December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Internet Police Law (fwd)
by Adam philipp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This seems to be an interesting developement in GA... With CP relevance. >It is being dubbed the Internet Police Law. Georgia's state government is >beginning to catch a little net-heat because of a new law signed by the >Governor last week which, according to some, CRIMINALIZES the use of e-mail >addresses which don't properly identify a person, as well as the practice of >linking to another web page by name without first obtaining permission to >link. > >If anyone cares to see information and commentary on this new law, feel free >to browse over to www.kuesterlaw.com. I would love to know what everyone >thinks about the constitutionality of this bill, as well as any other comments. > >Thanks. >jk >Jeffrey R. Kuester, Esq. Patent, Copyright, & Trademark Law >6445 Powers Ferry Road, Suite 230, Atlanta, Georgia 30339 >Ph (770) 951-2623 Fax (770) 612-9713 >E-mail: kuester(a)kuesterlaw.com >WWW: http://www.KUESTERLAW.com (The Technology Law Resource) -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-\ | My PGP key is available on my |Unauthorized interception violates | | home page: http://www.rosa.com |federal law (18 USC Section 2700 et| |=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|seq.). In any case, PGP encrypted | |SUB ROSA...see home page... |communications are preferred for | | -=[ FUCK THE CDA]=- |sensitive materials. | \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-/ If A is a success in life, then A = x + y + z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut. Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

2 1

Re: US law - World Law - Secret Banking
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"unicorn(a)schloss.li" "Black Unicorn" 26-APR-1996 01:19:03.47 >What has consistently alarmed me is the United States trend of extending >her own moral and ethical standards world wide. Granted the United States >is the foremost world economic power, but the power to control markets and >the political power to invade the sovereignty of other states are two >distinct issues. The United States is, in one form or another, attempting >to homogonize the legal systems of the world to comply with her own >concept of what is "right" or "fair." This is disturbing. I have no problems with extending US sovereignty where it will improve civil liberties. However, about the only place where it appears to do so is going against child labor. Otherwise, every action of the US government in this regard appears to have been to decrease civil liberties in other countries (and, indirectly, in the United States). >By no means are the states of the world united on the meaning of >anti-trust, the appropriate levels of regulation therein, or the manner in >which to enforce these segments of the law. That the United States should >seek to impose her own will and concepts on foreign states strikes me as >the antithesis of this once noble power's call, indeed the central focus >of her foreign policy, for the self determination of all nation states. Well, I wouldn't say that the self-determination of nation states is the important part. Indeed, most of the cases in which "national sovereignty" is used as an excuse are ones in which the other country is in the wrong. German censorship and Tianenmin (sp?) Square are excellent examples. If patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, national sovereignty is the last refuge of a scoundrel nation. I've deleted the rest of your statements because I essentially agree with them. -Allen

1 0

Re: Anonymous banking
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"unicorn(a)schloss.li" "Black Unicorn" 24-APR-1996 21:06:33.48 Thank you for the information. >Not too bad, but there are crackdowns on anonymous and pseudonym accounts. >MLAT's exist with the United States. Austria has been the focus of >careful investigations and a lot of diplomatic pressure. EC membership >will require compliance with standards for client identification. The >article is somewhat in error. Anonymous accounts are no longer easy to >open and generally require the voucher of a local attorney. Speaking of attorneys, is there any way that an attorney can serve as an anonymous mail forwarder? The user would give the attorney permission to look at anything suspicious (e.g., mail from a credit card company) to make sure no fraud, theft, et al were being committed. Would this be covered under lawyer-client confidentiality in the US? >In general adding a country to the money laundering offender list is a >political decision and NOT demonstrative of a country's actual money >laundering use. (Note that Vanuatu is not included, nor is Isle of Man). >Mostly its a question of countries with corrupt officials who will look >the other way, not of countries which strict banking privacy. Fascinating. >This is nearly irresponsible reporting. Reporters nowdays are getting so overloaded that they're taking information from whoever will talk to them. Look at what happened with the chips-in-Iraqui printer story. -Allen

2 1

Re: You are now an International Arms Trafficker (#1) ???
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:10 PM 4/27/96 -0700, William Knowles wrote: >Yikes, > >Tell me that conspiracy to break ITAR isn't grounds for becoming >arms trafficker #1 > >I don't even have the latest version of the shortened Perl-RSA >code back from the screenprinters. I thought of a method of exporting encryption code that doesn't require an export license, but better yet makes some _deserving_ soul a criminal. (In hindsight, it seems obvious, although I don't recall seeing it discussed.) Basically, you take advantage of the fact that on the Internet, incorrectly-addressed email is often/usually returned to what appears to be the sender. For example, send PGP source, split into appropriately-sized chumks, to somebody like bigshot(a)nsa.com. Mis-spell his name, of course, and forge the note so that it appears to be coming from some out-of-country address. His ISP's system's email software sees the bad address, "returns" it, and it's sent to that out-of-US location. Keep the messages as evidence; forward them to the appropriate prosecutor, who is stuck between a rock and a hard place: Either he prosecutes a "good guy," or he fails to prosecute an unauthorized encryption exporter and thus sets up a bad precedent. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

RE: Click here to become an International Arms Trafficker
by Richard C. Carpenter 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "Declared Munitions Exporter & Trafficker, Nos. 27 _&_ 28" (Not being a glutton, the first try didn't export crypto.) -RCC ================================================================ Key Fingerprint 7A 10 04 1C 81 60 96 FB A1 5A 57 E7 CB 67 4B 06 PGP KeyID A5D1C931 ** public key available on keyservers ** ================================================================ "Government is actually the worst failure of civilized man. There has never been a really good one, and even those that are most tolerable are arbitrary, cruel, grasping and unintelligent." -- H.L. Mencken ================================================================ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: cp850 iQCVAgUBMYLyCdjIfSil0ckxAQGTJgQAyBHD7ZGTi/KTDeXaIfxW07c6xxsR2sLI MjJ4jLx608/2bKtRkOw+PIzXZvj9NtTKdZ2elBDasszlgoK6l2Kb+NZS3jU1lYAS ZT7E2LiYE5ShBIWlI04D6nnwIuFWnPMgLPcBgdtIQ7MWrKxnb2qEtuFL9lAxj2kI UxNYSd0zQWw= =PjTz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

pgpcrack v0.6b
by Mark M. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- PGPCrack v0.6b is now available from http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/pgpcrack6b.tar.gz . It is now more portable and it is less likely to find an invalid passphrase valid. I have also included a passphrase list in the distribution. - -- Mark =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= markm(a)voicenet.com | finger -l for PGP key 0xf9b22ba5 http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/ | bd24d08e3cbb53472054fa56002258d5 "The concept of normalcy is just a conspiracy of the majority" -me -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBMYK0ULZc+sv5siulAQHJlAQAozGi0IW0GqB3cs/QsHaoeeVLY8YXqbKe 7la4Ybe7MYxSMgRXt7AXG8/5nd3ECNOBlopzEBN91TEotHHe7X4Idqx93cJC94+M jln5HbmnLlExr9JIKFgeyHiwm5wruxbk3UHMIOEn82Hp04OdzazjQxDzfjzst6r0 S38TgBHtoC4= =6ct2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Book: The President's Eyes Only
by hoz＠univel.telescan.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just finished reading "For the President's Eyes Only", a book by Christopher Andrew. It describes the uses that US presidents have made of intelligence and intelligence organizations, from George Washington to George Bush. What caught my eye first was a quotation by David Kahn that says: "This is the most important book ever written about American intelligence." The cypherpunks relevance (Besides the David Kahn quote) is the frequent mention of NSA decrypts and SIGINT. The frequency that nations and individuals have used (and apparently continue to use) breakable encryption is incredible. The intelligence that has been derived by breaking them is worth a great deal, in dollars and maybe lives. This book has made me understand a bit, why a government might try to limit strong cryptography. I suppose I tended to look upon ITAR restrictions on cryptography as a sign of a power-hungry, self-agrandizing, government that has lost track of the fact that its legitimacy depends on protecting the blessings of liberty for its citizens. That's partly true, but there's more to it than that. After reading "For the President's Eyes Only", I can understand that many in government believe that they are protecting the public by outlawing cryptography. After careful reconsideration, I still believe in strong free crypto, but it made me think very hard. I think that some on this list and in sci.crypt should be ashamed of their ad hominem attacks in an area where reasonable people disagree. The crypto-game is being played "for keeps". Someday, all crypto may be too strong to break, but for right now, many "bad guys" (and whatever your philosophy, I bet you can find some) use weak crypto, and this allows the US Govt. to know more about what goes on in the world. As long as Uncle Sam keeps his finger on a nuclear trigger, I can see a strong case that knowing what he's doing and not getting too surprised are (mostly) good things. There will be a price to pay when everyone uses strong crypto. There will be great benefits derived, as well. It will be very expensive, but worth it. If we want to make it happen sooner, we should understand (and respect) our opponents in this debate. Rick F. Hoselton (who doesn't claim to present opinions for others)

2 1

Re: WWW proxies?
by Ryan Russell/SYBASE 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We use CERN proxies, as well as general purpose proxies, which effectivly narrows it down to someone within my company. But, that only masks the IP address. My impression was that most browsers hand out enough info about you at the application layer that it does little good to mask the IP address. At least for privacy purposes...address translation is a great firewall model, IMHO. Ryan ---------- Previous Message ---------- To: cypherpunks cc: From: unicorn @ schloss.li (Black Unicorn) @ smtp Date: 04/26/96 07:13:06 PM Subject: WWW proxies? Has anyone developed such a beast yet? Will we have as extensive a WWW proxy network as remailer network? --- My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: US law - World Law - Secret Banking
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:43 PM 4/27/96 -0400, Michael Froomkin wrote: >I disagree with the assertion that a hypothetical 2 yr old with a US >passport who never set foot in the US again gets nothing for her >citizenship. The evidence is that she didn't rennounce it: if was >worthless to her she could easily do so. > She need not ever have even gotten a US passport. Additionally, she probably can't renounce her citizenship until she reaches majority. Also, if she is born with a fortune and the Clinton Exit Tax (which declares that renunciation of citizenship is a taxable event) is in place, she is out vast quantities of cash for nothing. The problem is the US tax system which tries to maintain an extra-territorial reach and encourages renunciation of citizenship. DCF

1 0

RE: Mindshare and Java
by Blake Coverett 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> "Trust" really isn't the right word for what I'm getting at. Microsoft's > digital signature initiative is basically FUD with the spin "Only stuff > signed or endorsed by Microsoft is going to work," but I don't think that > this spin is inherent in signed code initiatives generally. At the risk of being rude... I you had actually looked at the system in question you'd realize that your statements above are sheer nonsense. -Blake (who posted a summary of the WinTrust stuff some weeks back)

2 1