December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

remailer@rcmp-grc.gc.ca ??
by John Deters 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A bigger quote from the RCMP's Technological Crime Bulletin, located at: http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/html/tcb3-3b.htm [begin quote] There are many anonymous re-mailers in operation across the Internet. To use one of these services, a person must send an e-mail message to the re-mailer, who will, in turn, send a return message which will include a user ID for this anonymous service. You can now send a message to any e-mail address via this server and receive responses without divulging your true identity. Particularly privacy-conscious individuals have been known to loop their e-mail through two or more anonymous re-mailers to hide their tracks completely. Couple this with data encryption, and you have an exceptionally secure e-mail system. However, re-mailers may not be as secure as once thought. For example, the person who runs the re-mailer has the capability to discover who you are and to read and record all messages sent. The Internet re-mailer could be a government sting operation or a criminal enterprise designed to entrap people. Hackers can break into the re-mailer and read all of the e-mail traffic. Law enforcement must be aware of the existence of anonymous re-mailers, as they provide a cheap, efficient, and secret way of communication for criminal groups. Although there are few documented cases of this form of communication among criminal organizations, there is no doubt that the potential is present. But the news to law enforcement may not be all bad. It may be possible for law enforcement to use anonymous re-mailers as part of an ongoing operational plan. For example, investigators could also loop their e-mail messages through re-mailers to disguise their identity. This could have excellent application in all types of undercover investigations. [End quote] This quote, while not the entire page, shows that LEOs are not quite as clueless as they have been in the past. In particular, the author seems to have a functional grasp of remailers, even though he describes a penet-style remailer. He recognises the inherent dangers of trusting a remailer, and even the value of setting up a remailer for use in a sting operation! My favourite part is the last quoted paragraph, where he suggests that what's good for the goose is also good for the gander. Better check Raph's list again for the existance of remailer(a)rcmp-grc.gc.ca NotAMongerAtAll

1 0

Re: Jim Bell reference
by Antonomasia 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

mctaylor(a)mta.ca commented on the Jim Bell case and Dorothy Denning. Vin McLellan <vin(a)shore.net> forwarded the 'Freeh Speech' Statement of Louis J. Freeh, Director, FBI.... >The looming spectre of the widespread use of robust, virtually uncrackable >encryption is one of the most difficult problems >confronting law enforcement as the next century approaches. At stake are >some of our most valuable and reliable investigative >techniques Baloney. The figures you give later indicate 1000 or 2000 investigations a year meeting computer encryption. Even if they were all unbreakable that's 2000/year in a population of how many ? Dents the clear-up rate by how much ? Makes me think the issue is the preservation of many thousands of _unathorised_ taps. What else could explain that viewpoint? >There have been >numerous cases where law enforcement, through the >use of electronic surveillance, has not only solved and successfully >prosecuted serious crimes and dangerous criminals, but has >also been able to prevent serious and life-threatening criminal acts. For >example, terrorists in New York were plotting to bomb >the United Nations Building, the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels, and 26 >Federal Plaza as well as conduct assassinations of >political figures. Court-authorized electronic surveillance enabled the FBI >to disrupt the plot as explosives were being mixed. Over here video cameras in public places seem to hit the jackpot quite often in this area. >another example, electronic surveillance was used to >prevent and then convict two men who intended to kidnap, molest and then >kill a male child. Witnesses are better, they can catch the lone molester who has no communications. We had a well-publicised case a couple of years ago where a man was caught with a kidnapped girl in his van shortly after a gardener happened to see the girl's feet beneath the van at the instant she was lifted off the ground. Incidentally, I'm against terrorism, child molestation etc etc. I'm confident most other cypherpunks are too, so no nonsense please about free crypto supporters being backers of [crime of the month]. > Convicted spy Aldrich Ames was told by the Russian intelligence > service to encrypt computer file information that was > to be passed to them. But he was convicted anyway ? So crypto was not a problem to LE ? > An international terrorist was plotting to blow up 11 U.S.-owned > commercial airliners in the far east. His laptop > computer which was seized during his arrest in Manilla contained > encrypted files concerning this terrorist plot. Also not a problem if the files were found to concern the plot. > A subject in a child pornography case used encryption in > transmitting obscene and pornographic images of children > over the Internet. As above. > A major international drug trafficking subject recently used a > telephone encryption device to frustrate court-approved > electronic surveillance. If life were that easy you'd have your budget cut, and deserve it. >Over the last three (3) years, the FBI has also seen the number of computer >related cases utilizing encryption and/or password >protection increase from 20 or two (2) percent of the cases involving >electronically stored information to 140 or seven (7) >percent. These included the use of 56 bit data encryption standard (DES) >and 128 bit "pretty good privacy" (PGP) encryption. >Just as when this committee so boldly addressed digital telephony, the >government and the nation are again at an historic >crossroad on this issue. ...are again at a sharp disagreement ? Now over to M. C. Taylor >The one major difference in Dr. Denning's point of view is that she has a >large degree of trust in LEA. Period. That is the difference >between Dr. Denning and the average cypherpunk. Here in the UK you just have to say 'West Midlands Serious Crime Squad' (now disbanded) to blow away the idea that the police evidence is always genuine. Even today a senior policeman is reported in newspapers as saying his force employs dishonest people who would not be employed by a supermarket, and that he regrets needing such a high standard of evidence to fire them. When you think how easily alleged communications can be faked in contrast to physical evidence (such as a bloody glove, say) I'm uncomfortable that electronic evidence is even admissible. >The evidence is weak, in an article from May of this year, Denning quotes >500 cases world-wide, but neglects to follow-up with which of these cases >were solved regardless; due to other evidence or because the suspect was >using crummy crypto. > >Denning doesn't seem too concern with lawless government access, access >beyond the scope, government tampering or forgery of information which are >possible with poor key escrow technologies. Very good points. -- ############################################################### # Antonomasia ant(a)notatla.demon.co.uk # # See http://www.notatla.demon.co.uk/ # ###############################################################

1 0

Re: Airlines to start profiling, bag matching
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Duncan Frissell wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP FORGED MESSAGE----- > At 08:41 PM 7/10/97 -0700, Alan Olsen wrote: > > >"Is this Nazi land so good? Would you leave it if you could?" - from the > >missing part of the Clinton inaguration speech > > Or how about the Clash's "I'm Sick and Tired of the USA" Or, as I was saying to Lucky Green the other day, "Do you feel _punk_, Lucky? Well...do you?" BadPunMonger

1 0

From Hatch's testimony
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text X-Authentication-Warning: fma66.fma.com: majordomo set sender to owner-espam(a)lists.espace.net using -f X-Orig-From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> X-e$pam-source: Various X-Sender: rah(a)atanda.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 16:50:55 -0400 To: espam(a)intertrader.com, e$pam <e$pam(a)atanda.com> From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> Subject: From Hatch's testimony X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by daleth.atanda.com id OAA23282 Sender: owner-espam(a)lists.espace.net Precedence: bulk Reply-To: e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- This mail is brought to you by the e$pam mailing list --------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> Reply-To: rah(a)shipwright.com Organization: The Shipwright Development Corporation MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rah(a)shipwright.com Subject: From Hatch's testimony http://washingtonpost.com:80/wp-srv/WPlate/1997-07/10/015L-071097-idx.htm l Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="015L-071097-idx.htm l" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="015L-071097-idx.html" X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by lbo.leftbank.com i d QAA04134 [Image] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Image] [Image] Talk Central Section: discuss hot topics of the day online. All Editorials and Op-Ed columns from this morning's Washington Post. All editorials and commentary from Sunday's Washington Post Outlook section. [Image] ------------------------------------------------ For the Record Thursday, July 10, 1997; Page A18 The Washington Post From testimony by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) yesterday before the Senate Judiciary Committee: Although encryption has historically been a technology reserved for national security and military applications, the explosive growth of both electronic communications and stored data has enhanced the need to develop means to protect business, governmental and individual communications and information from improper access and use. A direct deterrent to economic espionage, consumer or commercial theft or fraud, or improper eavesdropping of private information or communications is the encryption of such information. By employing mathematical algorithms [that] convert electronic information into meaningless text, encryption prevents anyone other than a keyholder -- who has the algorithm necessary to unscramble or decrypt this information -- from gaining access to the information. The importance of meaningful legislation in this area cannot be understated. Consider for instance that consumer confidence in a secure network is deemed essential to the development of such things as on-line commerce, which is projected to grow from last year's $500 million to as much as $12 billion by the year 2000. The difficulty in evaluating a meaningful encryption policy is that, while its employment does protect the privacy of legitimate business and personal interests, it can also be used . . . by criminals to hide their communications and operations. . . . Today, Americans . . . enjoy the ability to use, and industry is free to market, commercial encryption of any strength domestically without restriction. The focus of congressional debate is the export and dissemination of U.S. encryption products abroad and the development of key recovery features that allow law enforcement access to encrypted communications under appropriate circumstances. © Copyright 1997 The Washington Post Company Back to the top ------------------------------------------------------------------------- [WashingtonPost.com] [I[Image] [Navigation image map] --------------------------------------------------------------------- Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion http://www.hyperion.co.uk info(a)hyperion.co.uk --------------------------------------------------------------------- Like e$? Help pay for it! See <http://www.shipwright.com/beg.html> Or, for e$/e$pam sponsorship, <mailto:rah@shipwright.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------- --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/

1 0

Advertise to 100 MILLION People for FREE!!
by nim＠nim.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Would you be interested in sending out an advertisement for your business or web page to 100 MILLION PEOPLE on the Internet for FREE? TO FIND OUT HOW: Respond to this email! (nim(a)nim.com) You will receive Information on how to do this for FREE!

1 0

Advertise to 100 MILLION People for FREE!!
by nim＠nim.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cypherpunks, Would you be interested in sending out an advertisement for your business or web page to 100 MILLION PEOPLE on the Internet for FREE? TO FIND OUT HOW: Respond to this email! (nim(a)nim.com) You will receive Information on how to do this for FREE!

1 0

Re: From Hatch's testimony
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Robert Hettinga wrote: > Thursday, July 10, 1997; Page A18 > The Washington Post > From testimony by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) > yesterday before the Senate Judiciary > Committee: > Today, Americans . . . enjoy the ability to > use, and industry is free to market, commercial > encryption of any strength domestically without > restriction. Try to think of laws as outlining what we are no longer free to do. Then go to a courthouse library and look at the mountains of books which contain a list of the freedoms that have been taken away from us. Who the fuck do the people who pass these laws think they are? I wish I had a nickle for every local city councilman who got a hard-on the first time he got to vote on a bylaw that empowered him and his pals and fucked everyone else. Then, once he's convinced himself that this -->| |<-- is 12", he decides that it is his duty to run for Congress and share his "greatness" with the whole country. I try to pay my parking tickets more than 500' from a schoolyard and sell my drugs before the date I'm due to appear in court, but I keep getting in trouble because I just can't keep up with all of the intricate details involved in being a law-abiding citizen. What happened to the "good old days" when all you had to do was stay out of stone-throwing range of the "righteous" in order to live according to your own dictates? Today, the "righteous" feel that they have the right to come in your home whenever they want, demand the wrong to read all of your correspondence, tell you what you can put on your website, limit what thoughts you can express and how you do so. And it never ends. If you want to build a dog-house you have to deal with an army of people who are upholding the "righteousness" of city permits, union rules, ecology regulations, tax laws, and a multitude of similar bullshit. And if you happen to forget to cross a 't' or dot an 'i', then you find you are in violation of a new law which is classified as an "inconsequential felony." Def. 'inconsequential felony' -- A legal term which refers to a harmless action which is nonetheless subject to the severest of punishments because someone in authority got a wild-hair up their ass for some silly reason and deemed it should be so. I met a man in Texas who spent twenty years in prison for the possession of a few stems and seeds. He thought it ironic that the state had imprisoned him for twenty years to try to prevent him from doing something that someone else thought would ruin his life. He told me that at his sentencing, his mother told him, "I told you smoking dope would ruin your life." She got upset when he was "unrepentant" enough to reply, "No. I think the judge did that." The problem is not that the citizens are "sinners" but that Hatch and his ilk are "righteous." When the "righteous" take it on themselves to speak for a "higher power," whether it be "God" or "National Security," then they begin justifying even the most horrendous of actions as "just following orders." Thus, it's not really going to matter whether you are using crypto to encrypt children's pictures or a new version of the Bible. Coming new laws will make you a criminal either way, because the "righteous" feel that it is up to them to decide if the children's pictures are pornographic or if the new version of the Bible is sacreligious. Government has merely usurped religion as the final authority on who is "righteous" and who is a "sinner," on what is "good" and what is "bad." They are priests with nuclear weapons to back them up in enforcement of their "commandments." The end result is that we have to fear getting nuked if we build the fence around our house more than 5' high, so that the ever- vigilant "righteous" don't hurt themselves when peeking over our fence to see if we've built an illegal doghouse. And we have to fear getting nuked if we want to electronically "whisper" when the "righteous" are trying to spy on the "sinners." Same shit, different religion. TruthMonger

1 0

Solution to McKain's worries
by geeman＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The alternative solution might go something like this (also known as the Mother of Clipper): 1. Outlaw use of any crypto not authorized and provided by an Official Source, which is to be provided in the form of hardware on the CPU/Motherboard (or equivalent, depending on the computing/communications device) 2. When you wish to send an encrypted communication or store encrypted data, the Official Crypto Device from the Official Source first must obtain a Secrecy Credential from a Central Repository, to which you have applied for some strength crypto. The Credential gives you certain secrecy privileges ... as long as you're being a good citizen. The Credential enables the crypto on your official device: the device will not function without communicating with the Central Repository and obtaining today's Credential. 3. When LEA wants to tap you, it sends a control message to the Central Repository which modifies your Secrecy Credential, dumbing you down to, say, 40bits. They could even provide the entire session key (or other secret as required by protocols.) As long as this state is in effect, your "encrypted" communications and storage are readable by the LEA. Now: consider the profits to be made by the Central Repository, which is responsible for maintaining your Credential. Each Credential use could be charged a transaction fee, as well as the annual licensing. The crypto device provider has a locked-in market for its silicon, as it must go on all the motherboards and into the CPU's. The big-system manufacturers responsible for the servers and communications required to manage the communications between the crypto and repository make out real well too. It sounds like a perfect fit for Microsoft, Intel, together with HP-s ICF!!

1 0

credit card
by a54＠ourlocation.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cash advance: Yes Approval number: 000-5467001 Credit limit: $3000.00 Approval Expires: 08/01/97 Credit provider: Morningstar Ent. Bank Affiliation: None Card Issued: Morningstar Card Member Status: Pending Annual Fee: None APR: 17.99% Dear Future Cardholder, Congratulations! You have been approved for a $3,000.00 Unsecured credit line from the financial card division of Morningstar Enterprise regardless of your past credit history. Your approval number is 000-5467001 and your approved credit amount of $3000.00 for credit purchases and cash advances will be available once you receive your Morningstar card! There is No security or money deposits Required! For more information on how to receive your Morningstar card Visit our web site at: http://www.ourlocation.com/morning

1 0

Re: The Recent Trend in "Collective Contracts"
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Reputation Monger wrote: > An anonymous message dated: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 08:46:32 +0200 (MET DST), > and signed with the initials KC, wrote: > >In any case... > Damn. Kent's figured out anonymous remailers. I read this message > because it came from anonymous--Kent's in my killfile. > > Know what this means? > Anonymous remailers have more reputation capital than Kent. Excerpt From: Welcome to the Cypherpunks Mailing List (TcM) ------------------------ Your initial post to the list has been digitally classified by the Cypherpunks Automated Response system in order to determine the initial level of reputation capital you will be awarded as a new member of the Cypherpunks Mailing List (TcM). ... At Reputation Capital levels below -1, you may be subjected to shame, humiliation and filtering to the point where the only hope for your posts being read is for you to post to the list anonymously, as a "Monger" of one sort or another. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- *** "Cypherpunks Mailing List" is a (Trade{cocksucker}Mark) of the Electronic Forgery Foundation, and any abuse of this (TcM) will be considered normal behavior on this list. *** Kent has obviously read "The Tao of Remailers," which explains the concept of turning the CypherPunks tools against them as weapons. One has to wonder if Louis Freeh has read the book as well and is sitting at home sending threatening letters to the President via a variety of remailers. I wonder if it is feasible to design a remailer which sends out anonymous email which is rated (Anonymous +7 / Anonymous -4) on the basis of reputation capital? Slightly Anonymous

1 0