- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

NYT on Biometrics
by Bill Stewart 15 May '03

15 May '03

I like the juxtaposition of two of the articles in David Pogue's NYT "Circuits" online column today... The article is about iris scanners, not retina scanners, and it doesn't mention the effects of glasses on it. I'd guess that conventional eyeglasses would interfere with its effectiveness, because they magnify or shrink the image and may distort it in other ways, but perhaps the scanners already need to rescale to adapt to different camera angles and distances. ----------- 6. How It Works: A Scanner Zeroes In on the Eyes ================================================ The eye-scanning system at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport is something of a novelty. But the technology might someday replace traditional forms of identification. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/15/technology/circuits/15howw.html?8cir 7. Online Shopper: Finding Eyeglasses on the Web ================================================ The Web may seem an unlikely place to shop for eyeglasses. But it even lets you check the fit. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/15/technology/circuits/15shop.html?8cir ----------

2 1

OIF Establishes Security for UNI and NNI
by Tyler Durden 15 May '03

15 May '03

For the transport/optical networking folks. Come to think of it, it is suprising that this hadn't been tackled soon, given the potential consequences of a compromised UNI, and given that UNI 1.0 was settled upon back in early 2001 or so. -TD FREMONT, Calif. -- In the wake of its quarterly meeting in Scottsdale, Arizona last week, the Optical Internetworking Forum (OIF) announced approval of the Security Extension for the User-to-Network Interface (UNI) and Network-to-Network Interface (NNI) Implementation Agreement (IA). The IA is the result of the combined efforts of the OIF's Architecture Working Group (WG), Carrier WG, Signaling WG and Operations Administration, Maintenance, & Provisioning (OAM&P) WG. The IA focuses on security for management interfaces and the auditing and logging of optical transport network elements. "Work on this implementation agreement began by identifying carriers' security requirements and then evaluating alternative solutions," said Joe Berthold, CIENA Corporation, president of the OIF. "The Security Extension IA is an example of multiple OIF working groups collaborating to better the industry." The Security IA defines a common extension for securing the protocols used in the UNI 1.0 IA and the UNI 2.0 and NNI works in progress. The IA was written to provide a common set of security mechanisms required to protect the signaling and routing of optical connections. These mechanisms safeguard transport networks against attacks that may compromise their control planes, seek unauthorized use of their resources or attempt to gain unauthorized information about their configuration and usage. To counter these threats, the IA was developed to protect the UNI signaling control channel(s). The Security Extension IA provides options for more extended coverage, defines a common method to secure additional protocols, allows compatibility between UNI and NNI security and reduces the need for manual intervention. The IA defines an optional-to-implement profile of the IETF's IPsec so signaling protocols that can be protected with mutual authentication, key management, message integrity, replay detection and confidentiality in a standard, widely-implemented, interoperable manner. _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

1 0

about fucking time! - local communities refuse to enforce patriot act
by Sunder 15 May '03

15 May '03

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,86915,00.html Local Communities Refuse to Enforce Patriot Act Thursday, May 15, 2003 By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos WASHINGTON . In a rare occurrence, conservative watchdogs are siding with liberal groups who say that several provisions of the anti-terror USA Patriot Act (search) are cause for concern by Americans seeking to protect their basic rights. "We must balance at all times the fact that national security is important, but freedom is essential," said Phil Kent, president of the conservative Southeastern Legal Foundation (search), which has taken issue with expanded federal surveillance powers granted under the law. Kent and others are applauding local efforts to try to ward off provisions of the Patriot Act. As of this week, the state of Hawaii as well as 104 cities and counties across the country have passed resolutions protesting federal law enforcement measures in the USA Patriot Act. <SNIP> Responding to a anti-Patriot Act resolution passed by the Tucson, Ariz., city council on May 5, Republican U.S. Sen. John Kyl said none of the invasiveness activists have warned about has come to pass. "Despite what critics charge, law-abiding Americans have not seen their rights infringed," he told Foxnews.com. <SNIP> [[[My comments: yeah, I guess that depends on your definition of American (said the same way W. J. Clinton commented on the definition of "is")]]] ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :25Kliters anthrax, 38K liters botulinum toxin, 500 tons of /|\ \|/ :sarin, mustard and VX gas, mobile bio-weapons labs, nukular /\|/\ <--*-->:weapons.. Reasons for war on Iraq - GWB 2003-01-28 speech. \/|\/ /|\ :Found to date: 0. Cost of war: $800,000,000,000 USD. \|/ + v + : The look on Sadam's face - priceless! --------_sunder_(a)_sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------

1 0

Homeland Security Department Used to Track Texas Democratic Legislators
by Bill Stewart 15 May '03

15 May '03

Yow! Either Jon Stewart's Daily Show or Jay Leno last night was quoting one of the Texas Republicans joking about the Democrats being Terrorists for blocking the bill this way, but apparently he wasn't totally joking. (Daily Show also showed a bunch of people in chicken suits mocking the Democrats, which is a perfectly appropriate response...) Apparently they only have to hold out till sometime Friday, but it's illegal to prevent a quorum in the legislature so the Republicans are able to send Texas police after them. I don't know if that law is intended to apply to outsiders preventing a quorum or if it really does apply to walkouts like this one. There's the initial posting and then a followup. ------ Forwarded Message Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 15:00:52 -0700 To: Dave Farber <dave(a)farber.net> Subject: Homeland Security Department Used to Track Texas Democratic Legislators (someone sent me this url... here it is for the IP if you wish) http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0514-07.htm Published on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 by CommonDreams.org Homeland Security Department Used to Track Texas Democrats by Glenn W. Smith Republicans in Washington and Austin, Texas apparently used a Homeland Security Department agency to track Texas Democratic legislators who left the state to block passage of a GOP-backed Congressional redistricting bill. This is the same Homeland Security Department that is supposed to be making America safe from foreign terrorists. It's the agency we were told would never be used for domestic political purposes. But today's edition of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports that the Air and Marine Interdiction and Coordination Center, in Riverside, California, became involved in the Republican search for 51 Democratic state representatives who went to Ardmore, Oklahoma to break a quorum of the House and block action on the redistricting bill. Here's what the Star-Telegram reported: "The agency received a call to locate a specific Piper turboprop aircraft. It was determined that the plane belonged to former House Speaker Pete Laney." Laney is one of the Democrats who is fighting against the redistricting bill. The newspaper said, "Laney's plane proved to be a key piece of information because, (Republican House Speaker) Craddick said, it's how he determined that the Democrats were in Ardmore. 'We called someone, and they said they were going to track it. I have no idea how they tracked it down,' Craddick said. 'That's how we found them.'" The Interdiction and Coordination center "falls under the auspices of the Homeland Security Department," the Star-Telegram reported. Republican Craddick, at the request of U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, is pushing a redistricting plan that would eliminate five Democrats from the U.S. Congress. Currently, the Texas delegation contains 17 Democrats and 15 Republicans. While saying they "called someone," Craddick denied making calls to any federal agency, but DeLay confirmed that Republicans sought the assistance of federal law enforcement. The action by the House Democrats, dubbed the "Heroes of the House" and the "Killer D's" (a reference to a similar quorum-busting action by Texas Senate Democrats in the late 1970s), has gained national attention. Their action has also received a surprising amount of support from Texas newspapers, which have criticized the deeply partisan actions of Texas Republicans. Republican leaders in Texas and Washington are furious. They have called the Democrats, holed up in a Holiday Inn in Ardmore, "cowards" and "terrorists." State troopers have followed the Democrats wives, parents and children. Troopers even staked out a hospital where one lawmaker's premature twins are being cared for. Staffers have been harassed. All this has happened after the location of the Democrats was known. Now, in a chilling revelation, we discover the Homeland Security Department was apparently used to try and track the Democrats' whereabouts. It was no doubt a ham-fisted, incautious and bungled attempt (like the Watergate burglary) by Republicans to use all the law enforcement they could find to overcome the Democrats' temporary advantage. But the use of the Homeland Security Department for partisan political purposes should alarm all Americans. It deserves a full, complete and independent investigation. The warnings of civil libertarians appear to have been justified. Even if it turns out that some half-crazed Republican staffer or independent investigator called the Air and Marine Interdiction and Coordination Center, it raises disturbing questions about the operations of Homeland Security and the lengths Republicans will go enforce their will. Americans deserve to know the details of this scandal. And they deserve to know them now. Glenn W. Smith is managing director/consultant to the progressive Rockridge Institute of Oakland, California. Smith lives in Austin, Texas. His email is glenns(a)affinitydynamics.com . ### ------ Forwarded Message From: Mary Shaw <mary.shaw(a)cs.cmu.edu> Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 22:13:32 -0400 To: dave(a)farber.net Subject: Re: [IP] Homeland Security Department Used to Track TexasDemocratic Legislators Dave, The online version of the article you sent has a link to an article in the Ft Worth Start-Telegram, http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/5858118.htm. The CommonDreams.org article didn't make it clear that rules of the legislature apparently give the state cops the authority to round up legislators if they are needed to make a quorum. Bringing in federal agencies still crosses the line, and the in-state tactics are questionable. But the (partisan) reporting in the CommonDreams article leaves the reader with the impression that it was over the line to be looking for the legislators at all. Mary Posted on Wed, May. 14, 2003 Eyes of Texas, U.S. on truant legislators By Jay Root Star-Telegram Austin Bureau STAR-TELEGRAM/RODGER MALLISON Reps. Al Edwards of Houston, Helen Giddings of DeSoto and Sylvester Turner of Houston talk with reporters in Austin. The three Democratic representatives returned to the House on Tuesday. Wives have been watched. A former House speaker's plane was tracked. Federal officials have been asked to intervene. Even the El Paso Police Department has gotten involved. The hunt for Democrats on the lam from the Texas Legislature has involved virtually every level of government, ranging from a house call by local cops to monitoring conducted -- apparently unwittingly -- by a California-based agency that normally is involved in the fight against terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. By Tuesday night, only one House member, Rep. Helen Giddings, D-DeSoto, had been apprehended. State Rep. Craig Eiland, D-Galveston, said he believes that the dragnet went overboard when a Texas Ranger tried to find him Monday night at the neonatal unit of the Galveston hospital where his newborn twins are recovering -- in intensive care. Eiland said he called the agent on his cellphone and told him that DPS agents had already found him in Ardmore, Okla. -- where he and most of his fellow boycotters are in self-imposed exile. "It's unnecessary, bordering on harassment," Eiland said. "Let the good guys go back to catching the bad guys and let the politicians deal with each other." The Texas Department of Public Safety says it's just doing its job: trying to haul in more than 50 Democrats who skipped town to block a controversial vote on redistricting. Although their tactic isn't a crime, state law enforcement officers have the authority to arrest members of the Legislature and deliver them to the Capitol to achieve the necessary quorum. At least three divisions of the DPS -- state troopers, Texas Rangers and the Special Crimes unit -- are on the case. [[[snip]]] ------ End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Re: Zero Knowledge in the Cave
by Major Variola (ret) 15 May '03

15 May '03

At 04:20 AM 5/15/03 +0200, Nomen Nescio wrote: >Zero Knowledge in the Cave > >There is a cave with a large entry room. From this room lead two >passageways, 1 and 2. Each of 1 and 2 branches into a myriad of smaller >passages, twisting and turning through the massive rock formation. >The passageways go on for miles and have never been fully explored. > >One of the big questions has been whether passageways 1 and 2 ever >connect up. Is there a way of getting from 1 to 2? Many have >searched, but none have ever succeeded. Most people believe that >no connection will ever be found. > >At least, no one used to. Now an explorer comes to you and claims to >have found a passage from 1 to 2, not a very long one, either. If so, and if "many have tried", then either: they have not been systematic xor the passage is deeply in there. The explorer's traversal rate constrains its depth. He will >prove it to you, but to you alone. Being a secretive type, he wants no >one else to know. If you accompany him to the cave, he will prove the >existence of the passageway to you. > >But there's a problem. You carry a video camera and record everything >that you see. If he shows you the existence of the passage, you will >be able to show the video tape to others, and they will learn of its >existence as well. > >Not to worry, he says. Come with me. So you enter the large entry room >of the cave together. He is risking that you have not put a tracer on him. So he has a UV lamp and a geiger counter. And carries a fully closed breathing system, trails brush behind him to conceal footsteps, etc. And has sanitized the cave to a much larger depth than he uses. >Now the simplest thing to do in order to demonstrate the existence of the >connection would be for him to leave through passage 1 and return through >passage 2. He could easily do this. However, your film record of the >event would prove to anyone else who saw it that there was a connection. Why is the film record assumed more reliable than your recollection? The time it takes him to demonstrate it constrains the depth of the solution. Perhaps he will require you to dose yourself with a time-distorting amnesic (E.g., tequila :-) which will make others not believe you? >Another way must be found. The explorer tells you what to do. Merely showing that something can be done (nukes, a blue LED, public key crypto) motivates others to investigate more, even without the ability to reverse engineer an instance. Again, the time it takes for the explorer to solve it constrains solutions. >Following his instructions, you leave the entry room for a few minutes, >while the explorer enters one of the passageways. You then re-enter the >room, and loudly call out one of the passageway numbers, either 1 or 2. >In a few minutes, the explorer comes out of the requested passageway. As a counter to the "twin" deception, you give him a tamper-"proof" sealed token which lets you know that its "him" that emerged. This does not work if Paul Kocher is the explorer :-) >You then leave the cave and repeat the process many times. Each time, the >reporter enters one of the passageways unknown to you; when you return and >name one of them, he is able without fail to exit from the named passage. I don't see why it matters that the entry point is unknown to the tester. >You reason that if there were no connection between the passageways, >the only way the explorer could come out the passage that you named >would be if he had gone in that same one. This would be rational (to you) even if the entry point is unknown AND he never calls off a test. He would have to guess >which one you were going to choose, and if he were right, he could >come out that one. But you have repeated the test dozens of times. >The chances that someone could guess right so often is infinitisimal. Infinitismal for large versions of "dozens" >The only logical explanation is that the passageway does exist. If the token is untampered with, ie no "identity" fraud. How good are the explorer's Flaps & Seals & Forgery friends? >Excited, you return to the tavern where you met the explorer and show >the other patrons your tape. But to your surprise, they just laugh. >They don't deny that the tape is real, that the explorer did come out >of the passageway you named. But they don't believe in the connection. > >Instead, they claim you are in league with the explorer in an attempt to >perpetrate a fraud. You have simply predetermined together the sequence >of numbers you would call out. Each of you has memorized the sequence, >and so each time the explorer is able to anticipate the number you will >call next. He enters that passage and is able, after a suitable pause, >to exit from that same one when you call its number. > >You leave the bar, frustrated. You are convinced that the connection >exists, but even though the tape shows all of the evidence that was so >convincing to you, no one else finds it persuasive. The explorer has >achieved his goal of proving the existence of the connection to you and >you alone. > >Questions for the student: > >1. How could you have done things differently, to produce a tape that >would be convincing to others? Use a more believable RNG. (Eg parity of hash of closing Dow Jones price that day, assuming you can't control this (without a lot of collaborators), and its publicly verifiable.) Keep filming as you rush the tape to the bar. (If you have a good video processing lab, you might have faked all outcomes well in advance, however. Are we assuming tape is always trustworthy?) The "zero (public) knowledge" part seems to depend on the observer's private (but publicly untrustable) generation of random choices. Is that the point? >2. What counter-measures and conditions could the explorer have put in >place to prevent you from getting a convincing tape in this manner? He could generate counter-tapes which are also submitted to the bar, reducing trust in your tapes. The tequila he splashes you with also helps (the UFO abduction discrediting attack on credibility :-) As does the sudden appearance of extra funds in your bank account. (Humans reason about other humans motivations.) Stimulating puzzle. Of course, we only have to believe what we can verify (or we can start a religion..), so if it is true in reality, others can verify it, xor it was a folie-a-deux, a commonplace phenomenon since the invention of language. ----- DSM-IV: Diagnostic criteria for 305.90 Caffeine Intoxication A. Recent consumption of caffeine, usually in excess of 250 mg (e.g., more than 2-3 cups of brewed coffee).

2 1

unsubscribe
by B Peterson 15 May '03

15 May '03

unsubscribe

1 0

unsubscribe
by B Peterson 15 May '03

15 May '03

1 0

unsubscribe
by B Peterson 15 May '03

15 May '03

1 0

Re: Brinworld++ U.S. Vigilantes Test Drones on Mexican Border
by Tyler Durden 14 May '03

14 May '03

You forgot to include the part where the drones follow each of the 100,000 Mexicans all the way to the farms they work for 50 cents an hour. Come to think of it, to multiply the real purpose of the drones, there should be a picture of a taco and a fuck-you middle finger painted on each of the drone's belly. -TD >From: "Major Variola (ret)" <mv(a)cdc.gov> >To: "cypherpunks(a)lne.com" <cypherpunks(a)lne.com> >Subject: Brinworld++ U.S. Vigilantes Test Drones on Mexican Border >Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 15:55:18 -0700 > >MONTERREY, Mexico (Reuters) - An Arizona vigilante group is testing >homemade "drone" reconnaissance planes on the U.S.-Mexican border to >monitor illegal immigrants entering the United States in lonely desert >areas. > >Glenn Spencer, head of the American Border Patrol vigilante group, said >on Tuesday the group has been testing two Unmanned Aerial Vehicles for >about a month and plans to have a fleet making passes over the border by >early July. > >"We want to show how the application of this technology can solve the >border problem," Spencer told Reuters. > >Police and residents say they are aware of the drones, similar to >unmanned U.S. military aircraft used in Iraq. > >Hundreds of thousands of illegal Mexican immigrants cross the border in >search of work every year. Three vigilante groups, some of them armed, >have sprung up in Arizona in the last three years to monitor the border >and hand over any illegal immigrants they find to U.S. Border Patrol >agents. > >The groups say U.S. authorities allow too many Mexicans to flout U.S. >immigration law. Since the Sept. 11 attacks, some have also said >unrestricted immigration poses an unacceptable security risk. > >Area residents say the drones invade their privacy and foster poor >cross-border relations. > >"The Mexican populations along the border are indignant," said Miguel >Escobar, a Mexican Foreign Ministry official based in Arizona. > >Ray Borane, mayor of the border town of Douglas, Ariz., said the group's >activities are racist. > >"BORDER HAWK" > >The vigilantes say they plan to outfit each UAV with a global >positioning device to pinpoint migrants, and then forward hose >coordinates to the Border Patrol. > >Dubbed the Border Hawk, the $5,000 drone has a wingspan of 5-1/2 feet >and flies at an altitude of 300-400 feet -- under the 500 feet mandated >for aircraft that need certification by the Federal Aviation >Administration. > >The craft are made by members of the vigilante group with experience in >electronics, Spencer said. > >Mario Villarreal, spokesman for the Bureau of Customs and Border >Protection in Washington, said: "We appreciate the community's efforts >in notifying us of suspicious activities... We encourage them to call >the Border Patrol or law enforcement but those efforts should be within >the law." > >He refused to comment directly on the vigilantes or their planned use of >drones. > >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51414-2003May13.html _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

1 0

Brinworld++ U.S. Vigilantes Test Drones on Mexican Border
by Major Variola (ret) 14 May '03

14 May '03

MONTERREY, Mexico (Reuters) - An Arizona vigilante group is testing homemade "drone" reconnaissance planes on the U.S.-Mexican border to monitor illegal immigrants entering the United States in lonely desert areas. Glenn Spencer, head of the American Border Patrol vigilante group, said on Tuesday the group has been testing two Unmanned Aerial Vehicles for about a month and plans to have a fleet making passes over the border by early July. "We want to show how the application of this technology can solve the border problem," Spencer told Reuters. Police and residents say they are aware of the drones, similar to unmanned U.S. military aircraft used in Iraq. Hundreds of thousands of illegal Mexican immigrants cross the border in search of work every year. Three vigilante groups, some of them armed, have sprung up in Arizona in the last three years to monitor the border and hand over any illegal immigrants they find to U.S. Border Patrol agents. The groups say U.S. authorities allow too many Mexicans to flout U.S. immigration law. Since the Sept. 11 attacks, some have also said unrestricted immigration poses an unacceptable security risk. Area residents say the drones invade their privacy and foster poor cross-border relations. "The Mexican populations along the border are indignant," said Miguel Escobar, a Mexican Foreign Ministry official based in Arizona. Ray Borane, mayor of the border town of Douglas, Ariz., said the group's activities are racist. "BORDER HAWK" The vigilantes say they plan to outfit each UAV with a global positioning device to pinpoint migrants, and then forward hose coordinates to the Border Patrol. Dubbed the Border Hawk, the $5,000 drone has a wingspan of 5-1/2 feet and flies at an altitude of 300-400 feet -- under the 500 feet mandated for aircraft that need certification by the Federal Aviation Administration. The craft are made by members of the vigilante group with experience in electronics, Spencer said. Mario Villarreal, spokesman for the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection in Washington, said: "We appreciate the community's efforts in notifying us of suspicious activities... We encourage them to call the Border Patrol or law enforcement but those efforts should be within the law." He refused to comment directly on the vigilantes or their planned use of drones. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51414-2003May13.html

3 2