- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Patriot II would outlaw encryption
by lcs Mixmaster Remailer 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

> actually......no....it isn't my bust. it is yours. > > it says: > > "knowingly and willfully uses > encryption technology to conceal any incriminating > communication" relating to a federal crime that they're > committing, or attempting to commit". > > Thus, after the fact.....I can send you an ecrypted email detailing my > crime and I won't be "upping the ante" another five years. Sure you will. The "ongoing conspiracy" (an agreement to commit a felony) continues after various events. For example, if Ted and Alice have an ongoing implicit understanding that they will meet in the shed behind her house occasionally to tend the five marijuana plants growing there, that is an ongoing conspiracy to commit a federal felony. So if, a week after Ted's last visit, Alice sends him an encrypted email saying "Come over and watch a video, or whatever", the prosecutor can clearly use that (if he can decrypt it) as 5 more years in prison, since it used encryption technology and concealed an incriminating communication (the crime being conspiracy) that they are commiting (ongoing). The prosecutors can get Ted's passphrase by granting him immunity (probably ONLY immunity from the encryption enhancement penalty, or best case, from that and conspiracy, still nailing him for the pot felony, or getting Alice to roll over on him for the whole deal!!!!) and forcing him to disclose it having eliminated his 5th amendment defenses. Then they have Alice for the pot felony, conspiracy, and the 5 year encryption booster. Of course, they will simply hang all of this draconian punishment over her head, her attorney will say they can fight for $75,000 and 2 years, during which she is in jail, or they can plead it out and become a felon with few further rights of citizenship. And if you "detail a crime" after the event in an encrypted communication, you've essentially included another person in the knowledge of a past crime in the expectation that such disclosure will remain secret from law enforcement. That is conspiracy to avoid prosecution and probably obstruction of justice. Conspiracy and obstruction are crimes, you've just used encryption in a federal felony, 5 year enhancement. Bye. For arguments re: protections from forced disclosure of keys, see http://www.rubberhose.org/current/src/doc/sergienko.html

1 0

Re: Putting the "NSA Data Overwrite Standard" Legend to Death... (fwd)
by David Howe 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

at Monday, February 10, 2003 3:20 AM, Jim Choate <ravage(a)einstein.ssz.com> was seen to say: > On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Sunder wrote: >> The OS doesn't boot until you type in your passphrase, plug in your >> USB fob, etc. and allow it to read the key. Like, Duh! You know, >> you really ought to stop smoking crack. > Spin doctor bullshit, you're not addressing the issue which is the > mounting of an encrypted partition -before- the OS loads (eg lilo, > which by the way doesn't really 'mount' a partition, encrypted or > otherwise - it just follows a vector to a boot image that gets dumped > into ram and the cpu gets a vector to execute it - one would hope it > was the -intended- OS or fs de-encryption algorithm). What does that > do? Nothing (unless you're the attacker). indeed. it usually boots a kernel image with whatever modules are required to get the main system up and running; > There are two and only two general applications for such an approach. > A standard workstation which isn't used unless there is a warm body > handy. The other being a server which one doesn't want to -reboot- > without human intervention. Both imply that the physical site is > -secure-, that is the weakness to all the current software solutions > along this line. The solution is only applicable to cold or moderately tamper-proofed systems, to prevent analysis of such systems if confiscated. It can only become a serious component in an overall scheme, but this is universally true - there is no magic shield you can fit to *anything* to solve all ills; this will add protection against the specified attacks and in fact already exists for windows (drivecrypt pluspack) - it is just non-windoze platforms that lack a product in this area.

3 2

Re: FC: DOJ quietly drafts USA Patriot II, includes anti-crypto section
by Sunder 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

Time to start a new ad campaign: "You don't run around naked in public do you? Neither should your packets! Encrypt your traffic - it's just common sense!" "Your internet packets are naked! Clothe them with IPSEC" "Don't help the terrorists to your financial info - encrypt!" "You wouldn't want Osama reading your email, would you? Encrypt" Then when everything's encrypted, such laws can be challenged. ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_(a)_sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ On Fri, 7 Feb 2003, Declan McCullagh wrote: > Thanks to Joe for being the first one to submit this... Here's a duplicate > URL if the original is too slow: > http://www.privacy.org/patriot2draft.pdf > > Note the draft legislation creates a new federal felony of willfully using > encryption in the commission of a felony. "No more than five years" in > prison plus a hefty fine. This seems at first glance to be remarkably > similar to what was in the SAFE bill years ago. Here's a Politech message > from 1998, before the politechbot.com archives: > http://www.inet-one.com/cypherpunks/dir.98.05.11-98.05.17/msg00046.html

1 0

Re: Putting the "NSA Data Overwrite Standard" Legend to Death... (fwd)
by Dave Howe 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

Jim Choate wrote: > On Sat, 8 Feb 2003, Sunder wrote: >> In real life this will not work as most Windoze hard disk encryption >> schemes can't encrypt the OS disk - and this is where the temp/cache >> stuff goes. Not always - certainly, windows cache goes to a partition that must be available at windows startup - but webbrowser cache can happily live on an encrypted disk (I have done this many times) Further, there is always the Drivecrypt pluspack which mounts an encrypted volume before windoze starts, and hands over to windoze as it comes up (I believe the same mechanism is used as for doublespaced drives, but I can't be sure; drivecrypt is closed source, hence I refuse to use it) >> At least with a unixish OS you can mount your crypto file systems up >> at boot time before the OS really starts up (before the system goes >> to multi-user mode for example (at the end of /etc/rc1.d and before >> the rc2.d init starts.) > Which is a blind path since those files -must- be unencrypted and if > they do mount the disk they have to have access to the key to > unencrypt the fs hence you're in the same boat as with Winblows. At least in theory a lilo boot could mount an encrypted partition while still in the initrd stage; as crypto support is moved into the kernel, I expect to see this become an available option.

1 0

Re: My favorite line from the DOJ's latest draft bill
by Sunder 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

My new favorite is how Rumsfeld just said that the Europe Delay to give the inspectors more time will INCREASE the chance of war.... Uh huh... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,78003,00.html My, my, how the reptiles have evolved the ability to speak out both sides of their mouth... or more aptly put out of another orifice better fitted to the application of toilet paper. ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_(a)_sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------ On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Declan McCullagh wrote: > http://www.dailyrotten.com/source-docs/patriot2draft.html > terrorism is at least as dangerous to the United States' national security > as drug offenses

1 0

Re: The Space Shuttle's Secret Military Mission
by Mike Rosing 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 GaryJeffers(a)aol.com wrote: > > http://www.aci.net/kalliste/columbia_spectral.htm I love conspiricy theory! Take totally unrelated stuff, mix it together and voila - instant evil! The problem with this article is that it uses a reference (to a really cool idea BTW) for a nuclear *rocket engine* and then claims that this is an *actual* power supply! It's totally bogus dude. But thanks for the reference to the rocket engine, I need to read that paper! Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike

2 1

DOJ worried about domestic-int'l terror links
by Declan McCullagh 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

http://www.dailyrotten.com/source-docs/patriot2draft.html The limitation to international terrorism in existing law is an impediment to the effective use of national security letters because it may not be apparent in the early stages of a terrorism investigation-or even after it has continued for some time-whether domestic or international terrorism is involved. The Oklahoma City bombing and the anthrax letter incidents illustrate this point. Moreover, in the current circumstances, domestic terrorists who attempt to ally with or are inspired to emulate international terrorists are an increasing concern. The dangers posed to the national security by such persons may be comparable to those posed by international terrorists, and national security letters should likewise be an available tool in the investigation of their criminal activities.

1 0

Re: Putting the "NSA Data Overwrite Standard" Legend to Death... (fwd)
by Dave Howe 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

Jim Choate wrote: > On Sun, 9 Feb 2003, Dave Howe wrote: > >> Jim Choate wrote: >>> Yes, it can mount the partition. That isn't the problem. The problem >>> is that for lilo to do this it has to have access to the key in >>> plaintext. That makes the entire exercise moot. >> not if you have to type it every time. > Then I'd say lilo isn't mounting it, you are. no, lilo is. if you you can mount a pgpdisk (say) without software, then you are obviously much more talented than I am :) for virtual drives, the real question is at what point in the boot process you can mount a drive - if it is not until the os is fully functional, then you are unable to protect the os itself. if the bootstrap process can mount the drive before the os is functional, then you *can* protect the os. Win9x uses dos as its bootstrap (and drivespace gives a good example of a virtual drive system that can hand over to a 32bit driver as the os starts). lilo *could* kick a virtual drive into existence during the kernel boot, given such a driver and some patches to both kernel and lilo itself. that it would need a password from somewhere during this process is both obvious and not a major issue.

1 0

Re: Forced Oaths to Pieces of Cloth
by Bill Frantz 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

At 6:55 AM -0800 2/9/03, Sunder wrote: >And also freedom of religion. Forcing someone to say "Under God" for >example. Back in the dark ages (the 1950s, and don't anyone get nostalgic for them), when the phrase "under god" was added to the pledge, I was a student in school. From what they had taught me, I knew then that this addition violated the establishment of religion clause. The solution I devised was to simply remain silent when this phrase was said. Unfortunately having started to question the relation between the pledge and the ideals of the country, I started to wonder why I was pledging to the flag, instead of the country. So over the years, I have a somewhat edited version (removed parts in brackets): I pledge allegiance to [the flag of] the United States of America [and to the republic for which it stands], one nation [under god], indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Except for the fact that one should not trust pledges that are made under coercion, I am reasonably comfortable with this edited version. It expresses the ideal nation that I wish the United States would become. Cheers - Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Due process for all | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | used to be the Ameican | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)pwpconsult.com | way. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

3 2

Re: Putting the "NSA Data Overwrite Standard" Legend to Death... (fwd)
by Dave Howe 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

Jim Choate wrote: > Yes, it can mount the partition. That isn't the problem. The problem > is that for lilo to do this it has to have access to the key in > plaintext. That makes the entire exercise moot. not if you have to type it every time. if you take that as criteria, then *all* encryption is moot, as I can't think of any you don't have to supply a key or passphrase for. you could also have lilo look at a dongle (a usb drive, say) for its key.

1 0