- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

RE: Mind control: U.S. Measures May Incite Domestic Terror
by citizenQ 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

Shit I'm sorry, I left out the "irony smiley" again. >Citizen Q: > >> It's domestic terrorist extremist right wing supremecist group >> etc. who will be experience "fear and anger" over the new laws. > (Outraged Irony here) >> Not "normal" people. (Outraged Irony here) >>Does this mean anyone fearing and angered >> by the proposed new laws will be a terrorist? >> >> Auto - I hope you get a message back to your ranks that we're not >> going to stand for it and we're not all extremist right wing >> supremecist terrorists. Aimee I would have suspected you of enough intelligence to catch the subtlety of intent by simple addition: Subject Line + followon = ironic disgust at the propagandistic spin caliming that only right wing supremacist terrorists are outraged angered, fearful. Get it? BTW, I can't really tell what the fuck you're saying either. >I most strongly disagree. > >Solutions that provoke acts of domestic terrorism, rather than preventing >them -- are not "solutions," no? While these groups may not hold legitimate >opinions in the eyes of most Americans, they are legitimate threats. (I have >used some responsive commentary in here to make this point elsewhere.) > >In my opinion, some of these proposals not only "trade security for >privacy," (their words) they are going to "trade privacy for terrorism." I >think that's a bad deal for everybody.

1 0

Clueless CATO Institute Thinks Ban On Knives A Good Thing
by Matthew Gaylor 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

[Note from Matthew Gaylor: I usually highly recommend the CATO Institute as they nearly always take a principled pro-freedom stand on the issues. Below is an exception. CATO's Ivan Eland writes that "The ban against sharp metal objects (i.e., knives) aboard aircraft is a good one." Making airline passengers an even more inviting target is not something that strikes me as smart idea let alone a pro-freedom market liberal ideal. In the early 1960s American airline passengers could carry firearms on their carry on luggage- A period that didn't see hijackings I might add. It was only after government regulation via the FAA that effectively emasculated personal defense from both the pilots and passengers have we seen in flight terrorism. If you're disappointed with CATO's position I suggest you contact CATO Executive VP David Boaz <dboaz(a)cato.org>. Or write or call the Cato Institute, 1000 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Washington D.C. 20001-5403, Phone (202) 842-0200, Fax (202) 842-3490] <http://www.cato.org/current/terrorism/pubs/eland-010920.html> Don't Give Bin Laden Total Victory by Ivan Eland <ieland(a)cato.org>, Director of Defense Policy Studies, Cato Institute The monstrous and despicable attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center have given the terrorists two victories. We must prevent them from gaining a third. The first victory-achieving mass casualties-was obtained with a nefarious, but deft, lightning strike that converted ordinary airliners into explosive, building-busting weapons. The second victory was achieved by inducing first panic, and then fear, into the American public through the publicity that the attacks received. The first two victories were wrought by the terrorists' own efforts but whether they achieve a third victory is up to us. As bad as the mass casualties and widespread fear were, the worst and most long lasting scar from the attacks could be an alteration of the American way of life. Politically, the United States is the freest nation on earth. Our citizens enjoy freedoms unmatched anywhere in the world. If the attacks result in the curtailment of American civil liberties in the name of increased security, the terrorists' triumph will be complete. Added airport security might be needed but the measures chosen should not be applied in a broad and draconian way to show that the U.S. government is "doing something" about the problem of terrorism. The government's tendency to overdo its response to crises is well known. For example, after the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and the 1995 poison gas attack on the Tokyo subway, Congress passed the draconian Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. That law reduced civil liberties but did not institute measures that would have prevented those types of attacks. Instead, any new airport security provisions adopted should specifically help address the threat. The ban against sharp metal objects (i.e., knives) aboard aircraft is a good one. The bans on electronic ticketing and curbside check-in seem to be an example of government measures that have only a tangential relationship to the problem of hijacking. The apparent justification for them is that terrorists might opt for other means of attack if hijacking with knives is denied to them. If that is the case, then maybe we should prohibit all air travel. Although the public's desire for increased security is understandable, security measures should not be so onerous that air travel becomes a nightmare. If the speed limit on the highways were reduced to 5 miles per hour, many lives could be saved but our society would grind to a halt (or at least slow down dramatically). In anything we do in life, we take some risk. Despite the heat of the moment, terrorist attacks and airplane hijackings are still rare occurrences. Terrorism is like water flowing in a stream-it follows the path of least resistance. Like moving water, which flows around rocks, logs and other obstacles, terrorists will change their tactics to move around defenses and attack the weakest point. Terrorism, perpetrated by loose associations of small shadowy groups, also is hard for intelligence agencies to detect and is therefore difficult to stop. We can only institute so many security measures to prevent terrorism before the burden to an open society is too great. Therefore, in the long-term, when the dust settles after the predictable and justifiable military response to this heinous act, we should ask ourselves why the United States is the target of almost 50 percent of the world's terrorism. That percentage is high for a nation that is half a world away from most of the world's conflicts, has no ongoing civil war, and has no hostile neighbors. We should also ask ourselves whether increased security or intelligence gathering would trash the civil liberties that make the United States unique and great. That would be the greatest victory for Bin Laden and probably the most long lasting tragedy for America. ### ************************************************************************** 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/ **************************************************************************

1 0

Re: Signed, anonymous...(was Re: Getting Bush...)
by Karsten M. Self 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 on Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 12:40:14PM -0700, Meyer Wolfsheim (wolf(a)priori.net) wrote: > On Tue, 25 Sep 2001, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > > Might I ask what the purpose of utilizing hushmail, signing a message, > > and not having publicly available keys, is? > > Future verifiability? The thought crossed my mind. > It currently isn't possible to publish public Hushmail keys, or import > your own. > > > [demime 0.97c removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature] > > Might I ask what the purpose of signing a message, and sending it to a > public list, in a format that causes list software to remove the signature > is? Someone got cluesticks for me WRT cypherpunks list protocol, and/or the cypherpunks listmanager WRT RFC 2015? - -- Karsten M. Self <kmself(a)ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7sOvvOEeIn1XyubARAmVFAJ91MLY+RZRBeDmuc6FIlEpnuYRwkgCfe34U tT5rsEpFnaxcRvGoJzoah24= =J9Yj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Re: Schneier on Stego, Dead Drops, bin Laden
by mmotyka＠lsil.com 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

Here are some excerpts : > It doesn't surprise me that terrorists are using this trick. The > very aspects of steganography that make it unsuitable for normal > corporate use make it ideally suited for terrorist use. Most > importantly, it can be used in an electronic dead drop. >... > Why can't businesses use this? The primary reason is that legitimate > businesses don't need dead drops. >... > Steganography is good way for terrorist cells to communicate, > and this ... > So, what's a counter-espionage agency to do? > > {chop} > If Bin Laden uses the same image to > transmit multiple messages, the NSA could notice that. Otherwise, > there's probably nothing the NSA can do. Dead drops, both real and > virtual, can't be prevented. > Am I wrong or does this article essentially say that stego is a tool for terrorists and that no legitimate enterprise has any use for it? The observation that there is probably nothing that anyone can do about it notwithstanding, this looks to me like a strong statement that stego is not a good thing. Whether stego has a 'legitimate business' use or not is irrelevant except as an argument for prohibiting it. The investment in stego detection is probably substantial and due to increase. Mike

1 0

Lo que estabas esperando...
by MisProductos.com 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

1 0

Richard, Get Your Audio Cassette Player plus 4 Audio Books for a Penny!
by specialoffers＠freesamples.com 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

Dear Richard, Don't have time to read anymore? FreeSamples.com and Audio Book Club have the perfect solution. Get up to $120 worth of audio books plus a FREE cassette player for only 1 cent. Simply click on the link below and choose any 4 audio books you want. That is a value up to $120 for only a penny (plus shipping and handling). If you join today you'll also receive a FREE audio cassette player (retail value of $19.95). Click Here To Join: http://clickserve.cc-dt.com/link/click?lid=278377 *** If the link is not clickable in your e-mail program, cut and paste the entire link into your browser window. This offer is risk-free. Choose from the latest bestsellers, engaging biographies, self-help and motivational titles or the best mysteries available - the choice is yours. You have nothing to lose. You'll have 10 full days to review your enrollment selections. If you are not completely satisfied, return them and owe nothing. No questions asked. Sincerely, Your Friends at FreeSamples.com and Audio Book Club When you registered, you indicated you would like to receive information about special offers from our partners. To avoid receiving future notifications of special offers, please login to: http://www.FreeSamples.com?v=abc1 and go to the My Preference page to update your preferences.

1 0

Schneier on Stego, Dead Drops, bin Laden
by Subcommander Bob 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

[Reformatted for legibility. Please take the few moments required to clean up submitted text, wrapping and aligning text as necessary. KMSelf] Monday September 24 01:15 PM EDT Terrorists and steganography By Bruce Schneier, Special to ZDNet Security expert Bruce Schneier writes that terrorist groups may be using steganography to communicate, allowing communication without any group knowing the identity of the other. COMMENTARY--Guess what? Osama Bin Ladin uses steganography. According to nameless "U.S. officials and experts" and "U.S. and foreign officials," terrorist groups are "hiding maps and photographs of terrorist targets and posting instructions for terrorist activities on sports chat rooms, pornographic bulletin boards and other Web sites." Simply put, steganography is the science of hiding messages in messages. Typically, a message (either plaintext or, more cleverly, ciphertext) is hidden in the low-order bits of a digital photograph. To the uninitiated observer, it's just a picture. But to the sender and receiver, there's a message hiding in there. It doesn't surprise me that terrorists are using this trick. The very aspects of steganography that make it unsuitable for normal corporate use make it ideally suited for terrorist use. Most importantly, it can be used in an electronic dead drop. If you read the FBI (news - web sites) affidavit against (accused spy) Robert Hanssen (news - web sites), you learn how Hanssen communicated with his Russian handlers. They never met, but would leave messages, money and documents for one another in plastic bags under a bridge. Hanssen's handler would leave a signal in a public place--a chalk mark on a mailbox--to indicate a waiting package. Hanssen would later collect the package. That's called a 'dead drop'. It has many advantages over a face-to-face meeting. One, the two parties are never seen together. Two, the two parties don't have to coordinate a rendezvous. Three, and most importantly, one party doesn't even have to know who the other one is (a definite advantage if one of them is arrested). Dead drops can be used to facilitate completely anonymous, asynchronous communications. Using steganography to embed a message in a pornographic image and posting it to a Usenet newsgroup is the cyberspace equivalent of a dead drop. To everyone else, it's just a picture. But to the receiver, there's a message in there waiting to be extracted. To make it work in practice, the terrorists would need to set up some sort of code. Just as Hanssen knew to collect his package when he saw the chalk mark, a virtual terrorist will need to know to look for his message. (He can't be expected to search every picture.) There are lots of ways to communicate a signal: timestamp on the message, an uncommon word in the subject line, etc. Use your imagination here--the possibilities are limitless. The effect is that the sender can transmit a message without ever communicating directly with the receiver. There is no e-mail between them, no remote logins, no instant messages. All that exists is a picture posted to a public forum, and then downloaded by anyone sufficiently enticed by the subject line (both third parties and the intended receiver of the secret message). So, what's a counter-espionage agency to do? There are the standard ways of finding steganographic messages, some of which I have outlined in a previous essay. If Bin Laden is using pornographic images to embed his secret messages, it is unlikely these pictures are being taken in Afghanistan (news - web sites). They're probably downloaded from the Web. If the NSA can keep a database of images (wouldn't that be something?), then they can find ones with subtle changes in the low-order bits. If Bin Laden uses the same image to transmit multiple messages, the NSA could notice that. Otherwise, there's probably nothing the NSA can do. Dead drops, both real and virtual, can't be prevented. Why can't businesses use this? The primary reason is that legitimate businesses don't need dead drops. I remember one company talk about a corporation embedding a steganographic message to its salespeople in a photo on the corporate Web page. Why not just send an encrypted e-mail? Because someone might notice the e-mail and know that the salespeople all got an encrypted message. So send a message every day: a real message when you need to, and a dummy message otherwise. This is a traffic analysis problem, and there are other techniques to solve it. Steganography just doesn't apply here. Steganography is good way for terrorist cells to communicate, allowing communication without any group knowing the identity of the other. There are other ways to build a dead drop in cyberspace. For example, a spy can sign up for a free, anonymous e-mail account. And Bin Laden probably uses those, too. Bruce Schneier is CTO of Counterpane Internet Security, Inc. He publishes a free monthly security newsletter. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20010924/tc/terrorists_and_steganography_1.…

2 1

Mind control: U.S. Measures May Incite Domestic Terror
by citizenQ 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

It's domestic terrorist extremist right wing supremecist group etc. who will be experience "fear and anger" over the new laws. Not "normal" people. Does this mean anyone fearing and angered by the proposed new laws will be a terrorist? Auto - I hope you get a message back to your ranks that we're not going to stand for it and we're not all extremist right wing supremecist terrorists. >These new measures may be necessary components to protect the United >States from further attacks by foreign terrorists. But they will also likely fuel the >fears and anger of domestic groups such as the Michigan Militia or the North >American Volunteer Militia. In time, as the U.S. security apparatus looks for >threats coming from outside the country, the United States may again face >attacks from within.

2 1

VIRUS ALERT - Re: long may you live
by cypherpunks＠privacyexposed.mailshell.com 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

!!VIRUS ALERT!! W32.Sircam.Worm@mm virus was in this message DO NOT OPEN Attachment. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Houghton" Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 1:32 PM Subject: CDR: long may you live Hi! How are you? I send you this file in order to have your advice See you later. Thanks

1 0

Getting Bush\'s Ear: Panel Releases Guidelines For Battling Cyberterrorism
by auto301094＠hushmail.com 25 Sep '01

25 Sep '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- National Journal's Technology Daily September 24, 2001 CYBER TERRORISM: Panel Releases Guidelines For Battling Cyber Terrorism A congressionally-mandated panel that has the ear of the Bush administration and key lawmakers detailed its anti-terrorism recommendations on Monday, offering its thoughts on cyber security, the use of the military in response to terrorist threats, border security, and the national health and medical networks. The Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction expedited the release of its third and final report -- originally scheduled for December -- after the Sept. 11 terrorism attacks in the United States. It expects to forward its recommendations to the White House and Capitol Hill within a "couple of weeks." In an effort to combat cyber terrorism, the panel -- known as the Gilmore Commission after its chairman, Virginia Gov. James Gilmore -- recommended that any entity advising the president have "broad representation" from state and local governments and private industries that depend on information security. The panel noted that the advisory group proposed by the Bush administration to examine critical infrastructure includes only senior national security officials. The Gilmore Commission also recommended the establishment of a government-funded group representing all stakeholders -- including law enforcement and private business -- to provide cyber-security alerts and functions. The panel found "major shortcomings" in the FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center, RAND project director Michael Wermuth said at the panel's meeting. The commission also suggested that Congress and the executive branch hold a summit to address what changes in current law will be necessary to address cyber-security issues. A "cyber court" also should be created for U.S. attorneys, according to the final report. "This is the best way to be effective while at the same time protect civil rights," Wermuth said, stressing that the panel repeatedly emphasized that national security should not come at the expense of civil rights. The group recommended the creation of a federally funded consortium for cyber security. Its task would be to develop a plan for testing and evaluating cyber-security research. The panel also said the federal government should reestablish the operational capabilities of its effort to combat the Year 2000 computer bug as a way to combat cyber terrorism. Gilmore said President Bush is "aware" of the report because Vice President Richard Cheney met with the group in May. Gilmore also said Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge -- who will head the newly created Office of Homeland Security -- told Gilmore on Friday that he "wants very much" to get input from the Gilmore Commission. The commission also is getting more attention on Capitol Hill. Gilmore told National Journal's Technology Daily that he spoke with Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham, D-Fla., over the weekend, and Graham was "very interested in the entire range and array" of the recommendations. He said Graham is considering legislation on the issue. So far, Graham is working on legislation that would expand the length of some court orders to a year, and he supports efforts to give law enforcement broader powers to track e-mail and Web-surfing activities. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.0 wl8EARECAB8FAjuwxFQYHGF1dG8zMDEwOTRAaHVzaG1haWwuY29tAAoJEKadvsVlUK4P l68AnjeKe7NtdAkgyvApwfBB6dxuFe4FAJ4m+wsSAxQ09Ev8wQhxSSs3VrmfwQ== =e66v -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3