December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: E-Data Systems ~ patent #4,528,643
by Yanni 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I think this has made the rounds here, already. > > If it hasn't, any comments? > > Cheers, > Bob Hettinga yea, we got a couple of them from those guys... whatever... how can you claim a patent on that stuff? geeezzz... -jon Jon (no h) S. Stevens yanni(a)clearink.com ClearInk WebMagus http://www.clearink.com/ finger pgp(a)sparc.clearink.com for pgp pub key What I just wrote is beta. Please report all bugs directly to me.

1 0

I swear I am not making this up. (rec.music.white-power)
by ezundel＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: bb748(a)FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim) Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.skinheads,alt.politics.nationalism.white, alt.politics.white-power Subject: Statement Regarding rec.music.white-power Date: 6 Jun 1996 23:10:41 GMT Organization: The National Capital FreeNet Lines: 48 Sender: bb748(a)freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim) Message-ID: <4p7ohh$mq2(a)freenet-news.carleton.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca Now that the results for our newsgroup proposal have been issued, we wish to make a statement concerning our objectives. Three objectives were sought in the rec.music.white-power project: #1: Generate mainstream media publicity for the Aryan Resistance Movement and disseminate the Holy Cause of the 14 Words -- "We must secure the existence of our People and a future for White children." #2: Encourage revelation of Enemy activists' identities to facilitate counter-espionage and prevent many instances of "anti-racist" activism against the 14 Words. #3: Create a newsgroup for discussion and promotion of Aryan music. On objective one, we succeeded beyond all expectations. No informed North American is not now unaware of our existence on the Internet. National Public Radio, _USA Today_, the _St. Paul Pioneer Press_, and Minnesota Public Radio, to name a few media organs, gave us priceless free publicity for our ideas and our Holy Cause. On objective two, we also succeeded well. We now have a comprehensive list of Enemy agents who are active on the Net. Aryan Corps Counter- intelligence is now undertaking a classification and cataloguing project which will make our counter-espionage efforts much more effective. On objective three, we obviously failed, but this was expected. Nonethe- less, benefit has been gained from this defeat. The Aryan Corps succeeded in organizing hundreds of Aryan Resistance Movement activists toward a constructive goal, increasing the "esprit de corps" of our ranks. We would like to thank all individuals who, for whatever reason, voted in the affirmative for our group. A special thanks is extended to Mr. Michael Handler, our vote-taker, for his herculean efforts to process the massive results for our proposal. We wish him well. -- Milton John Kleim, Jr., Proponent, rec.music.white-power; Chief Organi- zer, Aryan Corps -- White Wolf (RH), Deputy Organizer, Aryan Corps And on behalf of the entire Aryan Corps Network.

1 0

New type2.list/pubring.mix
by John Perry 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

PGP message

1 0

Internet Police
by caal＠hopf.dnai.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Has anyone seen this yet? Looks like it's two weeks old. Internet Police! >[BizWire] 5/20/96 > > (SUN/PSI-INTL)(SUNW) PSI International, Sun partner, unveils Java- > based Internet solution for law enforcement agencies; "Internet in > Blue" Police Internet/Intranet Application Suite Available in July > 1996 > > Business Editors/Computer Writers > > Highlights: > -- Internet in Blue, one of the first Java-based solutions aimed > at fighting crime, is being introduced by PSI International, a > strategic partner of Sun Microsystems Federal, and includes other > Sun products. > > -- Internet in Blue combines the power of Java and Netra servers > to enable law enforcement agencies and police departments to quickly > leverage the capabilities of the Internet and intranets. > > -- This solution is the latest evidence of Sun taking advantage > of the significant market opportunity for crime prevention > technology. Last year, Sun Federal announced a dedicated Criminal > Justice Operation, which is working with police departments and law > enforcement agencies around the world to help them use technology in > fighting crime. > > MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- May 20, 1996--One of > the first Sun(TM) Java(TM)-based solutions aimed at fighting crime > was introduced today by PSI International, a strategic partner of > Sun Microsystems Federal, a subsidiary of Sun Microsystems, Inc. > > Called Internet in Blue(TM), the solution combines the power of > Sun's Java technology, its Netra(TM) Internet servers, its Java > WorkShop(TM) development tools, and PSI's relational database > software. This solution fully leverages the capabilities of the > Internet for the benefit of law enforcement agencies because of the > inclusion of Java, the revolutionary Internet platform from Sun that > makes possible fast, easy, operating-system-independent use of the > Internet. > > To be offered by PSI, Internet in Blue will enable police > departments and other law enforcement agencies to leverage the > latest Internet technology to fight crime and promote citizen > involvement and community-based policing. From a citizen's > perspective, having a local police force with an Internet presence > gives people the opportunity to report problems online and play a > more active role in fighting crime in their neighborhoods. > > Besides utilizing the Internet, the PSI solution also allows > local police to build an "intranet," which is a greatly enhanced > internal information network to handle departmental processes as > well as to speedily access any internal database of interest. > Examples of these databases include local crime data such as > patterns of crimes, gang affiliations, data on previous suspects and > arrests. Currently, many police departments must locate such data > via a paper trail, which is very inefficient. > > "Law enforcement agencies are quickly realizing the power of the > Internet and intranets as strategic tools in fighting crime," said > John Marselle, president of Sun Microsystems Federal. "The Internet > in Blue solution from PSI -- based on Sun technology -- takes > advantage of Java's security features, platform independence and > database access capabilities. It should make it much easier for > police departments and other criminal justice organizations to get > online and to leverage the capabilities of the network." > > With Java WorkShop, a visual development environment for Java > that can be included as part of the Internet in Blue solution, > police departments can design, test, deploy and maintain Internet > and intranet applications based on Java with speed and simplicity. > Java WorkShop runs on the Sun Solaris(TM) environment and Windows > 95/NT. Using Java, the PSIBase relational database management > system can access Web browsers across any hardware platform. > > "The Internet is the next frontier in the development of law > enforcement information systems," said Paul Wormeli, program > director for law enforcement at PSI. "Our Internet in Blue solution > will enable law enforcement agencies to quickly exploit the latest > technologies like Java." > > Internet in Blue includes the following: > > A starter kit with a Sun Netra Internet server and PSI software > and services needed to set up a site on the World Wide Web, as well > as technical assistance from PSI for developing content and training > for a Webmaster. > > A full set of applications to create a police intranet providing > secure internal access to selected crime information, standard > operating police procedures and other infrastructure services. > > An interactive, community-based communications medium to > facilitate crime reporting over the Internet and community-based > policing. > > Suggestions for services that law enforcement agencies can > develop in order to offset the cost of the Internet project, such as > providing online crime reports and accident report information to > authorized outside organizations including legal firms and insurance > companies. -0- > > The Internet in Blue product will be available in July, 1996. > Pricing will vary depending on customer needs. > > PSI International, Inc. has provided systems integration and > services for over 14 years to federal, state and local governments. > The company specializes in law enforcement and public safety > solutions, consulting services, and integration of software and > hardware. With a staff of over 250 professionals in the information > system and services industry, PSI has a team of people that have > both technical and industry knowledge of public safety and justice > applications, including computer aided dispatch, records and > investigative management, imaging, telecommunications, and mobile > computing. > > Sun Microsystems Federal, Inc., headquartered in Vienna, > Virginia, is a subsidiary of Sun Microsystems, Inc. Sun Federal's > charter is to develop, deliver and sustain markets for Sun products > in governments worldwide. > > With annual revenues of $6 billion, Sun Microsystems, Inc., > provides solutions that enable customers to build and maintain open > network computing environments. Widely recognized as a proponent of > open standards, the company is involved in the design, manufacture > and sale of products, technologies and services for commercial and > technical computing. Sun's SPARC(TM) workstations, multiprocessing > servers, SPARC microprocessors, Solaris(Tm) operating software and > ISO-certified service organization each rank No. 1 in the UNIX(TM) > industry. Founded in 1982, Sun is headquartered in Mountain View, > Calif., and employs more than 16,000 people worldwide. -0- > > Note to Editors: Sun, the Sun logo, Sun Microsystems, Java, Java > Workshop, Netra and Solaris are trademarks or registered trademarks > of Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the United States and in other > countries. All SPARC trademarks are used under license and are > trademarks or registered trademarks of SPARC International, Inc. in > the United States and other countries. Products bearing SPARC > trademarks are based upon an architecture developed by Sun > Microsystems, Inc. UNIX is a registered trademark in the United > States and other countries exclusively licensed through X/Open > Company, Ltd. > > Internet in Blue is a trademark of PSI, International and is > properly written in boldface italics, all lower case. > > Press announcements and other information about Sun Microsystems > are available on the Internet via the World Wide Web using a tool > such as Netscape or NCSA Mosaic. Type http://www.sun.com at the URL > prompt. > > --30--css/sf* > > CONTACT: Burson-Marsteller (for Sun) > Jane Rauckhorst, 212/614-4880 > or > PSI International > Martha Hill, 703/352-8700 > > KEYWORD: CALIFORNIA > INDUSTRY KEYWORD: COMPUTERS/ELECTRONICS COMED > INTERACTIVE/MULTIMEDIA/INTERNET PRODUCT GOVERNMENT > > REPEATS: New York 212-752-9600 or 800-221-2462; Boston 617-236-4266 > or 800-225-2030; SF 415-986-4422 or 800-227-0845; LA 310-820-9473 BW > URL: http://www.businesswire.com >

1 0

NTT Chips Beat Cops
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Economist, June 8, 1996, p. 65. Encryption Silence of the bugs Spare a thought for America's professional snoops. For decades the FBI and others have counted the telephone wiretap among their favourite weapons against crime, as countless mafiosi can (and did) testify. Now, software in a computer or digital telephone can scramble a message so effectively that no law-enforcement agency can read it. For years, the government has fought back by restricting the use of encryption, to the fury of privacy advocates on the Internet, where rampant eavesdropping makes encryption essential. Now a bit of silicon and a stack of paper have apparently ended the battle: the cops lost. The bit of silicon is actually two chips that can encrypt data transmissions so that they are in effect uncrackable. Had the chips been developed in the United States, the government would have classified them as "munitions" and banned their export. But they were developed in Japan, by NTT, the telephone giant, and the Japanese subsidiary of RSA, an American encryption company, which revealed their existence early this week. They can therefore be used around the world, and even imported into the United States. There seems nothing the American government can do about it. As if that were not bad enough, America's restrictive encryption policy took another hit last week when a report, commissioned by Congress and compiled by the prestigious National Research Council (NRC), concluded that the policy had hurt Americans far more than it had helped them. For the past few years, the White House has been offering a purported compromise: give the government (or a mutually trusted third party) a key to read your encrypted e-mail, and you can scramble it all you like. The problem with this so-called "key escrow" proposal was that it smacked to many of Big Brotherism. The computer industry rejected it out of hand, and fell back instead on weaker encryption that was not regulated, even though this can be cracked over a weekend with a home PC. Up to now, the government's response to cries for better encryption for all has been to fall back on its responsibility to protect the citizenry. The NRC panel rejected this, together with the "if only you knew what we know" argument the government has usually trotted out. Composed of former security officials and encryption experts, this panel did know what the government knows, and was still not convinced. Now the NTT chips seem to sweep away the whole debate. NTT has already sold the chips in 15 countries, and they should soon be incorporated in products. Stewart Baker, the former general counsel of America's National Security Agency, concedes that the chips have probably killed encryption controls in America, but argues that the battle will continue to run in Europe, where countries such as France limit their use. For the rest of the world, these bits of silicon may indeed make it harder for police to protect citizens. But they will also make it easier for citizens to protect themselves. --

1 0

Re: It tolls for thee
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:42 AM 6/7/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >At 7:29 AM 6/7/96, jim bell wrote: > >>Even so, given how much noise we've been hearing out of DC on the subject >>of the Internet, digital cash, and good encryption, I'd say SOMEBODY is >>getting a bit worried. I haven't exactly been keeping this stuff a secret: >>What do you think their reaction has been, so far? When those >>government-types start considering various scary scenarios, what do you >>think they are imagining? > >I don't think any significant amount of the current stuff coming out of >Washington has anything to do with my words, your words, or the words of >anyone on this or any other forum I know about. Okay, I was not trying to suggest that any particular source is followed. What I'm noticing is the almost uniformly "pessimistic" (as to the fate of the government) views I've read on the various computer networks, and the uniformly hostile reactions to government proposals. This can't be reassuring to the people in power today. >Rather, the reasons for their actions and hyperbole about the Net, the Web, >online porn, money laundering, the "information highway," and all that >trendy stuff is because they can see many of the same trends we see. > >While I have a certain amount of pride that my single-page "Crypto >Anarchist Manifesto" essentially nailed a bunch of trends which have become >obvious to all in the 8 years after I issued it, I don't for a picosecond >think anything I wrote then or since has had any significant effect on >proposed leglislation. Don't be so sure. Legislators, alone, don't have the smarts to figure out why they "needed" a Clipper-chip proposal, or the capacity to tap 1% of the phone calls, or other recent government proposals. Government is usually very good at ignoring problems long after they become problems. The fact that they're so hot to control the Internet suggests to me that somebody has been talking to them about what is going to happen. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Clinton To Cipher Whitewater Video (fwd)
by Herr Wendigo 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An entity claiming to be Matthew Gaylor wrote: >From freematt(a)coil.com Fri Jun 7 12:31:25 1996 Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 12:02:40 -0400 X-Sender: freematt(a)bronze.coil.com Message-Id: <v0213050badddc7a0b29f(a)[198.4.94.200]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: freematt(a)coil.com (Matthew Gaylor) From: freematt(a)coil.com (Matthew Gaylor) Subject: Clinton To Cipher Whitewater Video From: softwa19(a)us.net (Charles R. Smith) Subject: Clinton To Cipher Whitewater Video President Clinton is scheduled to video-tape his testimony in the second Whitewater trial. He will do so from the oval office in July. The first video taped testimony he sent to an Arkansas court room was scrambled in order to protect his personal and political privacy. One can only assume that the President will also encrypt his second testimony for the same reasons. I have no problem with the President exercising his rights to use encryption. That is what the defensive technology is for. However, President Clinton is also engaged in an effort to deny that very same right from ordinary citizens. The Clinton administration has tried for several years to ban or remove all defensive encryption security from computers, stressing that crime had a higher priority over privacy. His latest Clipper III proposal would require all U.S. citizens to turn over their keys (escrow) so that the FBI can ensure that no one is using their computer for criminal activities. In effect, the proposal would invalidate the First, Fourth and Fifth amendments. Escrow is the modern equal to the FBI demanding your house key. This is so the FBI can check in every now and then. Yet, instead of making life safer, the proposal will leave us wide open for hacker attack. It is a fact that the Clinton record of computer security is so poor that the GAO reported over 160,000 successful penetrations against just the Defense Department in 1995. In fact, during one incident, a 16 year old hacker could have started a war between North Korea and America (Rome NY USAF Base/Korean Atomic Research Facility 1995). Please note - DOD has the best computer security record of all government agencies! That means the situation at the FBI, BATF, FAA, HUD and IRS is worse. Much worse. The computers that control the military, financial, industrial, medical and political heart of America are waiting for a Digital Pearl Harbor, left undefended by Presidental order. His proposal also assumes that a huge bureaucracy erected to monitor escrowed keys would be more secure than our nuclear arsenal. Ridiculous. President Clinton has risked global nuclear war to push intrusive and obsolete ideas which protect nothing. Instead, President Clinton should heed the GAO report which concluded that securing million dollar military computers with no encryption software, no firewalls and untrained, part-timers, is the wrong thing to do. President Clinton demands his personal and legal privacy but refuses to support the same for you and me. President Clinton has risked our personal safety and our common democracy in order to create a large bureaucracy of lawyers who will do nothing but count bits. The President should take a lesson from his own actions, cipher thyself, and protect America. He should join Senator Bob Dole and a whole crowd of Bi-partisan elected officals in supporting the PROCODE bill (S. 1726). This bill gives every American the right to encrypt. The right to personal privacy. The same right Bill Clinton enjoyed during the last video session at the Whitehouse. 1 if by land, 2 if by sea. Paul Revere - Encryption 1775 Charles R. Smith SOFTWAR Richmond, VA http://ally.ios.com/~softwa19 PCYPHER signature: 4279C640DB607D4D13B808082D7CC6F23938320C1956E31A50781D192D627672 601D141C6516051C061976462B382C294542435F19665B2B316E174955445C56 5A506675180400041F030A001472657A6A1201191C0E0003784FCCE47ACB9531 E1EE5997D5E34A97A351C22B2F1871573A85BB02E3CB5C046FB24E80478AEB74 4063578E1E8019425A08091923FE6D4CA375669185FD8935B361CA6B65949FE3 57E8629F5981F5030E0AAD2BECA669808B2A038E1D89E810398F0A4DDCD2F5A7 B1E6417290D1290346BE790894F6AD1E790C57A0B457C1BE85A5D3CFB42E38E8 D5C6BDAECA57F968898F345920D5804CF5832D70534F5C66230AF099F68CAECD **************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt(a)coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor,1933 E. Dublin-Granville Rd.,#176, Columbus, OH 43229 **************************************************************************** -- Mark Rogaski | Why read when you can just sit and | Member GTI System Admin | stare at things? | Programmers Local wendigo(a)gti.net | Any expressed opinions are my own | # 0xfffe wendigo(a)pobox.com | unless they can get me in trouble. | APL-CPIO

1 0

CDT Policy Post 2.23 - Congress/FTC Focus on Online Privacy Issues
by editor＠cdt.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- _____ _____ _______ / ____| __ \__ __| ____ ___ ____ __ | | | | | | | | / __ \____ / (_)______ __ / __ \____ _____/ /_ | | | | | | | | / /_/ / __ \/ / / ___/ / / / / /_/ / __ \/ ___/ __/ | |____| |__| | | | / ____/ /_/ / / / /__/ /_/ / / ____/ /_/ (__ ) /_ \_____|_____/ |_| /_/ \____/_/_/\___/\__, / /_/ \____/____/\__/ The Center for Democracy and Technology /____/ Volume 2, Number 23 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A briefing on public policy issues affecting civil liberties online ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CDT POLICY POST Volume 2, Number 23 June 7, 1996 CONTENTS: (1) Congress/FTC Focus on Online Privacy Issues - Solutions Differ (2) Text of EFF, CDT, PFAW, VTW Letter to Rep. Franks (R-NJ) on impact of "Children's Privacy" Bill (3) Join Senator Burns Live Online June 11, 10pm ET (4) How to Subscribe/Unsubscribe (5) About CDT, contacting us ** This document may be redistributed freely with this banner in tact ** Excerpts may be re-posted with permission of <editor(a)cdt.org> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** UPDATE: DECISION IS NEAR IN FIGHT TO SAVE FREE SPEECH ONLINE ** An announcement from the Court is expected any time. Be sure to visit http://www.cdt.org/ciec/ for the latest news and information! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) CONGRESS/FTC FOCUS ON ONLINE PRIVACY - OFFER DIVERGENT SOLUTIONS The increasing use of the Internet by children, combined with the ease of collecting personal information online, raise serious privacy issues. However, while there is broad consensus on the goal of giving people more control over the collection and use of personal information online, some of the solutions being offered may have far-reaching, though perhaps inadvertent, impact on the free flow of information in interactive media. Over the past several months, concerns about the availability and use of personal information in the online world, particularly with respect to the collection and use of information about children, have prompted the Congress and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to seriously consider this important issue. The approaches to this issue fall broadly into two distinct categories: * Create Criminal Penalties For The Collection And Use Of Personal Information About Kids Without Parental Consent. * Encourage The Development And Use Of Technologies That Enable Users and Parents To Limit The Amount Of Personal Information They and Their Children Reveal Online. Legislation designed to restrict the collection and use of personal information about children without parental consent was recently introduced by Rep Bob Franks (R-NJ). The bill has sparked concerns from cyber-rights advocates that it may end up increasing the collection of personal information online and result in restrictions on the free flow of information (see the attached letter from EFF, People for the American Way Action Fund, VTW, and CDT below). Recent hearings before the FTC emphasized the broad consensus about the need to give individuals more control over the collection and use of personal information. The FTC hearings highlighted the availability of technologies which empower users and parents to exercise more control over the collection and use of such information, and the possibility that existing methods, including the PICS standards, can be enhanced to enable users to express preferences about how and to what extent they are willing to have personal information reused (although much work needs to be done before this is fully implemented). In addition, Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), a long time champion of privacy issues, told the FTC panel that he would like to encourage the development of technologies that enable users to control the amount of personal information they reveal online. Markey also emphasized that Congress should consider legislation in this area if such technologies are not developed or are not effective. Markey told the FTC: "We should see if there are technological tools that can empower consumers. Where they don't exist, or where a particular industry refuses to embrace this code of electronic ethics in a way that solves this problem, then the government is obliged to step in and do something." Markey also announced that he intends to introduce legislation soon to give consumers the right to know that information is being collected about them, notice that personal information may be reused or sold, and the right to say "no" to the reuse or sale of their personal information. Markey's legislation would also commission a study of existing online privacy practices (The full text of Rep. Markey's statement is available at CDT's privacy issues web page URL below.) The FTC hearings illustrated that there is broad concern about the collection and use of personal information online. There was also great substantial support expressed for technological solutions to address this issue. As a result, the FTC has requested that the industry report back to the Commission in 6 months on progress towards developing technologies that enhance user control over the collection and use of personal information online. CDT is encouraged that Congress and the FTC have taken such strong interest in the issue of online privacy, and we look forward to working with all interested parties to ensure that solutions give users control over the collection and use of personal information and do not adversely affect the free flow of information online. More information, including CDT's testimony before the FTC panel and Rep. Markey's statement, and a demonstration illustrating the amount of personal information collected during the normal course of surfing the Web, can be found at CDT's Privacy Issues page: http://www.cdt.org/privacy/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (2) Letter from EFF, PFAW Action Fund, VTW & CDT to Rep. Bob Franks Regarding "Children's Privacy" (HR 3508) Bill The following letter was sent last week to Representative Bob Franks (R-NJ) regarding the "Children's Privacy Protection and Parental Empowerment Act" (HR 3508) from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, People for the American Way Action Fund, the Voters Telecommunications Watch, and the Center for Democracy and Technology. Among other things, the groups expressed concern that, as currently drafted, the bill raises some of the same privacy and free flow of information issues raised by the Exon/Coats "Communications Decency Act" to the extent that it is extremely difficult to know whether or not a person visiting a web site is or is not a child without requiring all visitors to identify themselves. While commending Rep. Franks for his efforts and expressing support for the goal of his legislation, the letter outlines several concerns about the impact of the bill on the Internet. The groups pledged to work with Rep. Franks and other interested members of Congress to explore technological solutions which empower users and parents to control the use of personal information and preserve the free flow of information. The Franks bill enjoys broad support from a number of conservative "pro-family" groups such as the Christian Coalition, Enough Is Enough!, and the National Law Center for Children and Families, as well as privacy groups such as EPIC, Privacy Times Publisher Evan Hendricks and Privacy Journal Publisher Robert Ellis Smith. The text of HR 3508 is available at: http://www.cdt.org/privacy/children/ The full text of the letter from EFF, PFAW Action Fund, VTW and CDT follows: ---------- June 4, 1996 Representative Bob Franks 429 Cannon House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Dear Representative Franks: We are writing to commend your efforts to protect children's privacy. We are pleased that you have begun a process to put these important issues at the center of the political debate. We believe, however, that the solutions recommended in your bill, -- the "Children's Privacy Protection and Parental Empowerment Act" (HR 3508) -- particularly as they relate to the exchange of information on the Internet, will not only increase the collection of information about children in certain circumstances but will also criminalize behavior in a vast array of unintended situations, thereby compromising the free flow of information online. With the rising popularity of the Internet and commercial online services, concerns regarding the vulnerabilities of unsupervised children's activities online must be addressed. Indeed, although the Internet offers children unprecedented and important new educational and recreational opportunities, the medium also may offer access to inappropriate material, or exposure to unfair marketing or information collection practices. Solutions to these problems must be carefully analyzed and should take into account both the unique nature of the Internet, as well as the multitude of First Amendment and privacy rights at stake for all who seek to read, communicate, and associate with others in the online environment. In fact, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), whose responsibility it is to police the existence and proliferation of unfair or deceptive advertising and information practices has scheduled hearings for June 4 and 5 to look at these very issues as they apply to the Internet. Because your bill was drafted to apply to all media we are concerned that its application in the Internet context may lead to unintended consequences. We ask that you examine, together with the FTC, the unique qualities of the Internet and the problems that result from regulating activity at the information publisher or Web site operator end. In its application to the Internet, the Children's Privacy Protection and Parental Empowerment Act is both over-inclusive, covering virtually all who participate in the Internet, and ineffective, in that it leaves substantial loopholes for those who engage in the behavior at which the bill is targeted. The term "personal information," the basic regulatory target of the bill, is defined in such as way that it may include nothing more than an electronic mail address which by its nature, gives no indication of the age or physical location of a user. Furthermore, the term "list broker," is drafted to cover any entity which exchanges personal information in the course of its operation. The vast majority of World Wide Web site operators, as well as anyone who operates a listserv, mailing list or other information distribution mechanism, all collect, store, and may well exchange, email addresses. Then, unless Web site operators obtain parental consent before collecting information, they risk criminal penalties for violation of section (a)(4). The difficulty in compliance is two-fold. First, information providers on the Internet have no way of distinguishing children from adults. In fact, compliance with the bill could well lead to an increase in the collection of information about children and adults, only compounding privacy risks. Even with the imposition of an unacceptably intrusive national ID system (a system that none of us support), it would still be essentially impossible for an information publisher or Web site operator to establish the age of the user visiting the providers site. Second, the requirement to disclose the source of personal information about children to parents creates unclear new obligations on Internet information providers. In fact, many of the information providers who would be covered by your bill do not keep track of the source of their information and thus may not have the ability to comply with the statute. Compliance with this section could well lead to an increase in the overall collection of personal information about Internet users, thereby compounding privacy risks. Imposed identification procedures applied to the World Wide Web under the threat of criminal penalties would limit all Internet users' ability to read, speak, receive information and interact online under constitutionally-protected conditions of anonymity. Further, requiring parental consent in all instances or requiring providers to disclose information to parents collected from children fails to acknowledge the distinction between young children and teenagers and their rights under the Constitution. Finally, section (a)(6) which criminalizes any distribution or receipt of personal information where the receiver has knowledge or "reason to believe that the information will be used to abuse the child or physically harm the child" is well-intentioned, but potentially so broad as to cover anyone who receives and discloses personal information about a child. The bill establishes no clear standard of care or level of knowledge necessary to meet this requirement, leaving everyone on the Internet in doubt about whether or not they may be violating this new crime. Schools and organizations who publish directories as well as newspapers who publish the identity of a child in a news story could be subject to prosecution because they had "reason to know" that the information may end up in the possession of bad actors. Given all of these difficulties in applying your bill to the Internet, and given the importance of addressing children's privacy issues, we suggest that examination of alternatives is in order. Empowering parents to protect their children's privacy with existing technological tools and fair information practices by the industry will help ensure that the Internet continues to grow and thrive for both commercial and noncommercial endeavors. For example, software already on the market such as Cyberpatrol, as well as industry-standard technologies such as the Platform for Internet Content Selection (PICS) enable people -- including parents and their children -- to restrict access to sites which practice objectionable marketing and information collection techniques. At present, PICS technology, along with other innovative products, allows parents to filter and block-out materials that contain objectionable content or block access to sites with inappropriate or abusive marketing practices. Current technology can enable parents to: * prevent their children from accessing Web sites with inappropriate information practices -- as defined by the parent or a consumer or privacy organization of the parent's choice; * prevent their children from revealing personal information such as name, address, and e-mail address to others; * install security measures such as passwords that prevent their child from changing rules about Web site access or information disclosure, collection and use that the parent has established. The Internet community is already considering extensions to the PICS specifications which will enable individual users and parents to block the transmission of their personal information to Web sites they visit and to express a preference about how and to what extent they are willing to have personal information reused. PICS, Cyberpatrol and other technologies can help eradicate the deceptive and inappropriate practices your bill seeks to address without compromising the rights of users or content providers. Several of us have had the opportunity to talk with you and your staff about this legislation. We appreciate your willingness to discuss these issues and look forward to working with you in this important area in the hopes that technological alternatives combined with better industry practices and much more narrowly crafted legislation will help protect this nation's children in the online world, consistent with First Amendment and privacy principles. Sincerely, The Center for Democracy and Technology The Electronic Frontier Foundation People For the American Way Action Fund Voters Telecommunications Watch ---------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (3) Join Senator Conrad Burns Live Online to Discuss Encryption Policy The Night Before His Subcommittee Holds a Hearing On the Issue! --> Visit http://www.hotwired.com/wiredside/ for details <-- In what is becoming the newest way for Congress to read the net.community's opinion on issues, Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT) will be on HotWired on June 11th @ 10pm EST to discuss the encryption issue with all attendees. The next day, Senator Burns will chair the first of two scheduled hearings on the encryption issue with industry luminaries. Never before has the public had this much access to legislators without geographical proximity. Cheaper than teleconferencing, and more direct and unfiltered than the traditional press, online chats allow the public to directly question and hear the answers of Congress. Have a question about encryption policy that you've never been able to find out from the government? Come to the HotWired chat and ask Senator Burns to be your advocate to press the witnesses and the White House on these issues. The online chat is at 10pm EDT (7pm PDT) on Tuesday June 11, the night before the first hearing. HotWired's WiredSide chat is at: http://www.hotwired.com/wiredside/ Next Tuesday's forum is another in a series of planned events, and is part of a broader project coordinated by CDT and the Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) designed to bring the Internet Community into the debate and encourage members of Congress to work with the Net.community on vital Internet policy issues. The transcript from last week's discussion with Congressman Rick White is now available -- for information about the transcript, previous events with other members of Congress, and upcoming events, please check CDT's newest Issues Page, "Congress and the Net": http://www.cdt.org/net_congress/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (4) SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION Be sure you are up to date on the latest public policy issues affecting civil liberties online and how they will affect you! Subscribe to the CDT Policy Post news distribution list. CDT Policy Posts, the regular news publication of the Center For Democracy and Technology, are received by more than 9,000 Internet users, industry leaders, policy makers and activists, and have become the leading source for information about critical free speech and privacy issues affecting the Internet and other interactive communications media. To subscribe to CDT's Policy Post list, send mail to policy-posts-request(a)cdt.org with a subject: subscribe policy-posts If you ever wish to remove yourself from the list, send mail to the above address with a subject of: unsubscribe policy-posts ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (5) ABOUT THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY/CONTACTING US The Center for Democracy and Technology is a non-profit public interest organization based in Washington, DC. The Center's mission is to develop and advocate public policies that advance democratic values and constitutional civil liberties in new computer and communications technologies. Contacting us: General information: info(a)cdt.org World Wide Web: URL:http://www.cdt.org/ FTP URL:ftp://ftp.cdt.org/pub/cdt/ Snail Mail: The Center for Democracy and Technology 1634 Eye Street NW * Suite 1100 * Washington, DC 20006 (v) +1.202.637.9800 * (f) +1.202.637.0968 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- End Policy Post 2.23 6/7/96 -----------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

middle-man may be moving...
by nobody＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It looks like I'm going to have to move the middle-man remailer. The nym server at alpha.c2.org has been down for several days. This directly affects the middle-man remailer. Since nymrod(a)nym.jpunix.com has made it to Raph's list, I'm going to contact the admin at jpunix.com and see if it's ok for me to point the middle-man remailer nym at his server. Maybe it will be a little more reliable and allow the middle-man remailer to work properly. Stay tuned for further details as they occur! middle-man-admin(a)alpha.c2.org (don't bother to reply, it doesn't work)

1 0

Re: Class III InfoWar: TST Article
by ScottMorris 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[snip] > >On the substance of Schwartau's claims about "HERF guns," I'm a bit >skeptical that this is a real threat _at this time_. I'll say more on this >later. > >So, why am I so skeptical? For a couple of reasons: > >1. Conventional explosives work perfectly fine for a lot of sabotage >efforts. It is unlikely that a mysterrious van is likely to be parked next >to a London brokerage or computer firm in the City of London, given their >history of terrorism. Why bother with explosives when you can pull a manhole cover and climb down with a <insert power tool of choice here, I prefer the chainsaw myself>. All that copper/fiber has to run somewhere in the area to get into the buildings. When the conductor is gone say goodnight. Or the alternative, pour gas into the access covers and light it. Simple is better. >2. To be a credible threat, there usually needs to be some form of >"demonstration." I have heard of no such thing. Absent such a public >demonstration, I find it hard to believe that beancounters would OK the >giving away of hundreds of millions of dollars for a threat which is >abstract and hard to understand for laymen. Short of a tac nuke there won't be one any time soon. The herf/emp/sci-fi weapon of choice is not feasible *at this time*. Remember the square law. If it isn't in the machine room, or damn close it won't work. One has to wonder why the assorted experts on this haven't built a working model and given a controlled demonstration. >3. This recent story smacks of hype. I'm not saying Schwartau is hyping his >conferences and his book, and his consulting business, just saying it >strikes me as a hyped threat without direct confirmation. While the consultants are hypeing all this I have REAL threats to deal with. > >--Tim May > P.S. I guess I'm going to have to get Eudora Pro so I can filter out the psychos 'R' us persona. ----- My opinions are my own, not those of my employer. Scott L. Morris smorri59(a)mailhost.icubed.net ** They can have my PGP key when they ** ** pry it from my cold dead keyboard! **

1 0