December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

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

RE: info assembly line, "flits" (long)
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Vladimir Z. Nuri "flits" would have an identity irrespective of companies. one could track them moving through different companies if necessary. (the "flits" might therefore also have security aspects associated with them.) the point is that the data must not be disconnected, it must be seen as continuous, and I think a flit-like concept is key to accomplishing this. ................................................................... Wouldn't this accounting of "flits" require that each of them be assigned a tag? Since this would encompass all the "flits" in cyberspace irrespective of who/where used them, whose "flits" would be counted first, beginning where? And once one "flit" was attached to a document which was maintained as a permanent structure somewhere in someone's database, that means it could not be used anywhere else, and how would this work for copies made of that original document? Once a "flit" was used as a copy and then detached and re-associated with some other document several times, would each new copy carry a record of where it had been previously, so that half of the amount of space of a document would be comprised of the historical record of where that "flit" had been? Sounds very costly. .. Blanc

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

Re: unsuscribe
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

naim(a)micronet.fr writes: > unsuscribe Hmm, the clueless list is no longer available at c2. Pity.

1 0

Re: L&J: Libertarians
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:35 PM 6/23/96 -0700, Franklin Wayne Poley wrote: >On Sun, 23 Jun 1996, Jean-Francois Avon wrote: >> 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... >> >I think we need public administrators (not politicians) who are hired by >the people for the people to do specific jobs, like looking after roads, >public buildings etc. and the public administrators who don't do their >jobs well are fired (not assassinated) like any other employee.... FWP. Privatization will occur. People will, indeed, be hired to do the tasks you describe. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: CDT Policy Post 2.25 - Senate Encrypti
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

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! Read carefully: >TELL CONGRESS WHY ENCRYPTION IS IMPORTANT TO YOU - ADD YOUR VOICE TO THE >CONGRESSIONAL RECORD > >Senator Burns, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and the other sponosors of the >Pro-CODE bill want to hear from the Net.community about why encryption is >important to privacy and security on the Internet. > >Please be sure to visit http://www.crypto.com/ and add your voice to the >debate over encryption policy on Capitol Hill. Responses will be tabulated >and the results, along with selected statements, will be included in the >Congressional Record by Senator Conrad Burns. The restults will also be >featured during the Security and Freedom through Encryption Forum (SAFE) on >July 1 (details on that event are attached below). > >To add your voice to the crypto debate in Congress, visit: > > http://www.crypto.com/submit/ > Right. Sure. And then they have a record of all the ppl interested in cryptoprivacy (keep reading) >ATTEND THE SAFE FORUM - JULY 1, 1996 STANFORD CALIFORNIA > >On July 1, 1996, in the heart of California's Silicon Valley at Stanford >University, members of Congress, prominent computer industry leaders and >privacy advocates will meet to discuss the need to reform U.S. encryption >policy. > >The event is FREE and open to the public, but space is limited and is going >fast. To find out more, and to reserve your free ticket, visit the SAFE >Forum Web Page at: > > http://www.crypto.com/safe/ > And sign up for a free trip to the roundup of people who want privacy. Coming soon to a police state near you. WHY THE FUCK DO THEY NEED TO KNOW YOUR NAME FOR THIS SHIT??? WHY IS NO ONE ASKING THIS??? Look carefully at who's sponsoring this. Who are they, and where does the money come from? Hint: three letters. Notice how they don't use PGP to sign the msg? Wonder why? What does PRZ say about this? Is there anyone we trust involved who can answer for this? [///// THIS LINE ADDED BY EZBBS-MAIL / DO NOT DELETE / MSGID-33f1a9 / END /////]

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

One more reason to bash encrypt policy.
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tonight, on the CBS show "60 minutes", we saw as the first portion the story of Carlos Salinas, the ex-president of Mexico, and his brother Raul, who managed to acquire $300 million despite the fact that his legitimate income never exceeded $190,000 in any year. Well, Raul's in jail now, and his probably-crooked brother is in self-imposed exile (escape?) in Ireland. Okay, you ask, is this relevant to Cypherpunks? Sure! The government's wanting to maintain an encryption policy to ensure that it is capable of reading encrypted traffic, right? Well, the Bush and Clinton administration signed NAFTA with Mexico when it was run by a crook. Where was the CIA? The NSA? Raul's money went through Citibank. Where's the FBI? Isn't that one of the reasons we have such agencies? Or is corruption among family members of the Presidend an old and established practice? (Cattle futures? Sounds like a lotta bull to me!) Why wasn't this stuff revealed by the US government? Did it consider this corruption a failure? Or a SUCCESS? If we can't trust the US government to keep us from dealing with sleazy government's like Mexico, and exposing them, then why are we signing long-term trade agreements with them? How much of Raul's money was due to NAFTA, for example? Anyway, I think here's yet another reason to reject any kind of "National Crypto Policy" that's claimed to allow the government to snoop: Clearly, they can't even be trusted to do the right thing with their information when they don't have to decrypt it. I sure as hell am not going to expect them to do any better in the future. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

The Reno Text.....
by Censored Girls Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I read the Reno text from John Young's site. Now not wanting to get into technical details, It sure seemed kinda chilling to me. The first "loaded word" she used was 'consensus'. And from there on in, it was all downhill. I would suggest that you read it. Love Always Carol Anne Member Internet Society - Certified BETSI Programmer - Webmistress *********************************************************************** Carol Anne Braddock (cab8) carolann(a)censored.org 206.42.112.96 My Homepage The Cyberdoc *********************************************************************** ------------------ PGP.ZIP Part [017/713] ------------------- M8H,),S$8G>&.WP(8IRA`-M['+`Q%&_C"">5-F%LX@<_Q$;*P'',Q$Z/AA[8M MF=O0H+*%(-S%&>S%+FS&<LS%3(Q&#W1"<]2%`H^;,]^1C$'HBN8PX$4SYAU^ MPGD<Q0ZLA0D+,`MCT!LA**4M[-JPAK9F?40!AJ,CW"'%DR#:'9?Q)3[%<DQ` ------------------------------------------------------------- for next chunk to export --> http://dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/export/

1 0

Re: CDT Policy Post 2.25 - Senate Encrypti
by shabbir＠vtw.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

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. -Shabbir J. Safdar * Online Representative * Voters Telecomm. Watch (VTW) http://www.vtw.org/ * Defending Your Rights In Cyberspace PS On a more serious note, I can't get testimony into the record for this hearing if you don't send it to me. Sooo...please either fill out the form at http://www.crypto.com/submit/ or if you find that format too constraining, just send it to me in email. I'll see what I can do to make sure PGP signatures are reproduced intact in the Congressional Record. Most everyone I know cannot simply jaunt off to D.C. for a day. Why not at least make your voice heard? 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! > >Read carefully: > >>TELL CONGRESS WHY ENCRYPTION IS IMPORTANT TO YOU - ADD YOUR VOICE TO THE >>CONGRESSIONAL RECORD >> >>Senator Burns, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and the other sponosors of the >>Pro-CODE bill want to hear from the Net.community about why encryption is >>important to privacy and security on the Internet. >> >>Please be sure to visit http://www.crypto.com/ and add your voice to the >>debate over encryption policy on Capitol Hill. Responses will be tabulated >>and the results, along with selected statements, will be included in the >>Congressional Record by Senator Conrad Burns. The restults will also be >>featured during the Security and Freedom through Encryption Forum (SAFE) on >>July 1 (details on that event are attached below). >> >>To add your voice to the crypto debate in Congress, visit: >> >> http://www.crypto.com/submit/ >> > >Right. Sure. And then they have a record of all the ppl interested in >cryptoprivacy (keep reading) > >>ATTEND THE SAFE FORUM - JULY 1, 1996 STANFORD CALIFORNIA >> >>On July 1, 1996, in the heart of California's Silicon Valley at Stanford >>University, members of Congress, prominent computer industry leaders and >>privacy advocates will meet to discuss the need to reform U.S. encryption >>policy. >> >>The event is FREE and open to the public, but space is limited and is going >>fast. To find out more, and to reserve your free ticket, visit the SAFE >>Forum Web Page at: >> >> http://www.crypto.com/safe/ >> > >And sign up for a free trip to the roundup of people who want privacy. Coming >soon to a police state near you. WHY THE FUCK DO THEY NEED TO KNOW YOUR >NAME FOR THIS SHIT??? WHY IS NO ONE ASKING THIS??? > >Look carefully at who's sponsoring this. Who are they, and where does >the money come from? Hint: three letters. > >Notice how they don't use PGP to sign the msg? Wonder why? What does PRZ >say about this? > >Is there anyone we trust involved who can answer for this? > >[///// THIS LINE ADDED BY EZBBS-MAIL / DO NOT DELETE / MSGID-33f1a9 / END //// >/] >

1 0