- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

The Myth of Posse Comitatus
by mean-green＠hushmail.com 21 Sep '01

21 Sep '01

The Myth of Posse Comitatus MAJ Craig T. Trebilcock, USAR The Posse Comitatus Act has been traditionally viewed as a major barrier to the use of U.S. military forces in planning for homeland defense. In fact, many in uniform believe the Act precludes the use of U.S. military assets in domestic security operations in any but the most extraordinary situations. As is often the case, reality bears little resemblance to the myth for homeland defense planners. Through a gradual erosion of the Act’s prohibitions over the past twenty years, Posse Comitatus today is more of a procedural formality than an actual impediment to the use of U.S. military forces in homeland defense. http://www.homelandsecurity.org/journal/Articles/article.cfm?article=7

1 0

Re: Zimmermann's guilty shame... what a farce.
by Meyer Wolfsheim 21 Sep '01

21 Sep '01

On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Anonymous wrote: > Grow a spine, Phil, you jellyfish. You think Ford is upset because > their U-Haul truck was used by Timmy to blow up the Federal Building? > Tears in the shower? Please... spare me. This isn't a fucking Dickens > novel or the goddamn string section of the orchestra in an Elgar > piece. Do we have to get Brando to slap you around in the smoky back > room and tell you to be a fucking man? Unreal. Before launching your tirade against Phil, did you perhaps stop and think that this could be an entirely inaccurate representation of what Phil actually said to the reporter? In an earlier article, Phil is quoted, and does not sound "guilty" or "ashamed" for having written PGP: http://www.washtech.com/news/netarch/12557-1.html > Zimmermann should have hit the lecture circuit immediately with > passionate resolve for his cause, rather than being reduced to a > withering pool of Jello by some 90 IQ random with an AOL account. What > a farce. To think I once had respect for the man. Frankly, I wouldn't know of any diplomatic way to respond to the email in question either. > Shame on you for fostering a thinly-veiled anti-crypto op-ed piece. I *highly* doubt that Phil would have given this interview if he had known that was the slant the reporter was going to take. This is why I generally do not speak to reporters. Most are self-serving sensationalistic jackasses, or simply clueless. Poor Phil, still believing in the idea that unbiased journalism is a realistic concept. > And really, in the end, how absolutely arrogant of you to think that > you somehow reach the level of importance in world affairs that could > genuinely self-attribute a significant degree of responsibility for > the events of September 11th. Again, I see nothing quoted in that article that would lead me to believe those are Phil's thoughts, rather than the reporter's. >From http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1234-2001Sep20.html Let me break this down here: "Like many Americans, Phil Zimmermann, a stocky, 47-year-old computer programmer, has been crying every day since last week's terrorist attacks." Many of us, indeed, shed tears because of the events on Tuesday. Because of the loss of life, because of the actions of our own country that led to these attacks, because of the anticipation of the loss of liberties we'll face in the future, because of the fact that such violence is possible... many reasons why one would cry over the attacks and deaths of more than 5000 people. "He has been overwhelmed with feelings of guilt." Notice, no quote that would confirm this. "Zimmermann is the inventor of a computer program called Pretty Good Privacy, or PGP. He posted the tool for free on the Internet 10 years ago;" Incorrect. Kelly Goen posted it, not Phil. "it was the first to allow ordinary people to encrypt messages so only those with a "key" could read them." Also incorrect. PEM based systems existed. "No government or law enforcement agency has been able to get in." Tell that to our dear mob friend in New Jersey sitting in jail right now. Clearly this journalist does not believe in checking her facts. "People warned Zimmermann back then that he could be putting powerful technology into the wrong hands. He knew that was theoretically possible, but he also knew that the program could do good: His work created a way for people in oppressed countries to communicate without fear of retribution." True. "Now the government is investigating whether Zimmermann's technology or another scrambler was used by the hijackers to coordinate last week's attacks, and U.S. lawmakers are calling for new restrictions on the use and distribution of the technology." There has been no evidence made public whatsoever to suggest that hijackers used PGP to coordinate these attacks. The reporter made that up out of whole cloth. The US government is investigating a lot of things; no where has it been stated that they are paying any special attention to a PGP - bin Laden link. "Zimmermann and other fathers of encryption say it may be too late, given that the technology has spread all over the world." Too late for what? Too late to provide any "safety" to citizens by depriving them of the security that PGP affords, that's what. This is a watered down version of the argument that laws against crypto will not stop criminals from using it, since it is widely and freely available. "In a telephone interview from his home in Burlingame, Calif., Zimmermann said he doesn't regret posting the encryption program on the Internet. Yet he has trouble dealing with the reality that his software was likely used for evil." Phil probably said that he doesn't regret *writing* PGP, since he is always very clear that he did not post it. If he were in fact overwhelmed with guilt, he'd be regretting having written it. And the idea that "his software was likely used for evil" has nothing to do with reality. Another error on the part of the journalist. "The intellectual side of me is satisfied with the decision, but the pain that we all feel because of all the deaths mixes with this," he said. "It has been a horrific few days." Ah, finally an actual quote. Or one that appears to be, anyway. Note it's pain because of the deaths, not because of any link to PGP, that he is referring to. Conjecture on the part of the journalist. "Zimmermann read the words over and over again the next day, trying to think of a way to respond. But in the end, the man who is known in the technology world for his rousing speeches and meticulous debates didn't know what to say." I wouldn't know what to say to such an ignoramus either. Delete. "He raises some points that many people are raising right now, namely that terrorists can use the technology," Zimmermann said quietly. "But it overlooks the strong need for good crypto." This is nothing new. It is not new to us, nor is it new to Phil. It is, however, apparently quite a new idea that Ariana Eunjung Cha has yet to grasp -- tools, in the hands of good people, can be used for good. In the hands of evil people, can be used for evil. Tools are not inherently good or evil. To the Washington Post: unemployment rates are high. Can you not find journalists with a smidgeon of intelligence to staff your offices? If I were Phil, I'd sue for libel. -MW-

1 0

PGP author under fire for terrorist use of crypto
by Craig Phillips 21 Sep '01

21 Sep '01

Matt: Don't know if this is of interest or not. It appears that Phil Zimmermann is taking heat directly over the whole crypto - terrorist thing. Details at: <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1234-2001Sep20.html> Regards -- Craig... ------------------ "I wonder if other dogs think poodles are members of a weird religious cult." --Rita Rudner ************************************************************************** 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

PGP author under fire for terrorist use of crypto
by Craig Phillips 21 Sep '01

21 Sep '01

Matt: Don't know if this is of interest or not. It appears that Phil Zimmermann is taking heat directly over the whole crypto - terrorist thing. Details at: <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1234-2001Sep20.html> Regards -- Craig... ------------------ "I wonder if other dogs think poodles are members of a weird religious cult." --Rita Rudner ************************************************************************** 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

Zimmermann's guilty shame... what a farce.
by Anonymous 21 Sep '01

21 Sep '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Quoting the Washington Post Article: To Attacks' Toll Add a Programmer's Grief... Contributing to [the guilt] is the hate e-mail [Zimmermann] got Sunday night. It began, "Phil -- I hope you can sleep at night with the blood of 5,000 people on your hands." PGP has become a "weapon of war," the e-mail continued, leveling the playing field between powerful countries like the United States and "zealots." Zimmermann read the words over and over again the next day, trying to think of a way to respond. But in the end, the man who is known in the technology world for his rousing speeches and meticulous debates didn't know what to say. * * * You have GOT to be kidding me. How about: "Sorry, I only accept e-mail encrypted to my PGP key. You can obtain my key at http://pgpkeys.mit.edu" ? Grow a spine, Phil, you jellyfish. You think Ford is upset because their U-Haul truck was used by Timmy to blow up the Federal Building? Tears in the shower? Please... spare me. This isn't a fucking Dickens novel or the goddamn string section of the orchestra in an Elgar piece. Do we have to get Brando to slap you around in the smoky back room and tell you to be a fucking man? Unreal. Oh, how the great (or at least those with decent PR acumen) have fallen. Sad, very very sad. None of you spineless dilettantes deserve privacy or freedom. Nearly 30% don't mind detention camps for legal aliens to affect a review of their status? Sheesh. The United States so richly deserve the police state that even now approaches that it will be a piece of lyrical poetic justice if it does in fact come to pass. Bittersweet poetry perhaps, poetry none the less. Land of the free my ass. Home of the slave, I should rather think. People, until the libertarian or privacy or crypto or whathaveyou movements develop the same lust for the political (and actual) jugular commonplace among their opponents they will ever be a fractional and sidelined distraction. Nothing more. September 11, 2001 fails to mark the end of the privacy movement only if its proponents grow a backbone. None seems forthcoming. Zimmermann should have hit the lecture circuit immediately with passionate resolve for his cause, rather than being reduced to a withering pool of Jello by some 90 IQ random with an AOL account. What a farce. To think I once had respect for the man. Shame on you for fostering a thinly-veiled anti-crypto op-ed piece. You could of at least gotten 30 pieces of silver, rather than settling for the kind of public sing-song sympathy more commonly seen from the audience on the Jenny Jones show or the afternoon TV viewers of a tearful "I have sinned against you..." public confession. I hope it was worth it, you invertebrate. And really, in the end, how absolutely arrogant of you to think that you somehow reach the level of importance in world affairs that could genuinely self-attribute a significant degree of responsibility for the events of September 11th. Again, I hope it was worth it. The price the rest of us may pay for your insatiable vanity might be dear indeed. - -lain -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 7.0.1 iQA/AwUBO6uBrf6o0E6piE+3EQKaUACgtsCP5oMWoOPHHUcZnoZm2vO0zDIAniZf OvUVsIJNq4bf0ZK/uAFqf18v =rsMH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: FC: Op-ed on encryption: Privacy is no longer an argument
by Jim Warren 21 Sep '01

21 Sep '01

>http://www.wartimeliberty.com/article.pl?sid=01/09/21/0450203 > > Crypto Op-Ed: Privacy No Longer an Argument > posted by admin on Thursday September 20, @11:39PM > > M. W. Guzy has a provocative and not entirely coherent essay > in Wednesday's St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Excerpt: "(Then-Senator > John) Ashcroft wrote that mandating deciphering tools was tantamount > to requiring 'individuals to surrender the keys to their house... to > the FBI just in case they are someday suspected of breaking the law.' > Somehow, that argument rings a little hollow when viewed through the > smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center... SHEESH! Are these anti-secure-crypto advocates REALLY that INCREDIBLY stupid and naive?! The thing that continues to drive me bonkers about this kind of simplistic crap is that pretends aht Trade Center bombers, international terrorists, child molesters and murders will stop using globally-available strong crypto just because a law prohibits it, or give up ("escrow") their crypto keys just because a law requires it! EVERY time we circulate yet-another idiot's message like this -- calling for limits on secure crypto or forced key escrow -- ALL of us NEED to attach a head-note pointing out that terrorists et al, are HARDLY likely to obey that law ... that instead, it will ONLY be law-abiding businesses and citizens who will LOOSE the ability to protect their sensitive corporate and personal communications (*and* files!) from competitors, foreign spies, and nosy voyeurs. --jim Jim Warren; jwarren(a)well.com, Senior Contributing Editor, MICROTIMES Magazine 345 Swett Rd, Woodside CA 94062; voice/650-851-7075; fax/off due to spam-glut [self-inflating puffery: InfoWorld founder; Dr.Dobb's Journal founding editor; PBS-TV Computer Chronicles founding host; DataCast Magazine founder; John Dvorak Lifetime Achievement Award; Autodesk Board of Directors (1990-95); Electronic Frontier Foundation Pioneer Award (in its first year); Soc.of Prof.Journalists-Nor.Calif. James Madison Freedom-of-Information Award; Playboy Foundation's Hugh Hefner First-Amendment Award; blah blah blah] ************************************************************************** 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: FC: Op-ed on encryption: Privacy is no longer an argument
by Jim Warren 21 Sep '01

21 Sep '01

>http://www.wartimeliberty.com/article.pl?sid=01/09/21/0450203 > > Crypto Op-Ed: Privacy No Longer an Argument > posted by admin on Thursday September 20, @11:39PM > > M. W. Guzy has a provocative and not entirely coherent essay > in Wednesday's St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Excerpt: "(Then-Senator > John) Ashcroft wrote that mandating deciphering tools was tantamount > to requiring 'individuals to surrender the keys to their house... to > the FBI just in case they are someday suspected of breaking the law.' > Somehow, that argument rings a little hollow when viewed through the > smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center... SHEESH! Are these anti-secure-crypto advocates REALLY that INCREDIBLY stupid and naive?! The thing that continues to drive me bonkers about this kind of simplistic crap is that pretends aht Trade Center bombers, international terrorists, child molesters and murders will stop using globally-available strong crypto just because a law prohibits it, or give up ("escrow") their crypto keys just because a law requires it! EVERY time we circulate yet-another idiot's message like this -- calling for limits on secure crypto or forced key escrow -- ALL of us NEED to attach a head-note pointing out that terrorists et al, are HARDLY likely to obey that law ... that instead, it will ONLY be law-abiding businesses and citizens who will LOOSE the ability to protect their sensitive corporate and personal communications (*and* files!) from competitors, foreign spies, and nosy voyeurs. --jim Jim Warren; jwarren(a)well.com, Senior Contributing Editor, MICROTIMES Magazine 345 Swett Rd, Woodside CA 94062; voice/650-851-7075; fax/off due to spam-glut [self-inflating puffery: InfoWorld founder; Dr.Dobb's Journal founding editor; PBS-TV Computer Chronicles founding host; DataCast Magazine founder; John Dvorak Lifetime Achievement Award; Autodesk Board of Directors (1990-95); Electronic Frontier Foundation Pioneer Award (in its first year); Soc.of Prof.Journalists-Nor.Calif. James Madison Freedom-of-Information Award; Playboy Foundation's Hugh Hefner First-Amendment Award; blah blah blah] ************************************************************************** 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: Government credentials and picture IDs
by Meyer Wolfsheim 21 Sep '01

21 Sep '01

On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Tim May wrote: > It's too bad so many people are so confused about what a "Web of Trust" > is. > > Do I need a "positive picture ID" of Lucky Green to communicate with him > securely? Black Unicorn? Pr0duct Cypher? Eric Hughes? Attila the Hun? > > The notion that a particular credential with a picture on it means > anything, or should be given weight, is one of the most dangerous ideas > there is. For the obvious reasons. > > As a hint, the people you _don't_ want to trust are a helluva lot more > likely to have nice, neat picture IDs than people like Lucky Green are. > > --Tim May (not my true name) To elaborate a little, In the PGP-style "Web of Trust", each user is effectively his own Certificate Authority. Likewise, each user has his own form of CPS. Some users will indiscriminately sign other people's keys. Some users will require "government issued ID". Some users will require that they personally know another person for some set amount of time before signing his key. By signing a key, you are, in effect, asserting to the world a belief in the identity of the key holder. One can communicate securely with other users even if he never signs another person's key. Signing is entirely optional -- a service, so to speak, to the other members of one's community. (Indeed, there are more than a few cypherpunks who do not sign keys at all, because of the information it reveals about their associations with others.) Those of us who know better would not rely on a simple picture ID to prove identity. Likewise, we would not put much faith in certifications made by someone who used that criteria for verification. But PGP users are free to use whatever means they like in "verifying" identities. The problem I see in "V Alex Brennen's" announcement is that he is requiring photo-ID for a key signing party. The *only* function a key signing party serves is to facilitate the pairing of keys (by their fingerprints) with bodies (either individuals, or organizations represented by the proper individuals). The key signing party organizer's responsibility ends there. He should not be dictating key signing policy to the end users. Picture IDs are just one of many methods of determining identity, and as Tim points out, a poor one, and useless for pseudonyms. In the case of a conference or other gathering of strangers where a large key signing party is planned, it is my recommendation that, rather than each individual signing keys of other conference attendees (unless there is an existing trust relationship between individual attendees), the conference organizers create a conference signing key with which to sign attendees' keys. This provides information about the key (it was presented at such-and-such a conference by a person calling himself so-and-so) and also clearly defines the limits of this information. Users can later take that into account when evaluating whether or not to "trust" the signed key. (Many of us will find this certification useless, and others will find it undesirable for the information it leaks about us. Which is why key signings are voluntary.) -MW-

1 0

IRS, Deceit, Rats, Narcs
by John Young 21 Sep '01

21 Sep '01

Ashcroft's anti-terrorism bill proposes allowing IRS data to be shared with law enforcement and intelligence agencies. As if that would be a new. The bill would also lift the stay of US attorneys taking part in illegal undercover work. As if that was new. Bush has asked citizens to inform on their neighbors, as if that was new. Narcs in the militia have called for defense of the homeland while the military is engaged elsewhere. Recall the IRS manual for undercover operations which states these strategems are already in use.

1 0

Conservative Forum: Threat is not FBI, cops need crypto-access
by Declan McCullagh 21 Sep '01

21 Sep '01

----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> -----

1 0