December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

A Pretty Good Story, from The Netly News
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

********* http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1617,00.html The Netly News Network (http://netlynews.com/) December 8, 1997 A Pretty Good Story by Declan McCullagh (declan(a)well.com) Phil Zimmermann had it easy fighting the U.S. government: At least everyone else was on his side. Today the legendary cryptographer and founder of Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) is finding that his latest adversaries are just as determined but much more diverse. Earlier this fall PGP drew fire for releasing PGP 5.5 with a so-called "message recovery" feature that a corporation could require users to turn on to let the boss read their e-mail. Then, when McAfee Associates announced last week it would buy PGP, formerly supportive privacy advocates screamed that the company's new owners were part of the "Key Recovery Alliance," a group of firms devoted to producing data-scrambling software easily snoopable by the government. Now the complaining may stop, at least for a while. The McAfee-PGP combo, called Network Associates, has dropped out of the alliance. "I never would have allowed my own company to join the Key Recovery Alliance," Zimmermann told me yesterday. "As soon as I found out about McAfee being a member, I tried to do something about it." [...]

4 3

"Kids Safe" calls for mandatory blocking sw; op-ed on summit
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[What was that the IFEA folks were saying last week? Oh, yes, I remember: by building systems like PICS you also create an irresistable temptation for Congress to make them mandatory. --Declan] Business Wire December 5, 1997, Friday DISTRIBUTION: Business/News Editors & High-Tech Writers LENGTH: 486 words HEADLINE: Child-Safety Advocate Calls on Congress to Mandate Parental Software on All Computers Sold in U.S. DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: Dec. 5, 1997--Saying that we must protect children from the dangers of sexually explicit material on the Internet, a leading child-safety advocate Friday called on Congress to enact legislation to mandate that every computer sold in the United States by 1999 be outfitted with parental software that can block out sexually explicit or adult Web sites. Jayne Murphy Shapiro, founder and president of KIDS SAFE, an organization dedicated to protecting children against sexual molestation, is writing all members of Congress to express her concerns about the dangers of the Internet and her goal to make the Internet online experience safe, educational and entertaining for chldren. Shapiro, who attended the Internet Online Summit in Washington this week and met with government officials and community activists from across the country, said, "Mandating that computer makers install screening software will give parents new power to control what material young children are exposed to. "Our proposal would require manufacturers to install computer software in new computers to allow parents to block Internet sites considered too violent or obscene for their children. The easy-to-use filtering software would allow parents, educators and employers to screen the Internet, providing an alternative to government censorship." Shapiro pointed out that KIDS SAFE does not believe in censorship of the Internet, but rather in the common goal of protecting the First Amendment and the Internet so it can be used for free expression, education and commerce. Current software on the market allows for an Internet site to be blocked if it meets the following guidelines: 1) a disclaimer indicating restricted access; and 2) a screen or warning that identifies the site as adult-oriented or containing information unsuitable for those underage or the publisher has requested that his/her site be blocked. "Screening software, coupled with parental responsibility, enables parents to make informed decisions about what Internet sites their children can enter," said Shapiro. "Parental responsibility, with the help of the screening software, can be a major step in curtailing the needless exposure to inappropriate Web sites that plague the Internet." -0- NOTE: Jayne Murphy Shapiro, president of KIDS SAFE, is available for comments on this or any other child-safety issues. ------ The Record (Bergen County, NJ) December 4, 1997; THURSDAY; ALL EDITIONS SECTION: OPINION; Pg. L10 LENGTH: 618 words HEADLINE: PEDOPHILES IN CYBERSPACE ; WE MUST STOP CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ON THE INTERNET BYLINE: The Record BODY: THE increasing presence of child pornography on the Internet is a national problem that must be dealt with aggressively and quickly. This is not a free-speech or First Amendment issue. Child pornography is a crime. We do not tolerate it in our communities, and we should not tolerate it in cyberspace. Unfortunately, as a Page One article in The Record pointed out yesterday, cyberspace is tailor-made for the dissemination of child pornography. It allows pedophiles instant access to explicit photos in the privacy of their own homes, and it gives distributors and collectors enough anonymity to avoid getting caught and being prosecuted. In fact, the anonymity and the ease of finding sexually explicit material involving children on the Internet may have actually broadened the audience for child pornography. And law enforcement officials worry that this could in turn lead to increased child sexual abuse. Vice President Al Gore has been leading a campaign to make the Internet safe for children. This week, he announced a new partnership between Internet service providers and the Justice Department in an effort to crack down on child pornography, and a toll-free hot line to report any suspected incidents of child sexual exploitation. America Online also announced its cooperation."When child pornography is appropriately brought to our attention and we have control over it, we will remove it,"AOL Chairman Steve Case said. But law enforcement officials, computer experts, and child advocates say it's not that easy, by any means. Even if AOL cooperates, a great deal of child pornography is found on chat rooms hosted by hundreds of much smaller providers, who are loathe to police themselves because of liability or censorship concerns, or because they don't have the staff to do so. The Record's article also pointed out that most law enforcement officials are not knowledgeable enough to track down child pornography distributors, who are experts at disguising themselves on the Internet and finding new ways to fool monitors. Law enforcement officials may also lack the manpower needed to track down pedophiles."If we go on line undercover for one night,"one investigator said,"we're busy for two weeks, getting warrants and records." Many more"cybercops"are needed at the federal, state, and local levels who have the expertise to keep one step ahead of child pornographers, and much more manpower and training is needed. In New Jersey, state Sen. Andrew Ciesla, R-Brick, has introduced a bill that would create a high-tech crimes and investigation support unit for the state police. The measure, which should be approved, would set aside $ 400,000 for the unit to investigate computer crimes, including child pornography on the Internet, and create a 24-hour toll-free state hot line for reporting anything suspicious. Alerting the authorities is a key component of this crackdown, and Mr. Gore also announced a national"Cybertip"hot line to report suspicious on-line activity related to child pornography. The number is (800) 843-5678. The vice president is to be commended for seeking ways to stop these ugly predators. But this effort must be more than just lip service. It will take time to find the most effective ways to crack down on child pornography on the Internet, but the quest should take on increasing urgency, given all the evidence that the problem is growing. In the meantime, intense pressure should be brought to bear on the Internet industry, which can make a huge dent in this particularly vile cybercrime by aggressively policing itself. ----

1 0

RightsMarket Demo
by Stacey Feltham 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for your interest in our product. In an effort to authenticate each user, we would ask that you please provide us with a more comprehensive profile, such as your full name, company name, and complete address and telephone information. Once this information has been forwarded to us (you can simply forward this information to this email address), we would be happy to provide you with a Username and Password for the RightsMarket Demo. Thank you again for your interest in our product and we look forward to receiving this information.

1 0

Re: Cato forum tomorrow: should money laundering be a crime?
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>(Why is this discussion limited to just the four of us? Surely Declan and >his Cato buddies are worthy to hear our arguments? I dislike the "taking >things private" mindset, when the lists are already so cluttered with Toto >rants and other consumers of vast amounts of bandwidth.) If my header lines implied this, it was inadvertent. I agree more 'relevent' content on CP is desireable. >I haven't quite said that all forms of communication/spending money will be >speech and therefore protected. (Besides, we all know of many forms of >speech that are unprotected.) > >What I (and Michael Froomkin, in his own CFP talk) have argued is that >digital money will be _undetectable_ in many cases unless government >demands that the contents of a private communication be revealed. A kind of >prior restraint on speech. > [snip] >If the government determines, somehow, that Alice was >involved in an illegal transaction, tax evasion, money laundering, etc., >they can try to get her on that. But they can't insist that words be >submitted to a government agent for approval." Isn't uttering a check protected speech? What about if a check is stego-coded in some political rant? Can the Feds insist I not utter that speech? --Steve PGP mail preferred, see http://www.pgp.com and http://web.mit.edu/network/pgp.html RSA fingerprint: FE90 1A95 9DEA 8D61 812E CCA9 A44A FBA9 RSA key: http://keys.pgp.com:11371/pks/lookup?op=index&search=0x55C78B0D --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear | tel: (702) 658-2654 CEO | fax: (702) 658-2673 First ECache Corporation | 7075 West Gowan Road | Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | Internet: schear(a)lvdi.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me ECache or give me debt! "It's your Cache"

2 2

Our guest Area is the Best...
by 12355302＠32245.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Filled with the hottest XXX action on the net. See it NOW for FREE... http://www.fleshgrotto.com/guests/ We feature Streaming XXX videos, LIVE feeds, huge XXX galleries, adult toys, imports, and much more!!! Our LIVE CyberSex can't be beat, see the Newest Blondes in our stable.. Ashley and Brianna. Come see how the latest in technological wizardry can make hardcore XXX action EXPLODE on your screen. No other site gives their guests so much... Check It Out. http://www.fleshgrotto.com/guests/

1 0

Re: Remailer Trivia / Re: Singapore & Freedom
by Charlie Comsec 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Harish Pillay <harish(a)brokat.com.sg> > Interesting that you hide behind an anomymous name and you claim to ^^^^^^^^^^^ > be outside Singapore. I for one, will stand by my name and say that > things I should say about this country of mine (warts and all) and > not have to hide behind anonymity (not that I would not use anonymity ^^^^^^^^^^^ > ever :-)). I find it interesting that most of the people who refer to anonymous posters as "hiding behind" or "hiding behind the skirts of" something usually have unlisted telephone numbers when you try to do a search for them. <g> I wonder why "hiding behind" an unlisted telephone number is considered acceptable but having an "unlisted" e-mail address is not considered acceptable? Nor is it useful to argue that anonymity should only be used when it's "needed". That decision should be at the sole discretion of the poster. With the advent of firms that sell "dossiers" of the public posts of potential job candidates to employers, maybe posting using your own name is something everyone ought to at least reconsider. For many people, the choice is not between posting openly versus posting anonymously, but rather between posting openly and NOT POSTING AT ALL. Censorious individuals contribute to that by deliberately attempting to ridicule and discredit anonymous posters. Since you often cannot determine an anonymous poster's religion, race, nationality, or sexual preference, those who prefer ad hominem attack to a rational debate of the issues attack the poster's anonymity, instead. BTW, do you "hide behind" clothes when you walk on the street? If so, why? Got something to hide? Huh? COWARD!!!! <g> - --- Finger <comsec(a)nym.alias.net> for PGP public key (Key ID=19BE8B0D) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNIwRWgbp0h8ZvosNAQFZ6Af9G4P92aD68wwQEHH4xNiHvD5x8JDzIFCK fzFPp+IxuSQi+0R8i8Udt9XUh317Ec78lgwuRpStwS8LooE88oBWP2A5StU9k0BH kEDT7U8XlP73z0MCxr3kGmKC7TQwJo7cBZma7GbLjs9+wN5w7/k3nhXPLmA0At2y wmV08KIHl1pJacR36dRSfb8vuph6KwkglAU+az1BxDROIfWWqCYXVDsADULsz63p dOiiHkIS4yDLyLSU9osGLA62zkGLZMHYIfs8eWDB9AVNoPHwo7l0DxMMtsF+QjtR Qjdeor+DUd4jo+4tmYGPBwdX370EHqXjN/J3/CspGc+e+GVRyIU/Nw== =Zi6K -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Press URL's from today's Bernstein appeal hearing
by John Gilmore 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Today's hearing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals went very well. The judges clearly understood the case -- both the picky legal details, and how it fits into the general social issue of encryption regulation. While we can't predict their decision (or even when it will come out), we are cautiously optimistic. We'll put transcripts of the hearing up on the Web as soon as we get them from the court reporter (in days or weeks). You may want to examine some early press coverage of the hearing at: http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/120997encrypt-bernstein.html http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,17114,00.html http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/content/zdnn/1208/261695.html (The Times requires a username/password; use "cypherpunks" and "cypherpunks" if you don't want them to track your accesses.) John Gilmore Electronic Frontier Foundation

1 0

Time Magazine on America Online pornospam and Kids Summit
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

********* http://www.pathfinder.com/time/magazine/1997/dom/971215/technology.why_john… .html Time Magazine December 15, 1997 Page 76 AMERICA ONLINE'S LITTLE PROBLEM By Michael D. Lemonick Reported by Bruce van Voorst and Declan McCullagh/Washington If you logged on to America Online last week, you may well have found E-mail waiting from someone you never heard of imploring you to JOIN US AT PINK PUSSY CLUB THE HOTTEST SITE FOR XXX LIVE GIRL SEX SHOWS!! or proclaiming OVER 1,000 EROTIC AND EXOTIC SHOWS!!!!!! CLICK HERE TO ENTER or any of hundreds of similar electronic come-ons. Spam--unsolicited junk E-mail--is perhaps the most irritating feature of online life. Its purveyors use powerful software to "harvest" screen names and then ship out bulk electronic mail bearing sales pitches or get-rich-quick schemes. [...] Other Time features: Bruce Handy on last week's Kids Summit: "Why Johnny Can't Surf": http://www.pathfinder.com/time/magazine/1997/dom/971215/technology.america_… .html Time poll on Are Your Kids Safe Online? http://cgi.pathfinder.com/cgi-bin/gdml2x/game/time/internet

1 0

Re: Remailer Trivia / Re: Singapore & Freedom
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Doesn't Anonymous have a brother, Neal? Isn't he a playwrite, or > author, or something? > Anybody? Neal Coward?

1 0

Re: Complete package for Cantsin Protocol No. 2
by Charlie Comsec 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Steffen Zahn <zahn(a)berlin.snafu.de> wrote: > I have put together a package for Cantsin 2 Signatures, to > generate the keys, sign documents and check signatures. > > Prerequisites are: > > perl Version 5 > libgmp Version 2.* > a C compiler > currently /dev/random for generation of keys and signatures > > precompiled binaries are provided for Linux-ELF (libc-5.*), if you have > that you don't need libgmp. > > Pick it up from http://www.snafu.de/~zahn/cantsin.tar.gz (70 KByte) Have you got a URL I can check out which explains this protocol and how it's superior to, let's say, PGP? Thanks. - --- Finger <comsec(a)nym.alias.net> for PGP public key (Key ID=19BE8B0D) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNIwWngbp0h8ZvosNAQG9CQf+M9d05odxcm4s0D+hQltI5XbXFIE3iCzx Bjl6n7Bs0rrs/oCy3goxTjGwrwrYlDNa7bNYpnXBPDGbRiZ2UE9vGSNY1B4aa/NL vSwjlpG2chPp9rt5JEHiKV2EgUg0zvnK53L+wT4a2EB8xDkBIzcIbdTjThQqegnu IxKD8oGXwloq8hHOxZO9kCqGiUrbUTbLsY2Swt7clYwxnFGL54JS9mw9nlUCgv8m /MKU9w+RWBLzvuQv3yNK4VaTqyu/PJ8hm/9iMLCqiiF6Rghs+8euUVUSseeLJDrc ZApkfzt/JNiu58DLpt1pI3ZReR4lCEVHjbOID/WyOPeVSKdnRrkyug== =q1Hg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1