December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

index.html
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CNN logo navigation Infoseek/Big Yellow Pathfinder/Warner Bros World banner Price Waterhouse rule OPEN MICROPHONE CATCHES CHRETIEN'S CRITICISM OF CLINTON Chretien Dehaene July 9, 1997 Web posted at: 9:10 p.m. EDT (0110 GMT) From Senior White House Correspondent Wolf Blitzer MADRID, Spain (CNN) -- Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien, apparently unaware that he was talking into an open microphone, was videotaped Wednesday making some rather undiplomatic comments about Bill Clinton, joking that the U.S. president formed his position about NATO expansion because he thought it would win votes at home. Chretien's remarks were caught on videotape as he talked with Belgian Prime Minister Jean-Luc Dehaene and Luxembourg's Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker before a NATO meeting in Madrid. Apparently unaware the microphone in front of him was on, Chretien bragged that his country does not let the United States dictate its policy, and suggested American politicians make decisions solely for reasons of expediency. "In your country, in my country, all the politicians would be in prison because they sell their votes," Chretien said. He also said Clinton was in favor of inviting Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic to join NATO because it would woo voters. Speaking in French, the Canadian prime minister said: "It's not reasons of state. It's all done for short-term political reasons, to win elections. Take the quarrel over whether to admit the Baltic states. That has noting to do with world security. It's because in Chicago, Mayor (Richard M.) Daley controls lots of votes for the nomination." The three leaders laughed as they waited for the Clinton and his advisers to arrive for the meeting. Juncker asked, "And if we started without them?" "To prove that we know what to do without them," Dehaene added. "To prove we're independent. He (Chretien), he's used to not doing what they want," Juncker said. "I make it my policy," Chretien said. "But it's popular. The Cuba affair. I was the first to stand up" against it U.S. policy tightening the economic embargo on Cuba. The three leaders chuckled among themselves. rule CNN Plus * Jean Chretien * Message Board: NATO expansion * Newsmaker Profiles Related stories: * AllPolitics - President Lauds NATO Expansion, Downplays Cost - July 9, 1997 * U.S. prevails in historic NATO expansion - July 8, 1997 * NATO invites Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic to join - July 8, 1997 * NATO agrees to add 3 countries, official says - July 8, 1997 * Clinton faces fight at home and abroad over NATO expansion - July 7, 1997 * On summit eve, NATO divided on new members - July 7, 1997 * Hold the obit: NATO re-emerging with new members - July 6, 1997 * Report: Yeltsin to skip NATO expansion summit - June 18, 1997 Related sites: Note: Pages will open in a new browser window * NATO + Summit - Madrid, Spain, 8-9 July 1997 External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive. Search for related CNN stories: ________________________________________ ______ [Help] Tip: You can restrict your search to the title of a document. Infoseek grfk Example: title:New Year's Resolutions rule Message Boards Sound off on our message boards Tell us what you think! You said it... [INLINE] Price Waterhouse rule To the top © 1997 Cable News Network, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you.

1 0

Cast of Characters for Crypto Politics (Judiciary Hearing)
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Senate Judiciary committee today heard testimony on key escrow, particularly the "Secure Public Networks Act" (S. 909) introduced last month. The Senate Commerce committee on June 19 approved the bill, backed by Sen. Bob Kerrey and Sen. John McCain, which would create a national key escrow infrastructure. Pro-encryption legislation is dead in the Senate; McCain-Kerrey has taken its place. Here's a cast of characters from today's hearing... SEN. ORRIN HATCH (R): Asked what PGP stood for. Hatch, who chaired the hearing, said "one would expect the executive branch to lead" on such an important issue but "the Clinton administration has been all over the map." Said it's time for Congress to seize the debate, that it's already "acting as a broker for these competing interests" and the Senate Judiciary committee in particular "must serve as a forum for open debate in this area." SEN. PATRICK LEAHY (D): The Senate's supposed defender of crypto-freedom was at best a milquetoast one today. During his opening remarks, he refrained from criticizing bills to encourage key recovery; in fact, he argued that *he's* been pushing key recovery bills far longer than anyone else. ("There has been _one_ key recovery bill pending in the Senate in the last Congress and for most of this one. That is the ECPA, which I introduced...") Spoke against the McCain-Kerrey bill not on broad, philosophical grounds but on narrower grounds such as awarding too much discretionary power to the Commerce Secretary. SEN. CHARLES GRASSLEY (R): Tried to paint himself as someone who understands the dangers of government power by noting he joined many Republicans in opposing roving wiretaps last summer, but then spoke darkly of pedophiles armed with crypto. "Encryption is hindering the investigation of chid sex offenders," Grassley warned. He told how Colorado police couldn't break into a teen's password-protected electronic organizer where incriminating information might be stored. His continuing fixation on child molesters shone through today, as it did two years ago at a hearing for his Net-censorship bill. He concluded: "How many child molesters should go free because of encryption?" SEN. BOB KERREY (D): Perhaps gaining confidence in his political backing, Sen. Bob Kerrey spoke at length about the dangers of uncontrolled *domestic* use of crypto. "The current law is unacceptable. The status quo is unacceptable," he said. At one point he talked about scrapping any legislative changes to export rules -- and focusing instead just on domestic crypto and domestic key escrow. SEN. JOHN KYL (R): Criticized Kerrey for being too moderate. "My own view is that the legislation does not go far enough," Sen. Kyl said of the McCain-Kerrey bill. He said he was concerned about *any* changes to export controls and wanted to keep the status quo. "I don't want to be sitting up here and to have law enforcement officials say to us you had the opportunity to protect American lives and you didn't do it," Kyl said. Tossed easy lobs to FBI Director Freeh, who batted them out of the park. SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D): Said "I would echo Sen. Kyl's concerns." Noted she represented a high-tech state but still was concerned about the uncontrolled spread of encryption. Said to Freeh: "You've made a clear and compelling case for key recovery. If it was understood by the American people, they'd be supportive." Followed up on Grassley's point about the passworded organizer by asking Kerrey, "Without revealing the classified briefing you participated in and we have recently, what's puzzling me is that the Colorado law enforcement doesn't have any recourse to be able to break into a system." She said she thought that the FBI could tunnel into such a device, but FBI director Louis Freeh shook his head no. SEN. JOHN ASHCROFT (R): Emerged as a staunch crypto-defender. Asked Freeh why, if 56-bit crypto was good enough for the general public, did the administration allow banks to export 128-bit crypto? Told Freeh, "Your presumption is that law breakers will use key recovery systmes that are voluntary." Argued that "there's no need for us to pass legislation [on key recovery]... this is something to which the market is responding." Wondered why the Cali Cartel would use crypto with backdoors for the Feds. Dismissed arguments about other countries' crypto restrictions by saying: "So we have a whole bunch of other comuntries without the commitment to civil liberties we have." Controlling crypto is tricky because "we're in a universe that's dynamic," he said. "It seems to me that with our marketplace using 128-bit, we ought to be very careful about saying we can consume it, we can use it, but we can't export it." Landed a solid blow when he questioned how the "crypto-in-a-crime" provision would work if someone encrypts their tax data and is found guilty of a crime later. "Is he guilty of a second crime because he sought to protect the integrity of his tax returns with encryption?" More info: http://pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1022,00.html http://www.jya.com/declan3.txt http://www.jya.com/declan2.txt http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,931,00.html http://www.well.com/~declan/fc/ -Declan ------------------------- Declan McCullagh Time Inc. The Netly News Network Washington Correspondent http://netlynews.com/

3 2

Question...
by zx325s7xv＠uunet.uu.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Question: What would it be worth to you: If you are in a RELATIONSHIP... to gain the understanding and knowledge to make love last forever? If you are a PARENT... to learn proven, effective techniques to give your children the gift of self esteem, and teach them confidence- building values to help them achieve their full potential? If you are in BUSINESS... to increase your negotiating power to save on your bottom line, or to acquire ideas, concepts and strategies to increase your profits? If you are in SALES... to double your sales in the next six months? If You Have a CAREER... to earn promotions faster, gain the latest techniques to manage and motivate your team, and learn how to become more effective at managing your time? If you care about your FINANCES... to build a secure "financial wall" around your family and gain leading-edge information and strategies for retirement and long term wealth? If you care about your HEALTH... to get the latest information on nutrition and workout techniques to help you live longer and get the most out of life? <><><><> Seminars in Your Living Room <><><><> What would it be worth to magically beam the greatest counselors in the country right into your living room? Just a few of the top names include: - Og Mandino - Mark Victor Hansen - Brian Tracy - Les Brown - Paul J. Meyer - and many more! Major corporations routinely spend nearly $1 million to hire these success coaches for just one day! Interested in learning more? Please visit: http://www.windansea1.com/tpnref.htm

1 0

Recreational pharmaceuticals by genetic engineering
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I know this is off-topic for the list... But why hasn't some cleaver graduate student engineered a common mold or yeast to yield easily extracted (or directly ingestible) common recreational pharmaceuticals? Ideally it would be a perpetual source, like sour dough starter, and easily cultured. Once distributed to the street it would be impossible to stop or track (since no controlled chemicals would be required for production). --$teve

11 15

RE: Recreational pharmaceuticals by genetic engineering
by Neil McKenty (WWBAKL) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>-----Original Message----- >From: snow [SMTP:snow@smoke.suba.com] >Sent: Friday, 11 July 1997 15:06 >To: tcmay(a)got.net >Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Subject: Re: Recreational pharmaceuticals by genetic engineering > >> >try to haul off people who have pond scum in their bird feeders and the >> >like. (Anything that will make them look even more absurd...) >> Speaking of which, I recall that the origins of LSD were from some kind of >> fungus or "rust" found on some types of grain. > > Ergot, a mold that grows on certain types of Rye or fescue, I forget >which. This is used to make Ergotamine (imine?) which is used in treatment >of certain types of migraines. > > >They also use the same mould, ergot, to make hydergine. A supposed smart >drug/nutrient.

1 0

Cypherpunks cap?
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anybody know who might be willing to sell one of the old Cypherpunks baseball caps? I need one for an outfit I am putting together. Thanks, --Lucky --Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56. http://rc5.distributed.net/

1 0

US and EU at odds on data protection
by Theodor.SCHLICKMANN＠bxl.dg13.cec.be 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Internet: US and EU at odds on data protection THURSDAY JULY 10 1997 By Neil Buckley -- Begin Differences between US and European Union laws on personal data protection have emerged as a potentially serious barrier to creation of a global free market for commerce on the internet. The European Commission yesterday urged the US to strengthen its laws on data privacy to bring them into line with European equivalents, or risk seeing curbs on exchange of information. The latest hurdle to development of a worldwide internet marketplace emerged at a meeting between Mr Ira Magaziner, senior adviser to President Bill Clinton and architect of last week's US report on electronic commerce, and Mr Hans Beseler, Commission director-general for trade policy. It came a day after differences emerged between EU ministers and the US at a conference in Bonn over the unrestricted use of encryption technology on the global computer network. A recently adopted EU directive on data protection makes it illegal after October 1998 for EU businesses to "export" personal data for commercial purposes to countries which lack comparable privacy laws. Such a ban could prevent the sale of customer information, or even exchanges of marketing databases between subsidiaries of international companies. The clause has already been cited by financial services groups as a potential barrier to trade. Commission officials said they were concerned that consumers would refuse to buy products or services on the internet if they were not confident that personal data they provided would be secure, and that they would not be bombarded by unsolicited marketing. Brussels wants the US to introduce European-style privacy laws. "The creation of a federal privacy body with powers to hear and investigate complaints, and act as interlocutor for European data protection authorities, would be a big step in the right direction," a Commission official added. But the US fears heavy-handed privacy rules could stifle trade, and prefers industry self-regulation. Mr Magaziner suggested internet traders should develop a voluntary code of conduct, with "seals of approval" for companies pledging to respect privacy and security of personal information. "Industry and consumer groups have the same incentive as we have to protect privacy, because they won't do business unless people feel their privacy is protected," he said. "Ultimately the power rests with consumers. They can buy or not buy, go to one web site or not go." Mr Magaziner suggested it would be a mistake for the EU to isolate itself by applying the clause in its data protection directive next year. © Copyright the Financial Times Limited 1997 "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of The Financial Times Limited. -- End We are not amused Theodor Schlickmann

1 0

Gene Engineered Drug Production
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, The topic of producing recreational pharmacuticals via gene engineered organisms is an interesting topic and one we discussed at least briefly 3-4 years ago. Might be worth reviewing the archives. There are some issues that I believe have kept this from being a commen practice: * Other than Marijuana and Cocaine most of the street pharmacuticals base chemicals take too much post-production to get them to a usable result. Either the process is something without an analog in the cellular systems or else it requires chemicals that don't occur in nature in great quantities and are such that you wouldn't want it produced inside the person taking the material. * Marijuana's complete gene map has only been available for a little over 2 years. * Educational and commercial institutions are not going to allow those with access either time or supplies to complete the project. * The LEA's and drug cartels would hunt the original designer(s) down and most likely terminate with extreme prejudice. You would be taking money from their mouths (so to speak). * Currently there is no country who has a legal structure such that they would be an acceptable haven. * Where's the profit? The person who creates it most definitely will not get rich. Just imagine filing your patent app. * E. coli or cooking yeast seem to be the best target. Both are fully mapped and acceptable to human systems. * In the case of Marijuana the chemicals produced by the genes are further processed and THC gets produced at this stage. This means the entire 2-tier process must be moved over. Neither yeast or E. Coli have this process in place (both being animals that isn't a surprise). This complicates the process greatly. * We are just waiting for some bright sole who believes that not only should "information be free" but so should drugs and is willing to spend 20 years or so on the run. * Regulation of production is a big unsolved problem. Assume for a moment that you have ingested some yeast that is producing TCH. How do you turn the regulation up or down? How do you keep the production from running away? Most drugs LD50 is simply way too low for such ad hoc regulation, drugs like TCH and LSD have ingestion levels of such magnitude that LD50 becomes a side issue. LSD would have a self regulating effect so it would be mediated irrespective of the level produced. THC on the other hand if not regulated would keep you in a sleepy daze most of the time. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Major International Credit Card
by markdan＠nt1.azone.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A lot of others talk about it! THEY DID IT! $5000.00 Major International Credit Card GUARANTEED UNSECURED! Regardless of Credit History Even Bankruptcy! No Social Security Number Needed! No Credit or Bad Credit? It doesn't matter! Everyone Qualifies! Complete Financial Privacy! Guaranteed approval from Offshore Financial Institution 6.95% starting Minimum $5,000.00 Credit Limit! Maximum $15,000.00 Line of Credit! This is a Legitimate Offer! Registered with Better Business Bureau Last year 20 million were turned down by banks for credit cards...even if you don't need or don't want a credit card, thousands of people do! And as a Bonus An Opportunity to Make More Money! Everyone you refer you make $25.00 Checks paid weekly. With a filled matrix you receive $4,841.24 MONTHLY Must be 18 years or older For Enrollment And Information Packet <A HREF="http://rensaw.com/dls/creditcard.html ">Click Here</a> or visit: http://rensaw.com/dls/creditcard.html

1 0

The Recent Trend in "Collective Contracts"
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm not a lawyer, but I am interested in the various ramifications--and the constitutionality--of recent "sweeping contracts" between vendors, lawmakers, consumers, etc. Two recent example: 1. The "tobacco agreement." Supposedly a deal involving the transfer of $360 billion from some number of tobacco companies in exchange for dropping of liability suits, immunity from future claims, voluntary restrictions (!) on advertising, etc. (And the "etc." is especially complicated in this huge case.) 2. The "voluntary ratings" agreement being announced today by Al Gore and some of the television networks. (Earlier "voluntary agreements" were implemented, but, according to supporters of censorship, "failed." Hence the new push for newer voluntary restrictions.) The issue, it seems to me, is that ordinary concepts of illegality and civil liability are being swept aside in favor of these huge "deals" to reduce liability in exchange for various actions. Well, who is bound by these deals? If "Tim's Tobacco Company" starts up next year, after this deal is "signed," is his company bound by this deal? If Tim the Smoker develops lung cancer, is he blocked from suing? (Caveat: My personal and libertarian view is that lawsuits against cigarette companies are wrong and should not be supported in a free society. And lawsuits by various states to "recover health care costs" are especially bogus. By this logic, McDonald's could be sued by California because California paid out more health care benefits to meat-eaters than it did to vegetarians. Utterly bogus.) Anyway, the free speech aspects of these deals are also worrisome. The "voluntary restrictions" on advertising, for example. Would the aforementioned "Tim's Tobacco Company," not a party to this Grand Deal, be somehow bound by a deal wherein it could not sponsor sporting events? Or advertise? Or even speak out against the deal? Imagine the implications for cryptography, using the logic of these kinds of deals: "The voluntary agreement reached between the cryptography industry and Washington calls for companies to voluntarily limit key sizes to 64 bits unless a key recovery scheme is used. And Washington agrees to drop RICO charges against PGP Inc. and RSA Data Security Inc. in return. Book publishers, who became part of the negotiations last summer, have agreed to limit the information published in books in exchange for relaxations on the export requirements for computer media. " Far fetched? Perhaps. But note the similarities to these other "collective contracts." And in many ways the Telephony Act, aka CALEA (Communications Act for Law Enforcement Access), was just such a deal. When the various telecom companies essentially said "we can live with this bill," they were tacitly committing themselves to just such a collective contract. (What happens when a new telecom company starts up and finds that it has been "bound" to provide wiretap points into its switches?) It seems to me that these contracts are going to collapse completely when the Supreme Court points out that they bind nonparticipants to terms which limit their constitutionally protected rights. (Quibblers can claim that "corporations have no constitutional rights," but the publishing companies which publish newspapers would take exception to this. And so on. There are many cases where corporations are enjoying the fruits of the Constitution. As it should be.) These huge mega-deals are a crummy way to interpret the U.S. Constitution. I fear the "Grand Compromise" deal that the telecom and crypto companies are being drawn into. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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."

6 6