- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Your papers please
by Steve Furlong 18 Oct '01

18 Oct '01

Duncan Frissell wrote: > > Don't do it in Massachusetts. They consider it wiretapping. Most states > aren't so funny. But why take it out. Leave it in your pocket (save when > clearing the metal detector, of ocurse). MA wiretapping law applies only to secret recording. In theory, holding the thing in plain sight should be ok. That's the written law. Case law might be different, and I might know it if I were a Massachusetts lawyer, which I ain't. Also, as measl pointed out, jackbooted thugs can trash the device and lie about it later. (I had a similar encounter which resulted in my equipment being smashed and the pigs lying about it when I complained. I wasn't arrested in that incident, though.) -- Steve Furlong Computer Condottiere Have GNU, Will Travel 617-670-3793 "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly while bad people will find a way around the laws." -- Plato

1 0

Re: Fwd: Reply from Zero-Knowledge
by Anonymous 18 Oct '01

18 Oct '01

My comments integrated below: > >I want to start by saying that Zero-Knowledge absolutely does not track or > >profile the users of its Freedom Privacy & Security Tools 3.0 software. Whenever I turn on Freedom, which, by default, happens when I boot, it sends a message to ZKS. EVERY time. How, again, is this not "tracking" of my usage behaviour? How is ZKS knowing every time I boot up that I've got Freedom 3.0 installed not something they can build a profile about? > >Our software loads updates (e.g. Ad Manager files and e-wallet scripts) as > >well as privacy-related content via HTTP. This was the case with previous > >versions of the software and is still true today, although today it may > >appear more prominent since we have designed Freedom 3.0 with a new user > >interface and are carrying more privacy content. I can't comment on Freedom 2.0, but this doesn't change any of my comments. > >This HTTP activity is covered by our privacy policies. I don't doubt it. > >As for cookies, Zero-Knowledge has always used cookies on its websites, for > >the purposes of store-, affiliate- and state-management. These practices are > >also reflected in our privacy policies. And EVERY time I turn on my Freedom client (usually at startup) it sends a request, info I don't have a clue about (And those cookies, when the domain in zeroknowledge.com and when I use IE as my browser, are sent back to ZKS whenever they're in my IE cache and I open ZKS. And, of course, there's the fact that Freedom notifies everyone between my computer and zeroknowledge.com that I'm using freedom. Which, of course, is covered by the Pen trace and trap warrants, and is collected by carnivore. Now I'm telling my ISP and the world what my IP is, what my platform is, and that I use Freedom. How, again, is this not tracking me? Things to consider. -- "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, 1759. ******** ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End forwarded message -----

1 0

Re: Fwd: Reply from Zero-Knowledge
by Anonymous 18 Oct '01

18 Oct '01

My comments integrated below: > >I want to start by saying that Zero-Knowledge absolutely does not track or > >profile the users of its Freedom Privacy & Security Tools 3.0 software. Whenever I turn on Freedom, which, by default, happens when I boot, it sends a message to ZKS. EVERY time. How, again, is this not "tracking" of my usage behaviour? How is ZKS knowing every time I boot up that I've got Freedom 3.0 installed not something they can build a profile about? > >Our software loads updates (e.g. Ad Manager files and e-wallet scripts) as > >well as privacy-related content via HTTP. This was the case with previous > >versions of the software and is still true today, although today it may > >appear more prominent since we have designed Freedom 3.0 with a new user > >interface and are carrying more privacy content. I can't comment on Freedom 2.0, but this doesn't change any of my comments. > >This HTTP activity is covered by our privacy policies. I don't doubt it. > >As for cookies, Zero-Knowledge has always used cookies on its websites, for > >the purposes of store-, affiliate- and state-management. These practices are > >also reflected in our privacy policies. And EVERY time I turn on my Freedom client (usually at startup) it sends a request, info I don't have a clue about (And those cookies, when the domain in zeroknowledge.com and when I use IE as my browser, are sent back to ZKS whenever they're in my IE cache and I open ZKS. And, of course, there's the fact that Freedom notifies everyone between my computer and zeroknowledge.com that I'm using freedom. Which, of course, is covered by the Pen trace and trap warrants, and is collected by carnivore. Now I'm telling my ISP and the world what my IP is, what my platform is, and that I use Freedom. How, again, is this not tracking me? Things to consider. -- "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, 1759. ******** ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End forwarded message -----

1 0

don't write "fags" on military bombs, its not polite
by Tabla bin Rasa 18 Oct '01

18 Oct '01

Anti-Gay Bomb Slur Wrong, Navy Says WASHINGTON (AP) - An anti-gay slur written on one of the bombs used in the strikes on Afghanistan was inappropriate and commanders have been directed to prevent similar incidents, a top Navy official said. Pilots or crews of U.S. warplanes often write messages on bombs, either taunting the enemy or praising America. Messages written on bombs during the anti-terrorism airstrikes have included several references to the Sept. 11 attacks. A news photograph of a plane on the USS Enterprise aircraft carrier last week showed one bomb with the message, ``High Jack This,'' followed by an anti-gay slur. The Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group, complained about the bomb's message. Rear Adm. Stephen Pietropaoli, in a letter to the group Wednesday, said the Navy does not tolerate discrimination and the bomb's message was an ``isolated incident.'' Several newspapers across the country also asked the Navy about the bomb's message earlier this week, said Pietropaoli, the Navy's chief of information. ``We immediately notified Navy commanders involved with Operation Enduring Freedom to ensure steps were taken to prevent a recurrence of this unfortunate incident. They have done so,'' Pietropaoli wrote. Elizabeth Birch, executive director of Human Rights Campaign, said in a statement that the letter was ``a welcome clarification and we are pleased the Navy has stated that this type of anti-gay behavior has no place in our armed forces.''

2 1

"Expert" fooled by Bert Stego
by Optimizzin Al-gorithm 18 Oct '01

18 Oct '01

At 12:40 PM 10/18/01 -0700, auto301094(a)hushmail.com wrote: > >Expert Warns Al Qaeda Planning Major Biological Attack > >DefenseWatch: One of the illustrations shows Osama bin Laden next to a cartoon >character from Sesame Street. What significance does that image have? > >The Sesame Street character that has appeared in a huge poster with Osama bin >Laden is significant in that it is yellow and has a mask-like quality. And one >can be certain that it was not placed on that huge poster by accident, as some people have stupidly suggested. It is a signal. Bert Stego? Occam's razor, dude. >Robert Koontz is an experimental nuclear physicist who earned his Ph.D. in 1980 >at the University of Maryland. His specialties are experimental nuclear >physics and high-energy physics, but he is also an expert in certain areas of >electronics, computer systems, software development and matters relating to >electronic intelligence gathering. Koontz has been a Staff Scientist at the >Department of Energys Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, a Professor of Physics at >the University of South Dakota, and formerly was an instructor at the National >Security Agency.He lives in Pennsylvania. He might be smart, and the rest of what he says is interesting, but he has paranoid delusions W.R.T. Bert.

3 2

Do SpecOps set aside a pair of clean underwear for Somalias?
by Optimizzin Al-gorithm 18 Oct '01

18 Oct '01

>`America will only be certain about its mistaken calculations after its soldiers are dragged in Afghanistan >as they were in Somalia,'' http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/nm/20011018/ts/attack_qaeda_usa_dc_1.html One bomb got USG out of Lebanon. A few stingers and some underwear on CNN got USG out of Somalia. Bombs didn't work for crusaders in Arabian barracks or warship. Wouldn't think oil is so addictive, but it is. People will die to get it. Maybe Osama's brother will recognize his writing and turn him into the FBI.

1 0

Im sorry aimee
by mattd 18 Oct '01

18 Oct '01

man who received a suspicious letter with amorous writings and lace panties turned it over to sheriff's deputies, who stored it in a biohazard barrel before determining it was not from a terrorist but from a secret admirer.

1 0

Re: Books being banned on planes...
by Optimizzin Al-gorithm 18 Oct '01

18 Oct '01

At 03:09 PM 10/18/01 -0700, j eric townsend wrote: >How to get detained and miss your flight. >Bring the wrong book with you: > >http://www.citypaper.net/articles/101801/news.godfrey.shtml >Plus, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations >stipulate that any passenger who jokes about explosives be arrested on the spot. By >contrast, Godfrey was never charged or even accused of breaking the law. I But the security personnel joke all they want. I flew out of San Jose after they gotten national guardsmen. Going through security, a security dude looks at my bottle of water, opens it, sniffs it, and acts like he's just whiffed sarin. Then he smiles and puts it back in my bag. I'm thinking, what an asshole, if I did that I'd be screwed. And I'm lucky no nervous guardsman saw his stunt from across the room and didn't see the laugh while he was slinging his M-16 around.. Wonder what they'll think if I bring my copy of _Demolition: the art of demolishing dismantling imploding toppling & razing_ by H. Liss & the Loizeauxs. The cover is a four-picture series of a hotel falling, less cleanly than the WTC actually. (But it looks like it was brick.) Or maybe _Why buildings fall down_ which has a B-25 bomber flying into a skyscraper (ca. 1945). Don't need Hollywood for that idea.

1 0

StreetMail (triangulate this)
by Incognito Innominatus 18 Oct '01

18 Oct '01

In the view of imminent remailer takeover/shutdown, here is a scheme that can piggyback on any entry/exit point and provide rather decent anonymity. Until I do exhaustive trademark research, let's call it StreetMail. It has nothing to do with crypto. It just exploits anonymity that (still) exists for people using public streets. Background: cheap residential 802.11b access points have significant outdoor range and cost around $200 (orinoco rg-1100; proxym skyline; apple airport ($300)). Orinoco seems to be the best choice because it provides ready ability to attach antenna. All these can be configured to allow access to anyone. Also, it can be specified which kind of traffic is allowed (say, only port 8000). By directing these access points to use in-house http proxy (like squid) that is configured to allow ONLY access to remailers and throwaway accounts (hotmail, yahoo,etc) all other use of public access is effectively prevented. If antenna is placed close to the window the range should be around 100-200 meters in the open. An interested party could drive in the range and pickup/send e-mail at will. Unlike with traditional remailers, where one must trust the operator, here the terrorist user controls anonymity herself. Who has seen you ? If you just walk by with a laptop who can ID you ? (use the radio card that has programmable MAC, like Orinoco gold.) Best of all, the operator is automagically exonerated, since she has no way of knowing who is connecting to the WLAN. Until operating WLANs becomes a crime, that is. The disadvantages are obvious - today's few active remailers are reachable from anywhere on the net. The proposed solution requires access point, server and always-on link (like DSL) and there should be one location per, say, half million inhabitants. The only difference between StreetMail this and those that chose to offer their DSL to the public (http://www.seattlewireless.net) is that StreetMail is far more restrictive, so you don't have to worry about your freaky neighbour serving gigs of Illegal Bits. Now, the above can be set up in about half hour. Further enhancements require access to AP development toolkits (or playing with unix drivers for radio cards instead): - limiting a single remote MAC to preset time and volume (like once every 6 hrs and no more than 100 kb per session (this also creates liability because logs will exist) - using internal remailer with random delay, so she can escape - bouncing traffic via radio links with nearby nodes. etc.

1 0

Re: Stu Baker on CALEA and the Net
by keyser-soze＠hushmail.com 18 Oct '01

18 Oct '01

>At 03:48 PM 10/18/2001 -0700, Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> wrote: >>"FBI requires ISPs to permit easy surveillance; EFF founder agrees" >http://www.politechbot.com/p-02671.html > >>"Stu Baker replies to Politech post on ISPs and EFF founder" >http://www.politechbot.com/p-02672.html > >>From: "Baker, Stewart" <SBaker(a)steptoe.com> To: "'declan(a)well.com'" <declan(a)well.com>, politech(a)politechbot.com cc: "Albertazzie, Sally" <SAlbertazzie(a)steptoe.com> Subject: RE: FBI requires ISPs to permit easy surveillance; EFF founder ag rees Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 14:52:52 -0400 Declan, I guess I ought to know what Mitch said and didn't say at this event. In fact, I took Mitch's remarks as an olive branch and an invitation to more civil discourse now that we have a keener sense of how much unites rather than divides us. He didn't say he was willing to abandon principle for expediency. He did say that he defines himself as many things, and civil liberties advocate is (just) one of them. He also said he is open to reconsidering his views in the aftermath of September 11. Well, who isn't? Only an ideologue would refuse to reconsider his views in the light of new data (or would accuse those who do of abandoning principles for expediency). But in fact, Mitch held up the civil! liberties end of the discussion with dignity and moderation, offering a determined argument against national id cards, for example. Stewart Baker > >Anyone who has given this subject much consideration knows that today's threats are not new and were already incorporated into informed views before September 11. No new threat has been identified, only fairly well known threats have been acted upon. No credible reasons for reconsideration of the balance of security vs. civil rights have been presented only propaganda. It is only the dereliction of our news media and government officials which has made the situation seem new to many citizens. Too bad military standards of justice aren't applied to all government employees. > >steve

1 0