December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

FYI: Who owns Sen. Kerrey (LONG)
by geeman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Actually the profile doesn't look too evil. One wonders who's pushing him on this, since he doesn't come across asa crypto expert ;) Below is from the Project Vote Smart pages... Senator J. Robert 'Bob' Kerrey Performance Evaluations by Special Interest Groups How to Interpret These Evaluations These evaluations are in percentage form. They represent the percentage of time that the incumbent voted with that organization's preferred positions on a number of votes that they identified as key in their issue area. Remember, by definition, these r atings by special interest groups are biased. They do not represent a non-partisan stance. In addition, some groups select votes that tend to favor members of one political party over another, rather than selecting votes based solely on issue concerns. However, they can be invaluable in showing where an incumbent has stood on a series of votes over a year's time, especially when ratings by groups on all sides of an issue are compared. Descriptions of the organizations offering p erformance evaluations are available. Project Vote Smart collects performance evaluations from ALL special interest groups who provide them. If there is a group you that feel is missing from our database, either they do not compile performance evaluations, they would not allow Project Vote Smart to distribute them, or we are unaware of the fact that the group does ratings. Please let us know if you think we are missing a group's ratings and we will contact the group immediately. A final note: The clearest way to read these percentages is, "In [year], the X YZ organization gave Senator/Representative X an 80% rating. That means that on votes they identified as key in their issue area during that time period, he/she voted with the group's preferred position 80% of the time." The exception to this is the evaluation done by the National Taxpayers Union, which represents how often a representative or senator voted to decrease, or not increase, spending. Performance Evaluations by Special Interest Groups Issue Area Year Percentage Evaluating Organization ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Abortion/FamPln 1991 20 Justlife Education Fund (Abortion) Abortion/FamPln 1993-1996 100 Planned Parenthood Abortion/FamPln 1996 0 National Right to Life Committee Abortion/FamPln 1996 100 National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action Business 1995-1996 41 National Federation of Independent Business Business 1996 10 Business-Industry Political Action Committee Business 1996 23 U.S. Chamber of Commerce Children 1995 89 Children's Defense Fund Chr.Fam. Issues 1991-1992 9 Christian Voice Chr.Fam. Issues 1995-1996 8 Christian Coalition Civil Rts/Lib 1991-1992 55 National Gay & Lesbian Task Force Civil Rts/Lib 1993-1994 80 Human Rights Campaign Fund Civil Rts/Lib 1995-1996 67 National Association for the Advancement of C Civil Rts/Lib 1995-1996 90 Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Civil Rts/Lib 1996 47 American Civil Liberties Union Conservative 1995-1996 21 Conservative Index Conservative 1996 5 American Conservative Union Consumers 1996 79 Consumer Federation of America Contractors 1995 17 Associated Builders & Contractors Crime 1995-1996 60 Citizens United for Rehabilition of Errants Defense/Foreign 1991 60 JustLife Education Fund (Arms Reduction) Defense/Foreign 1991 62 Professional's Coalition for Nuclear Arms Con Defense/Foreign 1993-1994 30 American Security Council Defense/Foreign 1995 60 Campaign for U.N. Reform Defense/Foreign 1995 92 Peace Action Defense/Foreign 1996 82 Council for a Livable World Economic Policy 1991 80 JustLife Education Fund (Economic Policy) Economic Policy 1994 20 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Totals) Economic Policy 1995 20 The Libertarian Party - Economic Freedom Economic Policy 1996 23 The Republican Liberty Caucus Education 1993-1994 73 American Federation of Teachers Education 1995 83 National Education Association Education 1995-1996 91 U.S. Student Association Env./consumer 1995-1996 67 U.S. Public Interest Research Group Environment 1994 11 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Environment Environment 1995-1996 74 League of Conservation Voters Environment 1995-1996 100 Fund For Animals Farm 1991-1992 50 National Farmers Organization Farm 1993 56 National Farmers Union Farm 1993-1994 67 American Farm Bureau Federation Farm 1994 100 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Agriculture Gun Issues 1993-1994 0 National Rifle Association Gun Issues 1993-1994 100 Handgun Control, Inc Health 1995-1996 89 AIDS Action Council Health 1996 93 American Public Health Association Immigration 1996 30 American Immigration Control Immigration 1996 50 Federation for American Immigration Reform-Se Labor 1989 100 Machinists Non-Partisan Political League Labor 1989-1990 100 National Federation of Federal Employees Labor 1991 67 American Postal Workers Union Labor 1994 90 United Food & Commercial Workers Labor 1995 30 Transportation Communications Union Labor 1995 62 Communications Workers of America Labor 1995 62 The Teamsters Labor 1995 75 AFL-CIO Labor 1995 85 United Auto Workers Labor 1996 75 American Federation of Government Employees Labor 1996 100 American Federation of State, County & Munici Liberal 1995-1996 81 Public Citizen's Congress Watch Liberal 1995-1996 85 National Committee for an Effective Congress Liberal 1996 85 Americans for Democratic Action Libertarian 1995 35 The Libertarian Party - Combined Score Populist 1995 30 Liberty Lobby Poverty 1996 100 Bread for the World Property 1995-1996 20 League of Private Property Voters Regulation 1994 29 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Deregulatio Seniors 1995 80 National Council of Senior Citizens Seniors 1995-1996 30 The 60 Plus Association Seniors 1995-1996 80 National Association of Retired Federal Emplo Seniors 1995-1996 86 National Committee to Preserve Social Securit Social Policy 1991 40 National Association of Social Workers Social Policy 1995 50 The Libertarian Party - Personal Freedom Social Policy 1995 87 Network Social Policy 1995-1996 77 Friends Comm. on Nat'l Leg. (Senate) Social Policy 1996 44 The Republican Liberty Caucus Social Policy 1996 100 Zero Population Growth Taxes/Spending 1991-1992 17 National Tax-Limitation Committee Taxes/Spending 1994 0 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Taxes) Taxes/Spending 1994 14 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Budget) Taxes/Spending 1994 15 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Spending) Taxes/Spending 1995 28 Citizens Against Government Waste Taxes/Spending 1995 35 National Taxpayers Union Taxes/Spending 1995 60 Concord Coalition Trade 1994 50 Competitive Enterprise Institute (Trade) Veterans 1989-1990 50 Vietnam Veterans of America Women 1989-1990 95 National Women's Political Caucus Women 1993 100 The Woman Activist (Senate) Women 1995-1996 25 Concerned Women for America Women 1995-1996 86 American Association of University Women Senator Kerrey | Nebraska Directory | 105th Congress Directory Project Vote Smart 129 NW 4th Street, Suite 204, Corvallis, OR 97330 Phone 541-754-2746 Fax 541-754-2747 Comments? Questions? E-mail us at comments(a)vote-smart.org Senator Bob Kerrey Sources of Campaign Funding The information in this section was provided by the Center for Responsive Politics and the National Library on Money and Politics. You can read a summary of the laws and procedures governing campaign financing which comes from their book Open Secrets. Another good reference is Supporting Federal Candidates -- A guide for citizens from the Federal Election Commission, July 1994. On-line at PoliticsUSA. FULL CYCLE DATA - 01/01/1989 - 12/31/1994 Net Receipts: ..................................... $5,006,236 Net PAC Contributions: ............................ $1,556,633 Net Individual Contributions: ..................... $3,290,334 The figures below represent Political Action Committee (PAC) contributions by industry and sector. Agriculture: ...................................... $268,605 Agricultural Services & Products........ $84,180 Crop Production & Basic Processing...... $63,425 Food Processing & Sales................. $43,000 Dairy................................... $27,000 Tobacco................................. $22,500 Livestock............................... $17,500 Poultry & Eggs.......................... $11,000 Commodity Brokers & Dealers............. $0 Forestry & Forest Products.............. $0 Miscellaneous Agriculture............... $0 Construction & Public Works: ...................... $20,850 Home Builders........................... $16,100 Construction Services................... $3,500 Building Materials & Equipment.......... $1,250 General Contractors..................... $0 Special Trade Contractors............... $0 Communication & Electronics: ...................... $113,600 Telephone Utilities..................... $65,300 Cable TV................................ $20,000 TV & Movie Production/Distribution...... $14,000 Telecom Services & Equipment............ $6,300 Printing & Publishing................... $4,000 Recorded Music Production............... $2,000 Computer Equipment & Services........... $2,000 Electronics Mfg & Services.............. $0 Misc. Communications & Electronics...... $0 Defense: .......................................... $87,720 Defense Aerospace....................... $49,500 Defense Electronics..................... $28,720 Miscellaneous Defense................... $9,500 Energy & Natural Resources: ....................... $62,005 Electric Utilities...................... $25,755 Oil & Gas............................... $23,250 Waste Management........................ $8,500 Miscellaneous Energy.................... $3,500 Mining.................................. $1,000 Environmental Services & Equipment...... $0 Nuclear Energy.......................... $0 Fisheries & Wildlife.................... $0 Commercial Fishing...................... $0 Hunting................................. $0 Finance, Insurance & Real Estate: ................. $250,060 Insurance............................... $87,050 Securities & Investment................. $65,925 Commerical Banks........................ $57,475 Accountants............................. $20,150 Real Estate............................. $8,710 Miscellaneous Finance................... $7,000 Savings & Loans......................... $2,750 Credit Unions........................... $1,000 Finance & Credit Companies.............. $0 Miscellaneous Business: ........................... $62,905 Retail Sales............................ $20,931 Beer, Wine & Liquor..................... $12,474 Food & Beverage......................... $8,500 Business Services....................... $8,000 Casinos & Gambling...................... $3,500 Miscellaneous Services.................. $2,000 Miscellaneous Business.................. $2,000 Textiles................................ $2,000 Chemical & Related Manufacturing........ $1,000 Misc Manufacturing & Distributing....... $1,000 Lodging & Tourism....................... $1,000 Business Associates..................... $500 Recreation & Live Entertainment......... $0 Steel Production........................ $0 Health: ........................................... $171,049 Health Professionals.................... $79,500 Hospitals & Nursing Homes............... $52,000 Pharmaceuticals & Health Products....... $33,799 Health Services......................... $5,750 Miscellaneous Health.................... $0 Lawyers & Lobbyists: .............................. $63,476 Lawyers & Lobbyists..................... $63,476 Transportation: ................................... $76,850 Air Transport........................... $33,500 Railroads............................... $26,850 Automotive.............................. $7,000 Sea Transport........................... $6,500 Trucking................................ $3,000 Miscellaneous Transport................. $0 Labor Union: ...................................... $250,050 Building Trades & Industrial Unions..... $111,500 Transportation Unions................... $68,000 Public Sector Unions.................... $52,050 Miscellaneous Unions.................... $18,500 Ideological/Single-Issue: ......................... $120,963 Pro-Israel.............................. $73,000 Democrat/Liberal........................ $15,500 Human Rights............................ $10,500 Abortion Policy......................... $10,000 Leadership PACs......................... $4,653 Miscellaneous Issues.................... $3,500 Foreign & Defense Policy................ $2,810 Gun Rights/Gun Control.................. $1,000 Republican/Conservative................. $0 Womens Issues........................... $0 Other: ............................................ $2,000 Other................................... $1,000 Education............................... $1,000 Civil Servants & Public Officials....... $0 Non-Profit Institutions................. $0 Retired................................. $0 Unknown: .......................................... $0 Unknown................................. $0 Homemakers/Non-income earners........... $0 No Employer Listed or Found............. $0 Generic Occupation/Category Unknown..... $0 Employer Listed/Category Unknown........ $0 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PARTIAL CYCLE DATA - 01/01/1995 - 06/30/1995 Net Receipts: ..................................... $116,890 Net PAC Contributions: ............................ $43,500 Net Individual Contributions: ..................... $21,175 Net Candidate Contributions: ...................... $0 Net Other Contributions: .......................... $52,215 Net Spent: ........................................ $125,359 Ending Cash: ...................................... $7,834 Debts Owed: ....................................... $0 This information is brought to you by Project Vote Smart Senator Bob Kerrey | Nebraska Directory | 104th Congress Directory | Vote Smart Web

2 1

Crypto foes have day in court
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11674,00.html Crypto foes have day in court By Alex Lash June 18, 1997, 5:45 p.m. PT SAN FRANCISCO--Both sides of a landmark court battle over the use of encryption made their final arguments here today before a federal judge, who now will decide if the government's restrictions on encryption exports go too far. The case focuses on Daniel Bernstein, a University of Illinois math professor who sued the government two years ago as a graduate student when he was not allowed to publish his Snuffle encryption program on the Internet without an export license. But the case extends to the all Internet users, who are coming to rely more on privacy and security for electronic correspondence and transactions. Strong encryption is considered necessary to provide that security. On the other hand, law enforcement officials are worried that the unchecked spread of strong encryption will make communications by criminals impossible to track and decode. U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn Patel has already proven sympathetic to Bernstein's case. In April 1996, she ruled that software code is free speech and therefore protected under the First Amendment. From that, she said in December that the government's regulations created unconstitutional "prior restraint" of free expression, meaning the creation of an atmosphere that made the free exchange of protected ideas difficult, if not impossible. Patel can now take as much time as she wants to hand down her decision. She must decide if the government regulations violate constitutional or statutory standards. The judge must also decide what type of relief to grant Bernstein and if that relief--in the form of unimpeded export of encryption software--should extend to everyone. Since her December ruling, the federal export rules have been switched from the auspices of the State Department to the Commerce Department's Bureau of Export Administration. Patel called the lead attorneys for Bernstein and for the government together today to determine if she should reconsider her December ruling in light of the shift. "We think [the issues] are fundamentally the same," Cindy Cohn, lead attorney for Professor Bernstein, told the judge. "All the things you found wrong before are still up in the air." Government attorney Anthony Coppolino essentially agreed, although he claimed the new rules, which were mandated by a presidential executive order, cleared up some of the confusion caused by the State Department rules. "The president's order of transfer made clearer that we want to control the encryption function, not the ideas," he said. Despite Judge Patel's differing perspective, Coppolino maintained that the government's rules, which require publishers of strong encryption software to apply for a government license, were aimed at controlling the unimpeded spread of "easy-to-access, easy-to-use" encryption but not the spread of intellectual expression. Coppolino nonetheless seemed resigned to yet another "adversarial" decision, as he called Patel's previous rulings, and argued that if the judge rules in favor of Bernstein--which seems likely given her remarks today--her interpretation should be as narrow as possible. Coppolino said that a national injunction on the regulations would be overkill. "You can clearly fashion relief [for Bernstein] without throwing it open on a nationwide basis," Coppolino contended. Cohn, who has argued the case pro bono with the help of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, countered that Bernstein's job requires not just his own free expression but free communication in general. "We think that everyone else should be protected," she argued to Patel. "There's no way that Bernstein can speak freely if no one else can speak back." The encryption battle is also being fought in Congress, where several bills aim to strike down the same federal export rules that Bernstein is challenging, while one bill, sponsored by Senators John McCain (R-Arizona) and Bob Kerrey (D-Nebraska), seeks to impose domestic controls for the first time. Introduced yesterday in the Senate, McCain-Kerrey seeks to mandate the use of key recovery--a system that allows law enforcement officials to intercept and decode encrypted electronic communications--for all government products and government-funded networks. It also aims to tie the domestic use of digital certificates--a type of electronic ID card that verifies the legitimacy of an electronic transmission--to key recovery. Under the plan, users will not be able to obtain a digital certificate from a government-licensed "certificate authority" unless they make their private encryption keys available to law enforcement when necessary.

1 0

Party on IRC
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Much happened this week. If you feel like a conversation, join me on #cypherpunks on EFnet. --Lucky, who was going to go to a party, but who's clutch gave up. --Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56. http://rc5.distributed.net/

8 8

New crypto bill clears committee
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,11693,00.html The fix is in... New crypto bill clears committee By Alex Lash June 19, 1997, 11 a.m. PT just in Just two days after it was introduced, a bill that seeks to impose restrictions on the domestic use of encryption sailed without hearings through the Senate Commerce Committee. The bill, sponsored by Commerce Committee chairman John McCain (R-Arizona) and Bob Kerrey (D-Nebraska), originally was a proposal floated by the White House as an alternative to other bills that aim to lift most restrictions on the use and export of encryption software. The Commerce Committee passed the bill on a voice vote. Unless it is diverted to another committee, the bill will be scheduled for a full Senate vote. Privacy advocates viewed the success of the McCain-Kerrey bill, known formally as the Secure Public Networks Act of 1997, with great concern. "This is majorly bad news," David Sobel, legal counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said today. "It basically mandates use of key recovery encryption in any federally supported network, including universities. It also muddies the waters for the prospects of liberalizing encryption policy, and it's directly at odds with the SAFE bill that is moving through the House." Both the SAFE bill in the House and the Pro-Code bill in the Senate seek to ban federally mandated key recovery. Pro-Code had early success after its reintroduction this year but has stalled in the same committee that just passed the McCain-Kerrey bill. Like the White House proposal, the McCain-Kerrey bill seeks to impose for the first time mandatory key recovery within the United States on top of the White House's crypto export regulations. Despite implementing tight domestic controls on encryption, the bill leaves open a window for looser export controls. It gives the Commerce Department secretary leeway to approve the export of strong encryption software without key recovery if similar products already or soon will be available. The bill slams the door, however, on the possibility of challenging a crypto export denial: "The secretary's decision on the grounds for the grant or denial of licenses shall not be subject to judicial review." The struggle over encryption policy has centered on law enforcement access to private information transmitted electronically or stored on computers. The government argues that criminals will use unregulated strong encryption to keep their plans secret. The use of key recovery requires users of encryption software, such as secure email programs, to store their keys in a place where the government can quickly access them without the users' knowledge. The McCain-Kerrey bill would make key recovery mandatory for all products purchased by the government and for any product used on a network that is even partially funded by the federal government. The bill also states that law enforcement would require only a subpoena to access private keys, whereas current federal regulations require a court order. The new bill would also link digital certificates to key recovery and grant government the authority to license digital certificates. These certificates, which establish and verify the identity of the sender of an encrypted communication, are considered a critical element of electronic commerce. However, if McCain-Kerrey becomes law, users won't be able to obtain a government-approved certificate without storing their keys with a third party. Current regulations administered by the Commerce Department allow software makers to export encryption up to 56 bits in strength without a license or key recovery mechanisms. That limit seems less secure, however, after yesterday's announcement that thousands of people linked their computers over the Internet to crack a 56-bit DES code from RSA Data Security. In a report released last year, a group of leading cryptographers recommended a minimum key length of 90 bits to ensure secure communications. Senior writer Janet Kornblum and reporter Courtney Macavinta contributed to this report.

1 0

e$: Fickle Fingers of Fate...
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Sender: e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 12:47:32 -0400 From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> To: Multiple recipients of <e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com> Subject: e$: Fickle Fingers of Fate... At 11:00 pm -0400 on 6/18/97, Tim May wrote in cypherpunks: > Not that it matters. Face it, our words in print vanish without a trace, > and are remembered by nobody except ourselves. Yeah, but every once in a while the ideas stick in the head of someone else, which is good enough for me, and, ironically, where my aforementioned "aspirations to lethargy" regarding getting "credit" for the quote comes from. Sometimes having people think about something is much more important than them knowing who gave them the idea. On the other hand, I get e-mail from people all the time for stuff I've written or said (with attribution) in the press and on the net, and most of those people are excited about all this new stuff they haven't heard of before. I get quite a great kick out of that. Sometimes, though, speaking of kicks, I do feel like I've got a "kick me" sign on my back or something. I just got a copy of the NHK video about Sameer, (and cryptography ;-)), and FC97 is talked about there a lot, but, unfortunately, no real credit given to Ray Hirshfeld as conference chair for organizing the program, or, for that matter, for myself as the the guy whose idea FC97 was in the first place. Also, while not having read the July Wired yet, I have heard from other people that the article reads like FC97 was Vince Cate's idea and not mine. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that the reason that Vince got front and center was because I didn't jump out there steal it from him. ;-). Any "fault" for not making sure proper "credit" was given is primarily my own, as the, um, promoter, of FC97, anyway. So, maybe we should have a press conference or something next year and put out the "official" story, just to further complicate matters. Frankly, since Vince actually *did* do all the *work* on Anguilla itself, as well as helping to sholder whatever financial risks there were, along with running the money, and the transaction processing on offshore.com.ai, and lots of other important stuff, and, since Ray and I *really* want to do it there again next year, Vince can have all the 'credit' he wants. :-). Especially if I get to go to Anguilla for free once a year, and, like I did last time, walk around like I own the place. (My needs are simple, you see...) I do think my own powers of hucksterism are improving, though. A banking conference organizer called yesterday, and she wanted me be a speaker at a series of conferences in London, San Diego and Malaysia. I figured I'd do the old digital bearer certificate "book-entry settlement is dead" bit and scare them all a little. We'll see if she still wants me after she sees the e$ home page and my nonexistant credentials for outraging the financial status quo. As usual for these things, of course, I'm not getting paid anything but travel and room and board expenses. (Now, where's that 'kick me' sign, again? I *know* it's back there somewhere...) On the same terms, but for nice people anyway, Dave Birch from Hyperion is having me fly out to London to do an electronic money conference in October, and I'm supposed to speak at MacWorld Boston in August. In addition, I'm going to be on a national talk radio network again pretty soon, and I'm in the process of cranking out another rant-for-publication, if I can just keep the thing from getting bigger every time I sit down to work on it. Somebody's also talking about recording me doing some of my rants for audio tape. Finally, the FC97 proceedings are just about ready, and Springer-Verlag will have them later this summer. Since I get to edit the introduction, I at least get to make sure they spell my name right. :-). And, of course, the process of organizing FC98 is just starting to get, um, organized, and that's fun to think about. (The dates for the conference next year will be February 23-27, in case people want to save the date.) So, while I still haven't quite cultivated the ability to create that completely sterile no-man's land between me and a TV camera just yet (I heard someone say on cypherpunks that the most dangerous place in the world was between Phill Gramm and a TV camera...), I'm having an enormous amount of fun, attributed or not. Oh, and I forgot e$lab. I've gotten mail from about 50 people in response to the initial pair of rants, and we're in the process of preparing some, er, collateral information (can't call it a business plan, really, because whatever management team we put together will actually have to write their own plan from scratch), to hand to people who happen to wander in too close to Hettinga's Patented Reality Distortion Field (tm). Yeah, I know, Jobs has one too, but mine's patented and trademarked. Something I learned from a fellow Universalist, P.T. Barnum. Besides, the knob on my *my* reality distortion field goes to 11. So, I suppose, when all that 'credit' is passed around some day, I'll be getting my share. My next trick, though, is to get some money in the door for all this fun I've been having. I'm starting to feel like Stephenson's Hiro Protagonist, at the moment, though not nearly as cool. (Heck, I can't even write code.) Nonetheless, I suppose I'm lucky I get to do what I love, though I can't exactly describe it to people very well. Most people don't get that chance very often. To do what they love to do, I mean. Now, where *is* that "kick me" sign... Cheers, Bob Hettinga, (currently suffering rotator cuff injuries from trying to swipe at his back all the time...) ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ ---------- The e$ lists are brought to you by: Intertrader Ltd: "Digital Money Online" <http://www.intertrader.com/library/DigitalMoneyOnline> Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion http://www.hyperion.co.uk info(a)hyperion.co.uk Like e$? Help pay for it! <http://www.shipwright.com/beg.html> For e$/e$pam sponsorship, mail Bob: <mailto:rah@shipwright.com> Thanks to the e$ e$lves: Of Counsel: Vinnie Moscaritolo <mailto:vinnie@webstuff.apple.com> (Majordomo)^2: Rachel Willmer<mailto:rachel@intertrader.com> Commermeister: Anthony Templer <mailto:anthony@atanda.com> Interturge: Rodney Thayer <mailto:rodney@sabletech.com> --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/

1 0

No Subject
by William Casperson (Compaq) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In the end, it was child pornography that derailed encryption legislation in the U.S. Senate and dealt a bitter defeat to crypto supporters. Spurred by the chairman's denunciations of cyberporn, a majority of the Senate Commerce Committee rejected ProCODE II this morning -- and instead approved a bill introduced earlier this week that creates new Federal crimes for some uses of crypto and an all-but-mandatory key escrow infrastructure. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), committee chair and chief sponsor of the measure, led the attack, saying Congress must "stop child pornography on the Internet and Internet gambling. These legitimate law enforcement concerns cannot and should not be overlooked or taken lightly." He warned that allowing encryption to be exported would permit child pornographers to use it. "If it's being used for child pornography? Are we going to say that's just fine? That's it's just business? I don't think so." Then Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Tex.) chimed in, saying she doesn't want "children to have access to pornography or other bad types of information." Sen. John Ashcroft (R-MO) tried to disagree. "It's like photography. We're not going to [ban] photography if someone takes dirty pictures." (At this point, one of the more deaf committee members asked, "Pornography? Are we going to ban pornography?") Between the child-porn attack team of senators McCain, Hollings, Kerry, and Frist, ProCODE sponsor Sen. Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) didn't stand a chance. Hunched over the microphone, Burns was outmaneuvered, outprepared, and outgunned on almost every point. Nevertheless, he introduced ProCODE II -- a so-called compromise measure -- and was defeated 8-12. The changes from ProCODE I gave the NSA, FBI, and CIA oversight over crypto exports and permitted only the export of up to 56-bit crypto products without key escrow. Products of any strength with key escrow could be exported freely. That's hardly a pro-privacy, pro-encryption bill, says the ACLU's Don Haines. "The ProCODE vote shows the political bankruptcy of the pro-business agenda. Even in the Commerce Committee, commerce arguments didn't work," he says. The committee also approved amendments proposed by Kerry that would give jurisdiction over crypto exports to a nine-member "Encryption Export Advisory Board." The panel would "evaluate whether [a] market exists abroad" and make non-binding recommendations to the president. Frist also introduced amendments to the McCain-Kerrey bill that were accepted: * Requiring that not any Federally-funded communications network, but only ones established "for transaction of government business" would use key escrow -- thereby jumpstarting the domestic market. * "Requirements for a subpoenas [sic] should be no less stringent for obtaining keys, then [sic] for any other subpoenaed materials." * Key recovery can mean recovering only a portion of the key "such as all but 40 bits of the key." * NIST after consulting with DoJ and DoD will "publish a reference implementation plan for key recovery systems;" the law will not take effect until the president tells Congress such a study is complete. After the vote, advocacy groups tried to put a good face on the devastating loss -- and an expensive defeat it was. After 15 months of lobbying, countless hearings, backroom dealmaking, and political capital spent, ProCODE is gutted and dead. "There's another day. We have confidence in the system," said BSA's Robert Holleyman. CDT's Jerry Berman said, "What is encouraging is that unlike the CDA other committees are getting involved." Of course, the involvement of other committees is only likely to add more key escrow provisions and limitations on crypto-exports. ProCODE's replacement -- the McCain-Kerrey bill -- now goes to the Senate Judiciary committee, and its chairman has already been talking about mandating key escrow in some circumstances... -Declan ------------------------- Declan McCullagh Time Inc. The Netly News Network Washington Correspondent http://netlynews.com/

7 10

It ain't just crypto they're screwing with....
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

People sometimes wonder why I'm moving toward the "just kill them all" position, meant rhetorically, of course. (I would never, never suggest that anyone actually kill the criminals McCain or Kerrey, or the other 533 criminals, but they have surely all richly earned whatever befalls them.) Besides the blizzard of new crypto laws, some proposed, some passed, similar nonsense can be found in almost every other area of life. Here in Kalifornia, not even the cops and district attorneys seem to know what's happening with gun laws, knife laws, insult speech laws, and so on. And here in my little piece of Paradise, a recent law made it illegal to "discriminate" against those with rings through their noses, studs through their tongues, etc. (Some of you, being "punks," may actually be so adorned. I hope you understand the deeper point that what I do with my property, including who I hire, is my business, not the "Committee Against Appearance Discrimination's" bussiness.) The real problem is that the thousands of professional politicians, the organized crime families of politics, and the hundreds of thousands of cops, narcs, judges, bureaucrats, drones, and other criminals keep on writing more laws, trying to patch the broken aspects of society with more and more laws. Anyway, one of my occasional interests is following the knife community. After recent warnings that the knife laws in my area may make it illegal to carry a folding knife either in my pocket ("concealed") or clipped to my belt ("brandishment"), I started paying close attention to what the clowns in Sacramento are doing to resolve this situation. As might be expected, they are screwing things up further. As with crypto, the laws keep getting more and more complex, with layers upon layers of cruft making nearly any interpretation a DA (District Attorney, or Prosecuting Attorney) might want to push possible. As the famous saying by a corrupt (as most of them are) DA went, "I could get an indictment against a ham sandwich if I wanted one.") Here's an insight into the knife laws in California. It makes me want to climb a tall tower and start shooting. (I won't, of course, but I am confirmed in my view that the politicians in Sacramento and D.C. ought to be disposed of as quickly as possble. Hang the bastards.) > From: James & Toni Mattis <jkmtsm(a)earthlink.net> > Newsgroups: rec.knives > Subject: Re: California cuttery enthusiasts, support AB 78 > Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 20:52:41 -0700 > > BUD LANG wrote: > > > > I am publishing an article in the October 1997 edition of Knives > > Illustrated, written by Chris Micheli, the gent in Sacramento who is > > fighting the battle for Buck Knives. The Calif DA's association and the > > Sheriffs are seeking to have that bill changed again. Why? They claim > > everyone and his cousin is now on the streets using these knives in > > combat. We all know this is bull pucky, but they want to change it back. > > Bud > > Latest news on AB78: After another conference with law & order types, > they've removed from the bill the part that says it's OK to carry a > fixed blade knife in a container like a backpack, toolbox, purse, > etcetera. The part that decrminalizes folders is still there, but if you > buy a chef's knife in the mall, you can't carry it to your car in a > shopping bag. You'll have to carry it openly through the mall and scare > lots of people instead. > > This isn't a stretch. The Los Angeles public defender's office has a > pending case where they busted a homeless guy for having a steak knife > in his backpack. Unofficial word is that he's a little too crazy to > stand trial, but I can't get it in writing that they'll only do that to > crazy poor people, and crazy poor people need to eat, etcetera, too. > > The law is an ass. I've squawked to the lobbyist, and my squawk to some > other people goes out tonight. > > James K. Mattis > http://home.earthlink.net/~jkmtsm > "If the law supposes that . . . the law is a ass, a idiot" - Dickens -- There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

ping
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBM6mgxo9Co1n+aLhhAQGL6AQAixZikrODaTGvexNLkLn9N1Ccj6udj8xU OnVHZ9Czqymic7za4Y+1xFiFL+93SBlZDe9lGwu6Dlj6mA7W7uje17Wszfb6+NLO aG9p8bqp2bFD+MD6UIGSDntlTL0LiRc//0PfHCzR1ABgtEOfDRLX0Aq5JgcYL/tl zY3VBlF4n1w= =ALs+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Senate panel nixes ProCODE II, approves McCain-Kerrey bill
by John Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Frist also introduced amendments to the McCain-Kerrey >bill that were accepted: > >* Requiring that not any Federally-funded > communications network, but only ones established "for > transaction of government business" would use key > escrow -- thereby jumpstarting the domestic market. Will this narrow the bill so it no longer applies to researchers, students and others who happen to use subsidized networks? If so, that would take out the worst part of it. Key escrow when you're sending to the government isn't so bad, since the government can read your message anyway. "John --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------

2 1