December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

FISA Mock
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

6-23-96. WaPo Mag cover story: "Secret Intrusions" Government surveillance, terrorism and the U.S. Constitution: The story of a Washington Courtroom no tourist can visit. Last year, a secret court in the Justice Department authorized a record 697 'national security' wiretaps on American soil, outside normal constitutional procedures. Is the world growing more dangerous -- or has Big Brother found a way around the Foruth amendment. A revealing report on burgeoning FISA wiretap intrusions, featuring FBI, NSA, CIA, Freeh, Kallstrom, Gorelick and little-known Mary Lawton who, before her death, guaranteed the incorruptibility of FISA: "In the modern age of intelligence gathering and federal law enforcement, no one was more important to the management of the most critical legal issues binding the two communities." And what has happened without her "gold standard of legality in the world of counterintelligence." A wideawake eye-opener to General Reno's sweetsong lullaby at the Commonwealth Club. Taken from a book due out next month: "Main Justice," by Jim McGee and Brian Duffy. ----- http://pwp.usa./pipeline.com/~jya/fismok.txt (54 kb) FIS_mok

1 0

Arsenal Ship Details
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A front-page detailed description of the Navy's latest work on the remote-controlled Arsenal ship: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1996-06/23/100L-062396-idx.html

1 0

Tales from the UK: Part III
by winn＠Infowar.Com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Attacks on the Financial Sector: Reprise I've spent the last two weeks in Europe, five countries, an avarage of 2.6 countries per day. Two kids and a wife along for a 'family vacation' which I have concluded is a modern day oxymoron. I'm thankfully back on the road to DC and Atlanta, sans kids, in a few days for a well earned rest. :-) (Love you honey, really do, but I do need a break . . . .) But what you care about is the attacks that the Sunday Times has been talking about for the last couple of weeks. I've received incredible volumes of email on this story asking for more details - mostly very supportive - so here goes I met with the Times in London's Trocadero (while the kids played Virtual Games upstairs in an incredible arcade). I also spoke with them at length while at the top of Le Tour Eiffel, at Euro-Disney (Space Mountain violently pivots you end over end in complete darkness: a definite PG-13 ride), on the Chunnel Train and at Legoland. First, the errors in their reporting that annoy me: 1. As a co-sponsor of InfoWarCon, I can assure you that the Brussels event had *nothing* to do with the alleged attacks as the June 2 article implies. 2. There were absolutely *no* secret meetings at InfoWarCon about the alleged attacks, 3. Laithe Gambit is not a secret study group about the distresses of the financial community. It is a NATO SHAPE security group and most of it is quite open. Despite the protestations of the Net community, masses of media folks and my own criticisms of their writings, the Sunday Times is sticking by their stories with dedicated vehemence. In some ways they seem confused and chagrined that their reporting is suspect. They really do believe what they are saying. I argued that they gave no names of their sources and they responded that it wasn't necessary since they used the word 'spokesman' in several places. We have to remain disagreed on that point. If it's a rumor, then say it's a rumor. If it's a well placed source who wants anonymity, say so. If it's a spokesman, name him in writing. As a result, the U.S. media has been calling Kroll Associates and the NSA and the British DTI and so on and getting rebuffed at every turn with firm denials of having ever had conversations of the nature claimed in the Times' articles. According to the media with whom I've spoken, this is a giant red flag. Curiously, though, according to the Times, when they call back the very sources used for the articles in the first place, they too are being met with cold shoulders and 180 degree attitude shifts. Curiouser and curiouser. The Times swears by the validity of the story, and is putting on additional pressure to those people who they claim are in-the-know and will come out with the real details which could be further corroberated. I will be receiving, hopefully this weekend, (not here yet) an updated article that is being published in the UK on this story. From what I've heard about it so far, it will include some comments from Russian Admiral Pirumov (ret) and others on the record. In the next couple days: Someone in Basel corroberates the tale. Peace Winn Winn Schwartau - Interpact, Inc. Information Warfare and InfoSec V: 813.393.6600 / F: 813.393.6361 Winn(a)InfoWar.Com

1 0

Sign me up
by Todd Murchison 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please post me on the mailing lists.

1 0

Re: Oil Change software snoops through hard drive
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:31 PM 6/23/96, Alan Lewine wrote: ><<I wrote: >>But this isn't MS's RegWiz. It's capabilities sound much greater, and >>it's not clear how to opt out, etc. >>Tim May replied: ><<Not buying it and not installing it would appear to be an easy way to >"opt out.">> >Maybe i'm confused, but oil change sounds like a mole that can burrow >unbidden into user's disks. I don't think user installation is required, >or else it will auto install the user code on installation of whatever >software has licensed it. If I understand your comments (the strange wrapping doesn't make it easy), you are confusing Oil Change with a virus or worm. It's a commercial product, offering a (putative) service to those who buy it. One "opts out" by not buying and installing it. There may be privacy implications, but then there are privacy implications in all sorts of other areas. Such as filling out a loan request, applying for a credit card, visiting a doctor, etc. I'm of course not saying that these privacy implications are not worth discussing, and do not vary from example to example in seriousness, only that Oil Change hardly appears to be a significant threat. To repeat, no one is forced to buy and install Oil Change, and it certainly doesn't copy itself onto the machines of unsuspecting users. --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: L&J: Libertarians
by Jean-Francois Avon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 22 Jun 96 at 18:56, jim bell wrote: > In practice, I think we'll discover we don't NEED politicians at > all! I was having a discussion with a retired physics dept director the other day. He never heard of AP and we did not discuss it. But we discussed the Net a lot. And he made a very fundamental remark. He said someting along thoses lines (not an exact quote but one that sums it up in essence) : "It is amazing how the Net is. It is a total anarchy and yet, it seems to work *perfectly* well without any central decision making authority. Actually, no central authority could ever make it happens better than this actual anarchy led by self-interest on the part of each individuals each owning a tiny piece of the network." It make me think about how essential the govt is, and especially in the field of economy... > Sure, there are some people who scoff, > but I think they're just displaying sour grapes. They're so used to > the current system, they want to "fix" it with half-measures rather > than really eliminating the problems. Some peoples have a vested interest in maintaining the system as it is. For example, take here in Canada, progressive tax rates / a flat income tax. If a flat income tax rate would be put in place, just think of how many chartered accountant would be jobless overnight... > That's exactly the kind of discussion I want to have, on the 'net. > It turns > out, however, that many if not most of the people who "get" this > idea, are satisfied that it'll work, and don't seem to see the need > for discussion of the details. Anybody who discuss it openly on the net and plan to implement it will get killed by governments (pick your favorite one). I find it very unlikely that all e-mail on the topic is not monitored, just as anything having my name, or Jim Bell's or anybody else that ever discussed the topic. Even peoples who apparently seemed to denigrate AP, like Unicorn, will be suspected since they'll reason that he might have a secret wish to implement it while opposing it publicly. Just like mole get to the highest rank in the organization they want to undermine. That is the *nature* of any security oriented organization. And communicating with each other with PGP without remailers would probably put us instantly on a hit list. To quote a famous french comic strip " when in doubt, it's better to hang..." . The best protection is either a long chain of remailer or to post *everything* publicly on C'Punks *AND* several newsgroups at the same time. Then, again, they might make "examples", helped by a scare publicity campaign by the mass medias. Wake up to it guys, if ever such a system gets implemented, it will be a major war and govt will use every allies they might have (mainly, the conventional mass-medias) to eradicate it. The war will be fought underground but it will be savage, as all wars are. I don't think that you will ever succeed to "educate" a sufficient part of the public to make things work as you figured. The net population represent a minuscule fraction of the population and most net surfers don't even care. C'Punks has a total cumulative subscription of, say, 10000 (out of the blue number), which represent (at 40E6 internet users) around 2.5 percent of 1 percent of all net users. Many individuals consider that it is better to get taxed to 50% and keep 100% of their life... JFA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2i Comment: Verify/Decrypt with PGP v2.6 or later. iQEVAgUBMc0L5ciycyXFit0NAQHFjggAiWQUV0YudQPHq1Q7Y8zkv64PicePiyoX MEBOfseSx6SEiSoB0N/JY3FBZYOEa6QYfYiNr/FBSWjyPVEuxQcJc3SBQ354lFOQ ZqiQnR6TrjzxZo0Z+NaVYI2Ys+G5ykOGW45NElF5TRyk0YjK1HI/dlS7UpD9Li1E +xMtJo8x+/joWYEc45ABIHg0DUAJWe4MG7AEcmde4veOcyC/yMi1gy+2QLMARyZ/ VbTfhJ+V1D5zwBTNVQCtcIOJMeXmMDeBy6gkBRlaYP5r6az+uQa6AKfo78Y3f1eQ P6XZWuGeWLPvdIeq+FTwWvULdfPkZ4xJtaCIJC03gOgBmXsuWNmy8Q== =Yovo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: Zimmerman/Viacrypt
by Rich Burroughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:25 AM 6/15/96 PDT, Edgar Swank <edgar(a)Garg.Campbell.CA.US> wrote: [snip] >Seems to me an employer has a perfect right to monitor his employee's >work product, for which he's being paid a salary and using the >employer's equipment (like business PGP). If the employee doesn't >like it, he's free to seek employment elsewhere (or start his own >business). Or he's free to encrypt all his personal Email at home >with a personal copy of ViaCrypt or a copy of free PGP. Sometimes these workplace privacy issues are really hard for me to come to a clear decision on. I don't know how many of you have been in a workplace where someone quit by just walking out in the middle of the day, but I have. Things would have been really messy had the person left encrypted data lying around that the company had no key for. It probably wouldn't have been hard to get a judge to make the employee give up the key (after getting the judge to understand what the hell encryption is...), but the time lost might have had a real impact on project deadlines. I'm not sure what the answer is, but I have a feeling that as an employer I probably wouldn't want to provide encryption that I had no key for. What if an employee died suddenly, and I needed access to their records/email? Perhaps a somewhat enlightened employer could opt to split the escrowed key up and pass it along to several people in the office, to help prevent management from just spying on everyone. Phil's feelings about PGP are a different matter, though. If he feels it shouldn't be used that way, and that Viacrypt has violated their agreement, then he should pursue it, IMHO. It doesn't necessarily follow that he's just using it as an excuse to wrest the commercial version from them. He may feel they really have gone beyond what was agreed upon. I suppose it will be up to the courts to decide whether the escrow system is a "back door" or not. Rich ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb(a)teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb See my Blue Ribbon Page at http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/blueribbon U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state New EF zine "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause

1 0

Auto-mail filters and penet-remiler loophole?
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hm. Seems someone sent a message to my frienly-mailer filter using penet remailer. So of course that person will get an anonymized reply, thus being able to know what my anon-id there is. Fortunetly I don't use penet or rely on it for any form of security. That's one situation where it would be nice to specify in a line somewhere *not* to anonymize mail sent through there (a command in header saying X-Do-Not-Anonymize maybe?) Rob.

4 3

unsuscribe
by Brian Andrew 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

unsuscribe

2 1

Paranoids Day Out
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:57 AM 6/24/96, Shabbir J. Safdar wrote: >Damn, we've been found out. > >I don't suppose anyone will notice the fact that although I've >helped with the preparation for the SAFE day, I won't actually be >attending the event. > >Clearly, I don't want to get caught. I also signed up for this "SAFE" event, using my True Name (tm, and TM). I feel that I can do more good for the Cause by working from within the Reeducation Camps than I can by wandering through the No Thought Zones. But, then, They already had my name.... >anonymous-remailer(a)shell.portal.com writes: >>WHY IS NO ONE TALKING ABOUT THIS VIOLATION OF OUR RIGHTS? EVER HERE THAT >>IN THE US VOTES ARE supposed to be *****SECRET*****??? NO MORE! >> >>Why does the vtw cdt etc want to hand over your name to the us gov? Notice >>how there's two events one on the east cost and the other on the west coast. >>Why is that? So they can get more names! ... >>Look carefully at who's sponsoring this. Who are they, and where does >>the money come from? Hint: three letters. Yes, the "NSA" is indeed the TLA operating VTW. This is well-known to all true paranoids. --Winston Smith

1 0