December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Real-time surveillance of the police
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:14 PM 12/11/94 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >I don't plan to say much more, and won't be playing the "Twenty >Questions" game, but the system does _not_ use satellites or anything >of that sort. Satellites up the ante considerably, and aren't even >needed. No invitatation to twenty questions intended. You could have sat quietly and let me make a fool of myself (or not) without futher comment. Since you have... I believe if you reread what I wrote, I said that the accuracy with satelites was considerable using a pretty small box to begin with (for instance, the Geostar satellite-based system's predicted accuracy was about 6 inches in two dimensions and two meters in three dimensions), but that with local antennae (say every block or so) you could have pretty phenomenal accuracy the the signal was possible. If you put embedded antennae in the walls (we put wires in walls already, yes?) you could get accuracy enough to precision mill with ;-). So, given your reference to ground-based radio, I think we're in "violent agreement here". The application of this to physical commerce has been discussed here before. Just pick up a tagged item and walk out of a store with it. It could be made anonymous, I bet. > >Radio is enough to get 1% positional accuracy (or better) and radio >can have better coverage in many places that GPS-like systems can't reach. > >> the backs of commerce. The only thing which saved GPS for mere mortals like >> us was the MIC's usual severe understimate of Grove's Law and the > ^^^^^^^^^^^ >> exponential cost effectiveness of integrated circuits over time. >A minor nit, but that's "Moore's Law, A major nit, in my book, and one I'm standing on the wrong side of. I got Andy Grove confused with Gordon Moore. It must because they look so much alike. :-). Grovelling in your general direction as always, Bob Hettinga ;-) <I seem to be downwind as usual...> ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) "There is no difference between someone Shipwright Development Corporation who eats too little and sees Heaven and 44 Farquhar Street someone who drinks too much and sees Boston, MA 02331 USA snakes." -- Bertrand Russell (617) 323-7923

1 0

Re: Broadcasts and the Rendezvous Problem
by cactus＠seabsd.hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <v01510103ab114c09dd73(a)[192.0.2.1]>, Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> wrote: >Which brings us back to the news -> mail gateway. There has to be a better >way. I don't see a problem. Broadly put, news is broadcast e-mail. There are many sites which in fact do not distinguish between the two, the most notable of which is CMU's Andrew Message System: the admins of such systems believe the "experiment" to be an all-around success. If you want message A to get from site B to site C without a clear trail, you've got to broadcast. It's that simple. It isn't a very big problem that site B put something into the flow, so mail to news isn't a weak point: an article can be injected at the remailer's site without compromising the channel to traffic analysis. - -- Todd Masco | It's difficult to be loud about keeping your enumerated cactus(a)hks.net | rights when you're busy exercising your unenumerated ones. cactus(a)bb.com | http://www.hks.net/~cactus/cactus.html - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLuu/KyoZzwIn1bdtAQHDbwGAgkIM2IZ3W1NtzzgNbpCkjpfJwPMVCMG2 ed0TnOHKU7ws4oUrHpddC6pAjzmk22uO =2zh3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

re: real time surveillances
by Mark Hittinger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Some thoughts on this: Will the people *believe* the electronic position data? Nope. When you are busted not only will you be frisked but you will also be bulk erased :-) (to get TC's DAT tape!) The technology to fabricate video evidence is there is it not? There was a relatively recent sad case of two officers that had a video camera installed in their patrol car. They had pulled over a speeding car. While obtaining the license the occupants of the car murdered the policemen and the *entire* scene was obtained on video tape. When the tape was later reviewed, searching for a clue as to what happened, the individual had to watch the officers slowly die - all captured on video. It is possible that they might have been saved had this been real-time video rather than taped. Consider the next level here folks? Will just having archived knowledge of where certain people are be adequate? Will there not ultimately be a call for real time monitoring of these officers? Will that be something that would be cool with them? Another great idea would be anonymous real-time monitoring of vital signs along with position data. Auto-911 if you will. We know somebody at this corner had a heart attack 5 minutes ago where is he? Cheers mark.h

1 0

RE: Real-time surveillance of the police
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, Michael Crawford wrote about my article in the December '94 issue of Wired, ("Watching the Detectives", p. 141): ... The advantage for society is that the cop's behaviour, such as billy-club swinging velocity, can be monitored. It could detect gunfire, too, ... This would work to the extent that the equipment is actually mounted on the cop it claims to belong to, so some manner of authentication would be needed. Fleming told me that the localizers would also take biometric readings to monitor the cop's physical status. It turns out that individual biometric readings vary significantly from person to person. It would be very hard for one cop (or a dog, suspect, whatever) to pose as someone else by wearing his localizer. ... Yes, that's right - keep surveillance cameras going on _yourself_. If you're not doing anything illegal, you've got nothing to fear from taping everything you do. I don't like this idea one bit. I agree with Tim that it is the first step on a very slippery slope. ... I expect that it will be difficult to convince our Nation's Finest to adopt this new technology - though I'm sure they'd be happy to apply it to parolees and those serving on probation.... It would be difficult for the cops to reject it. After all, it definitely benefits vast majority of good cops. It only hurts that teensy-tiny minority who violate people's rights. Right? Michael also argued that it might be more easily sold to private security firms for legal liability reasons. This argument is even more persuasive for police officers. Cities routinely pay astronomical settlements, or fight expensive law suits, arising out of alleged incidents of police misconduct. Frivolous lawsuits would be quickly thrown out of court. Rogue cops would be identified and thrown off the force. Works for me. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Hal Finney & Bob Rae and Ontario's Parliament
by FRODO＠uhura.trinity.toronto.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- All lines between this and the PGP header may be suspect. This is what I posted to Ont.general this evening. Those who are interested in getting more information about the kerfuffle in Toronto over the posting through an anonymous remailer might want to check out http://www.earth.org/~newsbites (I believe that's it. You might want to try without the directory.) Which contains muchos information, including the discussion going through the newsgroups, and the Globe and Mail article.) The article below is what I posted to ont.general myself this evening. Seemed a good chance to proselytize... ;) It was signed, as below, with my shame-facedly new PGP key, though the signature file was slightly different. (I've managed to grab the real .sig off my unix account. As I noted, one of my e-mail sites is currently not sending mail.) Article begins: Short note. Mike Harris' behavior in the legislature is the symptom of either malevolence or incompetence or both. Either way, he won't be getting my vote. On the other hand, there are ways of protecting yourself from forgeries such as this. You can't stop people from sending such mail, but you *can* make mail that you write unique. PGP, a fully legal encryption program which the Ontario government could use FOR FREE, has a signing protocol so that recipients can check to make sure that your mail did indeed come from you. If you make it a standard that you don't send unsigned mail, and don't post to newsgroups without signing what you send, unsigned mail will be suspect. In this case, the mail went through the cypherpunks anonymous remailer at portal.com. I trust that whoever sent the mail had enough computer sense to have chained it through several remailers, if little else. We've been through the arguments about "yes there was a disclaimer," but people seem to be ignorant of the fact that there are already ways of protecting yourself from misrepresentation on the net. The University of Toronto's CDF facility is currently having a little problem with sending mail (ie, it can't), so I'm posting this instead of sending it directly to Bob Rae. Perhaps we should send him PGP for Christmas? Richard - -- Richard Martin ChemPhysCompSci 9T7+PEY = 9T8 g4frodo@cdf Trinity College University of Toronto SVW92 martinrd(a)gpu.utcc My opinions, when not poached. (or fried) frodo(a)uhura.trinity [Tack a "toronto.edu" on the end of each e-mail address. I'm faced with a mailing program with draconian margin policies.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.i iQCVAgUBLuvVl6+lG3+zwTCVAQFPdwQAtX0fh0aJuhPC1mCUAlNDDi9tV0QB0yy8 cSNIlBxVgEzTl6K0geu25CSXSGh2N4dFdh6rHMPjkMkOsfcVPFI5nXb8+zHtfFgd UxkU0mwhunyFzLCN4tm0UVKruzWmfV8bGV9EezSsRrmAeAsZwT9s5hJ3qdOnf3mn twbGIn1Eadg= =UI1+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

RE: Real-time surveillance of the police
by jrochkin＠cs.oberlin.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:11 PM 12/11/94, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > ... Yes, that's right - keep surveillance cameras going > on _yourself_. If you're not doing anything illegal, > you've got nothing to fear from taping everything you > do. > >I don't like this idea one bit. I agree with Tim that it is the >first step on a very slippery slope. > > ... I expect that it will be difficult to convince our > Nation's Finest to adopt this new technology - though > I'm sure they'd be happy to apply it to parolees and > those serving on probation.... > >It would be difficult for the cops to reject it. After all, it >definitely benefits vast majority of good cops. It only hurts >that teensy-tiny minority who violate people's rights. Right? I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic here, although I don't think you are. That seems like a slippery slope all it's own, there. I don't like it when someone tells me "what do you have to worry about if you aren't breaking any laws," and I don't like it when someone says that about the cops too. That argument is awfully scary. Yeah, if the cops didn't want to accept such a thing, it might be worth calling them on their hypocrisy for applying that argument to citizens and not to police. But I don't think it would be wise to use the "what do you have to worry about if you aren't breaking any laws," argument too often.

1 0

Re: Articles on RC5 and GOST in January 95 Dr Dobbs Journal
by alano＠teleport.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>In the Jan 95 issue of Dr Dobbs Journal, you will find the following: > [stuff deleted] > > An article by Ron Rivest on RC5 (without code). I could have sworn that had code with it. In checking, it has only pseudocode. My mistake... Oops. >Remember, you can export cryptographic source code in paper form. I wonder how it effects their FTP archives... | "Encryption ROT13s your mind." | alano(a)teleport.com | |"Would you rather be tortured by the government | Disclaimer: | |forces or the people's liberation army?" -mklprc | Ignore the man | | -- PGP 2.6.2 key available on request -- | behind the keyboard.|

1 0

RE: Real-time surveillance of the police
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: ... I don't like it when someone tells me "what do you have to worry about if you aren't breaking any laws," and I don't like it when someone says that about the cops too.... This misses the point I was trying to make. The first argument in favor of wiring the cops, is that it is to their benefit. It helps backup officers or medical personnel to find them. It protects them from unfounded accusations of brutality or other misconduct. It makes a permanent visual and sound recording of perps who get away. This helps in later identification. Even with all these arguments in favor of wiring, I have a sneaking suspicion the cops will not want it. Why? Though few police would admit it publicly, my conjecture is that they know they are currently getting away with murder (sometimes literally) and would feel being wired would force them to obey the law. So my "teensy-tiny-minority" argument was offered sarcastically. In addition, I think recording officers' shifts would show just how little work cops actually do for their pay. Wiring would really throw a money wrench in the doughnut-boys cushy deal. Cynical? You betcha. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Real-time surveillance of the police
by blancw＠pylon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by Michael D. Crawford: . . . if a street gang felt the cops were thumping their members with unwarranted enthusiasm, the gang could purchase a case of cameras at the local Price Club, and everyone could carry them to photograph the cops. ............................................................... The first thing I imagined on reading this, was numbers of young blacks in the ghetto carrying on their shoulders - not boom boxes, but camcorders. But next I multiplied and elaborated and exaggerated the idea of everyone protecting themselves by any and all surveillance devices possible and available, and came up with this vision of a society where membership required that everyone be amenable to being recorded on contact with anyone and their cat. "Of course, I respect you - I just don't *trust* you." Blanc

1 0

Re: alt.anonymous.messages propagation
by L. McCarthy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Todd Masco writes: > Timothy C. May writes: > # Isn't this what "alt.anonymous.messages" is all about? > Alas, it is not available at MIT. I'll have to scrounge for a server that > carries it (volunteerings of feeds welcome!); Hmmm, does MIT get alt.anonymous at least ? I understand alt.anonymous was created to serve a purpose similar to that of alt.privacy.anon-server, but at the moment it's a de facto equivalent of alt.anonymous.messages. alt.anonymous is somewhat better propagated than a.a.m, from what I've heard. You should request one or both groups from the MIT news admins. If users there want to read the group, they'll likely be quite happy to carry it. I'm a fairly well-known regular in alt.config, and I believe I can probably recruit some prominent news admins to send booster newgroup messages for alt.anonymous.messages. Apart from that, it's a matter of people asking their local news admins to pick up the group if they aren't already carrying it. > Though netcom is our > IP provider, I'd rather not get news from them. Heh, I don't blame you. Although I heard they recently ditched alt.this.site.newgroups.everything (or something like that), they still carry virtually everything that gets newgrouped by anyone, accidentally or not. - - -L. Futplex McCarthy; PGP key by finger or server "We've got computers, we're tapping phone lines; I know that that ain't allowed" --Talking Heads - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBLuvzUGf7YYibNzjpAQHr7AP/WCfDofFHaj8JgOEIWM490zc5hPCQxSSV 2d1KZ61wVGsJEDGLdEMI1OT1cuZAgTzbs4HXd+Hi0z5gu/ZsynSpkxCQTfPr7RZV 4+wPSSVOiEK4rrwf95dfJsC7U+EZk8fUCd8gNX0dXVJKYe9n258oWlUNk8VkgNgM L6f+bXRX/VY= =B8La - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLuv0uioZzwIn1bdtAQEbggF/ax15KwhS915RJ4eTZHpAPBS2W62tT8eK IniODiSMg+yqtueEQ7yTs8cny7RLOUYq =YTYr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0