December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Liberal lawyer joke from Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #34
by jf_avon＠citenet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 16 Oct 97 at 9:58,somebody wrote: > Research labs are increasingly replacing rats with lawyers. > > There are three reasons for this: > > 1. The lawyers are in abundant supply > 2. The lab workers do not develop any kind of emotional attachment to lawyers > 3. There are things you just can't get a rat to do.

1 0

FBI allowed to keep file on New York man's lawful activities
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

FBI allowed to keep file on New York man's lawful activities By LAURIE ASSEO Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court today refused to order the FBI to purge its file on lawful activities by the former head of a charitable foundation. The court, without comment, turned away arguments that said the FBI is violating a federal privacy law by keeping a file about the man's years-ago meetings with foreign leaders and political dissidents. Lance E. Lindblom of Larchmont, N.Y., was president of the Chicago-based J. Roderick MacArthur Foundation from 1984 to 1994. The foundation supports civil liberties activities, and Lindblom's duties included meeting with foreign leaders and political dissidents. After filing a request with the FBI, Lindblom learned in 1989 that the bureau kept records that described his meetings with such people. Lindblom and the foundation sued the FBI in federal court in the District of Columbia, saying the 1974 federal Privacy Act required the bureau to purge those files. The law limits federal agencies' authority to keep records describing how people exercise their rights under the Constitution's First Amendment, including rights of free speech and association. Under the Privacy Act, agencies can keep such records only if it is authorized by another law or "within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity." A federal judge ruled for the FBI, saying the files were compiled for legitimate law enforcement purposes. The investigations were not aimed at Lindblom or the foundation, but were aimed at the people with whom they met, the judge said. A federal appeals court agreed last December. Federal agencies can keep records they lawfully collected, the appeals court said, adding that a requirement to purge old files would be too burdensome. In the appeal acted on today, Lindblom's lawyers said agencies must separately justify the need to keep old records, even if they originally were lawfully collected. Keeping Lindblom's file increases the risk that it will be used illegally, his lawyers said, noting the 1996 controversy after it was found that the FBI files of 700 former White House employees had been sent to the White House. Justice Department lawyers said a requirement to purge old files would cause problems if the information later was needed for a new or reopened investigation. The case is Lindblom vs. FBI, 97-82. APTV-10-14-97 1020EDT

1 0

PGP Inc apology deal
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To reply to Jon Callas request for an apology for my rudeness, I'll offer a deal: - If I am unable to show you how to improve the GR (GAK resistance) of a system with a similar set of recovery properties to the CMR system; which replacement design is vialble to use in a typical corporate environment I will publically apologize for being rude, and for wasting your time. - If I am able to show you how to improve the GR (GAK resistance) of a system with a similar set of recovery properties to the CMR system which replacement design is vialble to use in a typical corporate environment, I _don't_ want an apology. I want something much more interesting: I want PGP Inc to implement and deploy it. - The group which will judge this process is PGP Inc. Do we have a deal? Adam -- Now officially an EAR violation... Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

2 1

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net> writes: > This also applies to CMR as well. Whatever the perceived business reasons > for CMR, the fact is that it introduces additional failure points. No > longer will Alice and Bob be secure that at least there are no "other > readers" in the channel between them (what they do with the plaintext after > decryption is of course solvable by no technology). I thought that was the whole point of the PGP design. It makes the presence of third parties clear and visible to all participants. This seems to be the fundamental principle. PGP is designed to allow Alice and Bob to be informed if third party access is built in. Key escrow and re-encryption are inherently less visible forms of message access.

4 3

Re: FCPUNX:proposal: commercial data recovery
by Eli Brandt 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Will Price wrote: > In your model, the recipient automatically > decrypts and then re-encrypts to a data recovery key -- even though > end-user computers are likely to be insecure thus making this decrypt & > reencrypt step rather specious at best. The value of this security model escapes me -- if the receiver's machine is insecure, you lose, period. Please, let us assume that neither endpoint is controlled by an attacker. You are concerned that the recipient is re-encrypting with a key whose access characteristics are unknown to the sender. Now, for all the sender really knows, the recipient may be storing the message in the clear, or maybe putting it on a Times Square billboard. This is not a cryptographic failure. In your CMR system as well, the sender has no choice but to trust the recipient's integrity and data hygeine -- or to not send the message. The headers could contain a request as to the eventual disposition of the message, but there are never any guarantees. > As an actual data recovery system, it also fails fundamental tests. If I > encrypt critical data to a colleague wiping it from my system after > sending, then the colleague is incapacitated before receipt and processing > of the message, the data can never be retrieved. Forget bus-struck colleagues, think unreliable messaging -- if you do this and your e-mail is lost in transit, your "critical data" is lost. So don't do this. > A data recovery system > must solve this kind of issue -- data recovery here means that from > end-to-end the data is recoverable in case of emergency. One cannot ignore > message transit time in this -- it can take days for a message to travel > from AOL to the outside world. I'm not seeing how transit time figures in here. Are you proposing to bypass it by sending in an emergency team to acquire the in-transit message from the AOL machine room? If you find this practical, you can even retrieve an un-CMRed message by putting the recipient on this emergency team. But as I said, this situation should never be allowed to arise. Data recovery means you can get the data. It doesn't specify which copy you get decrypt. For reliable transmission over an unreliable medium, the sender must not destroy the original until receipt has been confirmed; for stored-data recovery, "receipt" involves appropriate re-encryption. (A reliable medium simply involves shoving all of this down into the messaging protocol.) So reliable transmission can support data recovery, from one end or the other, without message recovery. You might ask what happens if both endpoints are struck by meteorites. If the data is critically important, it will have been replicated off the sender's disk. The bottom line is that no such data can be trusted solely to an AOL mailserver (of all things). > If you don't need data recovery, don't use > it, but at least respect the people who do need it and need it to actually > work at all points. I'm no protocol designer, but I'd have more respect for this system if explanations for its necessity seemed to have been fully thought through. The issue of communications keys versus storage keys has been discussed before; I don't believe I'm raising any novel issues. Did PGP Inc. consider and reject stored-data recovery (if so, what were the good reasons?), or are we seeing a retroactive explanation here? -- Eli Brandt | eli+(a)cs.cmu.edu | http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~eli/ (on FCPUNX, cc'ed replies appreciated)

1 0

Internet Tools For Your Business (fwd)
by Japhy Ryder 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

----- Forwarded message from prectimes(a)mail2.c-flash.net ----- >From prectimes(a)mail2.c-flash.net Thu Oct 16 17:27:18 1997 From: prectimes(a)mail2.c-flash.net Message-Id: <199710162227.RAA18064(a)enteract.com> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 11:17:49 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Internet Tools For Your Business **************************************************************************** We sincerely apologize if this message has reached you in error. This is a one time mailing, you need not reply as you will not receive this message again. **************************************************************************** The Internet is the marketing opportunity of a lifetime, don't let it pass you by! I make thousands marketing my products with Bulk E-MAIL. Responsible E-MAILING WORKS, and regardless of any non-applicable ridiculous fax or phone law someone may quote you Bulk E-mail is a 100% legal and ethical way to make tons of money, I am living proof. If you are interested in making serious money and saving yourself all of the time and hasle of finding the right tools and Internet resources read on because what I have to offer you will save you hundreds of hours of research that you could be using to get down to business and make money with direct e-mail marketing. If you send me $15 bucks I will send you via e-mail a file containing the following information that will arm you with all the tools you will ever need to jump start a Internet marketing campaign. Just print and mail the order form at the bottom of this page with your payment and as soon as I receive it I will mail your file. Then you can be on your way to harvesting the gold mine I have found in direct E-mail marketing. I WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH! 1.) A list of top bulk e-mail servers and I.S.P.'s that you can mail from without losing your acounts. 2.) The U.R.L to two bulk mail marketing members- only forums and message boards, where you will find free e-mail marketing software, archives full of bulk mail marketing information, and have the opportunty to ask questions and get advise from from pros like myself who have battled and won the war with bulk mail marketing. 3.) A LIST OF 1500 U.R.L's where you can place FREE classified ads. 4.) The location of a site where you fill out one form with information about your Web Site and they will submit it to 200 search engines for FREE. 5.) A Internet address that will link you to almost 100 classified ad areas where you can submit your advertisements for FREE. 6.) A list of 25 newsgroups where advertiseing your products and services are acceptable. These are the newgroups I have been successful with for years. 7.) The U.R.L for eight sites who offer you free e-mail boxes where you can receive your mail or have it forwarded to any address you desire. 8.) A list of sites where you can obtain bulk e-mail software to fit any budget. Most of these sites even offer free demo versions for download, so you can try before you buy. 9.) A internet address location where they will not only set-up C.G.I. order scripts on your Web Site but maintain them for only ONE DOLLAR A MONTH. 10.) The U.R.L of a site where you can set up a completely annomous I.S.P account. 11.) A site address where you can obtain publicity for your products or services, and it's absolutely FREE. As if this wasn't enough If your order is postmarked before October 15, 1997 I will include the following FIVE Internet Marketing Information reports, that have made me thousands marketing on the Internet. These five reports usually sell seperately for $50, but they are all yours for the asking when you order this package. AND THAT'S NOT ALL, I am going to throw in 100,000 good net and com email addresses and the location of a site you can go to immediately and download a fully functional copy of bulk-mail software so you can get started NOW! Report #1) Direct Response Web Sites (How to Get Your Prospects To Buy Now) Report #2) Search Engine Rip Offs (How to Play Hardball And Get 600 Hits A Day In Less Than A Week) Report#3 "14 Reasons Why You Can 'Literally" Make A Million (right now) By Turning Other Peoples Fax Machines Into Your Own Personal Printers" Report #4) How to turn 1000's of prospects into buyers and die hard, loyal customers for life. Report #5) How To Increase your Profits 15 Times by knowing the secret of headlines and the role they play on the Internet. SPECIAL BONUS: all orders post marked by the October 30 will also receive a clean list of 100,000 e-mail addresses to kick start your new business. These are all good addresses that have been run through remove databases. Yes Send me a copy of your Bulk e-mail Information Kit. I understand that if I am not completely staisfied I will have the total purchase price of $15 refunded to me upon request within 30 days from purchase. Name_________________________________ Address_______________________________ City, State, Zip___________________________ Telephone# (______)____________________ E-mail Address__________________________ Check here if you would like to receive information about our other products ( ) Send your check or money order for $15 to: Precious Times Publications 18551 Chase Street Northridge, California 91324 If you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact us at Tel: (818)-885-1823 or Fax: (818)-885-8014 ----- End of forwarded message from prectimes(a)mail2.c-flash.net -----

1 0

Freeh letter to NYT
by Roger Schlafly 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[From www.nytimes.com, Oct. 16, 1997] To the Editor: "An Attack on Privacy Rights" (editorial, Oct. 3) argues that the approach to encryption that the law enforcement community is advocating has somehow "put the need to eavesdrop on criminals above the privacy rights of ordinary Americans." Nothing could be further from the truth. You fail to mention that the same court-ordered, judicially approved procedures that now apply to wiretaps and electronic data searches would also apply to our ability to obtain decryption keys or information. In fact, what we proposed requires two orders from a judge before we proceed, not just one as now required. There is another issue that, if unaddressed, will have public safety ramifications. Encryption that cannot be deciphered regardless of the number of court orders or new technologies obtained by the police will devastate our ability to fight crime and prevent terrorism. It will nullify the ability to carry out court-authorized searches and seizures of criminal communication and electronic evidence. Policy decisions about encryption should not be left solely to market forces. Congress, the computer industry and law enforcement can work together to craft legislation that balances the public safety with the commercial and private needs of law-abiding Americans. We are not wedded to any particular solution, but feel that some workable solution can be found to insure that law enforcement can gain immediate access to the plaintext of encrypted criminal communication or electronic data that we have lawfully seized. LOUIS J. FREEH Dir., Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington, Oct. 10, 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------- How can he say this with a straight face? >In fact, what we proposed requires two orders from a judge >before we proceed, not just one as now required. The DOJ proposal, sect 302, says: (A) A Key Recovery Agent, whether or not registered by the Secretary under this Act, shall disclose recovery information stored by a person: (1) ...; or (2) to a law enforcement or national security government agency upon receipt of written authorization in a form to be specified by the Attorney General. It also contradicts his final sentence: >... some workable solution can be found to insure that law enforcement can >gain immediate access to the plaintext of encrypted criminal communication >or electronic data that we have lawfully seized. The term "immediate access" means without having to goto a judge. Roger

2 1

Re: Liberal lawyer joke from Cdn-Firearms Digest V2 #34
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:26 PM -0700 10/16/97, jf_avon(a)citenet.net wrote: >On 16 Oct 97 at 9:58,somebody wrote: > >> Research labs are increasingly replacing rats with lawyers. >> >> There are three reasons for this: >> >> 1. The lawyers are in abundant supply >> 2. The lab workers do not develop any kind of emotional attachment to >>lawyers >> 3. There are things you just can't get a rat to do. Just a word: the "lawyer jokes" sent out recently are at least 10 years old. Calling them "liberal lawyer" jokes doesn't make them any fresher. I suggest original content, in the form of essays or analyses, is better than stale old lawyer jokes. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

No Subject
by Igor Chudov ＠ home 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

test

1 0

index.html
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CNN logo Navigation Infoseek/Big Yellow Pathfinder/Warner Bros Main banner rule SECRET SECURITY MESSAGES ON STAMPS CAN BE DECODED Postal Service Logo October 16, 1997 Web posted at: 3:39 p.m. EDT (1939 GMT) WASHINGTON (AP) -- The post office is preserving a bit of nostalgia from an era when children saved cereal box tops for the secret decoder rings. The new decoder isn't a ring, but it does the job by revealing secret messages hidden on some U.S. postage stamps. "It was done primarily as a anti-counterfeit measure, but we knew that collectors of all kinds would enjoy it as an interesting design element as well," said postal spokesman Barry Ziehl. You normally can't see the hidden image, but the post office is selling decoders to interested people. For $4.95 collectors can get a special lens that reveals the hidden message when placed over the stamp. The first hidden image was on a 32-cent U.S. Air Force stamp issued in September. With the decoder, viewers can see the letters USAF repeated over and over across the face of the stamp. The decoder has to be turned slightly from side to side to get the image to appear. Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. rule Related sites: Note: Pages will open in a new browser window * US Postal Service External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive. Barnes and Noble Recommends Selected books on Postage Stamps Or find any book in print by keyword: ____________________ ______ _________________________________________________________________ Infoseek search ____________________ ____ ____ _________________________________________________________________ rule Message Boards Sound off on our message boards You said it... [INLINE] rule To the top © 1997 Cable News Network, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you.

1 0