December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Identity, Persistence, Anonymity, and Accountability--Part II ofII
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

As promised, here is Part II, with a more graphical analysis of the issues of identity, anonymity, traceability, accountability, and the correlations between them. Consider two principles axes: -- identity -- accountability A "0" on the identity axis means a complete lack of any identity, with no assurance whatsoever in the nickname, casual name, and certainly not in the True Name, of an entity. The canonical "Anonymous," with not even any clues as to identity. A "1" on the identity axis means a complete certainty as to whom someone is, with extensive credentials, perhaps even voiceprint, blood tests, etc. An appearance by Bill Clinton probably rates a "0.999" on this scale, as various input vectors are summed...most of my posts might be rated at "0.95," and so on. There are some meta-issues about what true names really are. Was Bill Clinton switched at birth? Did the Trilateral Commission actually kill the real Bill Clinton when he was at Oxford and replace him with a KGB lookalike? Do his footprints match that on the birth certificate on file in the Arkansas hospital? Is that stuff even what we mean by "that guy is Bill Clinton"? I won't get into these meta-issues here, but they are eventual boundary-value problems for any "is-a-person" formal system. On the "accountability" axis, a "0" means an entity cannot be held accountable. Cannot be reached, cannot be hauled into court, etc. This could be because the entity is outside a jurisdiction. Marc Rich, resident of Zug, Switizerland, is about a "0.1" on the accoutability scale. A "1" obviously represents full accountability. Clearly it is possible for someone to be high on the identity scale (like Marc Rich), but low on the accountability scale. Or, more interestingly, it is possible for a participant in a transaction to be essentially anonymous, but very accountable. This is what digital cash and anonymous escrow systems provide. Chaum's "credentials without identity" makes this clear. It is possible to present some credential for some property, such as age, without identity. (An easy to see example being admissions to bars...as ID scanning technology spreads, we would like to see methods for checking an age credential without also creating a computer record of all bars visited, number of drinks consumed, etc.) (Crime and illegal markets often work this way, too. That is, with identity not necessarily known ("Vinnie the Nose"), but with other mechanisms for ensuring accountability. The usual, but important, stuff about reputation capital. Ditto for primitve markets, with goods left in clearings...absolutely no "identity," but various mechanisms for enforcement of trading protocols (including "no future business if you screw me," which is how many markets have worked, a la the Law Merchant for international trade, which evovled into the Uniform Commercial Code.) OK, here's a diagram. Notice that the central diagonal, the "main sequence" ( a la Hertzsprung-Russell diagrams) is the correlation between "identity" and "accountability." To those who argue that accountability IS identity, this is there line. But there are many other place in this space. For ease (to me) in making this diagram, I've had to just use letters, with the legend below the diagram. ^ CASH TOTAL 1 | CHAUM | ESCROW ^ | BRIN | | DIGNYM | | CORP Accountability | | | MRICH | | ANON 0 |_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 Identity --> CASH = immediate clearing, but no identity CHAUM = Chaumian "credentials without identity" (in many forms) ESCROW = leaving a deposit, or linking to another payer (an anonymous VISA card, with a deposit, works this way. Or a corporate account, card, etc., where the company backs the transaction, but identity of the participant is unknown, or poorly known) BRIN = David Brin's "accountability means identity" mapping (no doubt there are nuances to his view, but I believe this fairly characterizes the position he has described here recently) TOTAL = The total state. Eveyone in their place, every transaction logged, everyone held accountable by the State DIGNYM = Digital pseudonyms, or signed messages. Identity may be variable, from almost completely anonymous (e.g., Pr0duct Cypher) to known to some (e.g., Black Unicorn). Accountability also varies, depending on factors like jurisdiction. CORP = corporate, or collective, accounts, where identity of actual participants is poorly known, but accountability is high MRICH = identity known to high certainty, but "judgment proof" (note that this applies to many other persons, such as poor persons, who may say all kinds of libelous or actionable things, but who are not worth going after) ANON = the canonical "anonymous" message, with no identity, no accountability. Of course, there are many other examples. And each examples has "scatter." Each is a "blob," not just a point. And they can move around, as laws change. (For example, Marc Rich could quickly become "accountable" were Switzerland to change its laws about extradition.) The structure of this identity-accountability space is itself interesting, with peaks and valleys (suggesting a third axis, that of "cost" to live in these spaces....). And so on. I hope this helps clarify for you some of my thinking on these issues. i find that simplistic arguments, whether, "accountability requires identity," or "anonymity is a basic right," are not very helpful. There are clearly times when participants in a voluntary transaction want some kind of "identity credential" (especially to the extent they think identity = accountability). There may even be times when the State has a legitimate interest in compelling identity (though many of us would quibble with most such demands, and look for ways to satisfy these "is-a-person" needs less invasively than by requiring national I.D. cards and tattooes on forearms). Again, I hope this has helped. --Tim May Voluntary Mandatory Self-Rating of this Article (U.S. Statute 43-666-970719). Warning: Failure to Correctly and Completely Label any Article or Utterance is a Felony under the "Children's Internet Safety Act of 1997," punishable by 6 months for the first offense, two years for each additional offense, and a $100,000 fine per offense. Reminder: The PICS/RSACi label must itself not contain material in violation of the Act. ** PICS/RSACi Voluntary Self-Rating (Text Form) ** : Suitable for Children: yes Age Rating: 5 years and up. Suitable for Christians: No Suitable for Moslems: No Hindus: Yes Pacifists: No Government Officials: No Nihilists: Yes Anarchists: Yes Vegetarians: Yes Vegans: No Homosexuals: No Atheists: Yes Caucasoids: Yes Negroids: No Mongoloids: Yes Bipolar Disorder: No MPD: Yes and No Attention Deficit Disorder:Huh? --Contains discussions of sexuality, rebellion, anarchy, chaos,torture, regicide, presicide, suicide, aptical foddering. --Contains references hurtful to persons of poundage and people of color.Sensitive persons are advised to skip this article. **SUMMARY** Estimated number of readers qualified to read this: 1 Composite Age Rating: 45 years

1 0

Re: Fw: Jim Bell Sentenced (fwd)
by Phillip M. Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Phillip M. Hallam-Baker <hallam(a)ai.mit.edu> wrote: > >>FC folk may find this interesting. What Jim Bell was charged >>with and admitted was planning and executing attacks on the >>IRS. > >No, that's not correct. He was charged with (and plead guilty to) >obstructing an IRS agent (26 USC 7212(a)) and misuse of a Social Security >number (42 USC 408). The "attack" he admitted to executing consisted of >applying a stinky chemical to the doormat of an IRS office. (see ><http://jya.com/jimbell-dock4.htm> for more.) Actually I was entirely correct. He had already executed a non-lethal attack and there was considerable evidence to suggest he was planning something more lethal in future. >>His 'Assasination Politics' essay was used to demonstrate >>motive (amongst other things). > >That doesn't make any sense - it could conceivably have been introduced to >demonstrate intent, or state of mind .. but not motive, at least in the Read the essay, he quite clearly states his reason for wanting to see IRS agents murdered. >But it's misleading to say that the essay was used to "demonstrate" >anything, as it was never introduced into evidence - there was no trial. He plead guilty, to lesser charges. That does not mean he gets the benefit of the doubt. He was clearly a loon and quite probably would have killed someone sooner or later. Phill

2 1

Re: IRS intimidation of Cypherpunks
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

bureau42 Anonymous Remailer wrote: >would anyone be kind enough >to provide pointers to information about incidents of c-p >list members having received unsolicited email from .gov? See the IRS spam at: http://jya.com/irs-spam.htm And the 7 headers of 19 spams, titled "Death to Tyrants" and "Something of Interest" sent to various persons at: http://jya.com/irs-header.txt I recall that Declan offered to ask IRS about the spam, but do not recall if he was successful.

1 0

Gates of Hell
by Jenaer Mixmaster Anonserver 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'd always wondered how Bill Gates could shit with that pole so far up his ass. Then I realized: The pole is too long to be completely embedded in his ass and he uses the other half of it to rape computer users everywhere on a regular basis. And since the pole is crammed in his ass he can't shit, so he just retains his shit, making him incredibly anal retentive. I'm sure he enjoys this.

1 0

All Children Work in Sweatshops
by Eric Cordian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

One of the interesting things about the child porn crusades is the terminology manipulation employed to officially describe more and more innocuous things as officially being "child porn," and by inference, describing those who object the slightest bit to the government's violation of the First Ammendment as "child porn supporters." Now the wonders of government terminology have been applied to a new problem, the "scourge" of child labor. While an historical review will clearly demonstrate that laws preventing minors from working and earning a living had their origins in times when adult unemployment was high, and were heavily pushed by the public school teachers labor unions and immigrant parents outraged that their children had an opportunity for financial independence, the myth that such laws exist to "protect children" instead of to economically and politically disempower them persist. Enter the current crusade, being heavily trumpeted by the media, to rescue children from "sweatshops." What is a sweatshop, you may ask? According to the official definition, a "sweatshop" is a workplace that engages in repeated labor violations involving wages, hours worked, or the age of its employees. So by the magic of government definitions, all unlawfully employed minors automatically work in "sweatshops," by virtue of their being illegally employed. All people arguing for the right of minors to work of course "support sweatshops," and all consumers and stores who buy goods produced by these illegally employed minors are purchasing "goods produced by children working in sweatshops." 290,200 children are alleged to have been employed illegally last year, (in sweatshops of course). And woe to anyone who doesn't support the call to liberate these children from their paychecks. (er, sweatshops) The US is now attempting to export its crusade against so-called "child labor" to third world nations, citing of course only the most egregious examples in the case histories it presents. The US still refuses to sign the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child because it prohibits the execution of minors, which many US states permit, and guarantees minors access to reproductive health information. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

1 0

Invitation to Join "Nym"
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You are cordially invited to join "Nym," a new mailing list devoted to discussing anonymity and pseudonymity. The topics: anonymity's history, current politics, and proposals to regulate anonymous speech and commerce. Nym's primary, but not exclusive, focus is on anonymity and pseudonymity online. This includes the technologies of untraceability: digital cash, anonymous remailers, and public key encryption. It will be unmoderated but not widely advertised at first in hopes of preserving quality of conversations. Personally, I'd like to see folks join from many disciplines. I don't expect it to be very high volume. To sign up, or for more info: http://www.well.com/~declan/nym/ Or send "subscribe nym" to majordomo(a)vorlon.mit.edu. -Declan

1 0

Plot to Overthrow U.S.Government: three indicted
by ichudov＠Algebra.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Wow, this is a colorful story. As usual, I am not sure how much of it is true. igor Three Indicted in Alleged Plot to Overthrow U.S. Government AP 13-DEC-97 LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) Three men charged with planning a revolt against the United States government wanted to create a new republic limited to whites while allowing polygamy to build its population, prosecutors say. Chevie Kehoe of Colville, Wash., and Daniel Lewis Lee of Oklahoma City were charged Friday with murder, racketeering and conspiracy in a seven-count federal indictment. Kehoe, 24, directed the group, and Lee, 24, carried out the orders, the indictment said. Faron Lovelace, 40, of Sandpoint, Idaho, was charged with a single count of racketeering for allegedly being Kehoe's assistant. Prosecutors say Kehoe and the others wanted to create the Aryan Peoples Republic through a campaign of murder, robberies and kidnappings. Once the U.S. government was gone, their new country would grow quickly "by recruiting certain white people into the Republic and by engaging in polygamy so that the number of these white persons would greatly increase," the indictment said. The indictment did not detail threats or name targeted officials. Kehoe and Lee were previously charged in state court with the 1996 deaths of William Mueller, 52; his wife, Nancy, 28; and Mrs. Mueller's daughter, Sarah Elizabeth Powell, 8. Kehoe and Lee allegedly robbed Mueller, a gun dealer in Tilly, Ark., to support their cause, and the circumstances surrounding the deaths gave the Arkansas grand jury jurisdiction. Prosecutors said state murder charges would be dropped to allow the federal case to advance. Authorities say the Muellers and Kehoes knew each other and were associated through gun shows and militia group activities. Kehoe is accused of directing crimes that also include theft, interstate transportation of stolen property and money laundering. Part of Lee's job was to carry out four murders, and Lovelace's duties included one murder, according to the indictment. Kehoe and Lovelace are accused of transporting stolen goods from the white separatist community of Elohim City, Okla., to Spokane, Wash., in March 1995 and again from Arkansas to Washington after the Muellers were killed. Lovelace was convicted this year of killing Jeremy Scott, 23, in 1995 out of fear Scott was a government informant. Lovelace also has admitted kidnapping and robbing a Washington state couple in 1995. He held them captive for five hours after stealing their weapons and extorting several thousand dollars from them. Kehoe and his brother, Cheyne Kehoe, 21, made national headlines in February when they were allegedly involved in a shootout with Ohio police. It was caught on videotape by a camera mounted on a police car. No officers were wounded but a passerby was injured by a bullet fragment. Kehoe and his brother were fugitives until June, when Cheyne surrendered and told authorities where to find his brother. Cheyne was not named in Friday's indictment. Kehoe was being held in Ohio awaiting charges stemming from the videotaped shootout. Lee was jailed in Arkansas on capital murder charges, and Lovelace was being held in Idaho. Copyright 1997 & The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. `

3 2

No Subject
by Nobuki Nakatuji 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

When posted MISTY algorithm source code, I hadn't read "A Cypherpunk's Manifesto" yet. Such a fee was set up as a result. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

1 0

SHY?.....................................
by highjock＠yahoo.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

FREE.....FREE.....FREE..... FREE FREE CALL! 011-678-77432 ( NEW !!! ) If you're OVER 21, Get Ready and HANG ON! Our young girls are SEXY & HOT (or HOWEVER you want), and are for real! >>>>>> LIMITED TIME OFFER <<<<<< Talk to them LIVE...... For FREE! NO 900's, NO credit cards needed! Just pick up the phone.But HURRY. You don't have too much longer. We want to introduce you to our girls and our new business, so we're charging NOTHING for the service, you just pay for normal small long distance charges. Shy?........Then sit back and listen in on live, sexy conversations with other callers. Get away from that computer, loosen your belt for a few minutes, recharge your batteries, and have some fun! They're waiting for your call, and will talk about ANYTHING you want! No holds barred. >>>>> LIMITED TIME OFFER <<<<<< FREE CALL! 011-678-77432 (Use your country code if 011 doesn't work) This is a one time mailing!! You will not receive any more ads from us. But if you'd like, hit reply and put "remove me" on the subject line.

1 0

$145 turned to $1300: BEST investment for ANYBODY
by woostp＠ns.interred.co.cr 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Friend: Earlier this week I sent you this very same letter and since I have not heard from you I imagined either it didn't get delivered or you accidentally hit "delete" on it. Or you simply just haven't gotten around it. I don't think you want to wait around much longer. Especially if like other friends of mine and business relationships, you are interested in MULTIPLYING SUBSTANTIALLY (and in a very short time) a very small investment. So here again, is a copy of my letter. Today I write you to share one of the most simple and beneficial investments I found in the last months. I waited effectively several months to verify the incidence of my decision and truly, I am so glad of this one, that I decided to share it with a selected handful of people. I was proposed to invest $145 minimum and $485 maximum to receive a basic $1300 in the first months with a program, by sharing it with a very few friends. (I took the $485 option). Conclusion: not only didn't I have to wait one year to see a 800% of return on my investment, but I had the surprise to receive this amount SEVERAL TIMES BY MONTH. It seems incredible, but it's true. The American Company offering this program is not only serious, but I could personally speak with the President and the CPA and they have been reliable for the few friends I shared the program with. So, if I awakened your interest just a little bit, this is the moment and opportunity to give a look to the complete information pulling the FAX ON DEMAND # 716-720-2106 or visiting the following WEBSITE: http://peopleschoice.com/STP/home.html And remember, do as I did by considering this opportunity as an investment, and, applying the program, it will give you the most secure and fantastic yield you can find. FOR ONLY $145 to $485. Just try it, contemplating that the risk is around zero and share it with two or three of your best friends just after you applied. To participate, you must indicate a sponsor number. I would be glad if you used mine, it is: # 983 registered under the name of my corporation, WOOSTER CORP. So don't hesitate on this opportunity my friend. You are getting today one of the most safe and simple ways to increase a very little capital SEVERAL TIMES. Just try it as I did. Friendly Jean Marc Gelot CEO / WOOSTER CORP.

1 0