- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Letter From The PREZ.
by ourplaces＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

More and more companies are downsizing. More and more people are working for themselves, and many are [or want to] work out of their homes. There are something like 80,000,000 users of the Internet today, and the Net is a wild, crazy ever-changing, anarchistic baby that seems to be living in the days of the Wild West! There are no rules, because technology keeps changing the playing field. So how can an individual work from home and take advantage of the Net? Its hard. Really hard. If you are selling a service, or a product, and you are not a large company, just what can you do? Email. Spam? No - responsible email, with no hype, no lies, no bull. Yes, there are some who say that ANY form of unsolicited email is illegal. Wrong!!! There are no laws against bulk email so long as the message is not fraudulent, just like regular bulk mail. So, by using responsible email, you can reach that huge market at a fraction of the cost of traditional bulk mail. Less than 1/10th of a cent per address... We will send 100,000 pieces of email for just $99 with up to one full page of text. The only other limitation is that it cannot be a chain letter, pornography or hate mail. Drop us a line at webmaster(a)alpha-services.com, or fax 561-835-0690, or call 561-835-4077 and we will send complete details. Thanks for your time. Dave Kaplan, President (You really didn't think this was from THE Prez, did you?)

1 0

Snake Oil wanted
by Lewis Koch 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am a journalist who has specialized in investigative reporting. I have been writing about and for the Net for about nine months, though I have about three decades as a reporter/columnist/author. There has been some discussion on this list of one story that I broke -- that of Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick's speech "National Security in the Information Age" delivered at the U.S. Air Force Academy 29 February 1996 in which she calls for the development of a "Manhattan Project" to counter computer hackers. The column and her complete speech can be found at http://upside.master.com/online/columns/cybersense/9607.html "U.S. Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick Speaks Out Against Freedom and Security on the Internet." The story was published in a monthly column Cybersense which I write for Upside Magazine's Website. I am currently interested in writing about snake oil, especially as it relates to claims about ensuring e-mail privacy, total computer security, plug-and-play effortless encryption or hype relating to computer crime -- its origins, its prevalence, its prevention. My Net audience is composed of people who perhaps pretend to more sophistication that they truly have but who I think are most interested in clarity. My areas of expertise are non-technical. Over three decades, however, I have proven record of investigative reporting. I have been fortunate to meet and rely on some very responsible people to guide me through the technical thickets -- some of whom are members of this List. Any form of response is acceptable and all confidences will be respected. Lewis Z. Koch lzkoch(a)mcs.net http://www.upside.com -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAzHn8xwAAAEEANNKB31dvtigkO5ojKKBAjbrRhkTCrzg3vwhiQ0iS1Ubrxk8 HG/pMYjV4eCR3dZrekbI5/gvNPIG9yRdY8AA3THF761XWHiYZKyhQ8OHxNyjAgSA jze+joT9559kQY++xiayAGK/0sd3P9ByUT+5yy3g9bNBV+vX9vA+Q6AhQTctAAUR tA5semtvY2hAbWNzLm5ldA== =YZQ8 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption Technology
by Bart Croughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perry Metzger wrote: >Bart Croughs writes: >> But there is another axiom of economics which the >>nationalist/socialist can use for his case against the free movement of >> capital. This axiom states that the wages of workers depend on the >> amount of capital invested. The more capital invested, the higher the >> wages are. >This must be some new axiom of economics that I had not heard of. It's not a sin to be ignorant, but to boast about it... I recommend you read the great libertarian /austrian economists: Murray Rothbard, Henry Hazlitt, etc. Bart Croughs

2 1

Police on the Net
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

First, I'd be interested in knowing some of those online reporting addresses, and how much limits they place on what can be mailed to them... persuading these cops to deal with the improper use of another's computer (i.e., spam) would seem to be a distinct possibility in diverting them from other activities. Second, it would appear possible (unless they're encrypting it) to intercept some of these email lists of theirs - if necessary, by forging a subscribe to an _overseas_ nymserver that isn't too well known (unlike, say, anon.penet.fi). That's about on the same grounds as their mention of "know thine enemy." (It is, of course, pretty certain that various libertarian groups are among those monitored, such as cypherpunks.) Third, this gives additional reasons not to give out one's address to anyone. What people know about me is a post office box and my old address. -Allen > webslingerZ > LONG ARM OF THE LAW IS GOING ONLINE > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 Seattle Post-Intelligencer > (Aug 10, 1996 00:05 a.m. EDT) -- When police "net" a crook these days, > cops may be referring to the Internet. [...] > On the Internet, citizens anonymously report drug dealers to the > cyberpolice, check out crime in their neighborhoods, calculate their > risk of being murdered and communicate directly with the chief of > police. > Police say the Internet is a powerful and versatile law-enforcement > tool: Communication is immediate and crosses jurisdictional > boundaries, information is just a keystroke away and the cost is > commonly less than hiring a police officer. > "I think it's the most effective money you can spend to prevent > crime," said Bill Taylor, crime analyst for the Sacramento, Calif., > Police Department, which has developed one of the nation's most > sophisticated Internet police sites. > More than 2,000 law-enforcement agencies have gone online, extending > the long reach of the law to millions of Internet users, said Ken > Reeves, a Microsoft manager who recently established a Web site > promoting new technology in law enforcement. > "They're creating virtual police," he said. [...] > The Internet also has become a popular tool for police to communicate > among themselves. > Thousands of police officers subscribe to electronic mailing lists and > read electronic bulletin boards where they can discuss ethical issues > in private and exchange information about firearms, narcotics and > other sensitive topics. > "These are things you don't want to make public, but you need other > professionals to bounce off ideas," said Ira Wilsker, a former police > officer who is leading a series of U.S. Department of Justice seminars > on law enforcement and the Internet. > Run for and by police officers, the computer exchanges often offer > information that cannot be found elsewhere, Wilsker said. For example, > police raised the alarm on the Internet about illegal use of Rohypnol, > the notorious "date rape" sedative, more than a year before warnings > about the drug were issued through official channels, he said. > On the philosophy of know thy enemy, Wilsker said police also turn to > the Internet as an intelligence source, monitoring online chatter by > hate groups, drug users and others who discuss their views on computer > news groups. These news groups, though commonly thought of as private > communications, are open to public view. > The Internet also can be an effective people finder, he said. > For example, more than 90 million people and their telephone numbers > and addresses can be found at the Internet site www.switchboard.com, > making a nationwide search sometimes as simple as keying in a name, he > said. The service is free. > With an address in hand, Wilsker advises police to turn to > www.mapquest.com, which in seconds can pinpoint on a map the location > of a suspect's home. > "We use it for serving warrants where we don't know the area," he > said. [...] > Still, the response to serious attempts at online policing at times > has been disappointing. The vast majority of people prefer to deal > directly with police than go online to report a crime. Chicago's > effort to elicit information about drug dealing over the Internet has > drawn only a smattering of responses. Some departments have dropped > their most-wanted postings on the Internet because they brought in so > few tips. [...] > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

1 0

Searches
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:17 PM 8/9/96 -0400, Thomas C. Allard wrote: > In a landmark decision a federal court in New York has ruled >that a CBS film crew and Secret Service agents are liable for filming and >broadcasting a search of a private citizen's home. It is the first reported >court decision to hold a television broadcaster liable for accompanying >police agents on a search and filming it for the broadcast. Just because someone at your door has a warrant or a contractual right to search your place does not require you to allow anyone else in. Par example: Landlord of (A Member of This List): The fire inspectors are here and would like to inspect your apartment. (A Member of This List): They got a warrant? Landlord of (A Member of This List): No. (A Member of This List): Then they can't come in. Landlord of (A Member of This List): But I can enter the apartment with reasonable notice under the rental agreement. (A Member of This List): You're welcome. The Fire Inspectors aren't. Landlord of (A Member of This List) who allowed a search of the rest of his building was cited by the Fire Inspectors for an illegal apartment in the basement. DCF "Why is it that when I'm faced with a reasonable request from a public servant my immediate response is 'Load triple cannister'?" -- Cannister. A cylindrical metal container filled with lead shot. Designed to turn a field artillery piece into a very large shotgun.

1 0

Yet another blame-the-Internet-for-child-porn
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

They are, of course, failing to answer the question of why encouraging people to consume _computer-generated_ child pornography should be considered a justification for legal intervention, not to mention that such an effort would also make putting _Lolita_ on the Internet illegal (text could drive up demand for it as well, after all), or even political speech such as from NAMBLA. (It's political speech just as much as material from neo-Nazis... or from the Demopublicans.) There is also the lack of realization that someone can't be "exploited" except in the Marxist sense on the Internet... only when the material is originally made. Another point is that countries do differ on when is considered old enough for voluntary participation in making pornography - Tracy Lords material is legal in much of Europe, for instance. I'd also point to the media bias evident; they only quoted from people who were in favor of governmental regulation. Fortunately, as even one of the people at this "world congress" admitted, governmental regulation of free speech on the Internet will ultimately fail. Prevent actual harm - the _production_ of child pornography. -Allen > Centura > WORLD CONGRESS TO FIGHT INTERNET CHILD PORN > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 Reuter Information Service > STOCKHOLM (Aug 11, 1996 12:29 p.m. EDT) - Distribution of child > pornography on the Internet seems destined to top the issues at the > world's first conference against sexual exploitation of children > opening later this month in Stockholm. > Activists are trying devise ways of keeping pedophiles from peddling > such material on the global computer network, which is already used as > a billboard to advertise prostitution and sex tourism and to exchange > adult pornography. > "The Internet is like heaven for the pedophile," said Toby Tyler, a > United States police officer who lectures at the Federal Bureau of > Investigation (FBI) academy on child abuse. > "As far as our ability to restrict the distribution of child > pornography and stop the sexual exploitation of children on the > Internet...it's not something that can be done." > Campaigners are concerned that unless urgent action is taken to stamp > out the Internet's distribution of child porn, whether it features > real children or just computer generated images, it could spark > greater demand for child pornography. > Tyler said the Internet has ended the days when pedophiles had to make > costly cross-border runs to buy child pornography in countries where > laws were laxer and penalties lighter. > Now they can obtain and distribute films and photos from their own > homes on the Internet with little risk of capture. > But not everyone agrees that regulating the internet or its 20 million > users worldwide is the right move. > Some advocates say the Internet represents free speech. > Others argue that the distribution of child pornography on the > Internet is not that widespread. > Margaret Healy from Bangkok-based End Child Prostitution in Asian > Tourism (ECPAT) said in a report prepared for the five-day Stockholm > conference which opens Aug. 27 that the regulation of child > pornography on computers presents special challenges and called on > governments to fund better training. [...] > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

2 1

"X-Ray Gun" for imperceptible searches
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I would wonder if a jamming device (preferably area-effect with a slowly randomly varying swathe of area, to avoid figuring out who was carrying it) would be possible, or some variety of shielding (i.e., emitting waves looking similar to flesh). -Allen > Direct Media > NEW X-RAY GUN TRADES PRIVACY FOR SAFETY > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 The Associated Press > SANTA MONICA, Calif. (Aug 12, 1996 09:47 a.m. EDT) -- The latest > weapon against terrorism can see right through you. > The Passive Millimeter Wave Imager can X-ray through clothing to "see" > a concealed weapon, plastic explosives or drugs. A police officer can > surreptitiously aim it into a crowd from as far away as 90 feet. > The new X-ray gun is becoming a symbol for an unlikely alliance of > civil libertarians and gun owners who fear the fight against crime and > terrorism may be waged at the expense of personal freedoms. > "I'm incredibly concerned," said John Henry Hingson, a past president > of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, meeting here > this past week. "The entire nation could become a victim of illegal > searches and seizures and the law is powerless to protect them from > these police abuses." > But in these nervous times following the the crash of TWA Fight 800 > and bombings at the Olympics, Oklahoma City and the World Trade > Center, many Americans are now willing to trade some of their privacy > and civil liberties for greater security. > A poll last week by the Los Angeles Times found that a majority of > people -- 58 percent -- said they would curtail some civil liberties > if it would help thwart terrorism. Thirteen percent said it would > depend on what rights were at stake. The poll didn't ask people to > single out any rights. > The Clinton administration has proposed increased wiretapping and > other anti-terrorism steps, and is doling out research grants for > cutting edge anti-crime technology that once may have been intended > for only military use. [...] > Two models are being developed of the Passive Millimeter Wave Imager, > a creation of Massachusetts-based Millimetrix Corp. > The larger one, about the size of a shoebox, is mounted on a patrol > car and pointed at the unsuspecting person. The gadget doesn't send > out X-rays; instead, it picks up electromagnetic waves emitted by > human flesh. > Anything that stands in the way of those waves -- like a gun -- or > anything that emits weaker waves -- like a bag of cocaine or a plastic > explosive -- will show up on a little screen in the patrol car. > Clothes emit no waves. Neither do walls, allowing the device to be > used from even outside a room. > A second model is a smaller, battery-operated version that an officer > can operate by hand, like a radar gun. > Millimetrix hopes to field test the larger model soon at a police > agency. > Hingson argues the device runs roughshod over bans against illegal > searches and seizures. The law says police can stop and frisk a person > only when an officer has a "reasonable suspicion" the person is armed > or involved in a crime. > Millimetrix points out that while the imager can see through clothing, > it still leaves people some privacy. The device's display screen, the > company says, "does not reveal intimate anatomical details of the > person." > Chip Walker, spokesman for the National Rifle Association, noted that > devices like the imager threaten the legal rights of people in 31 > states who are allowed to carry concealed weapons with proper > licenses. > "We certainly support efforts to disarm criminals, but we need to be > careful that we're not painting with too broad a brush here," he said. > Walker said that as troubling as terrorism is, people may be playing > into terrorists' hands by giving up their privacy. > "One of the broader issues is that if we start giving up certain civil > liberties, that essentially means that the terrorists are starting to > accomplish one of their goals," he said.

3 2

Re: Macintosh Mixmaster port... Who's doing it?
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:16 PM 9/22/96 -0500, Adam Shostack wrote: > A real Mac port of Mixmaster, that integrated with Claris >EMailer and Eudora would be a huge boon to the millions of Mac users >out there. I have no doubt that Vinnie's mac crypto conference talked >a lot about this sort of thing. Actually, the Mac crypto conference didn't spend any time at all on Mixmaster - which is not intended as a criticism of either the conference or of Mixmaster, but it just didn't happen. I gave a very short talk and said that I thought the Mac needed three apps, for people who wanted to jump in a write something useful to the cause of privacy on the net and didn't want to reinvent any wheels: a remailer client with a good user interface, a Mac-native remailer, and an implementation of DC-nets. Mixmaster would, of course, address two of those three. Lucky tells me that there is already a Mac implementation of DC-nets, but it doesn't seem to be very well known. My impression of the demographics of the conference was that it was folks who are mostly working developers who aren't necessarily up-to-the minute on crypto and ecommerce stuff, but are interested enough to at least think about including it in their applications. I'm pottering around with a Java-based remailer that acts like a POP client so it can run on a client machine, not a Unix box; but other people should take that as a challenge to see if they can finish one before/better than me, not a reason to avoid writing one. Hal Finney has already done some very nice work with Java and mailing; see his home page (the address of which I don't have immediately at hand) for more details. For what it's worth, I think future remailer/Mixmaster development might do well in Java. I'm not especially sold on or trusting of the alleged security or trustability features of Java (sorry, no offense) but I *do* think it's a neat tool for building non-machine specific network aware applications. Ignore the fact that people use it to build silly animations or that downloadaded applets may or may not be secure - it's still useful as a development tool. -- Greg Broiles | "We pretend to be their friends, gbroiles(a)netbox.com | but they fuck with our heads." http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | |

4 3

Is it Keynes or Is it .... ? (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 16:09:02 -0400 > From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> > Subject: Is it Keynes or Is it .... ? > Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1998 14:12:55 EDT > From: Hayek-L List Host <HayekList(a)AOL.COM> > Subject: Is it Keynes or Is it .... ? > "A year or so from now, it will be difficult to find > a single person who admits ever having believed > that a global free market is a sensible way of > running the world economy No global economy is a good economy, by its very definition it is a monopoly and contrary to the entire precip of free-market pundits. A free-market is exclusively a *local* market. > laissez-faire was short-lived .. The free market came > about in England as a result not of slow evolution No it didn't, it's the basic economic structure that everything else gets built on. You start out with a completely free-market and build from there. Free markets are for cavepeople. > but swiftly, as a consequence of the unremitting use > of the power of the state .. The free market > withered away gradually, thought the natural workings > of democratic political competition ... No, human psychology is what kills it. > century England illustrates a vital truth: Democracy and > the free market are rivals, not allies. Duh. Economics has nothing to do with civil liberties or crimes. One of the failures in current political and economic thought is the necessity for the *government* to regulate the money. It isn't a new belief either since it is embodies in our Constitution. What is required for a free-market is a mechanism for 'fair competition'. The problem is there is no way under a free-market to define fair or competition. > problematic relationship. The normal concomitant > of free markets is not stable democratic government > but the volatile -- and not always democratic -- politics > of economic insecurity. This is circular reasoning. A free-market is not compatible to democracy (of course not since a free-market requires two party economic contracts exculsively) but is compatible with a market that is solely stabalized by economic (in)security (which is a free-market economy after all). > History exemplifies an equally important fact: > Free market economies lack built-in stabilizers. > Without effective management by government, > they are liable to recurrent booms and busts -- > with all their costs in social cohesion and > political stability. Duh... > .. But is was also a consequence of governments' > holding to an orthodoxy that believed that so Governments *are* a form of orthodoxy, they don't hold onto it since they embody the concepts of orthodoxy. > long as inflation is under control the economy > can be relied upon to be self-regulating ,,," Nobody with half-a-clue believe this. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

provably hard PK cryptosystems
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

extracting from part of another thread... Dimitri Vulis <dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com> writes: > Adam Back writes: > > [...] I think I remember that you posted some time ago a way to have > > two plausible decryptions for one ciphertext, to enable things like > > duress keys, in terms of RSA. The problem with this, however is > > that RSA is currently very slow to use in its pure form for > > messages. > > I don't recall this one... My feeling about RSA is that one of these > days there will be a breakthrough allowing much faster factorization > (either through a better algorithm on a conventional computer, or by > a practical quantum computer) and then all the codes based on > factorization will become essentially plaintext. It's time to start > looking for other hard problem to base PKC on. I'm not sure about quantum computers, some people who know much more about particle physics than I do seemed initially sceptical, and didn't think it was doable. However I have read some optimistic sounding news clippings (on the list) which sounded as if things are progressing well, with techniques being found using redundancy to get around what were earlier problems of reliability. Is this accurate reporting (thinking of garbled stories by over enthusiastic journalists)? I'd be interested to hear opinions from anyone who does know about particle physics about the likihood of practical quantum computers being practical in the next 20 years or so. RSA has always had problems with two pitfalls in any proof of its hardness: no proof that RSA is as hard as factoring, and no proof that factoring is hard. Rabin and variants of it at least have the proof of being as hard as factoring. You mentioned your opinion that a vastly better factoring algorithm may yet be found. What about the possibility of finding proof of a useful lower bound for the complexity of factoring, do you have any thoughts on the likelihood of this being achieved? That would be a very significant result, and in the absence of a quantum attack would be as good as it gets. It would allow you to make realistic calculations about physical limits of attacking it, in a similar manner to the entropy calculations possible for brute force of symmetric ciphers. (Heat death of the sun before a solution even if every particle was part of hardware key cracking computer type arguments). One other area that did sound promising was some kind of mapping problem in n dimensional tiling that Tim was discussing at a physical meet while I was over in the US. A news clipping posted to cypherpunks a short time ago was talking about a researcher who had constructed a crypto system related to the problem of finding paths in a tiling problem (sounded like the same problem). The interesting part was that the researcher was reported as having a proof of hardness. Similarly is this being reported accurately? > E.g., does anyone know of any progress made on public-key > cryptosystems based on the word problem in semigroups, described in > Neal Wagner and Marianne Magyarik, _A public key cryptosystem based > on the word problem_, Advances in Cryptology: Proceedings of Crypto > '84, G. R. Blakley and D. Chaum, eds., Lecture Notes in Computer > Sciences #196, Springer Verlag, 1985, and also mentioned in Wayne > Patterson, _Mathematical Cryptology for Computer Scientists and > Mathematicians_, Rowman and Littlefield, 1987? Not familiar with the problem. Is it something you could explain briefly, or are there any on-line papers on the subject? > >From what I neard, NSA tried very hard to implement it and failed, > and the Soviets actually built a cryptosystem similar to what they > described. I tried to duplicate what the Soviets supposedly did, but > without success. Adam -- #!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1 lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)

1 0