NOT required. Only a form specified by J. Reno. Most people don't realize that many of the so-called protections that are in place to guard our constitutional rights and our privacy only apply to _use_ of the material in an _official_ proceeding, such as a trial or hearing. Government, private agencies and corporations daily exchange all manner of supposedly private information, often using court orders only to _officially_ get portions of what they already had. It is no accident that LEA's often get court orders asking only for access to certain incriminating information (since they've already done the "fishing"). This is a tricky point in the bill, but notice that: > (1) Court orders are not required for wiretaps in the US. While it may > be true that court orders are used most of the time when wiretap evidence > is used in a criminal trial, there are a number of exceptions. Also, many of the wiretaps have already been in place when the court orders are applied for. "Redating" of wiretap records is a common and sophisticated part of LEA practice. NSA has a database that is used to cull out wiretap references which are out of sync with the purported time-stamp on records. It lists all worldwide social and religious time-sequence indentifiers such as Easter, Hannuka, the running of the bulls, sports contests and playoffs, etc. > (2) There is no restriction in the bill to getting keys to decipher > communications covered by the wiretap > Under S.909, > if the cops can get access to the data, then they can get the keys > without any court order. Which they no doubt will do and apply for the court order after they have found what they want. This will be even more effective than their voice-wiretap methods have been because their will be no need to redate the information they claim as being found after getting the court order since files, unlike voices, linger. > (4) In S.909, all of the requirements on law enforcement officials > can be lifted by executive order. Which means it can be done _retroactively_ with a nod, a wink, and a few simple strokes of a pen. S.909 quite simply butt-fucks the Constitution and the citizenry. The shameless criminals on Capitol Hill of Manure no longer even seriously pretend to be in the least concerned with Constitutional issues. They think (and may be right) that they only have to chant the "National Security" mantra a couple of times to absolve all of their sins against the Constitution. TruthMonger

1 0

spawn of Vulis
by Zooko Journeyman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> FWIW, my 8 y o has his own IBM Aptiva, his own Internet access, his own > e-mail box, and I exercise absolutely no control over what he reads or > says on the Internet. You need to help him set up a pseudonym, Dmitri. Think about 10 or 20 years down the road when he wants to get a contract/ join a phyle/avoid an enemy or whatever, and his entire childhood e-mail and virtual-community history is greppable via a 2-second, 2-cent search. This would give his employers/ partners/competitors/enemies/governments a great deal of leverage over him in various ways. Also it might be very embarassing socially, which is no less important. Get him a pseudonym. You can always (more or less) claim the reputation capital that your pseudonym accumulated, but you can never (probably) lose history accumulated under your True Name. Of course he could always change his name/adopt a strong 'nym in the future in order to get a clean start, but this might not be easy, especially since people can find him through you and perhaps other of his relatives or friends. Sincerely, Zooko Journeynym

1 0