December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

[UNIX] Re: Secured RM ? (source)
by cactus＠hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <199512150218.VAA14539(a)homeport.org>, Adam Shostack <adam(a)lighthouse.homeport.org> wrote: >| >| While we're here.. I havn't been able to find anyone on the planet who's >| seen or heard of a linux un-remove, which makes testing my code very >| tricky. > From comp.unix.questions FAQ: > (http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/unix-faq/faq/part3/faq-d…) [Info about delete/undelete/expunge/purge del] That's not very useful in this context: all it does is move files to .#{oldname} and then later remove them. I'd suggest that anybody interested in this topic under UNIX examine the vnode structures and understand how the filesystem keeps file lists. Many vendor UNIces have fairly well commented header files. {Only marginally cypherpunk-related, in the 'Security in the real world' category.} - -- Todd Masco | "life without caution/ the only worth living / love for a man/ cactus(a)hks.net | love for a woman/ love for the facts/ protectless" - A Rich Cactus' Homepage - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMNDqmSoZzwIn1bdtAQGorwF+KsU/UZom/+C8ldvzKDPajDh6fiVtg1K1 kxTyLGyAjf5W+SNRM1f6kU5YdJlUmZxP =yo70 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: ADDRESS DATABASE?
by Ed Carp (ecarp＠netcom.com) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Date: Thu, 14 Dec 1995 13:06:50 -0800 > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > From: Bill Stewart <stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com> > Subject: Re: ADDRESS DATABASE? > At 01:32 PM 12/14/95 -0600, you wrote: > >sandfort(a)crl.com said: > >> Something of privacy interest happened to me yesterday. I phoned a > >> company to ask for a copy of their catalog. The phone clerk asked > >> for my last name and zip code. After receiving that info, the clerk > >> asked me, "Is this your full name and address?" and then gave them > >> both correctly. I was taken aback. > > > > Taken aback? Its only going to get worse in the future. As Telcos, credit > >card companies, etc., start looking for new ways to make money I think > >selling information about you will increase dramatically. > > I'm in the process of moving and getting new phones, and Pac Bell asked me > if it was ok to send my Social Security Number to my long-distance carrier. > I told them "no, but you don't have my SSN anyway" "Oh, you're right, we don't; > can we have it" "No" "OK. Would you be willing to give us your driver's license > number or another form of ID? We've just started asking for this recently." > "Is it required?" "No, it's optional, but I have to ask" "No, thanks" You know why they want that, don't you? So if you don't pay your bill, they can ding your credit report. PG&E will do the same thing to you, and they will both do it illegally, without notifying you first as they are required to do by law. So, I'd advise you to check your credit report regularly for signs of abuse.

1 0

Re: ADDRESS DATABASE? (fwd)
by Charles Gimon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From toad.com!owner-cypherpunks Thu Dec 14 17:36:57 1995 > Date: Thu, 14 Dec 1995 14:50:19 -0800 (PST) > From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort(a)crl.com> > > So far, no one has come up with anything stronger than specula- > tion about my database question. Some "anonymous" told me how > easy it was to buy *phone numbers* on CD-ROMs. Great, but I > didn't give the guy my phone number. > It was probably a shrewd guess on the part of the phone peon, combined with a fresh database from the telephone company. Are there many people in your zip code with the same last name as yourself? If not, that pretty much answers your question right there. When you pull a credit report from TRW's database, the only information TRW needs is the first four (?) letters of the last name, the initial of the first name, the numeric part of the address, the first character of the street name, and the zip code. I'll leave it to the experts in information theory to explain that in rigorous technical detail. Given only a last name and a zip code, I wouldn't be surprised if you found the proper individual most of the time. (If you're in Minnesota and you're looking for Swenson in 55419, you may need more info, but not much.) Another anecdote to add to the pile: I moved to a new apartment last May. For various reasons, I got an unlisted number, and had my credit card bills and magazine subscriptions sent to a mail drop (MBE). The phone, gas, electric and cable bills went to the new apartment, not to the mail drop. I didn't get any junk mail at the new apartment until a couple of weeks ago--right after I changed my subscription to Byte to come here (now I'm getting AOL disks, etc.). Before that, I got no junk mail here (except from the phone or cable company). I get almost no telemarketing calls; I used to get at least one a night with a listed phone number. My experience appears to be that credit card and magazine companies sell lists; utility and cable companies don't. Mass mailers must not get unlisted number customers on the lists they get from the phone company. Again, this is only from my experience, all disclaimers apply. And all this has no relevance whatsoever when you bring the government into the picture. Crypto relevance? Well, I did mention information theory...

1 0

Re: And the standard continues to lower...
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:17 PM 12/13/95 -0600, you wrote: >Dr. Brian L. Crissey includes in his .sig, courtesy of cactus(a)hks.net >[ much WRT YetAnotherSecureInternetCreditCardPaymentSystem(*tm) deleted ] >> ***Dr. Brian L. Crissey, Chair CS Dpt, Linfield Col., McMinnville, OR 97128 >> (503)-434-2426 brianc(a)linfield.edu >> Professionals built the Titanic, amateurs built the Ark... > >However, the Ark was *designed* by GOD (if you believe the story). Can Dr. >Brian L. Crissey say the same thing about his payment system? He seems to think so... He is so assured as to the security of his system. I am going to ask if I can post his challenge he made to me in private e-mail here. He needs to be taught some basics in security. (I do not have the proper hardware to subvert his scheme. I do have some other ways of subverting it, but that would be telling... (I occasionally assist with the web server on Teleport. Changing his script to collect information would not be difficult...)) I will see if he will let me forward his e-mail to the list. (I will also check with the webmistress on Teleport before I do... She might get pissed if I turned the people on the list onto Teleport's server.) | What is the Eye in the Food Pyramid? | alano(a)teleport.com | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmerman unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ | <fnord> |

1 0

Another One-Time Pad Reference
by Richard Charles Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.atria.com/~dawson/tbtf/archive/0044.html

1 0

Re: e-mail forwarding, for-pay remailers
by Andrew Loewenstern 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

E. Allen Smith writes: > There's one problem with this in regards to the "no necessary > connection," and that 's the governmental requirement for mail > forwarding. MBE and any legal other one will want to see at least > two forms of ID including one photo, and have a form that they fill > out using that and send to the local post office. Anyone have a > way around this problem? Why does an account provider need a snail-address and phone-number? Usually for billing purposes. However, this isn't necessary for accounts paid with ECash. I believe C2.org already offers non-dialup access accounts, paid for with ECash, that do not require a valid snail-address or phone-number. I am sure that there will be many more to come. andrew

1 0

Re: ADDRESS DATABASE?
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Some "~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " wrote: >C'punks, > >So far, no one has come up with anything stronger than specula- >tion about my database question. Some "anonymous" told me how >easy it was to buy *phone numbers* on CD-ROMs. Great, but I >didn't give the guy my phone number. You don't get it, do you? Sandfort A & K Irvine, CA 92714 Sandfort Christine San Jose, CA 95113 Sandfort Curtis J 19841 River Rd Gladstone, OR 97027-2285 Sandfort D 105 Cypress Ave Santa Cruz, CA 95062-3710 Sandfort D O 780 N Circle D Way Tucson, AZ 85748-3845 Sandfort Glenn & Sophia 24314 Carter Rd Bothell, WA 98021-9413 Sandfort Jack 4057 Lower Honoapiilani Rd Wailuku, HI 96793 Sandfort Jack L 6761 Hwy 49 N Mariposa, CA 95338 Sandfort Joe 1203 SE Malden St Portland, OR 97202-5935 Sandfort Rebecca F 1111 E Apache Blvd Tempe, AZ 85281-8600 Sandfort Rick 850 Kimball Rd Red Bluff, CA 96080-4533 Sandfort Robert & Marian 8575 Rue Jenny Ln Los Molinos, CA 96055-9729 Sandfort Robert Jr & Joann 859 Locust St Red Bluff, CA 96080-4218 Sandfort Astrid 3 Channing Cir Cambridge, MA 02138-4715 Sandfort D 640 Sfourth Ave Pleasantville, NJ 08232 Sandfort E 2641 Ridge Ave Pleasantville, NJ 08233 Sandfort Ed & Donna 15 Kristin Way Trenton, NJ 08690-2441 Sandfort Edward 8 Sixpence Ct Huntington, NY 11743-6436 Sandfort G B 187 E 7th St Clifton, NJ 07011-1739 Sandfort John 19 Sanfort Ln Warwick, NY 10990-3136 Sandfort K 10 Annette Dr Portsmouth, RI 02871-3704 Sandfort Karl Spencer Rd Red Hook, NY 12571 Sandfort Peter & Sandr 9 Peach Hill Ct Ramsey, NJ 07446-1226 Sandfort Phil P 3907 Rippleton Rd Cazenovia, NY 13035-9602 Sandfort R 481 Smithburg Ct Jackson, NJ 08527-4444 Sandfort Sherri 434 W 52nd St New York, NY 10019-6340 Sandfort Thomas D 1819 Beach Blvd Point Pleasant, NJ 08742-5218 Sandfort A 235 Larry St Augusta, KS 67010-1906 Sandfort Brad Catrock Rd Lake Ozark, MO 65049 Sandfort Brian 1215 11th St West Des Moines, IA 50265-2574 Sandfort Charles RR 3 Humboldt, NE 68376-9803 Sandfort David G 3610 W Clay St Saint Charles, MO 63301-4433 Sandfort David G Cpa 3660 W Clay St Saint Charles, MO 63301-4433 Sandfort David L 820 Timberwood Cir Mc Kinney, TX 75069-9183 Sandfort Ed Rm 307 1043 10th Humboldt, NE 68376 Sandfort Edward L 4436 Windsor Ave Kansas City, MO 64123-1736 Sandfort Fred F 1655 S Grorgetown Wichita, KS 67208 Sandfort G 133 Kunze Dr Saint Charles, MO 63303-5928 Sandfort G H 9802 NW Shaggy Bark Ln Kansas City, MO 64152-2560 Sandfort Gerhard 1813 S Washington St Casper, WY 82601-4853 Sandfort Gerhard Jr & Melanie 1500 W Odell Ave Casper, WY 82604-4708 Sandfort Harold & Jackie RR 2 Box 209a Fremont, NE 68025-9696 Sandfort Howser RR 3 Eldon, MO 65026-9803 Sandfort Irvin J 3614 W Clay St Saint Charles, MO 63301-4433 Sandfort J 3229 Herrington Dr Casper, WY 82604-5421 Sandfort James 844 Hollyridge Dr Ballwin, MO 63011-3552 Sandfort Jane L 6009 Sandhurst Ln Dallas, TX 75206-4730 Sandfort John R 214 Columbia St Augusta, KS 67010-1535 Sandfort Kay 1024 S Spruce St Casper, WY 82601-3621 Sandfort Keith 1315 East Ave Holdrege, NE 68949-1323 Sandfort Larry 3034 W State St Springfield, MO 65802-5168 Sandfort Leland K Catrock Rd Lake Ozark, MO 65049 Sandfort Loyd 108 W Brockman Ave Eldon, MO 65026-2206 Sandfort Melvin 114 N Benton Ave Saint Charles, MO 63301-2708 Sandfort Michael 844 Judson St Lincoln, NE 68521-2633 Sandfort Michael RR 1 Talmage, NE 68448-9801 Sandfort Neil 623 N 6th St Seward, NE 68434-1405 Sandfort Robert RR 1 Brock, NE 68320-9801 Sandfort Robert M 3612 W Clay St Saint Charles, MO 63301-4433 Sandfort Roger RR 3 Eldon, MO 65026-9803 Sandfort Ross 303 9th Brock, NE 68320 Sandfort S C Rt 1 Box 145-Dd Augusta, KS 67010 Sandfort Sara 202 Manor Dr Eldon, MO 65026-9678 Sandfort Waldo D 2150 Randolph St Saint Charles, MO 63301-0844 Sandfort Wayne W 6969 Brentwood Ct Arvada, CO 80004-1900 Sandfort Wm PO Box 1393 Lake Ozark, MO 65049-1393 Sandfort Eva Rl Est 901 S Pine St Spartanburg, SC 29302-3310 Sandfort Eva Rlest 901 S Pine St Spartanburg, SC 29302-3310 Sandfort F 108 Thistle Knoll Ct Asheville, NC 28803-2014 Sandfort John P 209 Woodgrove Trce Spartanburg, SC 29301-6431 Sandfort John W 6540 Greyledge Ct Alexandria, VA 22310-2410 Sandfort Mark R Oakdale, PA 15071 Sandfort Marni 2140 L St NW Washington, DC 20037-1510 Sandfort Raymond Warren Center, PA 18851 Sandfort Ruth A 111 Jonthnct Oakdale, PA 15071 Sandfort Sarah 114 Maury Ave Charlottesville, VA 22903-3058 Sandfort Clarence 1016 Highway 63 Baldwin, WI 54002 Sandfort Daryl L 12676 W Hart St Waukegan, IL 60087-1122 Sandfort David J 14 Wintergreen Ct Downers Grove, IL 60517-1713 Sandfort E F 2400 S Finley Rd Lombard, IL 60148-7029 Sandfort Gary 340 N Plum St Carlinville, IL 62626-1316 Sandfort George 1380 Maple St Baldwin, WI 54002-9395 Sandfort J 300 3rd St Ann Arbor, MI 48103-4307 Sandfort J 6947 N Elm Tree Rd Milwaukee, WI 53217-3705 Sandfort James 34217 N Stonebrdg Ln Grayslake, IL 60030 Sandfort James 314 Oakridge Dr N Hudson, WI 54016-1117 Sandfort John 3101 N 13th St Terre Haute, IN 47804-1233 Sandfort John P 3149 N Mountain Maple Ct South Bend, IN 46628-3716 Sandfort Larry 8225 Knox Ave S Minneapolis, MN 55431-1413 Sandfort M Thos 2034 Chandler Ln Columbus, IN 47203-4015 Sandfort Melissa 910 Lake St Evanston, IL 60201-4319 Sandfort Melissa 706 Seward St Evanston, IL 60202-2946 Sandfort Mike 7394 Christie Chapel Rd Dublin, OH 43017-2415 Sandfort R W 275 E Dunedin Rd Columbus, OH 43214-3803 Sandfort Ronald G 602 21st Ave W Menomonie, WI 54751-3825 Sandfort Stephen 607 Washington Blvd Oak Park, IL 60302-3954 Sandfort Stephen & Rebecca 218 Second Sheb Fls Sheboygan Falls, WI 53085 Sandfort Steve 2654 Briarcliffe Ave Cincinnati, OH 45212-1306 Sandfort A M 2903 Nepperhan Rd Louisville, KY 40218-4715 Sandfort Christopher 10209 Barkley Dr Jeffersontown, KY 40299-3120 Sandfort Federick H 2495 Paddock Way Oviedo, FL 32765-8067 Sandfort Greg 1125 Carpenters Trce Covington, KY 41017-4416 Sandfort J 1550 NE 191st St Miami, FL 33179-4145 Sandfort Jeff 132 Landing Cir Hazel Green, AL 35750-8807 Sandfort John F 11 Estes Dr Bella Vista, AR 72714-5613 Sandfort Joseph & Lynn 311 Castle Blvd Paris, KY 40361-2455 Sandfort M 14191 Georgian Cir Fort Myers, FL 33912-5646 Sandfort Michael & Deb 457 Sun Lake Cir Lake Mary, FL 32746-3332 Sandfort Phillip L 4623 Soundside Dr Gulf Breeze, FL 32561-9275 Sandfort Road Assembly Of God 205 26th Ct Phenix City, AL 36869-6463 Sandfort Scott & Robyn 401 E Intendencia St Pensacola, FL 32501-6139 Sandfort Tad Rev 8304 Quail Run Dr Zephyrhills, FL 33544-2048 Sandfort Terry N 1680 NE 191st St Miami, FL 33179-4102 Sandfort Weldon W 407 Rock St Dardanelle, AR 72834-3402 This took about a minute using a shabby consumer-level DB. *Now* do you get it? Hieronymous -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQBVAwUBMNEPY73g0mNE55u1AQGE7AH/VmrgEKI1cf3QoF3sR+tUqjOsbp/5OgOd nFhuSPro8+W2wJIdNcQ8n4oyo1ecm6UCN90HUBycie5Xh5c4Zebc+A== =WWU1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: Fwd: Corporate Crime and CDT Funding on behalf of so-called medical privacy
by clarkm＠cnct.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks (belatedly) for posting this, Russell. Who was it said, "Follow the money." Great stuff. For a good time, call the EFF about these folks. For a better time, call the ACLU. It might be hilarious to make some inquiries around Stanford... Maybe Rich Graves can give us the poop. Best, Clark Probably time someone wrote an expose of industry and cryptocrats "hacking" public policy groups. Wonder where one could PLAGIARIZE such tidbits? ;-) (apologies -- "plagiarize" is an inside joke for the filterslugs ;-) //--- forwarded letter --------------------------------------- > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Date: Tue, 21 Nov 95 12:01:10 -0500 > From: JWRCLUM(a)aol.com > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Subject: Fwd: Corporate Crime and CDT Funding on behalf of so-called medical privacy > The following article appeared in the current issue of > Corporate Crime Reporter (Volume 9, Number 44, November 20, 1995, > page one). It is redisseminated on the Internet with the > permission of CCR. > > SELF-PROCLAIMED "PUBLIC INTEREST" GROUP HEAVILY FUNDED BY > COMPUTER, TELECOMMUNICATIONS, DATABANK CORPORATIONS THAT WOULD > BENEFIT FROM "MEDICAL PRIVACY" LEGISLATION GROUP SUPPORTS -- > EQUIFAX, TRW, DUNN & BRADSTREET IN THE MIX > > The Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), a self- > proclaimed "public interest organization," is in fact heavily > funded by large private computer, telecommunications, and > databank corporations. > Funders of CDT, a two-year old Washington, D.C.-based > advocacy organization, include Dunn & Bradstreet Corp., Equifax > Inc., and TRW Information Services, three large databank > corporations that stand to benefit from federal legislation CDT > actively helped shaped and is shepherding through Congress. > This year, CDT has received $699,643 from more than 30 large > corporations, including $100,000 from Microsoft, $75,000 from > AT&T, $60,000 from Bell Atlantic, $50,000 from Apple Computer, > $25,000 from IBM, $10,000 from TRW Information Services, $10,000 > from Dunn & Bradstreet, $5,000 from Direct Marketing Association, > and $5,000 from Equifax Inc. (For a complete list of CDT's > funders, see At A Glance, page 16) > At a hearing before the Senate Labor and Human Resources > Committee last week, CDT deputy director Janlori Goldman said > that CDT "strongly supports" legislation, S. 1360, sponsored by > Senators Robert Bennett (R-Utah) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), > because it represents "the most comprehensive and strong privacy > bill the Congress has yet considered in this area." > But opponents of the bill argue that the legislation is not > a privacy statute at all, but instead is a vehicle that would > legitimize the creation of large computerized databanks of > personal medical information, thus benefitting those companies > like TRW and Equifax that give financial support to CDT. The > legislation would allow for broad, unauthorized searches of those > databanks, opponents claim. > In an interview, Goldman told Corporate Crime Reporter that > all of CDT's corporate funding is earmarked for other projects > and that none of the corporate funding is supporting her work on > the medical privacy bill. > "The corporate funding is not related at all, in any way > shape or form to my work on this bill," Goldman said. "The reason > we are doing this bill is that I've worked on privacy issues for > a decade. The most important privacy issue to work on is the > passage of the medical records privacy legislation. That is a > very sincere issue for me." > "None of the corporate support that CDT gets is related to > my work on this bill," Goldman emphasized. "None. Zippo." > CDT's executive director, Jerry Berman agreed. "We have no > funding for the medical privacy project -- zero," Berman said. > But critics of the CDT's position on the legislation were > skeptical. > "During the Senate hearing this week, Senator Bennett was > angered at the suggestion that S. 1360 was an industry bill," > said Jamie Love of Ralph Nader's Center for Study of Responsive > Law. "He claimed that he had widely consulted with privacy groups > and patient advocates. CDT's Janlori Goldman was the key person > who decided who was in the loop, and who was not in the loop on > this issue. Groups that were not receptive to the idea of massive > database systems of personal medical records were excluded from > deliberations." > "To find out that CDT has been funded by companies such as > Equifax, TRW, Dunn & Bradstreet, IBM and the telephone companies > is remarkable, because these are among the groups who have the > most at stake in legitimizing and preserving the current system > of maintaining and managing medical records," Love said. "I think > that Janlori Goldman should have mentioned in her Senate > testimony that CDT was funded by corporations who have an > interest in this issue." > "If CDT were doing its job, TRW and Equifax wouldn't want to > give it money," Love added. > Harold Eist, president-elect of the American Psychiatric > Association, said that "any datagathering and large computer > company would clearly benefit from legislation that drives large > amounts of individually identified data about American citizens > into data banks without the knowledge and permission of those > American citizens." > "Selling that information would represent a gold mine for > those companies," Eist said. > "It is not surprising that an organization with a > disingenuous name -- Center for Democracy & Technology -- would > be supporting a bill with a disingenuous name -- The Medical > Records Confidentiality Act," Eist said. "In fact, this bill > represents an effort to give away the privacy of American > citizens without their knowledge." > "My understanding is that Janlori Goldman was involved in > writing the bill," Eist said. "It seems to me that as a former > civil libertarian, she should know very well that there are > loopholes in that bill regarding protections to privacy that you > could drive a Mack truck through." > "Unless people can be assured that their privacy will be > protected, there is little or no chance that they will reveal the > kind of tormented and dark secrets that they have to reveal to > recover from their illnesses," Eist said. "Confidentially is the > sine qua non of medical treatment, and especially if it is > psychiatric medical treatment." > A driving force behind the effort to derail the > Bennett/Leahy bill is Denise Nagel, a Boston physician who > organized the Coalition for Patient Rights of New England "to > restore confidentiality to the doctor-patient relationship." > Nagel refused to comment on CDT's funding. > At the Senate hearing last week, Nagel told the committee "I > have no industry ties." > Nagel charged that S. 1360 was written "to advance the > interests of certain segments of the computer, > telecommunications, data processing and health-care industries." > "With this bill they would be able to careen full speed > ahead to develop data networks that will give innumerable people > access to our medical records legally and without our knowledge," > Nagel said. > "I am convinced that S. 1360 is not at all primarily > concerned with the confidentiality of medical records," Nagel > told the committee. "It is just the opposite. It talks about > informed consent, but then authorizes the creation of databases > without patient knowledge or consent. It talks about individual > rights, and then allows police broad authority to search > databases directly instead of obtaining a specific record from > the patient's doctor. It talks about civil and criminal > sanctions, and then pre-empts all common law and most existing > and future state statutes. It talks about ensuring personal > privacy with respect to medical records, and then sets a ceiling > rather than a floor on medical confidentiality." > > AT A GLANCE: CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY FUNDING, 1994- > 1995 > > American Advertising Federation 500.00 > America Online, Inc. 25,000.00 > Apple Computer Inc. 50,000.00 > AT&T 75,000.00 > Bell Atlantic 60,000.00 > Business Software Alliance 6,000.00 > Cellular Tellecomm Indust Assn 10,000.00 > CompuServ 30,000.00 > Delphi Internet Services Corp 10,000.00 > Direct Marketing Association 5,000.00 > Dunn & Bradstreet Corp 10,000.00 > EMA 5,000.00 > Equifax Inc. 5,000.00 > John Gilmore 2,500.00 > Hartford Foundation 153,000.00 > IBM 25,000.00 > Information Technology Industry 5,000.00 > Interactive Digital Software 5,000.00 > Lotus 6,250.00 > MARC 80,000.00 > MCI Telecommunications 15,000.00 > Microsoft 100,000.00 > National Cable Television Assn 15,000.00 > Netscape Communications Corp 5,000.00 > Newspaper Association of Am 5,000.00 > Nynex Government Affairs 25,000.00 > Pacific Telesis 25,000.00 > Prodigy Service Company 10,000.00 > Software Publishers Assn 10,000.00 > Time Warner Inc 5,000.00 > TRW Information Svcs 10,000.00 > US Telephone Association 10,000.00 > US West Inc 10,000.00 > > Total Funding 814,020.00 > > Received 1994 114,377.00 > Received 1995 699,643.00 > > Total Funding 814,020.00 > > > > Russell Mokhiber > russell(a)essential.org > voice: 202/429-6928 > [big birdie follows] .---. .----------- * :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: / \ __ / ------ * clark.matthews(a)paranet.org / / \(..)/ ----- * :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ////// ' \/ ` ---- * //// / // : : --- * PERMISSION TO \\/ / * / /` '--* COPY / REPOST \*/ * //..\\ x-x-UU----UUx-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x '//||\\` N E M O..M E..I M P U N E..L A C E S S I T x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

4 3

"Strongly Voluntary" Key Escrow
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:18 PM 12/14/95, jim bell wrote: >I disagree. The issue is one that might be called "standing." Who, >exactly, is responsible to whom in such an arrangement. Let's suppose key >escrow (for keys for non-exported encryption devices) is REALLY VOLUNTARY. >In that case, the escrow agent's only legal responsibility is to the owner >of the encryption device. The government isn't a party to this voluntary >arrangement, and thus hasn't a complaint if the escrow agent refuses to comply. > >I could, for example, enter into a voluntary arrangement with an escrow >agent so that he would be obligated to erase the key no more nor less than 5 >days after he received it. If he did so 1 day after, and I needed the key, >he would have breached his obligation to ME, but not to the government. >Likewise, if he failed to erase the key, he would likewise be breaching his >agreement with me. I agree with this analysis. When key escrow was being debate in the summer of '94 here, I called this criterion the basis for a "strongly voluntary" system. Specifically, that one could have the bit bucket as an "escrow agent," with of course no retrieval by the government. Or one's lawyer, or one's spouse, or an offshore bank, and so on. All of these are "voluntary" key escrow (though I hate that misuse of the word "escrow") systems. None of them involve government certification, and there are few circumstances where I think "government certification" is even useful, let alone necessary. Any scheme in which the government interjects itself in what would not normally involve them can hardly be said to be strictly voluntary. --Tim May Views here are not the views of my Internet Service Provider or Government. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: OSF security announcement
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There are two or three dce-web folks on this list, so if anyone has questions after reading the web pages (http://www.osf.org/www/dceweb) drop me a line or post. /r$

1 0