December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Officers face suspension for email offenses: Half of Town's Police Force Involved
by Max Inux 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Chief cleans house after half the Department makes fun of him via email on Patrol Car Computer Terminals (PDC's)... (Plus it's a rally cool website - listen to police scanners while you read FBI FOIA files on people like Frank Sinatra). OAKLAND, N.J. (APB) -- Half of this small borough's police force may be suspended for allegedly using computer terminals in their patrol cars to send one another disrespectful comments about the chief and the borough. http://www.apbonline.com/911/1998/12/06/oakland1206_1.html

1 0

FW: Survey Says Kids Feel 'Threatened' By Real Life
by Matthew James Gering 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ack, I missed one. Revised: ---------- Subject: FW: Survey Says Kids Feel 'Threatened' By Real Life A survey has suggested that up to one and a half million British children may have been upset by something they have heard or read. The NOP poll shows that one in five of nearly 4,000 children between the ages of six and 16 interviewed for the survey between September and October this year were "uncomfortable" with the state of world affairs. In the UK, 7.2 million children are estimated to be exposed to the outside world - roughly 98% of all children between six and 16. Of those who have had negative experiences while being outside the home, the largest proportion - 40% - had seen something "rude". 'Not surprised' One in seven said they had encountered information that had "freightened them", while 25% heard ideas that "would get them into trouble". NOP Associate Director Rob Lawson described the numbers as a "significant minority". The children's charity NCH Action for Children suggested the survey strengthened calls for censorship to protect younger people. Charity spokesman John Carr said: "I regret to say I'm not surprised by this survey's findings, it's what we have been saying for some time. Censors "Parents need to know their children are learning in safety and security. At the moment, they have no way of knowing that at all." NCH Action for Children, which advises the government on children's issues, backs the introduction of censors - people who filter out ideas unsuitable for children. The survey, called Kids.net, was paid for by Microsoft, the NSA, the GOP, China, and MCI/Worldcom in syndicate. The Department of Trade and Industry's forthcoming review on Thought regulation is expected to be published before Christmas. [satire on news from news.bbs.co.uk]

1 0

Re: Power Outage in San Fransisco/bay area (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 15:51:01 -0800 (PST) > From: Max Inux <maxinux(a)bigfoot.com> > Subject: Re: Power Outage in San Fransisco/bay area (fwd) > On Tue, 8 Dec 1998, Jim Choate wrote: > >Damn, you beat me to it. I was going to post something about a dry run for > >Y2K in San Fran. > > > >Any rioting? > > Suprisingly, no looting, major accideents (Only one was in the unaffected > Fremont) by Mowry... dont go towards NAI or Great America ;-) Thanks for the feedback. ____________________________________________________________________ If I can put in one word what has always infuriated me in any person, any group, any movement, or any nation, it is: bullying Howard Zinn The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

wassenar crypto agrmt/wiretapping
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Jonathan David Boyne <boyne(a)hawaii.edu> To: Undisclosed recipients:; Subject: [exploration] The Wassenaar Invasion of Privacy (fwd) >from: >http://www.zolatimes.com/V2.41/pageone.html ><A HREF="http://www.zolatimes.com/V2.41/pageone.html">Laissez Faire City Times >- Volume 2 Issue 41</A> >The Laissez Faire City Times >December 7, 1998 - Volume 2, Issue 41 >Editor & Chief: Emile Zola >----- >The Wassenaar Invasion of Privacy > >by J. Orlin Grabbe > > >>From the first moment it proclaimed the "information superhighway", the >Clinton administration has waged a wholesale assault on Internet free >speech and privacy. > >The latest blow is the Clinton administration's strong- arming of the 32 >fellow countries of the Wassenaar Arrangement to agree to an export ban >on strong cryptographic (data scrambling) software. The net effect will >be to make it easier for each government to read its own citizen's email >and other private documents. > >Normally if a nation attempts to restrict the domestic sale of strong >encryption software, that attempt is made ineffective by the >availability of strong encryption software from other countries. But >such software won't be available anymore--at least not from one of the >Wassenaar countries, once they have enacted local legislation to >implement the terms of the Wassenaar agreement of December 2. > >The Wassenaar Arrangement is supposed to be an intergovernmental >agreement to restrict international traffic in arms. What does this have >to do with encryption? Simply this: the US government still holds that >secret-code-producing software is a munition. So if you encrypt your >letters and files, and the government hasn't given you permission to use >that caliber encryption, then the person who gave you the encryption >software may be in violation of some regulation on arms dealing. > >"They've plugged a loophole," gleefully proclaimed Ambassador David >Aaron, the President's Special Envoy for Cryptology. The day following >the agreement, the US Department of Commerce issued a press release in >which Aaron spouts gobble-de-gook phrases about a "level playing field" >and about balancing "commercial and privacy interests with national >security and public safety concerns" (see Appendix A for Commerce Dept. >press statement). > >How has this agreement supposedly created a "level playing field" and >helped U.S. industry? Well, namely, by censoring foreign publishers of >cryptology software in the same way that the US government already >censors US publishers. This is similar to arguing that by increasing >tyranny in surrounding countries, we can create a "level playing field" >for freedom. > >"It's ironic, but the US government is leading the charge >internationally to restrict personal privacy and individual liberty >around the world," said Alan Davidson, a staff counsel at the Center for >Democracy and Technology, according to Reuters (see Appendix B for >Reuter's news release). > >A restriction on cryptology is a restriction on free speech. In the >Second World War, the US used native Navaho speakers for secure >communications. Since no one else understood the language, it served as >a powerful secret code. But is what you speak or write in an email >message suddenly not speech or language if the government can't >understand it? If your message says "Xu23MN iilc]z MNBl", does the >government suddenly have the right to imprison you for writing >gibberish? > >While the clear answer is No, nevertheless the US government thinks it >has the right to restrict your "gibberish" if it is produced by >encryption software that it can't crack. The Wassenaar agreement says >encryption software that is "weak" (less than 56 bit keys in some cases, >or less than 64 bit keys in others), so that the government can >unscramble and read the real message underneath the gibberish, is okay, >and in fact frees up some export restrictions on this type of software. >The trade-off? Greater restrictions on software that produces secret >code the government can't read. > >Arms control. It sounds wonderful, doesn't it? Go over to the Wassenaar > web page and take a look. High nobility of purpose, right? "We're >keeping those guns away from the Indians," they proclaim. But what they >mean to say is: "We fully intend to read what is written on the hard >drive of your computer." > >Posting to the cypherpunks mailing list, Timothy May noted: > >I recently heard T. J. Rodgers, CEO of Cypress Semiconductor, repeat his >oft-made point that Silicon Valley and the high tech industry gains >nothing by talking to Washington. That as soon as dialog is started with >Washington, things get worse. This applies as well to crypto, to gun >rights, to everything. Everything Washington touches turns to statist >shit. > >Is there any good news? Enabling legislation has to be enacted in each >country to carry out the terms of the Wassenaar agreement. Raising a hue >and cry with legislators over this latest invasion of privacy should >have a positive effect. > >In the meantime, Mr. "Information Superhighway" Al Gore is poised for a >presidential run, so he can continue to ignore privacy concerns and bend >over for the Big Brother agencies of the national security >establishment. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Related Links > >The End of Ordinary Money: Part 1 >The End of Ordinary Money: Part 2 > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Appendix A: Commerce Dept. Press Release > > >UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NEWS > >International Trade Administration > >Washington, DC > >For Immediate Release >Tuesday, December 3, 1998 > >Contact: Maria Harris Tildon > (202)482-3809 > Sue Hofer > (202)482-2721 > >P R E S S S T A T E M E N T > >U.S. Applauds Agreement on Encryption in International Export >Control Regime > >Vienna, Austria -- The United States welcomed the decision taken >Thursday in Vienna by the 33 members of the Wassenaar Arrangement >to modernize and improve multilateral encryption export controls. >Ambassador David Aaron, the President's Special Envoy for Cryptology, >said that "the international agreement reached here goes a long way >toward leveling the playing field for exporters and promoting >electornic commerce. It provides countries with a stronger >regulatory framework to protect national security and public safety." > >The agreement caps a two year effort by the United States, to update >international encryption export controls and to balance commercial >and privacy interests with national security and public safety >concerns. Thursday's agreement simplifies and streamlines controls >on many encryption items and eliminates multilateral reporting >requirements. Specific improvements to multilateral encryption >controls include removing controls on all encryption products at >or below 56 bit and certain consumer entertainment TV systems, such >as DVD products, and on cordless telephone systems designed for >home or office use. > >Wassenaar members also agreed to extend controls to mass-market >encryption above 64 bits, thus closing a significant loophole in >multilateral encryption controls. This gives Wassenaar member >governments the legal authority to license many mass market >encryption software exports which were previously not covered by >multilateral controls and enables governments to review the >dissemination of the strongest encryption products that might >fall into the hands of rogue end users. The new controls also >extend liberalized mass-market hardware below 64 bits. Until >today, only mass-market software products enjoyed this >liberalized treatment. > >"The decisions taken here in Vienna reinforce the Administration's >efforts to promote a balanced encryption policy," Aaron confirmed. > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Appendix B: Reuters News Release > > >Thursday, 3 December 1998 12:57:40 > >U.S. claims success in curbing encryption trade > >Aaron Pressman, Reuters, Washington newsroom, 202-898-8312 > >WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Clinton administration officials >Thursday said they had persuaded other leading countries to >impose strict new export controls on computer >data-scrambling products under the guise of arms control. > >At a meeting Thursday in Vienna, the 33 nations that have >signed the Wassenaar Arrangement limiting arms exports -- >including Japan, Germany and Britain -- agreed to impose >controls on the most powerful data-scrambling technologies, >including for the first time mass-market software, U.S. >special envoy for cryptography David Aaron told Reuters. > >The United States, which restricts exports of a wide range of >data-scrambling products and software -- also known as >encryption -- has long sought without success to persuade >other countries to impose similar restrictions. > >``We think this is very important in terms of bringing a level >playing field for our exporters,'' Aaron said. > >Leading U.S. high-technology companies, including Microsoft >Corp. and Intel Corp., have complained that the lack of >restrictions in other countries hampered their ability to >compete abroad. The industry has sought to have U.S. >restrictions relaxed or repealed, but has not asked for tighter >controls in other countries. > >Privacy advocates have also staunchly opposed U.S. export >controls on encryption, arguing that data-scrambling >technologies provided a crucial means of protecting privacy in >the digital age. > >``It's ironic, but the U.S. government is leading the charge >internationally to restrict personal privacy and individual >liberty around the world,'' said Alan Davidson, staff counsel at >the Center for Democracy and Technology, a Washington-based >advocacy group. > >Special envoy Aaron said the Wassenaar countries agreed to >continue export controls on powerful encryption products in >general but decided to end an exemption for widely available >software containing such capabilities. > >``They plugged a loophole,'' Aaron said. > >The new policy also reduced reporting and paperwork >requirements and specifically excluded from export controls >products that used encryption to protect intellectual property >-- such as movies or recordings sent over the Internet -- from >illegal copying, Aaron said. > >Encryption uses mathematical formulas to scramble >information and render it unreadable without a password or >software ``key.'' One important measure of the strength of the >encryption is the length of the software key, measured in bits, >the ones and zeros that make up the smallest unit of computer >data. > >With the increasing speed and falling prices of computers, >data encrypted with a key 40 bits long that was considered >highly secure several years ago can now be cracked in a few >hours. Cutting-edge electronic commerce and communications >programs typically use 128-bit or longer keys. > >Under Thursday's agreement, Wassenaar countries would >restrict exports of general encryption products using more >than 56-bit keys and mass-market products with keys more >than 64 bits long, Aaron said. > >Each country must now draft its own rules to implement the >agreement. > >-30- > >from The Laissez Faire City Times, Vol. 2, No. 41, Dec. 7, 1998 >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >The Laissez Faire City Times is a private newspaper. Although it is >published by a corporation domiciled within the sovereign domain of >Laissez Faire City, it is not an "official organ" of the city or its >founding trust. Just as the New York Times is unaffiliated with the city >of New York, the City Times is only one of what may be several news >publications located in, or domiciled at, Laissez Faire City proper. For >information about LFC, please contact CityClerk(a)LFCity.co > >Published by >Laissez Faire City Netcasting Group, Inc. >Copyright 1998 - Trademark Registered with LFC Public Registrar >All Rights Reserved >----- >Aloha, He'Ping, >Om, Shalom, Salaam. >Em Hotep, Peace Be, >Omnia Bona Bonis, >All My Relations. >Adieu, Adios, Aloha. >Amen. >Roads End >Kris > >DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER >========== >CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic >screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters >and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright >frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects >spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL >gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; >be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and >nazi's need not apply. > >Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. > >======================================================================== >To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: >SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] LISTSERV(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM > >To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: >SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] LISTSERV(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM > >Om > - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sponsored by NextCard Internet Visa. http://ads.egroups.com/click/136/1 Free Web-based e-mail groups -- http://www.eGroups.com - - --------------F29987D12CAF6600E1F2D03D-- - ------- End of Forwarded Message ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

libertarians advocate suing govt
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message Subject: Release: Sue the Government? Date: Tue, 08 Dec 98 01:02:13 PST From: announce(a)lp.org To: announce(a)lp.org (Libertarian Party announcements) - - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ======================================= NEWS FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY 2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 100 Washington DC 20037 ======================================= For release: December 8, 1998 ======================================= For additional information: George Getz, Press Secretary Phone: (202) 333-0008 Ext. 222 E-Mail: 76214.3676(a)Compuserve.com ======================================= A radical idea: Why can't people sue politicians for their deadly programs? WASHINGTON, DC -- If politicians can sue gun and tobacco companies for damages caused by their products, why can't ordinary Americans sue politicians for the destruction caused by their products: Government programs? "Government programs -- such as wars, exploding automotive air bags, and grisly radiation experiments -- have killed and maimed tens of thousands of Americans over the years," said Steve Dasbach, national director of the Libertarian Party. "Americans shouldn't tolerate a double standard of justice, one for the politicians and one for the people. It's time to start holding the government accountable." What started Libertarians thinking in this direction? The fact that 41 state governments are about to divvy up a $40 billion settlement against tobacco companies, said Dasbach -- and the fact that several big-city mayors are deciding whether to join New Orleans in its lawsuit against gun manufacturers. With those legal actions serving as an inspiration, he said, why not prosecute the government for: * War deaths: "Recent military actions totally unrelated to U.S. national security -- like those in the Persian Gulf, Lebanon, Panama, and Somalia -- have claimed hundreds of American lives," Dasbach said. "If gun company executives can be held liable when criminals use guns irresponsibly, why not hold presidents and Congressmen liable when they use American troops irresponsibly?" * Cancer deaths: "The federal government admitted last year that Cold War nuclear tests exposed 230,000 Americans to high levels of radioactive iodine, and may cause 75,000 people to develop fatal thyroid cancer," Dasbach said. "If it's fair to force tobacco companies to pay for smoking-related illnesses, it's fair to force the government to pay for legislation-related illnesses -- like thyroid cancer." * Air-bag deaths: "According to the federal government, 49 children have been killed by government-mandated air bags," Dasbach said. "Their grieving parents ought to file wrongful-death suits against the Congressmen who demanded this law and the Transportation Department bureaucrats who wrote it." * Alcohol-related deaths: "Eighteen state governments control the liquor stores that operate within their borders," Dasbach said. "So why aren't those state politicians and bureaucrats sued for the cost of every alcohol-related car crash?" * Deaths caused by gun-control laws: "According to a landmark study last year by criminologists John R. Lott and David B. Mustard, the refusal of 24 state governments to pass concealed-carry laws caused an additional 1,414 murders, 4,177 rapes, and 60,363 aggravated assaults in 1992 alone," Dasbach said. "Residents of these states ought to file an immediate injunction to prevent these victim-disarmament laws from causing more innocent blood to be shed." * Deaths caused by criminals on parole: "According to Department of Justice figures, murderers are freed from prison an average of 11.6 years before their full sentence expires; armed robbers are sprung 5 years early; and rapists are back on the streets 5.9 years early," Dasbach said. "The politicians who handed these murderers, robbers, and rapists get-out-of-jail-early cards -- usually so they could fill the jails with people convicted of victimless crimes -- ought to be charged as an accessory to every crime these violent thugs commit." * Gambling-related suicides: "Heavily advertised state-sponsored lotteries siphon billions of dollars a year from America's poor, and are directly responsible for uncountable numbers of gambling-related bankruptcies, suicides, and broken homes," Dasbach said. "Since politicians addicted to taxes are harming vulnerable Americans addicted to gambling, shouldn't the state officials who run these destructive lotteries be held personally responsible?" But Libertarians aren't holding their breath waiting for the government to be brought to justice, Dasbach admitted. "Courts have consistently ruled that government is protected from prosecution by the legal doctrine of sovereign immunity," he said. "According to the courts, death-by-government programs are not against the law. "But wouldn't America be a much safer country if politicians were held to the same standard as any other individual? "Unfortunately, unless that happens, prosecution-proof politicians will continue to escape the consequences of their actions -- while hypocritically sending ordinary Americans off to jail." - - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNmzhy9CSe1KnQG7RAQES5wP6Ap6aRD4XRSWEEnC+2Vz5+ix8aQg4ss+3 srlja3yDIqsh94SIo1xoIESwZ/61DEpXyvhO/PdJ0xt6wtcFWNkAGbt1VVyr26Tx O+2Qv3NMcHq7ISSMV1SGHYuuRsCuAg/om+PU39NxNfj60eTMpEkPDz0wyAm9XFxu 3c0bMkh+0Zw= =qedo - - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- The Libertarian Party http://www.lp.org/ 2600 Virginia Ave. NW, Suite 100 voice: 202-333-0008 Washington DC 20037 fax: 202-333-0072 For subscription changes, please mail to <announce-request(a)lp.org> with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the subject line -- or use the WWW form. - - -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.inannareturns.com "See God in Every Eye" --Inanna, Goddess of Love V.S. Ferguson author, Inanna Returns and Inanna Hyper-Luminal - - --------------54D4A0A30C2370EF22396E74-- - ------- End of Forwarded Message ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

spy cameras
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 09:18:29 -0500 From: Dan S <dan(a)SOUTHEAST.NET> Subject: [CTRL] Smart spy cameras on the way To: CTRL(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM -Caveat Lector- >From : http://www.telegraph.co.uk:80/et?ac=001036222020742&rtmo=VqqqD8sK&atmo=kkkk… - - Smart spy cameras on the way By Patrick Hook POLICE scientists are close to a major breakthrough that will allow CCTV cameras to "recognise" criminal activity. Using leading-edge neural and pattern recognition technologies, developed for space and defence applications, scientists are confident that it will shortly be possible to police whole areas of the country automatically and alert the authorities to criminal activity. Speaking at a recent London conference organised by the research and development group SIRA, Dr Mike Taylor, head of technology operations at Scotland Yard, said the main barrier to the development of such a system was the quality of the images that were generally produced by existing CCTV equipment.""It is perfectly feasible to develop software which can distinguish certain actions, but the quality of image capture means that it is often difficult to see exactly what is going on," he said. "The quality is, it seems, in direct proportion to the amount of effort that users are prepared to invest in such systems. Since its introduction more than 20 years ago, the need for such technology has increased, and intelligent sensory information processing and information fusing is going to play a very key part in crime management. The next step is to add other sensory devises such as microphones to pick up the sound of breaking glass and sensors that can detect the smell of particular substances and trigger an appropriate response." The work is part of a research programme into an area of security that has been identified by the government's Foresight Challenge as a priority for further study. Drawn from a range of organisations, including the police, the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency and the Home Office, the work of the team is being partly funded by Brussels. Most of the research is centred on the fusing of information from several sources to present a more accurate report of what the CCTV camera has seen. "The additional cost of a microphone or other sensor is not likely to be great," said Taylor, "and should make a significant difference to the ability of the police to detect criminal activity." Not everyone is enthusiastic, however. John Wadham, director of Liberty, said: "It's difficult to see how this kind of technology would work accurately in practice. It could result in officers' time being wasted investigating incidents - and indeed individuals - which turn out to be entirely innocent. I do wonder whether we have enough surveillance already. Surveillance technology is better at protecting property than people and is still not adequately regulated to protect privacy." - -- dan(a)southeast.net DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] LISTSERV(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] LISTSERV(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM Om ------- End of Forwarded Message

3 2

Re: Wei Dei's "b-money" protocol
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

x(a)x.com asks about Wei Dei's b-money proposal: >there must be something here that I'm missing. At the core of this >protocol seems to be the establishment not of crypto anarchy but of a >crypto elite. in this scheme only the processors of computing power have >economic power. Now I realize that our current economic system is based on >economic power being invested in a closed community of powerful elites, and >is by no means egalitarian, but this looks to be like simply substituting >one group of "haves" for a different group of "haves" > >I have to admit not being familiar with the Orthodoxy of crypto anarchy, >but if the premise is a centerless self organizing system of free agents >this protocol seems to miss the mark. or what is it that I am missing here? The description is intended to show how money is transferred, and how it is created. These are technically difficult issues when dealing with electronic money, and that is what the proposal addresses. It is not anticipated that most people will make money by using their computing power. That feature is only used when the money supply needs to expand, because of increased economic activity. Instead, people will generally get money the same way they do today: someone will give it to them, either as a gift or as payment. You are free to give your money to whomever you want to, and you are free to offer your goods and services in exchange for money. Such exchanges of money should be much greater in volume than the amount of new money which is created by burning computer cycles.

1 0

Reinsch On Crypto/Wassenaar
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Excerpt from a speech by BXA's William Reinsch on December 7, 1998, at the Practising Law Institute conference "Coping with U.S. Export Controls." Note final paragraph about detailed crypto session today -- no report on that yet. Full speech: http://jya.com/war120798-2.htm Also by him yesterday on crypto: http://jya.com/war120798.htm [Begin excerpt] Encryption continues to be a hotly debated issue. As I stated last year, the U.S. continues to support a balanced approach to encryption policy which considers privacy and commercial interests as well as protecting law enforcement and national security interests. Furthermore, we also remain committed to promoting the growth of global electronic commerce through secure financial and business communications. Our position has always been to seek industry-led, market-driven solutions to achieve a balanced approach. What has changed is the direction where technology and the market place are taking us. Key recovery technology remains a very important part of our policy; however, over the past two years, we have recognized that key recovery is not a solution for all problems. That recognition, brought about in part as a result of our ongoing dialogue with industry, has helped us also focus on recoverable technologies that can enable law enforcement to continue its authorized activities. As a result, on September 16, Vice President Gore unveiled a policy update, which will not end the debate, but which does include steps to further streamline exports of key recovery products and other recoverable products which allow law enforcement, under proper legal authority, recovery of plain text. The update also provides for 1) the export of 56 bit DES worldwide to any end user under a license exception; 2) exports of strong encryption to U.S. companies and their subsidiaries under a license exception; 3) exports of strong encryption to the insurance and medical sectors in 45 countries under a license exception; and 4) exports of strong encryption to secure on-line transactions between on-line merchants and their customers in 45 countries under a license exception. This is consistent with our earlier announcement relating to financial institutions. This is an evolutionary process and we intend to continue our dialogue. We must continue to adapt to changes, and we will review our policies again within the year to determine whether further change is necessary. We intend to publish regulations implementing the Vice President's announcement this month. With respect to developing a common international approach to encryption policy, Ambassador David Aaron, our special envoy on cryptography, is working with other countries to ensure that our policies are compatible. He has found that most major producing countries have public safety and national security concerns similar to ours and are interested in developing a harmonized international approach regarding compatible infrastructures for electronic commerce and for a key management infrastructure. At last week's Wassenaar Arrangement plenary session, the participating states approved a number of changes to modernize and improve multilateral encryption export controls. These changes removed controls on products below 56 bits and on certain consumer entertainment systems, such as DVD products, and on cordless phone systems designed for home or office use. Most important, participating states agreed to extend controls to mass-market encryption exports above 64 bits, thus closing a significant loophole. This will enable governments to review the dissemination of the strongest encryption products that otherwise might fall into the hands of rogue end users. For those of you deeply interested in the details of our encryption policy, we have a specific session devoted to it tomorrow. [End excerpt]

2 1

[CTRL] Feds And FDIC To Monitor All Your Personal Financial Activities
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: DrErebus(a)AOL.COM Subject: [CTRL] Feds And FDIC To Monitor All Your Personal Financial Activities Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 10:11:25 EST To: CTRL(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM -Caveat Lector- Feds And FDIC To Monitor All Your Personal Financial Activities 12-1-98 The following is direct quote from the first page of FDIC document (6174-01) (12 CFR Part 326) Notice of proposed rulemaking. "SUMMARY: The FDIC is proposing to issue a regulation requiring insured nonmember banks to adopt and maintain "Know Your Customer" programs. As proposed, the regulation would require each nonmember bank to develop a program designed to determine the identity of its customers; determine its customers' sources of funds; determine the normal and expected transactions of its customers; monitor account activity for transactions that are inconsistent with those normal and expected transactions; and report any transactions of its customers that are determined to be suspicious, in accordance with the FDIC's existing suspicious activity reporting regulation. ---" The things to be very concerned about in this case are the PROFILE PARAMETERS that in turn define the various limits that when exceed, qualify as an exception to the norm and thus must be reported to another federal agency, as a suspicious transaction. There is virtually no limit to the number or type of profile parameters that can be established. For example, is the customer an 8 foot tall white male weighing in excess of 400 pounds or is the customer a four foot tall black female weighing less than 90 pounds. The question or questions (and there are many questions) then becomes, who will be responsible for establishing, defining and controlling the limitless number of possible profile parameters? Who will be responsible for adding, changing and deleting established profile parameters? Who will be responsible for insuring that this awesome and massive capability will not be misused and abused by the various departments of the Federal Government. In other words, is the 8 foot tall white male an exception to the norm or is the 4 foot tall black female the exception or, are both the upper limit and the lower limit considered as an exception to the norm. How about all those in between? As noted in the quoted SUMMARY of the document identified above, the "key operative statements" are as follows; 1. Identify its customers. 2. Determine its customers' source of funds. 3. Determine the normal and expected transactions of its customers. 4. Monitor account activity for transactions that are inconsistent with those normal and expected transactions. 5. Report any transactions of its customers that are determined to be suspicious ---. Before we briefly examine the five individual requirements noted above, and so that you will understand where"I" am coming from, please be aware of the fact that, in addition to being a Baptist Preacher, I have been a Data Processing Systems Analyst for some 48+ years. At least half of that time was spent working for the Federal Government, designing and installing total Data Processing Facilities, from the Presidents Battle Staff, to the Congress, to the Department of defense, to the local Church name and address data base. I have written and taught several college courses: (a) Management of Data Processing Facilities and (b) Systems Analysis. One of the first things that I always tell the new students in my Systems Analysis class is "In the field of electronic data processing, your only limitation is you own imagination. If you can rationalize it in your mind, 'electronic' data processing can do it." Now, given that background and qualifications let me tell you, in no uncertain terms, -- I know exactly what the Federal Government is up to. I know exactly what information they are looking for; I know exactly how to get that information and I know exactly how they plan to eventually use that information. Requirement # 1: Identify its customers. I have no problem with this requirement so long as that identifying information is limited to name, mailing address and an account number generated by the "local" financial institution and assigned to a particular account to provide unique identification, but absolutely nothing more. Requirement # 2: Determine its customers' source of funds. This I have a BIG problem with. Even though the government would like for you to believe that this requirement is related to identifying "possible" illegal money laundering by drug traffickers, that is not the only reason they want to know the source of your finances. Remember now, the ultimate objective of the vast majority of government regulations and programs are directed at controlling the "individual." This item required that you advise the bank of all the sources that you will be receiving money from that you will be depositing in this particular account. We will expand this item in more detail below. Requirement # 3. Determine the normal and expected transactions of its customers. For purposed of this discussion we will consider only four primary parameters related to deposits and withdrawals against this particular account. First: When you established a new checking account you will be required to identify the number of deposits you expect to make each month and the average amount of each deposit. For example (a) military retirement pay = $2,000.00, (b) Social Security Income = $400.00, (c) Rent from income property = $750.00, (d) Interest from stocks & bonds = $ 300.00, and so on. Second: You will be required to identify the number of withdrawals you expect to make each month from this account and the estimated amount of each withdrawal. For example; (a) Mortgage payment=$ 800.00, (b) Car Payment = $250.00, (c) College tuition = $ 1,000.00). Once the average number of deposits and the average amount of each deposit has been determined and the average number of withdrawals and the average amount of each withdrawal has been established, it will be very easy to identify all transactions, in and out, that exceed the established norms for this particular account. For example should you find a paper bag on the side of the highway containing 10,000 well used one dollar bills, or Aunt Sue passed away and left you 10,000 well used one dollar bills and you deposited that windfall in your checking or savings account, that would immediately be detected as exceeding the established norms for your account. Requirement # 4. Monitor account activity for transactions that are inconsistent with those normal and expected transactions. This requirement establishes the requirement that each financial institution establish a procedure to monitor your financial accounts on a regular basis for any transactions that exceed the established norms as illustrated above. Requirement # 5. Report any transactions of its customers that are determined to be suspicious ---. This requirement requires that all financial institutions immediately report any and all suspicious transactions detected as a result of deposits or withdrawals that exceed the established norms for your account. As I was reviewing the aforementioned FDIC document, as quoted above, I called a long time friend of mine who is vice president of a local bank that I do business with. I ask my vice president friend to identify the government agency(s) to which he would report such a suspicious transaction. His response was, the IRS and the FBI, at the national level. My friends, as a long time ADP/EDP Systems Analyst I want you to pay particular attention to the following. Whenever a good and successful Information (Data) Processing Systems Analyst designs a large scale information processing system, such as what we have been talking about above, he will ALWAYS allow for future expansion of "existing" applications and processing capabilities and his design work will also allow for "additional" applications and processing capabilities to be added with a minimum of additional effort and cost. Based on my 48+ plus years in the business, let me tell you what you can expect in the very near future if the proposed "rulemaking" provisions as defined in the FDIC document identified above are allowed to be implemented. Please, read the following very carefully because it lays out the route our government is taking toward a cashless society as required by the design of a one world government under the United Nations. 1. PRESENTLY ALL recipients of military retirement pay MUST have a bank account into which their monthly retirement pay is electronically transferred. The government will no longer pay individual retirees directly, or send their retirement pay to a home address. This is part of an over all plan to extended more absolute control over the individual. It has absolutely nothing to do with economy as the government would have you to believe. 2. In the very near future look for legislation that will "require" ALL government employees, federal, state and local, to have a bank account into which their salary will also be electronically transferred, just like the retired military. In as much as most government employees already have the direct deposit option available, it requires only vary simple legislation to complete this phase of the plan. 3. Next you will see legislation that will outlaw the direct payment of all wages or salaries to any individual, by an employer. All employees who work for a wage or salary, will also be required to have a bank account into which the employer will be required to direct deposit their salary. And once again the legislation necessary to accomplish phase of the plan is very simple and easy to implement, simply because most business would welcome the reduced payroll cost. The governments objective here is to eventually make the local financial institution the only source of legal tender for the individual. At this point and for the purpose of this paper, legal tender is defined as dollars, debit cards or other credit cards. When objectives 2 & 3 above have been fully accomplished, it will then be a very simple matter to implement the rest of the plan. Let me explain it this way. The total plan equates to $1.00 (One dollar) When steps 2 & 3 have been fully implemented, as step 1 has already been accomplished, that will equate to $ .95 cents of that $1.00. The rest of the plan equates to only 5 cents out of that one dollar. And just what is the rest of the plan? It's very simple. After steps 1, 2 and 3 as noted above have been fully implemented, the only thing left to do then would be to outlaw all cash transactions and require all transactions now involving cash, be accomplished through the use of checks or smart cards followed by the eventual elimination of the checks. At that point the federal government can then trace, track AND CONTROL ALL TRANSACTIONS, simply because all transactions will then be processed by massive computer systems controlled by the federal government. Given the above accomplishments and current electronic capabilities, the ability to exercise absolute control over "individuals" provided by the additional five cents noted above are absolutely mind boggling. There are many, many more reasons that all Americans should and must oppose implementation of the five (5) requirements identified above. There are TWO things that every American should do, immediately. First: All Americans should send a letter to the FDIC expressing their STRONG objection and opposition to the plan to PROFILE individual bank accounts for what ever purpose. The FDIC will be accepting public comments until December 27. Send your comments to: Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary Attention: Comments/OES, FDIC 550 17th Street, NW Washington, DC 20429 --- Spectre <temporal(a)earthlink.net 12-3-98 Hi Jeff: Found this site about the new FDIC "Know your Customer" regulations: http://www.bankinfo.com/compliance/newkyc.html Seems to me the laws and regulations can be interpreted to mean a lot and I wouldn't completely discount the article you posted on your web page as a complete hoax, if you read the article.: PARTS from that page below: " By requiring banking organizations to determine the true identity of their customers, as well as to obtain knowledge regarding the legitimate activities of their customers, the proposed regulations will reduce the likelihood that banking organizations will become unwitting participants in illicit activities conducted or attempted by their customers." "While it is impossible to identify every transaction at a financial institution that is potentially illegal or is being conducted to assist criminals in the movement of illegally derived funds, it is fundamental for safe and sound operations that financial institutions take every reasonable measure to identify their customers, understand the legitimate transactions to be conducted by those customers and, consequently, identify those transactions conducted by their customers that are unusual or suspicious in nature. By identifying and, when appropriate, reporting such transactions, in accordance with existing suspicious activity reporting requirements, financial institutions are protecting their integrity and are assisting the efforts of the bank regulatory agencies and law enforcement authorities to thwart illicit activities at financial institutions." "The Board has long advocated that one of the most effective means by which a financial institution can both protect itself from engaging in transactions designed to facilitate illicit activities and ensure compliance with applicable suspicious activity reporting requirements is for the institution to have adequate "Know Your Customer" policies and procedures" "In the Board's view, a financial institution should take the necessary and reasonable steps to determine the true identity of its customers, their sources of funds, and their normal and expected transactions and to identify unusual or suspicious activities". ------ Please excuse my distress, but often times the best-intentioned people are quick to jump and call something a "Hoax," which unfortunately misleads people, when just the opposite is true. Being very familiar with legal research, it was simple for me to determine if the the e-mail sent to you by Mr. Gene Ingram [gene(a)cup.hp.com] declaring the post the "Feds and FDIC to Monitor All Your Personal Financial Activities" a hoax; and to see if Mr. Ingram was presumptively correct in his analysis. The most impmrtant point you should know it was stated in the beginning of the article in re the "Feds and FDIC" that this was a *proposed rule* being submitted by the FDIC "...requiring insured nonmember banks to adopt and maintain "Know Your Customer" programs." ALL proposed rules submitted by any federal agency must first be sent to the Federal Register for publication under the *notice* rules. >From the wording of this "Sunshing Act Meeting" chaired by the Board of Governors for the Federal Reserve System, the FDIC is "only following orders." Please find below a replica of the *notice*: ________________________________________________________________ [Federal Register: September 28, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 187)] [Notices] [Page 51579] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [http://www.wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr28se98-60] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Sunshine Act Meeting Agency Holding the Meeting: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Time and Date: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, October 1, 1998. Place: Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, C Street entrance between 20th and 2lst Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20553. Status: Open. Matters to be Considered: Summary Agenda: Because of its routine nature, no discussion of the following item is anticipated. This matter will be voted on without discussion unless a member of the Board requests that the item be moved to the discussion agenda. 1. Publication for comment of proposed amendments to Regulation H (Membership of State Banking Institutions in the Federal Reserve Qystem), Regulation K (International Banking Operations), and Regulation Y (Bank Holding Companies and Change in Bank Control) to require domestic and foreign banking organizations to develop and maintain ``Know Your Customer'' programs. 2. Any items carried forward from a previously announced meeting. Discussion Agenda: None. No Discussion Items Are Scheduled For This Meeting. Note: If an item is moved from the Summary Agenda to the Discussion Agenda, discussion of the item will be recorded. Cassettgs will then be available for listening in the Board's Freedom of Information Office, and copies can be ordered for $6 per cassette by calling 202-452-3684 or by writing to: Freedom of Information Office, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, D.C. 20551. Contact Person for More Information: Lynn S. Fox, Assistant to the Board; 202-452-3204. Supplementary Information: You may call 202-452-3006 for a recorded announcement of this meeting; or you may contact the Board's Web site at http://www.federalreserve.gov for an electronic announcement. (The Web site also includes procedural and other information about the open meeting.) Dated: September 24, 1998. Robert deV. Frierson, Associate Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. 98-25960 Filed 9-24-98; 11:19 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P ___________________________________________________________ The rule[s] will not be published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) until the proposed rule[s] is finalized. These rule changes will be to Regulations H, K and Y pertaining to Banking administration procedures. The proposed changes *may* be all inclusive within 12 CFR 326 - I wouldn't begin to guess until the final rules are drafted. Perhaps this is the reason why Mr. Ingram was unable to find what he was looking for. In the interim, I suggest caution, research and a thoroughly checking your sources before labeling anything a *Hoax* or stating something as fact if you don't know first hand or from personal experience. If anything, the obvious fact this determination was dictated by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System ...well, I'll leave that to your readers to decide the relevancy or merit of the Board's decree. If you would like additional information, please feel free to contact me. Lynn Shaffer fadaar(a)psn.net DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] LISTSERV(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] LISTSERV(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM Om

1 0

CALL 1-800-HOT-PUSSY....CALL NOW!!
by 54+6 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi Sexy, I am lonely waiting for you to call me. Let me be the "Little Secret" in your life! WARNING!! These lines are extremely xxx-rated. Adults over 18 only!!! Sex starved girls will give you a hot sexual experience you'll never forget. Not recommended for people with weak hearts or bad backs!!! Call 1-800-HOT-PUSSY(468-7877) $2.99-$4.99 per min. Billed by Teleworld Visa/Mastercard/Amex Must be over 18 Call 1-900-288-LIVE(5483) (US ONLY) Billed as 1-ON-1 on your phone bill $25.00 per call Must be over 18 1-900-451-PUSSY(7877) (Canada) $2.99-$4.99 per min. (US $) CALL NOW!!! CALL NOW!!! CALL NOW!!!

1 0