December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports) (fwd)
by gimonca＠skypoint.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 17:33:17 -0700 > From: jfricker(a)vertexgroup.com (John F. Fricker) > Subject: Re: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports) > Before this gets too out of hand, I'm going to mention that Chris Hibbert's Social Security Number FAQ (posted regularly to several newsgroups, including news.answers) is superb. Great job of separating legitimate paranoia from old wives' tales. Check for it in Usenet or your favorite search engine. Remember--privacy is your own responsibility. > At 12:59 PM 8/5/96 -0700, you wrote: > >Black Unicorn wrote: > >> > >[ ...random losers asking for your SSN... ] > >> > I was horrified and gave a random number. > >> > >> You should always be horrified, and always give a random number. > > > >Well, it would be nice if it was that easy. You (legally) need to give > >the correct one to anyone who has to make a report about you to the IRS, > >right? Such as your employer. But it's not always clear who else needs > >it. > > Originally the 1939 ('37?) Social Security Act explicitly stated that the > SSN could not be used for anything except SSA matters. Times apparently have > changed or perhaps it's just de facto legislation by complicity. > >

1 0

Re: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports) (fwd)
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:34 AM 8/6/96, Charles Gimon wrote: >Forwarded message: >> Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 17:33:17 -0700 >> From: jfricker(a)vertexgroup.com (John F. Fricker) >> Subject: Re: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports) >> > >Before this gets too out of hand, I'm going to mention that Chris >Hibbert's Social Security Number FAQ (posted regularly to several >newsgroups, including news.answers) is superb. Great job of >separating legitimate paranoia from old wives' tales. Check for it >in Usenet or your favorite search engine. I _know_, Chris Hibbert. Chris Hibbert is a _friend_ of mine. And this is not just old wives' tales. (w apologies to the Texas senator) --Tim Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Internal Passports
by jfricker＠vertexgroup.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:37 PM 8/5/96 -0700, you wrote: >At 1:01 AM 8/6/96, Duncan Frissell wrote: > >>The SS resists issuing new numbers in spite of widespread duplication and >>theft. Soon people will find themselves denied the right to work in this >>country unless the SS reverses this reluctance. If your SS# is stolen and >>used "too many times" in a future worker verification program, you're >>screwed. And there won't even be any welfare for you. >> >>Use Alta Vista to find the SS Number FAQ. There's more stuff. > >BTW, I attempted to comply with the law in a recent request posted to >ba.jobs.offered and scruz.general: I solicited workers for some brush >clearing on my place, but advised them to only apply if--appearing to be >Hispanic, Latin, Mexican, or otherwise unOfficial--they provided proof of >their legal ability to work for me. > Hmmm. Actually a long time ago I lost my job with Greenpeace out of refusal to sign an I-9 which was in '86 the Department of Justice's form to exhibit eligibility to work in the US. The form required that I present two pieces of photo identification or a driver's license to be authenticated by my employer. Maybe it's a CA state law that adds an additional skin tone criterium to for the filing of an I-9. --j

3 2

e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce Stiffing, Stealth Conferences, Pieces of the True Cross, Stiffies, Grenades and Magic Feathers Robert Hettinga 8/5/96 The principal waste of my time and attention, for the last six weeks or so, has been my negotiations (or lack thereof) with an (as yet ;-)) unnamed cypherpunk (and company) about whether they're going to stiff (or not) Peter Cassidy, me, and two (as yet) unnamed other people, on the final payment (a moderately signigicant chunk of change) for some consulting work we did for them earlier this year. We accuse them of shooting the messenger, because their idea won't work. More to the point, they couldn't make it work even if a market was there. Which it isn't. For them, anyway. They accuse us of gross incompetence. Interesting, because we punchlisted the entire contract (and voluminous addenda) before we shipped the report, have logs of them downloading *all* the source material and appendices, which we put on the server for them *long* before we started dunning them for a past due invoice. Not to mention Peter's written more *published* articles on topics like this (in places, like, say, the Economist) in the last *year* than most people *write* about *anything* in their entire lifetimes. And, of course, they *aren't* going with the business idea they hired us to check out in the first place. Go figure. May you live in interesting times, the chinese curse goes, and things have gotten interesting enough for me lately, thank you very much. I finally decided to unwrap myself emotionally this week from this particular "interesting time", "modulo" (to quote the aforementioned unnamed cypherpunk) real (or imagined :-)) "other" measures our legal help says we can take, should the inevitable stiffing (or not) occur, and concentrate on other stuff, "modulo" my time spent in further negotiations about being stiffed (or not). Clearly, I've been talking with legal types too much lately. Speaking of which, someday, I want to write another non-repudiation rant. Code and Reputation instead of Law and Force, and all that. But not now. We still might work this out. I hope. So, in the background of the aforementioned stiffing (or not), Vinnie Moscaritolo and I have been working on a project, something we've been talking about since January or so. We wanted to throw a small Macintosh crypto conference. Tim Dierks, of Consensus (and ex- Apple DTS, where Vinnie now works), buttonholed Vinnie in a coffee shop a while back, and proposed that we "stealth" the crypto conference idea into one about digital commerce. Seeing as how both Vinnie and I gibber about "Digital Commerce is Financial Cryptography" and all, it was fine by us. Along about June (July?) or so, Vinnie, ever the mil-spec, surreptitiously obtained the necessary sack of grenades and started paddling in towards the beach in a rubber raft, inviting us to mop-up festivities the next morning at dawn. Next thing we all knew, he had scheduled an Apple conference facility in Cupertino for 2 days, the 5th and 6th of September, a Thursday and Friday, and he may have even gotten Apple to spring for groceries, though Those with Proper Budgetary Authority might have gotten hit by a grenade or two, and they (the groceries) could be MIA. Fortunately, this activity has been entirely a ground-up exercise on the developers' part, so going dutch for lunch probably won't scare anyone off, one way or the other. We could probably hold it in a Chuck-E-Cheese and fill the room, people are that interested in internet commerce, and crypto, on the Mac. And those little gophers, of course... Meanwhile, also in my, heh, copious, free time, (did I tell you I'm also pitching sponsors for FC97? :-)), I've been working on a Mac-e$ rant with Vinnie. Collaberation is Hard. But, it looks like we're just about through. Real Soon Now. Kind of reminds me of the late-1960's button which said "Freedom Soon". In the process, said rant has turned into some kind of Magnum Opus, which makes me nervous, with contributions from a couple of other people besides Vinnie and myself. And, no, the one you're reading isn't it. :-). But it's coming. Soon. We hope. All of which brings up the *real* point of this rant. I mean, who *cares* if you can do crypto on the Mac or not? Why not stand back and watch the MacRubble bounce? My thinking about all of this started because I've been reading Vinnie's mail over his shoulder. (Yes. I'm shameless. When we're working on stuff together, we trade our mail about it. As they say in the Mac biz, "Sosumi".) That is, Vinnie's been out there scaring up speakers for this shindig that he "borrowed" the grenades for, and, well, in his tree-shaking (God help you if Vinnie shakes a tree you're in), he invites (if you could call what Vinnie sent an invitation :-)) Yet *Another* Nameless Cypherpunk (YANC) to come and give us what we hope would be a Patented Colorful Cypherpunk crypto-Peptalk, with Vinnie saying to him (YANC), in effect, we need him (YANC) for a proper Laying-On of Hands, him being a Piece of the True Crypto Cross, and all. Of course, Vinnie didn't stand a chance. If we *could* consider Vinnie for it, (which we can't, because he's on the selection committee) he might have earned the coveted 1996 Black Rhino "Mr. Kevlar" award (for courage in the face of imaginary gunfire) for his efforts. Actually, considering the, heh, caliber, of last year's winner, it's just as well. A, uh, bang-up job Mr. Weinstein of Netscape did last year. A hard one to top. And so, the search continues. Both for this year's "Mr. Kevlar", and, of course, for some other Piece of the True Cross. Or so we think. I'll get to that in a moment. What Vinnie got from Yet Another Nameless Cypherpunk, instead of "Yes, I'll come talk about crypto, the universe, and everything.", was Yet Another Rendition of the Apple Macintosh Massacree. In six-part ;-) harmony, of course. And, no, I won't sing it here in its 21-minute (not even 17 for radio) entirety. However, I should really note here that no matter how reasoned and cogent YANC's arguments were (and cogent they were, too: upon reading them, I was halfway to the dumpster with my trusty old PB180, tears in my eyes, before I came to my senses), in general, one of the *big* reasons that Vinnie got the $0$AD ($ame Old $ong And Dance) Re the Future of the Mac as a Viable Platform was probably more because the aforementioned YANC has eschewed speaking opportunities like this for years anyway, and Vinnie probably didn't ask him with the Proper Deference Necessary for a Cypherpunk of That Stature. In fact, I *know* Vinnie didn't, because I read his mail ;-). However, that, of course, wasn't why YANC gave Vinnie the aforementioned Massacree in particular. YANC Massacreed Vinnie because there's a lot of *very* disappointed Mac users out there, YANC being a prominent example thereof. Love the computer. Hate the company. Hell hath no fury like a Mac user (not to mention shareholder) scorned. Heck. I understand *that*. I did the *same* thing just over a year ago this week. "Platforms are Meat", and all that. For what it's worth, YANC, I *feel* your pain... :-). So, I repeat, why *not* stand back and let the MacRubble bounce? No, this is not a segue for me to stand up in my chair and start singing the Apple Company Song at the top of my lungs, complete with a QuickDraw-VR DOOM environment file of One Infinite Loop right up there on the screen for y'all to marvel at and play with using your very own Newtons, all while I sing 100 Company Song verses with a six-part MIDI chorus of my own voice (Yechhh!). Nope. Not me. Indeed, I really *do* say, "Why not?". That is, let's look at what happens if people *don't* develop crypto for the Mac. The truth is folks, not much. First of all, we all think it'll be Real Bad News for Apple Real Soon if real-live strong cryptography isn't shoved as far down as it's possible to make it go into the Mac's operating system, and right now, dammit. But, so *what*? The Mac's only, say, 5-7% of the computer market anyway, and the only possibly new, cool, stuff Apple's involved in, say, OpenDoc/Cyberdog, has 5%, maybe 10%, of *that*, so, who *cares*? Potential Mac crypto developers aren't effecting that many people at *all*. They would better spend their time doing CryptoJava++ or something, because there's *much* more market penetration *there*. Or, even better, developers should go do CAPI for Windows. I mean, that's where the *real* money is, right? So fergadaboudit, go write CAPI-code, I mean, Microsoft Gets The Internet Now, right? At least there'll be *active* developer support from the MotherShip, which is better than whatcha get from Apple ferchrissakes <He said, ducking a mysteriously appearing grenade fusilade from Vinnie's general direction. Can someone tell me *how* he pulls the pins and throws them all at once like that?>. But, as bad as all this is, lack of strong crypto is not nearly that much of a Mac-Killer, or more to the point, an Apple-Killer. (Love the Machine, Hate the Company, remember?) What's killing Apple is Apple's sclerotic management style, and, frankly, too much living high off the hog when margins were fat. Of course, you never know. Apple could just keep cranking out more and more machines, at smaller and smaller market shares, ad infinitum. Look at Porsche (remember Ferry Porsche and what a "disaster" the Volkswagen was?), or Rolls-Royce. Personally, I would bet that, *if* the Sclerotic Apple scenario's the case, then jumping with both feet into crypto, and by extension, financial cryptography and digital commerce, could add a few more years to Apple's lifetime, but all that money might just go straight to Apple's waistline *anyway* (at 360lbs soaking wet, *I* should talk...), and make the end, if it occurs, even that much more grotesque. ( Yeah, but what a way to go... Fat Power! ;-)) And, yet, Vinnie's probably going to fill the room on September 5th and 6th. Hell, he might even fill Chuck-E-Cheese to boot. How come? Because, even though the market share is small, there's just enough there to support the small developers who made the Mac a great machine in the first place. There's a guy in Germany named Ruf. I still think he's around. Don't ask me how to say his name. What he does is buy brand-new Porsche 911s, fresh from the factory, and "blueprints" them. That is, he takes them all apart, down to the nuts and bolts, and rebuilds them *exactly* to the original design specifications, remachining metal where necessary. You can imagine that, with Porsches, there isn't much tolerence for production errors to begin with, but blueprint them Mr. Ruf does. After he does that, he tweaks them with all the aftermarket go-fast stuff it's possible to cram onto the little 30-year-old 911 design, some of which he's invented himself. After he's done, they really do. Go fast, I mean. Usually, his tweaky stuff gets onto his cars, now sold under the "Ruf" brand name, *waay* before it gets adopted for production 911s. Mr. Ruf has been doing this for a long time. His cars go for twice or three times what a production 911 goes for, if you can imagine paying that much for a *very* fast Porsche 911. He has a very long waiting list. He sells, say, 10 cars a year. He makes out like a bandit. And he *loves* his job. There're a whole bunch of guys around Stuttgart who do this kind of stuff. And *they* love their jobs, too. That's why Vinnie's going to fill that room in Cupertino. (On the 5th and 6th of September, remember?) First of all, the developers who are left in the Mac market are there because they love it. The old guys, who, like me, can't get it up anymore, still hack Macs because they love them. The *new* developers hack Macs because they can't get leave it *alone* and don't know from market share anyway. They just love what they're doing. <heh, heh. He said "get it up", Bevis> <heh, heh. Yeah. And up there, Butthead, he said "Stiffy"> <No, Bevis. He said "Stiffing"> <Oh, yeah. heh, heh. *I* knew that...> Mssrs. B & B aside, who *knows* what the women Mac developers feel, young or old, because I'm not one. Or a woman, for that matter. :-). But I *bet* they're there because *they* love the Mac, too. And, of course, *all* of the Mac crypto developers also understand the importance of strong cryptography to digital commerce, so they want to make sure the Mac has it, if they have to do it themselves, just like Mr. Ruf and his friends blueprint those brand-new Porsche 911s. So, finally, I'm going to pull out a dusty old story from the Disney Canon: Dumbo. <Oh, No! Not the Dumbo story!!! Not Again!!!> Yes. The Dumbo story. Again. Remember that Dumbo had a magic feather, given to him by the crows, so that he could fly, which of course, he didn't really need, because he could fly already, he just didn't know it. Yes, boys and girls, Vinnie and the Mac crypto developers wanted, in fear of that 900-foot drop into a teeeny bucket of water, to have Yet Another Nameless Cypherpunk, A Piece of the True Crypto Cross, be a magic feather. So they could fly. Well, it looks like Vinnie, and all those room-filling Chuck-E-Cheese- Gopher-Banging Mac crypto developers will have to use their ears (or what's between them, anyway) to fly instead. Only this time, Dumbo's got a sack of grenades. A "munition" indeed... Cheers, Bob Hettinga <Heh, heh. Uh, anyone out there got a magic feather, uh, just in case?> <Shut *up*, Bevis!> <Owwwwww! My *'Nads*!> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMgbH1PgyLN8bw6ZVAQGkrQP9GyrOI9NWlookyXQdbfdjmC437fxNbQuQ g3CHsGMi4uhqO1UO6dF71XO7Osh57n//cVKF52Tv3b2UpOU3khtj15ASH7sOLaMs KwDQYvNta1I/nL1k9L8mAnNUfEdkttfhqgKjDwB5nKvwwJqbOemG60Bz6jKzCO5T cXOXOcEVyLE= =Fjkr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender." -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard, for Bart Simpson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

Re: Credit Cards over the internet
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:46 PM 8/5/96 -0800, Vinnie Moscaritolo wrote: >Just read a forwarded message from a merchant who indicated that: {credit card hastles deleted] I have been having some similar hastles setting up a site for credit card usage. It seems that the credit card companies are confused between protecting cards over the net and validating credit card information. (Two entirly different problems.) The broker we are going through seems to have gotten a few clues, but it is taking ALOT of explaining. (The site will be running Stronghold when we are able to process credit cards. We are currently running Apache 1.1.) Actually I am having a harder time getting through to the sysadmin at the host site why we need a commerce server than I am with the credit card company... It sounds like the scare stories on the news have taken their toll. --- Alan Olsen -- alano(a)teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction `finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."

1 0

Re: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
by Alan Horowitz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 6 Aug 1996 hallam(a)Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote: > Several years ago the IRA attempted to murder my cousin. I have been > warned not to continue my political activity but I do so regardless. > > I do not advocate the bringing of troops onto the streets but I see > it as the logicial response to the case put by the NRA. They are > playing a tune I have heard before. Claim to stand for freedom while > doing whatever is possible to encourage restriction of liberty. I have added you to my computerized list of individuals who advocate the violent overthrow of the US Constitution. I am going to go to the law library and see what my options are, with respect to filing a petition to have you deported out of the United States. This is not a rhetorical statement.

1 0

Re: Cookies on Microsoft Explorer?
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:48 PM 8/5/96 -0400, you wrote: > >Does anyone know what the equivalent technology is on Microsoft to >Netscape's cookie technology? Does Microsoft have support for cookies or >not? Internet exploder 3.0 supports cookies. >All of the discussion on the list to do with >cookies is related to Netscape. Does this mean that if one switches to >Microsoft Explorer one can avoid the problem? Many thanks. There is no escape. Resistance is futile. You will be server pushed, filed, tracked, counter digited, and numbered. You are not a free individual, you are an IP address assigned from a dynamic pool. Be seeing you! --- |"Computers are Voodoo -- You just have to know where to stick the pins."| |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann 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/ | alano(a)teleport.com |

1 0

Re: Censorship through proxy
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:23 PM 8/6/96, Joel McNamara wrote: >SingNet, one of Singapore's larger ISPs is telling all of their subscribers >they must move to using SingNet's proxy server by September 14, 1996 if they >want to have access to the Web. > >If you try to access one of the SBA's banned sites, you'll get a message >that says, "The site you requested is not accessible." > >Check out: > >http://www.singnet.com.sg/cache/sbareg.html Sing Sing (the country is now a prison, so...) is one of the states we should think about targetting for "special attention." Not in the sense of violence, but in the sense of offering help to freedom fighters, those who want to use stego, web proxies, etc. I wonder what would happen if "Computers, Freedom, and Privacy '98" was held in Sing Sing? --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

Re: More to be paranoid about...
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:50 PM 8/4/96 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: >At 10:14 PM 8/3/96 -0700, you wrote: >>Take a look at: >> http://www.spiritone.com/cgi-bin/plates >>Feed it an Oregon licence plate number and it will feed you back all sorts >>of info about the person/victim. > >It's interesting to know that Senator Hatfield's wife's birthday >is 1/17/29, and that the title to the car is held with a >security interest by the US SENATE EMPLOYEES FEDERAL CREDIT, >and that (at least) Social Security Numbers weren't listed >for the plates I checked. Also that, unlike many states, >the Governor doesn't have License Plate #1. It turns out that I am indirectly (two steps removed) responsible for this information being publicized on the 'net. I bought a copy of a CDROM that included this data (from a person who bought this data from the State of Oregon on magtape), and a friend of mine got a copy from me and made a copy for his friend, who decided to put it on the web as an accessible item. In any case, contrary to Alan Olsen's implication, I think that this kind of thing is a step forward for freedom. Government agencies already have access to this kind of information whenever they want; it's only the individuals who don't. Indeed (as my friend pointed out, correctly) this information is only considered valuable because not everyone has it. Making this information available puts government-types under the same "gun" as the rest of us already were. It is now being seen that driver's licenses, while ostensibly merely being a certification that we know how to drive, are most useful to government as a way to "legitimately" collect information on us, including our address and age. Since the function of credentialing is being implemented using encryption in ways to protect privacy, I suggest that we should push the government in that direction. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Looking for CJ's or State Dept. correspondence re "public domain"
by John Gilmore 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We got a brief last week from the State Department in the Bernstein case (in which we're trying to overturn the crypto export controls on First Amendment grounds). They state: "In fact, the State Department does not seek to control the various means by which information is placed in the public domain. Lowell Decl, para. 22. The Department does not review scientific information to determine whether it may be offered for sale at newsstand and bookstores, through subscriptions, second-class mail, or made available at libraries, or distributed at a conference or seminar in the United States. Id. "These clear examples are included in the ITAR to enable individuals to determine for themselves whether particular information is subject to regulation as technical data. Indeed, individuals rarely -- if ever -- seek a determinatino from the Department as to whether information is in the public domain, and the regularions are not applied to establish a prepublication review requirement for the general publication of scientific information in the United States." I am wondering if anyone else has ever sent in a CJ request that sought to determine whether the item in question was considered "public domain" by the State Department. Several CJ's of this type can be found near the bottom of my crypto export web page, at ftp://ftp.cygnus.com/pub/export/export.html. Has anyone else had interactions with the State Department about the "public domain" status of anything? Please let me know. -- John Gilmore gnu(a)toad.com -- gnu(a)eff.org RESTRICTED Notice. - This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Act (U.S.C. 50: 31, 32). The transmission of this document or the revelation of its contents in any manner to any unauthorized person is prohibited.

1 0