December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: WSJ on "IRS-bashing"
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:01 PM 5/29/96 -0700, Rich Graves, who lives in a parallel universe where political correctness is no threat to liberty, and the FBI and BATF no threat to law abiding people wrote: > any such law > would be invalidated by R.A.V. v. St. Paul. The only exceptions are > restrictions on "fighting words" that meet the tests in Chaplinsky v. New > Hampshire and "hostile working environment" discrimination, which I assume > is what you're talking about, in some elliptical way. When I was looking for a house in Oregon, I pointed at the map and asked the real estate lady "Why are houses in this area cheap". She did not give a straight answer I pressed her, and then she then started asking me questions that indicated she suspected I was an agent provocateur from the government trying to entrap her into revealing forbidden information. I eventually discovered that the area in question was occupied predominantly by people of a particular ethnic group, but she was forbidden to tell me this information. This explanation of the price disparity did not occur to me until she started feeling me out to see if I was a cop. But Rich Graves does not regard that sort of thing as any violation on freedom of speech. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

2 1

Re: [Off-Topic] "Curfews"
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 31 May 96 at 19:08, Timothy C. May wrote: > This is off-topic for the list, but I want to share it anyway. It touches > on issues of increasing police surveillance, and also touches on the issue Not really too off topic at all, considering the surveillance state and GAK relate very much to what we're doing here. An aside: at the University I used to attend, there were field trips to this small museum on the campus by elementary school children, who apparently regarded the motion detectors for the automatic doors as being cameras which they'd happily wave hello to. Images of Huxley's Brave New World intermingled with Warhol's 15-minutes-of-fame stewed up with Orwell here.... > of "age credentials" (in the sense that how else is a cop who stops a young > person for "curfew violation" to determine if a violation has occurred when > most 14- and 15-year-olds carry no driver's licenses?) Since when are we now to carry ID everywhere. And of course the local police will (as usual) be selective about who they stop to ask about directions. Also note that a reasonable exception will be for kids to go to work or school-related activities (institutional), but nothing non-institutional such as a party at a friend's house (drugs or no drugs), band practice, etc. etc. > The "curfew" meme is spreading quickly, with Clinton calling for a federal > curfew, at least in cities, and Dole trying to outdo him with even more > draconian curfew laws. Many communities already have them, including San > Jose, New Orleans, and other large cities. And my own community, Santa Cruz > County, ironically begins a curfew program on Saturday, tomorrow. Some communities here in Long Island have them. Others have fought them, and I think a couple of attempts were struck down by courts. Also a blurb in the local papers about police not wanting the curfew here, believing it to be a waste of their time or unnecessary... (I'll have to dig the article up; I only rememebr it wasn't reassuring.) [..] > (Some purists claim that children are exempted from normal constitutional > protections, such as the right of free association, the right to be free > from unwarranted searches and seizures, the right of free speech, etc. > Especially this comes up in debates about rights in public schools (speech, > locker searches, movements are controlled, etc.). But I think a public A problem indeed. Children grow up used to the surveillance society and don't mind it when they become adults. Imagine a whole generation coming of age being told they are "criminals". Things will be very "interesting" (in the Chinese fortune cookie sense) during the next 10-20 years... > As I said, should such curfews become widespread, children will of course > need forms of age identification, and this opens yet another door for > universal I.D. cards. And for "travel papers." ...or they'll stay at home and net surf. Beware the Four (or six?) Horsemen... Rob. --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

1 0

Arms Trafficker Page Made CNN!
by Vincent Cate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Offshore Information Services Arms Trafficker page made CNN Computer Connection just moments ago. :-) The page: http://online.offshore.com.ai/arms-trafficker/ is now famous. :-) -- Vince

1 0

Re: Fairness, Justice, and Cypherpunks (fwd)
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:49 PM 6/1/96, Jim Choate wrote: >Businesses (and government) have no rights under the Constitution and should >enjoy no rights under the Constitution. Rights are the sole purvue of real live >human beings (ie individuals) and not groups or paper individuals (stupidest >idea I have ever seen in the legal field). It is not reasonable to support This may come as a surprise to newspapers, which are corporations for the most part, and other publishing companies. Here we thought the First Amendment covered them. Apparently not. The government of the U.S. may freely tell "Time" magazine what to right, may tell "Wired" what official slant to put on a story, and what images "Playboy" may not publish. Oh, and the various religious institutions are clearly not covered, either, as they are groups. While _individuals_ are free to worship as they please, they'd better not form a church or synagogue, lest the government give them instructions on what to do. And the Fourth Amendment and other amendments don't cover small businesses, large corporations, etc., so the cops are perfectly free to knock the doors down, enter whenever they wish, force companies to quarter troops, seize property without due process,.... Is this what you're saying is the case, or is this what you want to be the case? --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."

1 0

Interesting forum on CSPAN
by Mike Fletcher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Was channel surfing last night while MST3K was in a commercial and wound up watching a panel on CSPAN from the World Economic Forum on "Technology & Security". The pannelists were Nicholas Negroponte from MIT's Media Lab, John Barlow from the EFF, a Mike Nelson from the White House (no relation to MST3K's :), and two other people whom I can't for the life of me remember their names (one was from a security consulting firm, and the other was a lawyer from something like the "Bristol Group"). It was 3am, so sue me. :) I missed the first few minutes, but there was a bunch of administration encryption policy bashing from all sides. Nelson kept saying that the administration wanted to support "good strong encryption" and they wanted to be able to say (paraphrasing) "We think this is good. Use this." (Trust us, we're from a TLA. :) He also kept saying that (again, paraphrasing) "most encryption out there is no good". Which begs the question then why are they wanting to ban its use and export. Negroponte kept bringing up the point that their policy was based on the (flawed, as we all believe) assumption that no one outside the US could create good crypto. Other topics that were touched on were intellectual property rights and e$. It was interesting that the lawyer person agreed to a good extent with a lot of the remarks Barlow made. Overall it was pretty interesting (and not just to watch the White House guy squirm as his premises were invalidated out from under him :). CSPAN usually replays stuff like this at odd times during the weekend so you might want to keep your eyes peeled. --- Fletch __`'/| fletch(a)ain.bls.com "Lisa, in this house we obey the \ o.O' ______ 404 713-0414(w) Laws of Thermodynamics!" H. Simpson =(___)= -| Ack. | 404 315-7264(h) PGP Print: 8D8736A8FC59B2E6 8E675B341E378E43 U ------

1 0

(Fwd) Developers Directory
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I got the following 'junk' email so I bit. They asked for updated descriptions of software that I've thrown on the net, along with shareware/freeware/GPL/comm. ratings, etc. Also violence ratings... I set all my source codes to "Gruesome" <insert cheesy emoticon here> Interesting to see what proggies of mine they listed and what they didn't. --Mutant Rob ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 15:21:29 -0600 From: Author Database Maintenance <authors(a)exodus.pht.com> Subject: Developers Directory Dear Author, We're building a public database called the "Developer's Directory" which contains information about authors of shareware/freeware programs. We'd like to include you and some information about your programs. We'd sure appreciate it if you'd visit our website and help us fill in some info. http://pacific.pht.com/ [ my info deleted ;] Since this system is still in the testing phase, we'd like to hear your comments and suggestions. Please send them to: authors(a)pht.com Thank you! Koji Ashida --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

1 0

Re: NRC Cryptography Report: The Text of the Recommendations
by Joseph M. Reagle Jr. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:55 AM 6/1/96 -0700, watson(a)tds.com wrote: >Anybody know who the NRC is and whether they have any influence with anyone? They have influence in that their reports have a fair amount of credibility with the extra boost of NAS's "scientific authority." If one wanted to distinguish what they do with what the OTA did for instance, one could say that while the OTA generally had a very smart/competent staff (and had a turbulent, poorly managed history and political troubles) the NRC has the strength in that it is non-governmental and has the shroud of "scientific neutrality" about it it could hope to pull from its parent organization, the NAS. The NAS and NRC have interesting histories, the NAS was an honorary society that had some fundings for it snuck into an appropriations bill back in 1863, but generally it was not supported by the government aside from specific "contract" studies which the Congress might ask for. The NRC (known as the NDRC) was created as an advisory council under NAS to help the government with munitions research and development during WWI. Since, they conduct hoc scientific/policy studies to investigate a topic on Congress's behalf. Their "Realizing the Information Future" that came out a couple of years ago was highly regarded. For history on these topics I recommend: Hunter Dupree, Sciene in the Federal Government: A History to 1940, Harper & Row, 1974. Bruce L. R. Smith, American Science Policy Since World War II, Brookings Institution, 1990. >From their WEB page: National Research Council NRC Logo The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of further knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the National Research Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The National Research Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is the chairman of the National Research Council. _______________________ Regards, Real generosity toward the future lies in giving all to the present. - Albert Camus Joseph Reagle http://farnsworth.mit.edu/~reagle/home.html reagle(a)mit.edu E0 D5 B2 05 B6 12 DA 65 BE 4D E3 C1 6A 66 25 4E

1 0

Saw this on CNN: Anonymous Stock tips over IRC as bad???
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There was a story on CNN about how anonymous people on IRC (and other commercial online chats) giving stock tips is a Bad Thing (tm). Actually had some guy saying that a law should ban anonymous discussions of stocks online. Yeesh. What ever happened to caveat emptor? (Like a recommendation on IRC is automatically more trustworthy than overhearing a conversation in a public bathroom?) --Mutant Rob. --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

1 0

Re: NRC Cryptography Report: The Text of the Recommendations
by medea＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dave Watson wrote: >Anybody know who the NRC is and whether they have any influence >with anyone? Dave, Maybe the following article might answer your question.... Medea +++++++++++++++Forwarded Article+++++++++++++++++++ WASHINGTON (Reuter) - Cryptography, the art and science of secret writing, has long been the province of soldiers, rulers and spies. But a study for Congress released Thursday said the U.S. government should promote widespread commercial use of such tricks to curb theft of computer data, wireless communications and other electronic information. A committee of the National Research Council, which gives science and technology advice under a congressional charter, said a broad use of cryptography would help the United States in many ways including making banking and telecommunications networks more secure and giving individuals greater privacy. In a report requested by Congress, the panel said no law should bar the manufacture, sale or use in the United States of any form of encryption -- mathematical formulas to scramble electronic data to thwart eavesdroppers. Largely siding with industry in a long tug-of-war with law enforcement officials, it also said export controls on encryption technologies should be "progressively relaxed but not eliminated." The Clinton administration and its predecessors have blocked the export of powerful cryptography, fearing it would hinder officials in thwarting terrorism and counter-espionage. Committee chair Kenneth Dam, a law professor at the University of Chicago, acknowledged that the spread of encryption technologies would make some law enforcement and spying tougher for the United States. "But the many benefits to society of widespread commercial and private use of cryptography outweigh the disadvantages," he said in a statement accompanying the report, entitled "Cryptography's Role in Securing the Information Society". The administration wants to set up government-approved repositories that keep copies of mathematical keys for decoding encrypted information so officials can lift the veil on secret communications if granted a court order. Industry executives and privacy advocates strongly oppose such "escrowed" encryption, arguing that reliable coding technology is critical for commerce and for privacy in the information age and on the Internet, the worldwide collection of computer networks. In its study, the committee said U.S. policy should take account of national security concerns but should be driven more by market forces than by law. "Since the committee believes that widespread deployment and use of cryptography are in the national interest, it believes that national cryptography policy should align itself with user needs and market forces to the maximum feasible extent," it said.

1 0

NSCP, PRZ Hit NRC Crypto Rec
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Netscape (WSJ) and PRZ (Globe) say the NRC crypto export recommendations don't go far enough. ---------- Wall Street Journal, May 31, 1996, p. B5. U.S. Strategy Should Promote Computer Codes Panel Says a Free Market Is Best Policy, Urges Easing of Export Curbs By John J. Fialka Washington -- The federal government should promote rather than discourage widespread commercial use of powerful codes that can protect electronic communications, a panel sponsored by the National Research Council recommended. The government also should relax its export controls on such codes, according to the 16-member panel, which included a mix of business, academic and government experts. The NRC is an affiliate of the National Academy of Sciences, a private, nonprofit organization that advises the government on scientific matters. Encryption coding software scrambles computer data by using mathematical formulas that can't be read if intercepted. Only personnel with the correct "keys" can access the data. More Study Needed The NRC study, which took 18 months to complete, calls for greater trust in freemarket demands for protection and less reliance on the U.S. National Security Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to set the nation's code policy. It said the two agencies' recent promotion of "escrowed encryption," in which the government would hold a mathematical key to unlock codes, requires further study because it poses liability risks and introduces weakness into information protection systems. Kenneth W. Dam, a University of Chicago law professor who headed the panel, said changes are needed to counter "an explosion of computer-based crime" and other forms of espionage that threaten U.S. companies' ability to protect proprietary information, especially overseas. By promoting the use of more-elaborate codes, U.S. law-enforcement agencies would be better prepared to ward off hacker or terrorist attacks on the nation's electric power grid, banking and telecommunications systems and its air-traffic control networks, he added. Potential Problems Mr Dam said the widespread use of encryption by private business is "inevitable" and the government must "recognize this changing reality." The report noted that the FBI has argued for years that its law-enforcement efforts would be hampered if drug cartels and other organized criminals began using codes that couldn't be deciphered. Courtordered wiretaps, a major tool used to break organized-crime cases, could become useless, the FBI has contended. Edward Schmults, general counsel for GTE Corp. and a former deputy attorney general during the Reagan administration, said he and other panel members believe the FBI and other law-enforcement agencies would be helped more than hurt if legitimate businesses were better protected. "It's a balancing issue," he said. Spokesmen for the FBI and NSA referred questions to the White House, where an official said the Clinton administration disagrees with the panel's recommendation to relax export controls and wants to continue to explore the use of escrows by private industry to keep the keys to powerful codes. "We have equities to protect that the people who wrote the NRC report do not," he said. The administration, he said, still wants to review the export of more powerful codes on a case-by-case basis. The use of private, third-party escrows, he said, might be one way to protect the secrecy of companies while allowing federal agents with court orders access to code keys. New Markets Would Open The panel called for the U.S. to permit the export of codes containing a "56-bit" Data Encryption Standard algorithm. The algorithm, or formula, was developed by the National Bureau of Standards in 1975 and is 65,000 times tougher to break than current "40-bit" codes that are permitted for unlicensed exports. The panel estimated its recommendations would open up new markets for information security products, possibly increasing software-industry revenue "many tens of billions of dollars." Until now, export controls tended to set industry standards for a level of protection because companies were reluctant to use different systems for domestic and international applications. Jeffrey Treuhaft, director of security at Internet software giant Netscape Communications Corp., welcomed the report, but said exports shouldn't be limited to 56-bit keys. That would still blunt the competitive edge of U.S. software vendors, given that code-cracking computer power is multiplying, he said. "The U.S. has a lead right now and these arcane policies from the Cold War are giving U.S. industry cement shoes to compete with foreign competitors," Mr. Treuhaft said. "We can't run as fast as they ean." - Jared Sandberg in New York contributed to this article. [End] ---------- The Boston Globe, May 31, 1996, p. 36 Panel criticizes US government's encryption stand 'Net, cell phone security at stake, National Research Center says By Hiawatha Bray The Clinton administration's efforts to limit the sale of software that generates coded messages, already unfire from Congress and civil libertarians, is now facing criticism from a committee of the National Academy Sciences. The National Research Center, which gives science and technology advice under a congressional charter, yesterday said the government should promote the commercial use of encryption software to help cut down on the theft of computer data and other electronic communications. Law enforcement officials and intelligence agencies are worried about the development of cheap encryption grams, for fear it could become impossible to intercept a mobster's telephone call or read an enemy spy's electronic mail messages. But the center's report says that encryption software is essential for businesses and individuals who need to transmit confidential data using the Internet or cellular telephones. "On balance, the advantages of more widespread use of cryptography outweigh the disadvantages," the report says. Encrypted messages can easily be read by someone with the correct code "key." Without this key, it can take centuries of computer analysis to decode a message. The longer the key, the tougher it is to break the code. Under current federal law, US companies cannot export encryption programs that use keys longer than 40 bits. Computer experts say that 40-bit encryption systems are easy to break, and provide little security. As a result, many software companies that sell their products worldwide do not build in sophisticated encryption features. Industry experts say that this costs them millions of dollars in sales, as customers in foreign countries buy encryption software made outside the United States. The report urges a change in the federal law, to allow sale of an encryption system called DES that uses 56-bit keys. "Except in some very specialized situations, it gives adequate security," said council chairman Kenneth Dam, a law professor at the University of Chicago. The report also urges the administration to abandon efforts to force businesses and individuals to use "key escrowed" encryption software. Under this plan, companies could use encryption, keys of any length, but only if the keys were held in escrow, and could be made available to the government. The council urges the federal government to adopt key escrow to prove that the system is trustworthy. The report argues that many businesses will voluntarily adopt such a plan to guard against the loss of its encryption keys. A prominent critic of encryption policy was less than thrilled by-the council report. "It doesn't go far enough," said Philip Zimmermann, inventor of the Pretty Good Privacy encryption program. Zimmermann scoffed at the idea that DES encryption is secure enough for use by businesses. "It can be broken in seconds by the NSA [National Security Agency]," Zimmermann said. "All major governments can break DES. In fact, any Fortune 500 company can afford a machine that can break DES." But even if DES were secure enough, Zimmermann said he opposes any restrictions on the export of encryption software. [End]

1 0