- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Congresscritters with gas masks
by Declan McCullagh 27 Sep '01

27 Sep '01

Roll Call is one of the two major papers (along with the Hill) covering Capitol Hill... --Declan --- http://www.rollcall.com/pages/news/00/2001/09/news0924b.html Protective masks for every House Member and floor staffer were placed in an area readily accessible to lawmakers in the Capitol roughly a year ago to guard against a chemical or germ warfare assault, according to senior House staffers. "There were plenty of meetings where this was discussed and it was put in place," a knowledgeable House GOP aide said. Another House staffer added that masks are available in multiple places within the Capitol building.

1 0

Re: Cypherpunks declared to be a terrorist organization?
by bo.didley＠hushmail.com 27 Sep '01

27 Sep '01

The only obvious potential terrorist on the Cpunks list is Tim May. He fits the profile. He is paranoid,armed to the teeth,hates democracy. Hates the U.S. Government, which he refers to as the Z.O.G. Has called for the Nuking of Washington D.C. Only 300 killed in the recent attack. He must be real disappointed but maybe many more next time Tim. Hates big cities especially on the east coast. Hates Israel. Hates Jews. Hates those that don’t think like he does, “they need killing”. Is generally unhappy with the modern world and would see it burned down and rebuilt in his own particular vision. Seems Tim never has a nice day. Except perhaps 9/11. Bo D.

1 0

Scary Crypto
by mmotyka＠lsil.com 27 Sep '01

27 Sep '01

CY's article ( the crypto portion ) : The world is changing, new technologies sometimes have nasty applications. So let's embrace the illusion that governments can actually control everything and protect us from what scares us. In short, let's stick our collective heads in the sand and avoid evolving because the outcome is uncertain. That makes the outcome certain and not in our favor. Definitely not welcome in my foxhole. What a dipshit. Mike

1 0

RE: Defeatist Compromising Commentary From Reason Magazine
by Nick Gillespie 27 Sep '01

27 Sep '01

All, I appreciate your response to Cathy Young's recent column that was originally written for the Boston Globe and posted recently to reason.com. As I've noted to the Politech list, Young is a highly valued and often controversial contributor to REASON, both in print and on line, and I'm happy to post her writings even when I disagree with her on a specific issue, including encryption and whether the threat of terrorism should shrink civil liberties. As you may know, I and other members of the REASON writing community consistently and adamantly argue in favor of unfettered encryption, freedom from government oversight, and maximum civil, personal, and economic liberties in all spheres of human activity. For the unconvinced, I recommend a wider walk through our site and our print magazine (including our December issue, which features Declan McCullagh's contribution--among others--to a symposium about which civil liberties are most at risk in the government's new total war against terrorism). Yours, Nick ************** Nick Gillespie Editor-in-Chief REASON magazine www.reason.com gillespie(a)reason.com ************** -----Original Message----- From: Tim May [mailto:tcmay@got.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 10:33 PM To: cypherpunks(a)lne.com Cc: Nilsphone(a)aol.com; freematt(a)coil.com; gillespie(a)reason.com; davidn(a)reason.org; Charles Platt Subject: Re: Defeatist Compromising Commentary From Reason Magazine On Wednesday, September 26, 2001, at 06:15 PM, Nilsphone(a)aol.com wrote: In a message dated 2001-09-26 17:21 Pacific Daylight Time, freematt(a)coil.com writes: "Between Cato arguing for victim disarmament and Reason arguing that "right to liberty is preceded by the right to life," I say we just kill them all and let Rand sort them out." If you find Ms. Young's comments against encryption disturbing please write to Nick Gillespie <gillespie(a)reason.com> Editor-in-Chief of Reason Magazine and David Nott <davidn(a)reason.org> President, Reason Foundation.] I think Reason got it wrong. Crypto technology might simplify a terrorist's life a little, that is all. If there are no secure channels, terrorists can meet in person. The "GO" order can be done in the clear, "lets go" needs no encryption. Alternatively, low volume comm between people who know each other, and can meet beforehand, can easily be done using one time pad, which are drop dead easy to use, foolproof (as long as you dont lose or re-use them) etc, but not suitable for mass communication. I can write a one-time-pad program in minutes that does it all for you. You need a source for the pads, GM-tubes are best, rooms full of lava lamps and a digital camera have been used. Not very hard, can be set up at a central location, once, and then the pads distributed by hand. (This latter is a must and the catch in mass communications.) Nils Andersson (long time Reason subscriber, from the beginning in the 70-s) They fucking DID meet in person! There is not one iota, not one shred, of evidence that Atta and and his 20 or so co-conspirators used "crypto" in any form! (Including image file steganography, the form I invented in 1989-90 and which Kevin Kelly profiled in his book "Out of Control," based on interviews in 1992. I mention this because several journalists have been writing b.s stories aoubt Osama using "steganography, files hidden in images.' B.S.) And even had Atta and Company used crypto, which there is no evidence whatsoever of, this would be no more justification for "key escrow" or "backdoors" than the use of curtains by Al Capone to hide his activities was grounds for "transparency escrow" modes in curtains or for banning sealed envelopes. Most crime takes place out of sight of law enforcement. So? Atta and his co-conspirators met in apartments, motel rooms, and sent overnight letters. Unless the bozos at Reason are arguing for opening of all mail, for microphones in motel rooms, for "1984" levels of apartment surveillance, there is nothing that could have been done to stop the planning. This is all just very basic stuff, written about by some of us in the mid-80s. That so many journalists are just now "discovering" the crypto issue is symptomatic of our times. That bimbo at "Reason" is why "Reason" is just another enemy of liberty. --Tim May (P.S. I used to read "Reason" back when it was published out of my college town, Santa Barbara. Circa 1971-2 or so, maybe '73. A friend of mine knew Rob Poole pretty well. And I voted for John Hospers in '72. And my roommate at UCSB later worked for "Reason." And so on. But it got so repetitive and boring that I stopped reading it around 1980. They have missed out on the important trends.)

1 0

Are Plea Agreements Always Accurate
by Eric Cordian 27 Sep '01

27 Sep '01

[Yes, this is a duplicate. I screwed up my From: line on the prior one] According to an article by Declan in this morning's Wired News, Brian K. West has decided to take a plea agreement in the government's case against him for accessing an inadvertantly left wide open web site at a newspaper. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,47146,00.html The plea agreement alleges, amongst other things, that Mr. West intended to modify the newspaper's Perl scripts and market them commercially, as well as using a password file to access "private areas." As I remember the original story, Mr. West snarfed a local copy of the site to edit with Microsoft's FrontPage, to see what some modifications to it might look like, and in doing so, discovered that the copy of the site on the newspaper's server could be accessed and modified by anyone without need of a password, with complete access to all its scripts and other files. In the collection of files presented to the public was something that looked like a password file, and Mr. West tried one entry from it to see if access was granted, much like trying a key one finds on the ground in a nearby lock to see if it fits. Mr. West then informed the newspaper, which instead of simply fixing the misconfiguration, called the authorities, who then visited Mr. West under false pretenses, and attempted to get him to incriminate himself, and subsequently raided the premises and seized his computer. The newspaper, which had noticed the log entry from the password being tested, decided the whole thing was an attempt to steal their extremely precious Perl scripts, and market them to the public. The prosecutors, as prosecutors tend to do, managed to lie by juxtiposition by stating the fact of access using a password, a count of files transferred to Mr. West's machine, and the newspaper's allegations of software theft, in a way which suggested that Mr. West had "hacked" his way into the site using a stolen password, and used that access to steal hundreds of files, with the intent of making a profit from marketing the newspaper's stolen intellectual property. In fact, testing one of the passwords was incidental to the file transfer, the files were obtained because the site was wide open, not because a password was used, and the allegations that Mr. West intended to become the next Larry Ellison by stealing some Perl scripts a product of the newspaper's paranoid imagination. Now I find it unremarkable that Mr. West has chosen to take a plea agreement in this case, on a misdemeanor charge, instead of standing trial in the aftermath of the World Trade Center flattening as an Evil Terrorist Hacker, where the government's proof of nothing more than "unauthorized access" could send him to prison for many years. I also find it unremarkable that the plea agreement offered Mr. West to sign contains a complete laundry list of both the newspaper's and the prosecutor's twisting of the facts, and numerous confessions of "intent." What I find remarkable, is that Declan has written an article claiming that the plea agreement constitutes a "confession" by Mr. West, and that it demonstrates how easily "well-meaning" Netizens can be lead astray by a person who's really a dangerous criminal. Declan also has glowing words for the prosecutor, who he characterizes as unfairly maligned, and for the plea agreement, whose every word he characterizes as "fact." One wonders if Declan also considers everything in the Jim Bell and Carl Johnson plea agreements to constitute "fact" as well." The slant of Declan's article is also not helped by the fact that all the links provided by Wired as "also see" are about an exploit in Microsoft's Web server software having nothing to do with this case. Wired News and MSNBC continue to run neck in neck in the Birdcage Liner Olympics. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

1 0

Man With Bin Laden Tattoo Being Held in SoCal
by Subcommander Bob 27 Sep '01

27 Sep '01

http://www.latimes.com/editions/orange/la-000077361sep27.story?coll=la%2Ded… Man With Bin Laden Tattoo Being Held in O.C. Inquiry: Authorities are trying to learn his identity. They won't say whether charges have been filed. Orange County investigators said Wednesday that they are trying to determine the identity of a man arrested after the Sept. 11 hijacking attacks who has a portrait of terrorist Osama bin Laden tattooed on his chest. Authorities released few details about the man, including where he is being held and whether criminal charges have been filed against him. But Orange County sheriff's officials said the man, who was allegedly carrying false identification when arrested, was brought to the county jail in the days after the attacks. There, deputies discovered a large portrait of the terrorist emblazoned on his chest with the name "Osama bin Laden" written below. Local and federal authorities are working to determine whether the man is associated with Bin Laden or with the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, said Orange County Assistant Sheriff George Jaramillo. <snip>

2 1

Re: When the FBI Guys Come Knocking
by Declan McCullagh 27 Sep '01

27 Sep '01

On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 10:29:42AM -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: > Aimee may or may not be an agent, but this incarnation of An > Metet sure looks like an agent procovateur, trying to salt this list with > outrageous posts which Jeff Gordon and his merry men can later haul out > to show that anyone with contact with the list is a priori a bad guy. > > For the record, this kind of thing is very atypical on this list. Agreed. That kind of nasty rant would seem to be authored by an agent provocateur, or a very juvenile flamer. It's hardly representative of discussions here. -Declan

3 2

Defeatist Compromising Commentary From Reason Magazine
by Matthew Gaylor 27 Sep '01

27 Sep '01

[Note from Matthew Gaylor: Again more defeatist compromising commentary. Reason Magazine's contributing editor Cathy Young writes: "Do I like the idea of people being able to encrypt electronic communications so that they are beyond surveillance? Frankly, I found it scary even before Sept. 11 - precisely because of the threat of terrorism. It is said that there are no atheists in foxholes; perhaps there are no true libertarians in times of terrorist attacks. Even in the Declaration of Independence, the right to liberty is preceded by the right to life." In this case I found Cypherpunk Tim May's <tcmay(a)got.net> sarcastic comment right on the money. Tim writes: "Between Cato arguing for victim disarmament and Reason arguing that "right to liberty is preceded by the right to life," I say we just kill them all and let Rand sort them out." If you find Ms. Young's comments against encryption disturbing please write to Nick Gillespie <gillespie(a)reason.com> Editor-in-Chief of Reason Magazine and David Nott <davidn(a)reason.org> President, Reason Foundation.] <http://www.reason.com/cy/cy092401.html> September 24, 2001 Civil liberties may take a hit By Cathy Young It's such a cliche to say that the reality hasn't sunk in yet -- but it's true. Despite all the devastating images, part of me still doesn't belive that the Twin Towers are no more, or that the station where I have so often arrived in downtown New York by local train station from New Jersey lies under a pile of rubble, or that thousands are dead in what is unquestionably the most devastating terrorist act ever committed, not just on American soil but anywhere. And there are so many other cliches that come so easily right now and that are true: above all, that the world will never be the same. As always, there are those who would exploit an unthinkable tragedy for their own hateful agendas. On the left, a few commentators, such as filmmaker-activist Michael Moore, have found this a good time to decry the sins of American capitalism and US foreign policy for which we are supposedly being punished by the world's dispossessed. On the right, a few so-called men of God have found this a good time to decry the "wickedness" of gays and lesbians, feminists, the American Civil Liberties Union, and abortion providers, for which we are supposedly being punished by the Lord. So far, however, the divisive rhetoric isn't finding many takers. Americans are united in mourning and just anger. The way we have come together to help and support those affected by the horror of last week's bombings shows us at our best as a people. And yet moments of national unity and resolve are always of concern to those of us who are concerned with the expanding powers of the state and the fate of individual rights and civil liberties. Historically, individual freedom has not fared well in wartime, understandably so. And whatever military action we may take at the moment, one of the fears is that a war against terrorism may be, at least for the foreseeable future, a permanent war. There are libertarians who say that it doesn't have to be that way. They argue that, if our government only withdrew from meddling in regions where we have no real interest, stop playing global policeman, and limited itself to providing for a national defense against foreign attack, we wouldn't be a terrorist target. Alas, this is a myopic position. Aside from whether a 21st century democracy can survive in isolation, the sort of people who carried out this monstrous act hate us for much more than our foreign policy. Note that their targets included not only the Pentagon and (apparently) Capitol Hill or the White House, but the World Trade Center - a symbol and a bastion of international capitalism, not of US military power. Philosopher David Kelley, director of the Objectivist Center, makes this point eloquently in an essay on the center's Web site, "The Assault on Civilization." (which strikes a chord whether or not one shares the center's philosophy, based on the writings of Ayn Rand). The fanatics behind the bombings, Kelley writes, hate the West's cultural power most - "our secular culture of freedom, reason, and the pursuit of happiness. They hate our individualism; what they want is an authoritarian society where thought and behavior are controlled by true believers." We could stay out of world affairs and they would still hate and fear our influence. What to do, then? To sacrifice our freedoms to fear of terrorism would destroy the very way of life that we seek to protect and hand the terrorists a victory. On the other hand, a free society is not a suicide pact. We will undoubtedly have to put up with tougher security at airports. The movements of foreign visitors will be scrutinized more closely. Perhaps most alarming to many civil libertarians, it's likely that the government will expand its ability to monitor electronic mail, which has been a controversial issue for some time. Do I like the idea of the government intercepting e-mail? No. But, as long as there's judicial oversight and due process, that's no different from its longstanding power to intercept regular mail. Do I like the idea of people being able to encrypt electronic communications so that they are beyond surveillance? Frankly, I found it scary even before Sept. 11 - precisely because of the threat of terrorism. It is said that there are no atheists in foxholes; perhaps there are no true libertarians in times of terrorist attacks. Even in the Declaration of Independence, the right to liberty is preceded by the right to life. Cathy Young is a contributing editor to REASON. This column appeared in the Boston Globe on September 19, 2001. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ __________________________________________________________________________ Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. --- ************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt(a)coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **************************************************************************

3 2

'Cyberangels' to sponsor anti-OBL-hacking ad
by Trei, Peter 27 Sep '01

27 Sep '01

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,47099,00.html A TV Plea for Patriot Hackers By Brian McWilliams 2:00 a.m. Sep. 26, 2001 PDT A new TV public service announcement targets U.S. computer hacktivists with a blunt message: Uncle Sam wants you to help fight the war on terrorism. But the spot, which organizers hope to begin airing nationwide next week on major networks, will warn that misguided patriotic efforts from software experts can hurt the cause. [...] The first of its kind to address the issue of hacking, the "Hackers Against Terrorism" spot will attempt to channel U.S. computer security gurus into productive rather than destructive action, said Parry Aftab, executive director of Cyberangels, an Internet safety and help organization that is sponsoring the ads. "The hacker community is very important in the fight against terrorism. But we want to get the message out that if they want to get busy doing good stuff, they should come to us and not try to take action on their own," said Aftab. [...] -------------------------------- A couple points: 1. Is this really the first anti-hacking PSA? I don't think so - I definitely remember anti piracy PSAs from the BSA. Have there been others? 2. 'Cyberangels' is (I think) the same group which a few years ago tried to claim to be leaders in the fight against online child porn. As desirable as protecting actual children may be, the group seemed astonishingly ignorant of the online world - one spokesman claiming that *.gif and *.jpg file extensions were codes which indicates hetero and homo kp respectively. I hope they've cleaned up their act since then. [I will note that their site SSL certificate for reporting online kp fails checking, since it's issued to 'stores.mindspring.com, not www.cyberangels.com]

1 0

Re: FAA new rules and the nEW gEStApo (was Nail clippers
by mmotyka＠lsil.com 27 Sep '01

27 Sep '01

Yawn... xganon <nobody(a)xganon.com> wrote : >Hmm lets outlaw gelatin capsules on the grounds that they facilitate >turning human finger and toenails very hard and allow the use of same >as weapons(it does NOT take very much to tear the caratoid artery open) > Don't you mean carotid? >same for toothpicks and teeth.... >rolled up magazines facilitate lethal nerve strikes and >dont get me started on pens/pencils, chopsticks and forks :) > > anon > Recommended reading : Navy Seals Reference Manual NSRM123-54GXC-67453 101 Ways to Dismember Your Opponent With A Jelly Bean snore, whistle whistle whistle snore, whistle whistle whistle

2 1