December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

cypherpunks, Are You Infringing someone's trademark rights?
by hark12＠eudoramail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi cypherpunks, ************************************************************************************ Please reply with subject "remove" to be removed ************************************************************************************ Every day some small business person finds them selves on the receiving end of a law suit filed by a multi-national corporation with deep pockets. They claim infringement on their trademark rights. Currently their wealth means they are winning by default. We want to make you aware of your rights so you do not find yourself in the position of being the next "someone" the big boys decide to make an example of in court. As a user of the Internet you are entitled to use your domain name, as your trademark, without fear of being sued. However, not everyone knows the secrets to proper use and as such they have left themselves wide open to attack. We have prepared an article titled "How to correctly use your domain name". We invite you to read it. You will find the article at http://www.arvic.com/library/domanuse.asp If you are a small business person using the Internet to market your business and your products then perhaps you will be interested in reading the companion article on "How to use your Corporate or Product names as trademarks". You will find this article at http://www.arvic.com/library/useoftm.asp We are Arvic Search Services Inc. We operate TMWeb the "Home of the $25.00 Canadian & American trademark search". Since 1982 we have grown to become one of the most dominant advocates of small business rights both on and off the Internet. We help individuals protect their rights to use unregistered, as well as registered, trademarks without incurring the cost of registration. We will even show you, at no charge, how to conduct your own trademark searches. If you are currently the owner of a trademark then you may find our article on "The do's and don'ts of Trademark use" of interest. You will find this article located at; http://www.arvic.com/library/buz004.asp We believe it is in your best interest to learn as much as you can about trademarks, the rights of trademark owners and your rights as an Internet citizen. We invite you to visit our web sites. There you will find, in addition to the above, a number of guides and "How to" articles that should be of assistance. You will also learn more about us and the services we offer. When you visit our sites you will find our North America wide toll free phone number located on the bottom of every page. We encourage you to call and discuss any trademark, trade name or domain name issue of concern to you. Victor G. Arcuri Arvic Search Services Inc. Registered Trademark Agents #1710, 505 - 3rd Street SW Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 2E6 Local Phone (403) 234-0844 Local Fax (403) 294-0944 Toll Free across North America 1-888-227-8421 Please visit our web sites http://www.arvic.com and http://www.tmweb.com ___________________ This is the first time I have done this type of promotion. I am not even certain that I have worded this information correctly. If you see where I have made a mstake by omission then I ask that you advise me of same so that I get the best possible return from these mailings. We did not discuss whcih day of the week you would be sending the mail. I would ask that you waite until next tuesday to send the Canadian. Monday is a holiday. The US mailings can go at your convenience. -- Victor G. Arcuri Arvic Search Services Inc. Registered Trademark Agents #1710, 505 - 3rd Street SW Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 2E6 Local Phone (403) 234-0844 Local Fax (403) 294-0944 Toll Free across North America 1-888-227-8421 Please visit our web sites http://www.arvic.com and http://www.tmweb.com

1 0

Re: Clinton's fake apologies (fwd)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sat, 12 Sep 1998, Jim Choate wrote: > I figure it's the fact that 'principles' are involved that is confusing > everybody, no room to move like there is with relativism. Bottem line, he > held a public office, while in that office he should commit *NO* crime or > else he should loose that office. There was no abmiguity there in the minds > of the founding fathers and there shouldn't be in yours either. If this > confuses you then take it as an indication that you have a axiomatic > contradiction in your world view and need to rethink things in a serious > way. > > As Jefferson said, if you hold a public office your public property. > > Nail the son of a bitch to the wall, he did the crime let him do the time. > > It's a pitty he doesn't have this sort of empathy for all those people he's > put in jail for consensual crimes during his tenure. The man has a base > double standard, let him pay for it. I agree totally, but this has a somewhat deeper point. The idiots in government sign into law all sorts of unconstitutional or nonsensical legislation. As far as I'm concerned, it ought to be a law that for *ANY* crime they commit they are thrown out of office and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Of course it would never happen, but if it were to happen I think we'd see massive repeals of all this bogus legislation. "Senator, you have an encrypted file on your laptop. As per the Domestic Cryptography Prohibition Act, I am here to seize your computer, the office it is in, freeze your assets, and take you into custody. You will be ejected from the Senate, effective immediately. If convicted, you will spend the next five years at hard labor." "But...But I didn't know it was there! It was a virus which put it there!" "Ignorance of your violations of the law are no excuse. It says so in that Act." "Who is the idiot who passed this?!" "You introduced it, sir. It was something about protecting the children and how anybody who uses cryptography is a pedophile or something like that." Later that night, on the news: "Senator X was ejected from the Senate, arrested, jailed, and charged today with unlawful possession of random numbers. Later it was announced that former Senator X was charged with trafficing in child pornography." The next day: "In a daring no-knock morning raid, a flurry of automatic weapons fire occured and former Senator X's family was killed in the exchange. An FBI agent was quoted as saying, 'She was wielding an assault baby and we had to take her down.'" "It has just been announced that former Senator X is being charged under the Domestric Cryptography Prohibition Act, which he sponsored, with 'crypto in a crime.' This carries an additional penalty of 10 years. When asked what crime the cryptography was used in, an FBI representative answered, 'Given what Senator X argued on the floor of the senate when he introduced this bill, we're sure there is child pornography there somewhere. Like he said, the only reason to use cryptography is if you have something to hide, like child pornography or plans for widespread global armageddon. Because he used cryptography, we don't know where or what that porn is, but we're sure it's there somewhere.'" Three years later: "Former Senator X was convicted today of one count of 'crypto in a crime,' five counts of possession of cryptography without a license, eight counts of child porn (one for each encrypted file), and one count of intent to use weapons of mass destruction. In a swift action, he was sentenced to six consecutive life terms, to be served at hard labor." "Jim, isn't all this agaist the Bill of Rights?" "Well, Tom, it used to be, but since they repealed it..." *fade to black*

1 0

Re: Democracy... (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 22:18:44 -0700 (PDT) > From: "Brian W. Buchanan" <brian(a)smarter.than.nu> > Subject: Re: Democracy... > Incorrect. A parking ticket, like a speeding ticket or other minor > traffic violations is classified as an "infraction", not a misdemeanor. > Apparently, even the govts. recognizes that there are so many laws on the > books now that one can't possibly hope to avoid breaking them. They're still at least a Class C misdemeanor in the state of Texas. ____________________________________________________________________ The seeker is a finder. Ancient Persian Proverb The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

CJ Message
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This allegedly is forwarded from CJ, though from an unknown source so think twice: Thu, Sep 09 1998 part of a communication received via the anonymous route: "In the meantime, I hope that anyone who has possession of the PGP Secret Keys for Toto, TruthMonger, Son of Gomez, Magic Circle, etc., feels free to use them to digitally sign messages to the CyperPunks Disturbed Male LISP. "Passwords: sog, sog709, sog709cejCJP,sog709cjpCEJ, D'Shauneaux, D'shauneaux, and others..." --------- Some of CJ's amazing output related to the message above is archived at: http://www.uneedus.com/~dave/library.html See "Psychotic."

1 0

RF networks, spread spectrum (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 22:31:22 -0700 (PDT) > From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles(a)netbox.com> > Subject: RF networks, spread spectrum > Cpunks interested in radio networking and spread spectrum apps might find > the following links useful - > > <http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/fhsspaper.97.html> describes the design of > a 900 mhz spread spectrum 128kb/s TCP/IP radio network with 10baseT > input/outputs; > > <http://www.tapr.org/ss/qexss.html> provides an overview of spread > spectrum projects/regulations/applications > > <http://www.tapr.org/ss/index.html> has links to more spread spectrum > stuff. Another source of related information is the AX.25 Level 2 support built into the current Linux kernels. If you're using SuSE 5.3 it's located on the install CD at: /unsorted/Amateur-Funk & /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/ax25.txt In the SuSE manual (pp. 188) it says: "Enables data transfer via CB" ____________________________________________________________________ The seeker is a finder. Ancient Persian Proverb The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

DCS-NY Initial Meeting on September 8th
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text From: "DCS-NY Announcements" <dcs-ny-rsvp(a)piermont.com> To: "recipient list suppressed" <perry(a)piermont.com> Subject: DCS-NY Initial Meeting on September 8th Reply-To: perry(a)piermont.com Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Date: 17 Sep 1998 14:05:02 -0400 Lines: 103 [If you know of people who may be interested in this meeting, please feel free to forward this message to them.] I am pleased to announce the second luncheon meeting of the Digital Commerce Society of New York (DCS-NY), to be held on Tuesday, October 13th at 12:00. If you are interested in attending, please RSVP and send in your check (as explained below) as quickly as possible. We have relatively little time to make arrangements, and need to have a solid idea of the number of attendees by Friday the 25th of September. This Month's Luncheon Speaker: Stuart Feldman, IBM Institute for Advanced Commerce, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center Topic: Future Directions in Electronic Commerce Stuart Feldman will delve into a half dozen major themes for long-term research in electronic commerce. These areas will take years to resolve at a research level and even longer to achieve full impact in the world economy. They include privacy, the evolving marketplace on several time scales, the rise of dynamic businesses and electronic haggling, improved relationships to customers, and the systems underpinnings needed to support the vast new opportunities and capabilities of electronic commerce. Stuart Feldman is Director of IBM's Institute for Advanced Commerce. The Institute is dedicated to creating new technologies for support of e-commerce as well as pursuing fundamental issues in e-commerce. He is also the author of the original "make" and "f77." WHAT IS DCS-NY? As some of you probably know, Robert Hettinga has been running a group called the Digital Commerce Society of Boston for over three years. DCSB meets once a month for lunch at the Harvard Club in Boston to hear a speaker and discuss the implications of rapidly emerging internet and cryptographic technologies on finance and commerce -- "Digital Commerce", in short. The Digital Commerce Society of New York (DCS-NY) is a spin-off of DCSB. We intend to meet the second Tuesday of each month for lunch at the Harvard Club in New York, and conduct meetings much like those of DCSB. Our organizing meeting in September was attended by a wide variety of professionals involved in the business, technical and legal sides of the emerging world of digital commerce. If you are interested in attending our next luncheon meeting, please follow the directions located below. If you merely wish to be added to our e-mail meeting announcements list, you may send your e-mail address to "dcs-ny-rsvp(a)piermont.com". Perry PS We would like to thank John McCormack for his invaluable assistance in procuring the venue for our meetings. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- HOW TO RSVP: The meeting will start at 12:00 noon on October 13th at the Harvard Club, which located at 27 West 44th St. in Manhattan. The cost of the luncheon is $49.00. To RSVP, please: A) Send a check for $49.00 (payable to "The Harvard Club of New York") to: Harry S. Hawk DCS-NY LUNCHEON Piermont Information Systems, Inc. 175 Adams St., #9G Brooklyn, New York 11201 Please include along with your check: 1) The name of the person attending 2) Their daytime phone number 3) Their e-mail address B) Send an email message to dcs-ny-rsvp(a)piermont.com indicating that you have sent your check, so that we can inform the Harvard Club of the number of people who will be attending. Please note that the Harvard Club dress code requires jacket and tie for men and comparable attire for women. If you have special dietary requirements, please check with us by email before you RSVP. Making final arrangements for our room requires that we have a good idea of how many attendees we will have. Because of this, it is very important that you RSVP quickly so that we will be able to get a larger room if necessary. We are looking forward to seeing you! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Perry --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 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'

1 0

THE WHITE HOUSE: Briefing on encryption ( X-files ?? )
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text From: "Blair Anderson" <blair(a)technologist.com> To: "Robert Hettinga" <rah(a)shipwright.com> Date: Fri, 18 Sep 98 11:07:29 +1300 Reply-To: "Blair Anderson" <blair(a)technologist.com> Priority: Normal MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: THE WHITE HOUSE: Briefing on encryption ( X-files ?? ) THE WHITE HOUSE: Briefing on encryption M2 PRESSWIRE-17 September 1998-THE WHITE HOUSE: Office of the Press Secretary -- Briefing on encryption (C)1994-98 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD * Briefing by the Vice President, Deputy Chief of Staff John Podesta, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Robert Litt, Assistant Director of the FBI Carolyn Morris, Under Secretary of Commerce William Reinsch, Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre, and Deputy National Security Advisor Jim Steinberg * The Briefing Room THE VICE PRESIDENT: Good morning. While my colleagues are coming in here, let me acknowledge them. John Podesta is going to take over the podium after I complete my statement, and he is joined by Bob Litt of the Justice Department, Bill Reinsch of the Commerce Department -- Under Secretary for the Export Administration -- and John Hamre, Deputy Secretary of Defense. I also want to acknowledge Carolyn Morris of the FBI; Barbara McNamara of the National Security Agency; John Gordon, Deputy Director of the CIA. And you all should know that this process, the results of -- the interim results of which I'm announcing here, is a process that has been run principally by John Podesta and Jim Steinberg, Deputy at the National Security Council. And I also want to thank Sally Katzen at the NEC and David Beier on my staff for the work that they and many others have done on this. Some of you who have followed this issue know that it is probably one of the single, most difficult and complex issues that you can possibly imagine. But we've made progress, and we're here this morning to announce an important new action that will protect our national security and our safety, and advance our economic interests and safeguard our basic rights and values in this new Information Age. The Information Age has brought us the Internet, an inter-connected global economy and the promise of connecting us all to the same vast world of knowledge. But with that exciting promise comes new challenges. We must make sure that in the Information Age you get information about the rest of the world and not the other way around. We must ensure that new technology does not mean new and sophisticated criminal and terrorist activity which leaves law enforcement outmatched -- we can't allow that to happen. And we must ensure that the sensitive financial and business transactions that now cruise along the information superhighway are 100 percent safe in cyberspace. Balancing these needs is no simple task, to say the least. That is why, in taking the next step toward meeting these complex goals, we worked very closely with members of Congress from both parties, House and Senate; with industry; with our law enforcement community and with our national security community. And as we move forward we want to keep working closely with all who share a stake in this issue -- especially law enforcement -- to constantly assess and reassess the effectiveness of our actions in this fast changing medium. Today I'm pleased to announce a new federal policy for the encryption and protection of electronic communication, a policy that dramatically increases privacy and security for families and businesses without endangering out national security. Beginning today, American companies will be able to use encryption programs of unlimited strength when communicating between most countries. Health, medical, and insurance companies will be able to use far stronger electronic protection for personal records and information. Law enforcement will still have access to criminally-related information under strict and appropriate legal procedures. And we will maintain our full ability to fight terrorism and monitor terrorist activity that poses a grave danger to American citizens. With this new announcement, we will protect the privacy of average Americans, because privacy is a basic value in the Information Age, indeed in any age. We will give industry the full protection that it needs to enable electronic commerce to grow and to thrive. And we will give law enforcement the ability to fight 21st century crimes with 21st century technology, so our families and businesses are safe, but on-line outlaws are not safe. In just a moment you will hear more of the details of this new policy, but I want to conclude by saying that this policy does reflect one of the greatest challenges of these new times. And to state it broadly, it's a challenge of how we can harness powerful new technology while protecting our oldest and most cherished values, such as privacy and safety. I'm grateful to those who have worked so hard to reach this balance. And with today's announcement I believe that all families and businesses have reason to feel safer, more secure and more confident as we approach the 21st century. And now I'd like to turn things over to White House Deputy Chief of Staff John Podesta. Q Mr. Vice President, before you go, can you tell us what you say to Democratic lawmakers who say the President ought to resign? THE VICE PRESIDENT: I disagree. Q How about the release of that tape? What do you think -- THE VICE PRESIDENT: The President is going to have a press conference shortly and I'm sure that you will not miss the opportunity at this national security press conference with the leader of a foreign country to raise all these questions. Q What about the videotape, should it be released? Q It was staged by the White House -- you know that, don't you? MR. PODESTA: Guess what? I'm here to talk about encryption. Okay. I can see the front row leaving here. (Laughter.) As the Vice President noted, Jim Steinberg and I have co-chaired our process in this matter. I volunteered for that duty because of my well-known fascination with The X Files, which most of you know about. As you know, this is an important and challenging issue that affects many of our interests in our society. And over the past year we've promoted a balanced approach to the issue, working with all segments of our government and working with industry to find a policy that promotes electronic commerce, preserves privacy, protects national security and law enforcement interests, and permits U.S. industry to secure global markets. Recognizing the importance of moving this issue forward, last March the Vice President asked us to intensify our dialogue with U.S. industry, to bring industry's technical expertise to bear on this issue with the hope of finding more innovative ways that we might assist law enforcement. We appreciate the efforts of Congress, the law enforcement community and particularly the industry groups. I would note the Computer Systems Policy Project and the Americans for Computer Privacy, who have been in an intensive dialogue with us over the past many months to foster an environment that has allowed us to come up with a policy which we believe has balanced the elements that are necessary in this regard. I think all the stakeholders in this process, on our side, as well as on private industry's side, now have a greater appreciation of the issues and intend to continue the dialogue, which I think we're most pleased by. Again, I think some of the people here from industry will be available at the stakeout later to take some comment. Based on the ideas discussed among the various stakeholders, today we're proposing an update to our policies that we've announced in the past. I'm going to serve kind of as M.C. We're going to start off with Bob Litt from the Justice Department and Carol Morris, who I asked to join us, from the FBI, to talk about the law enforcement-FBI concerns. Then we're going to turn to Bill Reinsch from the Commerce Department to talk about export control and electronic commerce. And finally you'll hear from Dr. Hamre from the Defense Department. I might ask Jim also to join us up here. Before I give up the floor to Bob and Carol, though, I want to stress that encryption policy is an ongoing process. It's one of adaptation; it's an evolutionary process. We intend to continue the dialogue, and over the course of the next year, determine what further updates are necessary as we work with industry to try to, again, come up with a policy that balances national security, law enforcement, and the real needs for privacy and security in electronic commerce. Thank you. Let me turn it over to Bob. MR. LITT: Thank you, John. Good afternoon. The Justice Department and the FBI and law enforcement in general is supportive, very supportive of today's announcement on the updating of our export controls on encryption products, particularly with respect to those products that allow law enforcement to obtain lawful access to the plain text of encrypted information. We have been very encouraged over the last few months by industry's efforts to work with us to develop and market strong encryption products that provide law-abiding citizens with the ability to protect the privacy of their communications and their electronically-stored data, while at the same time maintaining law enforcement's ability to ensure public safety when these products, when they become commercially available, are used in furtherance of serious criminal activity. Our goal is through whatever means to ensure that when we have the lawful authority to take steps to protect public safety, we have the ability to do so. And we have been working cooperatively with industry for many months to develop approaches that will deal with that. Carolyn Morris will now talk a little bit about the technical support center that is being proposed. MS. MORRIS: Thank you very much, Bob. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. We in federal, state, and local law enforcement, are pleased with the administration's support to establish a technical support center. This center will provide federal, state, and local law enforcement with the resources and the technical capabilities we need to fulfill our investigative responsibilities. In light of strong, commercially available encryption products that are being proliferated within the United States, and when such products are used in the furtherance of serious criminal activity, this center becomes very, very critical to solving the encryption issues that we need to make cases. As a matter of fact, the FBI has already begun planning activities of this critical technical support center in anticipation of the availability of funds. The United States federal, local and state law enforcement community looks forward to a cooperative partnership with American industry, the Congress and the administration to ensure that this technical support center becomes a reality in the near future. With this center the American people can be assured that federal, state, and local law enforcement has the necessary resources and tools we need to fulfill our public safety mission. Thank you very much. UNDER SECRETARY REINSCH: With respect to export controls, the administration is updating its policy in three areas: Our existing policy and some revisions there, an expansion with respect to certain sectors, and an expansion with respect to so-called recoverable products. And let me address each of these separately. In keeping with the administration's reinvention initiatives, I'm going to try to do it in plain language -- or plain English, So that those of you that speak the vocabulary of encryption may find it to elementary, but we can go back and do it again in another language, if you want, later on in questions. With respect to our existing policy, we have for two years ending this December, permitted the export of 56-bit products after an initial one-time review without further review by the government. What we're announcing today is the maintenance of that window permanently. And so 56-bit products will be freed from export controls after a one-time review, in perpetuity, not ending at the end of this year. We are, however, removing the requirement for key recovery plans or key recovery commitments to be provided in return for that change, which was the initial condition that we extracted. In addition, we are continuing to permit the export of key recovery products -- products that contain those features -- without restraint worldwide. We are, however, going to simplify significantly our regulations that relate to those exports. In particular, we're going to eliminate the need for six-month progress reports for the plans that have been submitted, and we're going to eliminate the requirement for any prior reporting of key recovery agent information. For those of you that follow the regulations in detail, that means we're going to eliminate Supplement Five of our regulations on these matters. Now, with respect to sectors, we're making some new innovations in four areas. Some of you may be familiar with the fact that some time ago we announced expanded treatment of encryption products for export to banks and financial institutions. And what we did at that time, briefly, was to permit the export of encryption products of any length, any bit length, with or without key recovery features to banks and financial institutions in a list of 45 countries. What we are announcing today is, first, that we are adding insurance companies to the definition of financial institutions, so insurance companies will be treated the same way under this policy as banks and other financial institutions are now. In addition, we are providing the same kind of treatment for exports of these encryption products to the health and medical sector operating in the same set of countries. We are excluding from that biochemical and pharmaceutical producers. But the rest of the health and medical sector will be the beneficiary of the same kind of treatment. In addition, we are providing also this expanded treatment for that country group to on-line merchants that are operating in those countries. That means that for products that are like client-server applications, like SSL, will be able to be exported to those destinations. All these things will take place under what we call license exception, which means after initial one-time review to determine whether or not your product is, in fact, what you say it is, they can then go without any further review or intervention by the government to those locations. In addition, there is always the option in the export control system of coming in with an application to export these kinds of products to other destinations beyond the ones that I'm talking about right now, and those will be reviewed one by one on their merits. Finally, with respect to what we have come to refer to as a class of so-called recovery capable or recoverable products, and these are the products that, among others, include what has become known as the doorbell products, which are products that, among other things, will deal with the development of local area or wide area networks and the transmission of e-mail and other data over networks -- we are going to permit the export of those products under a presumption of approval and an export licensing arrangement to a list of 42 countries. And within those countries we are going to permit that export to commercial firms only within those countries. And both in that case and in the case of the on-line merchants that I referred to a few minutes ago, we are going to exclude manufacturers or distributors of munitions items, I think for obvious reasons. We can go into further details later, if you would like. I think for those of you that are interested in the nitty-gritty of all this stuff, BXA intends to post all the details, including the country lists, on its website and we should have that up later today. Thank you. DEPUTY SECRETARY HAMRE: Good morning. I'm here to speak on behalf of the national security community. I'm joined today by my enormously capable counterparts and colleagues, Deputy Director Barbara McNamara for the National Security Agency; and Deputy Director John Gordon from the Central Intelligence Agency. The national security establishment strongly supports this step forward. We think this is a very important advance in a crucial area for our security in the future. We in DOD had four goals when we entered these discussions. First was to strengthen our ability to do electronic commerce. We're the largest company in the world. Every month we write about 10 million paychecks. We write about 800,000 travel vouchers. One of our finance centers disburses $45 million an hour. We are a major, major force in business. And for that reason, we can't be efficient unless we can become fully electronic, and electronic commerce is essential for us. And this is an enormous step forward. Second, we must have strong encryption and a security structure for that in order to protect ourselves in cyberspace. Many of you know that we have experienced a number of cyber attacks during the last year. This will undoubtedly increase in the future. We need to have strong encryption because we're operating over public networks; 95 percent of all of our communications now go over public infrastructure -- public telephone lines, telephone switches, computer systems, et cetera. To protect ourselves in that public environment, we must have encryption and we must have a key recovery system for ourselves. The third goal that we had was to help protect America's infrastructure. One of the emerging national security challenges of the next decade is to protect this country, the homeland defense of this country, against attack. We must have strong encryption in order to do that, because most of this infrastructure now is being managed through distributed computer-based management systems, and this is an important step forward. Finally, it is very important that the Department of Defense and our colleagues in the national security establishment have the ability to prosecute our national security interests overseas. Terrorists and rogue nations are increasingly using these tools to communicate with each other and to lay their plans. We must have the ability to deal with that. And so this policy, it's a balanced and structured approach to be able to deal with all four of those problems. UNDER SECRETARY REINSCH: I apologize -- in listing my changes, I neglected one very important item that I want to go back to, and that is, in the sector area we are also announcing today the ability to export strong encryption of any bit length, with or without key recovery features, to subsidiaries of U.S. companies to all destinations in the world with the exception of the seven terrorist nations. MR. PODESTA: Okay, I think we're happy to take your questions now. If you could identify whom you're addressing, because there is a variety of expertise. And I would like to introduce one other person, Charlotte Knepper from the NSC staff, who has been instrumental in pulling this all together. Q John, this is a question for you. In October '96 and other White House statements on encryption, there has usually been a line also addressing the domestic side, saying that all Americans remain free to use any strength encryption. I didn't notice anything like that in today's announcement. Are there any conditions under which the White House would back domestic restrictions on encryption? MR. PODESTA: We haven't changed our policy, and the previous statements are certainly intact. We have made a number of policy statements in the past, since this administration came into office, and I think that you should view this as a step forward, building on the policies that we have put before the American public in the past. Q John, could I ask you one question about an un-encrypted matter? MR. PODESTA: Maybe. (Laughter.) Q Democrats on the Hill are now saying, and John Kerry is saying that the President's actions absolutely call for some sort of punishment. What are Democrats telling you about what they feel must be done at this point? MR. PODESTA: Well, I think I'm not going to stand here and take a lot of questions, but I'm going to give special dispensation, as a Catholic, today -- which is I'm going to return your phone calls later. But in deference to the people up here I think we'll handle it that way. But in specific response, I'll take one, which is that I think that we had a number of productive meetings with Democrats on both sides of the Hill yesterday. They view the President as a person who has led on the issues that are important to them, and I think what they want to do is get back to having him speak out and be a leader on the issues of education and the health care bill of rights, on saving Social Security. And I think they pointed at that and wanted to work with us on that. I think with regard to the question that you posed with regard to Senator Kerry, I think that's a matter that they are debating amongst themselves more than they are debating with the White House. I think it's probably presumptuous for us at this point to offer them assistance or guidance. I mean, the President has said that what he has done was wrong; he's apologized for it; he's asked for forgiveness. He is moving forward. And I think that this debate is going on, on Capitol Hill, but it's largely going on amongst members themselves. Q We haven't heard many of them say they want to get back to the work at hand. MR. STEINBERG: You heard John, and I'm going to leave it there. Let me just add a word in response, in connection with the domestic controls issue. I think one of the lessons that we've learned from this exercise is that -- actually, two lessons -- one, that trying to balance the various interests and equities in this is much less of a zero sum gain than I think some began to look at the question. That is, you heard from Dr. Hamre and others that many of the interests involved have common interests in making sure that we have secure and effective means of dealing with communications and stored data. And so we found, by looking in a very pragmatic way, that there were ways to solve these problems without very, kind of, broad-based solutions. In particular, I think the idea that there's no one-size-fits-all answer to the problems of meeting the various needs informs the decisions that we reached -- that there are a variety of different techniques that respond to the different aspects of the industry, the different aspects of the technology. I think that's what made the progress possible today, is that industry, agencies and Congress sat down together, pulled the problem apart, began to look at its different components and began to fashion very pragmatic solutions. And so I think we came to this discussion with a spirit of not looking for a kind of single or simple solution to the problem but, rather, how do you tackle and meet the various needs. And I think that's what led to this resolve. Q Could you talk a little more about the on-line merchants part of it? I mean, what do you have to do to qualify as an on-line merchant? Do you have to register or can anybody sort of set themselves up in business? UNDER SECRETARY REINSCH: I think the simplest way to respond to that right now is we'll have a definition in the reg that will be very clear as to what the criteria are for qualification. And those definitions have already been dealt with and agreed to, so we should have them up on the web site this afternoon. Q A question for Bill Reinsch. How do you handle, then, 128-bit, to which the Department has given export -- or has allowed to be exported after going through this review? Will 128 or things above 56-bit, will they require a license or will they still have to go through plans -- UNDER SECRETARY REINSCH: Well, with respect to the subsidiaries, the health sector, the banks, the financial institutions, the insurance companies, the on-line merchants, and the recoverable products as in the universe defined -- no. In the case of all but the recoverable products, they will all go on license exception, which means one-time review and then out the door. With respect to recoverable products, they will come in and go out pursuant to an export licensing arrangement, where we'll have to do a little tailoring depending upon the nature of the product. But there is a presumption of approval for the 42 countries that I indicated. And that's without reference to bit length -- 128 or more is all covered by that. Now, if you want to export an 128-bit product that is beyond any of those universes, then you would have to come in for an individual license application. Q A question for Mr. Litt. With regard to the technical support center, when do you expect that to be in operation? MR. LITT: I don't think we have a specific timetable yet. Obviously, it would be helpful for us to have it up and operational as soon as possible, but there are planning and budgetary issues that have to be dealt with. Q This is probably a question for Under Secretary Reinsch. The export exceptions now are essentially going to U.S. subsidiaries -- foreign subsidiaries of U.S. companies. I was wondering, could you be a little more specific -- what size company, what kind of company will be allowed to export powerful crypto to its foreign subsidiaries? UNDER SECRETARY REINSCH: That doesn't make any difference. The universe is determined by the end user, not by the nature of the American company. But it is not -- while part of this relates to subsidiaries of U.S. companies, that is correct, we also intend, on a case-by-case basis, to provide for favorable treatment for export of the same kind of thing to strategic partners of U.S. companies -- those foreign companies that are engaged in a closer, say, joint venture, that kind of relationship. Well, I think that's it. Q What about foreign companies that have U.S. subsidiaries, like Seaman's or -- or Chrysler -- can they get this encryption? UNDER SECRETARY REINSCH: Well, keep in mind, there are multiple universes here. If you're talking about the financial institutions, the banks and the insurance companies, those aren't necessarily American financial institutions. That's for export to any financial institution, and for their use in any of their branches, aside from the terrorist countries. This is true for the health sector; this is true for on-line merchants as well. Those are not restricted to U.S. companies. Obviously, if we're going to have a requirement for U.S. subs, it relates to U.S. subs, and wouldn't affect the examples you've described. Now, with respect to recoverable products, which actually is one of the areas where the companies you mentioned would probably be looking because they'd be looking to build a network among their various offices, affiliates of subsidiaries, dealers if necessary, worldwide, the recoverable provisions that I described could be exported to those companies within the territorial universe I described -- the 42 countries. Thank you very much. Blair Anderson (Blair(a)technologist.com) International Consultant in Electronic Commerce, Encryption and Electronic Rights Management "Techno Junk and Grey Matter" (HTTP://WWW.NOW.CO.NZ [moving servers, currently inactive]) 50 Wainoni Road, Christchurch, New Zealand phone 64 3 3894065 fax 64 3 3894065 Member Digital Commerce Society of Boston ---------------------------- Caught in the Net for 25 years ---------------------------- --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 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'

1 0

Sept. 19 column - Clintonites reject reality
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 23:24:28 -0600 Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 22:23:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: vin(a)dali.lvrj.com Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vinsends(a)ezlink.com From: Vin_Suprynowicz(a)lvrj.com (Vin Suprynowicz) Subject: Sept. 19 column - Clintonites reject reality Resent-From: vinsends(a)ezlink.com X-Mailing-List: <vinsends(a)ezlink.com> archive/latest/557 X-Loop: vinsends(a)ezlink.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vinsends-request(a)ezlink.com FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED SEPT. 19, 1998 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz It's the government schools, stupid Bill Clinton is a fake. As many Americans who had been taken in by him looked on in wide-eyed horror on Sept. 10 and 11, 1998, this emotionally hollow creature tried again and again to mimic precisely the right catch in the voice, precisely the right words, the wiping away of a tear at just the right moment, in what quickly became known as the Monica Lewinsky "Apology-thon." Just as our penultimate national office manager, George Bush, spoke with an impatient lack of comprehension about "the vision thing" folks seemed to want from him, so does Bill Clinton fail to understand the horror with which it is finally sinking in to about 35 percent of the American populace that this man (start ital)has(end ital) no core emotions ... he has merely been miming them all these years. But what should really frighten us is not the fact that Bill Clinton is thus revealed to be the moral and emotional equivalent of one of those human-looking androids in the science fictions movies, unmasked in a now-familiar scene in which they begin to stutter and shudder, and finally go cartwheeling around the spacecraft spewing white hydraulic fluid. No, what should frighten us is that only 35 percent of Americans seem to care. Sixty-five percent say: "So what? All that moral and emotional stuff is so much make-believe, anyway. Doesn't everybody lie? Doesn't everybody fake it?" Where did this race of pod people come from? From the government schools, stupid. For years, folks have been dismissing the direst of warnings about the "public schooling" scam with exasperated disbelief. Schools don't fight duplicity, cheating, drug use, and scorn for achievement, argued New York State Teacher of the Year John Taylor Gatto in his slim but estimable little volume "Dumbing Us Down" ($12.45, New Society Publishers, 4527 Springfield Ave., Philadelphia 19143.) Instead, Mr. Gatto discovered after a lengthy and distinguished career, these things are what the schools actually (start ital)teach(end ital). "Put kids in a class and they will live out their lives in an invisible cage, isolated from their chance at community," Gatto warns. "Interrupt kids with bells and horns all the time and they will learn that nothing is important; force them to plead for the natural right to the toilet and they will become liars and toadies; ridicule them and they will retreat from human association; shame them and they will find a hundred ways to get even" through exactly the kind of addictive, immature and dependent pathologies we expect from any inmates -- drugs, violence, random sex. # # # What caused his teachers to praise someone like the young Bill Clinton, who didn't just dodge the physical risks of Vietnam, but who (as some are only now discovering) apparently avoided all the emotional risks and commitments which help a boy mature into a man, leaving a 50-year-old president at the approximate level of emotional development of a giggling, groping 13-year-old, promising to "marry" his date to the sock hop if she'll let him cop a feel? Apparently no one believes Mr. Gatto. But the great novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand further explained the process by which children's normal mental and emotional development are now systematically and deliberately crippled in a 1970 essay called "The Comprachicos," available in the Meridian paperback "The New Left:" "At the age of three, when his mind is almost as plastic as his bones, when his need and desire to know are more intense than they will ever be again, a child is delivered -- by a Progressive nursery school -- into the midst of a pack of children as helplessly ignorant as himself. ... He wants to learn; he is told to play. Why? No answer is given. He is made to understand -- by the emotional vibrations permeating the atmosphere of the place ... that the most important thing in this peculiar world is not to know, but to get along with the pack. Why? No answer is given. "He does not know what to do; he is told to do anything he feels like. He picks up a toy; it is snatched away from him by another child; he is told that he must learn to share. Why? No answer is given. He sits alone in a corner; he is told that he must join the others. Why? No answer is given. He approaches a group, reaches for their toys and is punched in the nose. He cries, in angry bewilderment; the teacher throws her arms around him and gushes that she loves him. ... "The teacher's mechanical crib-side manner -- the rigid smile, the cooing tone of voice ... the coldly unfocused, unseeing eyes -- add up in the child's mind to a word he will soon learn: phony. He knows it is a disguise; a disguise hides something; he experiences suspicion -- and fear. "A small child is mildly curious about, but not greatly interested in, other children of his own age. In daily association, they merely bewilder him. He is not seeking equals, but cognitive superiors, people who (start ital)know(end ital). Observe that young children prefer the company of older children or of adults, that they hero-worship and try to emulate an older brother or sister. A child needs to reach a certain development, a sense of his own identity, before he can enjoy the company of his 'peers.' But he is thrown into their midst and told to adjust. "Adjust to (start ital)what?(end ital) To anything. To cruelty, to injustice, to blindness, to silliness, to pretentiousness, to snubs, to mockery, to treachery, to lies ... and to the overwhelming , overpowering presence of Whim as the ruler of everything. ... "After a while, he adjusts. ... He learns that regardless of what he does -- whether his action is right or wrong, honest or dishonest, sensible or senseless -- if the pack disapproves, he is wrong and his desire is frustrated; if the pack approves, then anything goes. Thus the embryo of his concept of morality shrivels before it is born," and is replaced with the realization that the objective reality of achievement is worthless, that everything of value is instead gained through the emotional manipulation of the pack, Ms. Rand explained. "Cut off from reality, which he has not learned fully to grasp, he is plunged into a world of fantasy playing. He may feel a dim uneasiness, at first: to him, it is not imagining, it is lying. But he loses that distinction and get into the swing. The wilder his fantasies, the warmer the teacher's approval and concern. ... He begins to believe his own fantasies. ... Why bother facing problems if they can be solved by make-believe? ... "The teacher prods him to self-expression, but he knows that this is a trap; he is being put on trial before the pack, to see whether he fits or not. He senses that he is constantly expected to feel, but he does not feel anything -- only fear, confusion, helplessness and boredom. ... "So he learns to hide his feelings, to simulate them, to pretend, to evade -- to repress. The stronger his fear, the more aggressive his behavior; the more uncertain his assertions, the louder his voice. From playacting, he progresses easily to the skill of putting on an act. ... He cannot know by what imperceptible steps he, too, has become a phony." # # # Is it really so hard to see how an "education" system that grades children on group projects and "how they fit in with others," that flatters them that all their uninformed opinions are equally, indiscriminately worthy of "discussion groups," that rejects the tried and true practice of encouraging the majority to aspire to match the achievements of the best and the brightest, instead naming (start ital)every(end ital) child "Student of the Month," could end up producing a Bill Clinton ... or 100 million Bill Clintons? Is it really any surprise that two whole American generations are now schooled not in math, spelling, and grammar, but rather in fantasy, deception, and manipulation? Can we really be surprised that they ignore evidence that the garbage men pour all their sorted trash into the same trucks, insisting the exercise of sorting green bottles from brown is still worthwhile if it "raises everyone's consciousness"? That they snort at statistics proving cities with gun bans actually have the highest rates of crime, or that one volcano releases more "greenhouse gases" than 1,000 years of Freon? They they instead insist it doesn't matter whether an "assault weapons ban" will really reduce crime, or whether banning spray cans will really close the "ozone hole," so long as jailing the violators of such freedom-crushing edicts makes us all (start ital)feel better about ourselves(end ital), since "at least we tried"? Should we really be surprised to hear them now, whining "What do you want? Everyone has affairs. Everyone lies under oath." Or, as letter-writer Bob Gore puts it in the Sept. 20 Las Vegas Review-Journal: "I feel like I'm living in a country that is collectively raising an adolescent. Listen to Billy Clinton and his friends: 'I didn't do it. Nobody saw me do it. You can't prove a thing. Everybody does it. It's no worse than anybody else. Kenny is a snitch ... and he's an old meanie. I do not have the five dollars that was on your dresser (I already spent it). I have to answer all the tough questions. I know I burnt the house down, but think of the new one we'll get. I'm sorry for what I did even though I didn't do anything.' ... "We're living an episode of 'The Simpsons', and Bart's in charge," Mr. Gore concludes. "I can't wait for this kid to move out -- as soon as he grows up." Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin(a)lvrj.com. The column is syndicated in the United States and Canada via Mountain Media Syndications, P.O. Box 4422, Las Vegas Nev. 89127. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin(a)lvrj.com Education rears disciples, imitators, and routinists, not pioneers of new ideas and creative geniuses. The schools are not nurseries of progress and improvement, but conservatories of tradition and unvarying modes of thought. -- Ludwig von Mises The most difficult struggle of all is the one within ourselves. Let us not get accustomed and adjusted to these conditions. The one who adjusts ceases to discriminate between good and evil. He becomes a slave in body and soul. Whatever may happen to you, remember always: Don't adjust! Revolt against the reality! -- Mordechai Anielewicz, Warsaw, 1943 * * * --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 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'

1 0

Re: THE WHITE HOUSE: Briefing on encryption ( X-files ?? )
by Dan S. Camper 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What is the URL for the web site mentioned here? Thanks, DSC >UNDER SECRETARY REINSCH: I think the simplest way to respond to that right >now is we'll have a definition in the >reg that will be very clear as to what the criteria are for qualification. >And those definitions have already been dealt with >and agreed to, so we should have them up on the web site this afternoon. __________________________________________________________________________ Dan S. Camper lordgrey(a)borrowedtime.com Software Thaumaturgist Borrowed Time, Inc.

2 1

No Subject
by jmotes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

SUBSCRIBE

1 0