- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: My short writeup of the NymIP effort
by auto110413＠hushmail.com 13 Dec '00

13 Dec '00

Now Im confused REALLY confused. For a second there, I thought ZKS was actually executing a turnaround to become a real privacy company, what with their recent repositioning towards managed privacy services and all. Companies out there need privacy solutions, and the field is wide open for the taking right now.. There arent many other companies out there with shipping products for the enterprise space yet .. in addition to ZKS (which Im not sure if they REALLY have a product for the enterprise space? although they seem to like to talk about it??) theres PrivacyRight and Privada out in California, and then thats about it.. and from what I can tell, the enterprise market is more than large enough for 3 companies right now.. I mean, if ZKS ever got their head screwed on right (read: fired Austin Hill??), they MIGHT stand a sliver of a chance of actually making some money -- But NOW, ZKS turns around and pulls a NymIP project for the IETF? What does this have to do w/ anything? (or at least, what does it have to do w/ the ZKS repositioning to become a genuine privacy company?) It seems this has more in line w/ what Ive been saying all along: the ZKS is really a free speech company, not a privacy company. Ive perused the (so far short) NymIP mailing lists and even the members agree that the NymIP project shares more in common w/ Fling (http://fling.sourceforge.net/) a free-speech system for the Internet, than it does w/ anything privacy related.. First, Ill go over all the obvious technical flaws w/ NymIP. For this protocol to have any practical applicability, we have to believe the ZKS mantra that IP addresses somehow represents personally identifiable information (PII) that is highly sensitive, and therefore must be encrypted We are asked to believe, in other words, that 1 IP address < == > 1 person.. Notwithstanding the obvious fact that today 60% of the Internet population logs on through AOL where 10,000 users share one IP address at the same time, Id like to ask the NymIP team what they plan to do once IPv6 is rolled out?? The 1 IP address < == > 1 person concept is highly tenuous under IPv4, and altogether laughable under IPv6.. Reading of the Goals of NymIP draft, the project lacks clear definition apparently they want to throw a bunch of academics in a room and see if they can come up w/ some vacuous concept called controlled nymity (< - - what the hell does that mean??) all w/o attempting to set any concrete benchmarks or milestones? The draft also stresses PKI.. Im wondering how much trust ZKS in general places in PKI? Have they read Schneiers 10 risks of PKI?: http://www.counterpane.com/pki-risks-ft.txt You have to wonder about IETF adoption too .. I checked out the agenda for the San Diego meeting and there is no mention of NymIP: http://www.ietf.org/meetings/IETF-49.html Also, just run through the standards that the IETF really does back: LDAP, Kerberos, IP telephony, VoIP, IPSec, and on and on.. these are real applications for have real business uses for enterprises and individuals. Thats why they have the support of the IEFT.. Wheres the real use for nyms? How many people have downloaded Freedom and are using? (I never see anyone I know on the Internet using @freedom.net addresses..) How many businesses are using ZKS? (if in fact they even have a product for businesses?) If nyms were a real thing, technologically + economically, they would have happened by now, but they havent.. (YES Im using a nym to write this email, but I dont use one nym to purchase computer books on Amazon, use a different nym to buy porno books on Amazon, etc.. and THAT is the economic reality that would have to be occurring for ZKS-style nyms to have any real traction yet it does NOT occur..) What irritates me more than anything about ZKS is their belief that cryptography can solve all the worlds privacy problems.. any sophisticated security professional will tell you that cryptography barely solves any security problems, and although good privacy starts w/ good security (since w/o security, information will tend to leak around where you dont want it to), privacy is vastly more complex than security.. 10 years ago you had people like Schneier talking about the role of cryptography in security. Since then, these people have moved beyond the algorithms and protocols, into the products, then into the policies and procedures, and today you have people like Schneier basically advising companies to just buy insurance to cover computer security risks after all, the whole security game is just a risk management game, and what better way to manage risk than via insurance? But at ZKS, theyre still living in a world where cryptography solves everything, completely ignoring the human element.. (which is really the most important) (and while we're on the subject on cryptography, what exactly is wrong w/ SSL? And don't tell me that SSL still lets you see IP addresses (perfectly in line w/ the TCP/IP spec) b/c that has NOTHING to do w/ privacy) When I look for the human element in a company, I look to the marketing department its the job of these guys to make sure that what the company is working on actually HAS a market. As soon as I heard about the NymIP project, my gut instinct was to fire the marketing VP over at ZKS it was like, this is the last straw the company has completely failed to position itself as ANYTHING. First youre selling this thingie called Freedom that is supposed to protect privacy but of course doesnt, then youre transitioning into the enterprise space, but you still leave 100 engineers working on Freedom on payroll, and then you start talking about being a consulting company even though PriceWaterhouseCooper will be better than you because they have actually broadened their knowledge base beyond crypto-anarchy and you havent and you then have Stefan Brands do a dog and pony show about building privacy into PKI, w/ applications in m-commerce, e-commerce, electronic voting, location-based services, age/gender verification, DRM, identity management and frequent flier miles (< -- NONE OF WHICH, by the way, are anything that any of the previously mentioned ZKS units are focusing on) and finally you come FULL CIRCLE and decide that youre going to work on this NymIP thing, which most closely resembled your initial Freedom product, which is actually a free speech thingie anyway and not a privacy thingie.. Wow NO FUCKING FOCUS.. and they must be burning at least $2.5 mil every month w/ basically nothing to show in revenues (Im guessing Freedom just isnt the cash cow they though it might be?? I mean, how many people do I see on the Internet using @freedom.net addresses??) But, back to what I was talking about I was about to recommend firing their marketing VP when I looked at their Web site and realized ZKS HAS NO MARKETING VP!! Then I thought: THATS THE PROBLEM!! Most modern high tech companies believe in the mantra that your customers drive your business, and will hire a marketing VP usually as employee, say, #3 or #4 so that he can go out and validate that there really IS a market for what you are proposing.. if not, its back to the drawing board until you CAN find some customers somewhere for what youre peddling.. Apparently ZKS does not choose to operate in this manner (listen to customers, ship products to market, etc..) And thats when I realized they likely have no marketing VP b/c its impossible to market a product as crappy as Freedom! Catch22.. In Silicon Valley, most VCs will not fund a company w/ market validation and w/o a marketing VP.. apparently this does not hold true in Canada.. I guess in the end, do I really care that much that Im surfing anonymously? Do I really care that much that Im surfing w/ a non-encrypted IP address? (this is, after all, how TCP/IP was designed to work). Im still SEARCHING for a business case here.. SOMEBODY HELP ME.. If I fill out a form and engage in a commercial transaction, then yes I want all that and related information to remain private (between me and the merchant), but does this really mean that I want all my info hidden from the merchant (maybe Im a sucker for frequent flier miles) and does it mean that Ill swim against the flow and drop $30 million++ into trying to redesign TCP/IP from the ground up so it has anonymity built-in?? Declan btw I appreciate the fact that your blurb in Wired about NymIP makes no mention of the word privacy I think its incredibly important that the concept of privacy be divorced from the concept of anonymity in the popular media (where oftentimes these two concepts blur together into one..) .. they are clearly not even remotely similar.. And dont get me wrong I firmly believe the Internet should have an anonymous safe haven, so to speak, if only for free speech if nothing else however, I have serious problems w/ a privacy company attempting to deliver on this, since its technically impossible, economically unmanageable and ultimately only confuses the an already befuddled marketplace (quite severely, in fact..).. >http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,40582,00.html > > Devising Invisible Ink > by Declan McCullagh (declan(a)wired.com) > 2:00 a.m. Dec. 9, 2000 PST > > WASHINGTON -- An ambitious effort to protect online anonymity > will kick off this weekend. > > A working group of about a dozen technologists, called NymIP, is > gathering before the Internet Engineering Task Force's meeting to take > the very first steps toward devising a standard that will foster > untraceable communications and Web browsing for Internet users.

1 0

This is why HTML email is evil.
by sunder 13 Dec '00

13 Dec '00

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/15423.html "For a very sweet dirty trick along those lines, one could embed a link to a porn picture on-line, resized at 1x1 so it's invisible in the e-mail. Network logs will show that a given employee requested, say, preteen_bestial.gif from www.loathsome-sex-offenders.com. Even better, if the company has spyware in place, the jack-booted network thugs won't even have to be notified by the trickster before grassing him out to senior management." -- ----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. --------_sunder_(a)_sunder_._net_------- http://www.sunder.net ------------

2 1

Important Membership Information
by announce＠inbox.nytimes.com 13 Dec '00

13 Dec '00

Dear cypherpunsl2132, Welcome to NYTimes.com! We are delighted that you have decided to become a member of our community. As a member you now have complete access to the Web's premier source for news and information -- free of charge. NYTimes.com not only provides you with in-depth coverage of events happening around the world but also with a wealth of additional features and services. The site is updated regularly throughout the day by New York Times reporters and editors to give you greater insight into events unfolding throughout the day. No matter what the hour, you can look to NYTimes.com for the most trustworthy coverage available and unique perspective you won't find anywhere else. Please feel free to explore the other areas of NYTimes.com. Here are some starting points you may find useful: ** Get NYTimes.com headlines e-mailed directly to you. Choose from the day's top stories, breaking news alerts and your favorite sections: http://email.nytimes.com/email/email.jsp?welcome ** Search and retrieve articles from The New York Times Archives back to 1996. Searches and summaries of articles are free, but there is a small fee for full text. http://archives.nytimes.com/archives?welcome ** Explore the Help Wanted and other classified listings on the Web: http://www.nytimes.com/jobmarket/?welcome ** Get a free photo screensaver from The New York Times Photo Archives Choose from Vintage New York, Americana, Coney Island and more: http://www.nytimes.com/partners/screensaver/index.html?welcome ** Search our archive of 50,000 book reviews, listen to author interviews or sign-up for an exclusive weekly newsletter from our Books Editor: http://www.nytimes.com/books/home?welcome Thank you again for becoming a member. We hope that you will make a point of visiting the site often. Sincerely, Rich Meislin, Editor in Chief New York Times Digital P.S. Your opinions are important to us. Share your thoughts about the site with us by sending an e-mail to feedback(a)nytimes.com ************************************************************* Your account information is listed below for future reference: Your Member ID is cypherpunsl2132 You selected your password at registration. Your e-mail address is cypherpunks(a)toad.com If you did not authorize this registration, someone has mistakenly registered using your e-mail address. We regret the inconvenience; please see http://www.nytimes.com/subscribe/help/cancel.html for instructions.

1 0

US: Democracy or Republic?
by Declan McCullagh 13 Dec '00

13 Dec '00

>Reply-To: "Kent Snyder-The Liberty Committee" ><kentsnyder(a)thelibertycommittee.org> >From: "Kent Snyder-The Liberty Committee" <kentsnyder(a)thelibertycommittee.org> >To: "Declan McCullagh" <declan(a)well.com> >Subject: Release: Democracy or Republic? >Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 13:57:19 -0500 >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 > >The Liberty Committee >701 W. Broad Street, Fifth Floor >Falls Church, VA 22046 > > >FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE >Thursday, December 07, 2000 >Contact: Kent Snyder, 703-241-1003 >E-mail: kentsnyder(a)thelibertycommittee.org >Web site: http://www.thelibertycommittee.org > >THE UNITED STATES IS NOT A DEMOCRACY. IT IS A REPUBLIC. THE ELECTORAL >COLLEGE SYSTEM SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED. > >House Concurrent Resolution (H.C.R.) 443 was submitted Monday, December >4, 2000 by Representatives Ron Paul (TX), Jack Metcalf (WA), Bob Stump >(AZ), and Mark Sanford (SC) expressing the sense of Congress in >reaffirming the United States of America as a republic. H.C. R. 443 >also reaffirms the electoral college system. > >"I call upon every member of the U.S. House of Representatives to >cosponsor House Concurrent Resolution 443 and ask every citizen to see >that they do," stated Kent Snyder executive director of The Liberty >Committee. He added, "The U.S. is a republic. Our present system of >selecting a president and vice president should remain so our republic >of independent and sovereign states will remain." > >The Liberty Committee is a nationwide, grassroots organization of over >45,000 Americans who are determined to restore the national government >of the United States to its constitutional limitations in order for >liberty to prevail. > >-30- > >

9 15

Only one horseman left!
by Declan McCullagh 13 Dec '00

13 Dec '00

today in dc: HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE Foreign Threats Crime Subcommittee hearing on the threat posed by the convergence of organized crime, drug trafficking and terrorism. Witnesses: Donnie Marshall, administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice Department; Michael Sheehan, ambassador at large/coordinator, Counterterrorism, State Department; Steven McCraw, inspector-deputy assistant director, Information, Analysis and Assessments Branch, Investigative Division, FBI; Frank Cilluffo, senior policy analyst/deputy director, Center for Strategic and International Studies; Ralf Mutschke, assistant director/sub-directorate, Crimes Against Persons and Property, Interpol General Secretariat; Raphael Perl, specialist, International Affairs, Congressional Research Service Location: 2141 Rayburn House Office Building. 10 a.m. Contact: 202-225-3951 http://www.house.gov/judiciary

1 0

Privacy is another victim of the war on (some) drugs
by Declan McCullagh 13 Dec '00

13 Dec '00

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,40532,00.html Privacy a Victim of the Drug War by Declan McCullagh (declan(a)wired.com) 2:00 a.m. Dec. 11, 2000 PST WASHINGTON -- When Indianapolis police stopped James Edmond and Joell Palmer at a drug checkpoint two years ago, the two men didn't merely get peeved. They got even. Edmond and Palmer filed a federal lawsuit claiming the drug-stop violated the Constitution's rule against unreasonable searches, and the Supreme Court recently agreed with them in a 6-3 ruling. But privacy scholars caution that the decision is only a minor victory for the right to be let alone, saying that the 30-year old war on drugs has gradually but persistently eroded privacy rights offline and online. Government officials have repeatedly warned of "drug smugglers" and "money launderers" while asking for encryption export controls, increased wiretap powers, and the authority to conduct infrared scans of homes without search warrants. The FBI claims its controversial Carnivore system is a big help in narcotics investigations. "The Fourth Amendment has been virtually repealed by court decisions, most of which involve drug searches," says Steven Duke, a professor of law at Yale University. Duke is talking about the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against "unreasonable" searches and seizures -- a phrasing that permits courts to decide what kinds of searches are reasonable or not. Since the 1970s, the Supreme Court has largely sided with law enforcement's views, and the justices over time have handed police more surveillance and search authority. The high court has said, for instance, that a search based on an invalid warrant is perfectly OK as long as police acted in "good faith." In Oliver vs. U.S., the justices ruled that police can search a field next to a farmhouse for marijuana plants, even if "No Trespassing" signs are posted and the police trespass was a criminal act in itself. Duke believes the court's ruling in the drug-stop case is mildly encouraging, but not much more. "The Supreme Court's decision is a ray of hope," Duke says. "I would hope that the pendulum might swing a little in the opposite direction. But I don't think we'll get back much of the privacy we've lost. I'd be very surprised if we did." One case that the Supreme Court has agreed to review this term, Kyllo vs. United States, will determine whether police can scan homes from afar -- without a warrant -- using a thermal imaging gun. The practice is becoming increasingly common as cops use the devices to hunt for heat patterns that could indicate pot plants in someone's basement. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that "we find no violation of the Fourth Amendment" when police used the Thermovision 210 to examine Danny Lee Kyllo's home and convict him of one count of manufacturing marijuana. [...] Perhaps the most striking intersection between the drug war and privacy is in a rather mundane area of the law: wiretapping. In 1968, state officials conducted 174 wiretaps and the feds none, according to statistics from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. By 1999, three decades after President Nixon kicked off the drug war, the number had ballooned to 1,350 wiretaps, with a breakdown of 749 state and 601 federal. Not one request was denied. By last year, the vast majority of the wiretaps had become narcotics-related: 978 of 1,350, according to government figures. "The expansion of federal wiretap activity and authority, which are two distinct concepts, is significant," says Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "It is clearly the case that the war on drugs has increased the number of wiretaps conducted and the number of circumstances where wiretaps can be conducted." [...] ********** John Gilmore adds: >The War on Drugs has certainly trashed the Fourth Amendment (with big >help from the so-called Justice Department and some abuse-apologists >on the Supreme Court), and has been a major reason for privacy >intrusions. The fundamental problem with outlawing consensual crimes >is that none of the participants will report them. To make them >enforceable you need a societal mechanism for monitoring consensual >behavior and reporting it to the police. This is not conducive to >privacy. > >I doubt that ALL privacy invasion has been engendered by the War on >Drugs. NSA's export controls were based on WW2 and Cold War >experience. The Internet has produced a major privacy problem by >making previously hard-to-access or hard-to-correlate records readily >available; search engines have been co-conspirators with the WWW >inventors in building easy cross-indexes. The abuse of census data in >rounding up and imprisoning honest and unindicted US citizens who were >Japanese-Americans was not motivated by the drug war. Marketeers have >not been idle either. > >The drug war-crime makes big problems for whatever lives or policies >it touches, and it has certainly had a big negative impact on privacy. >We would all have much more privacy rights if the drug war had never >happened. Restoring those rights after we end the drug war is going >to be a 50-year project. > > John

3 2

RE: Re: About 5yr. log retention
by Enzo Michelangeli 13 Dec '00

13 Dec '00

Tom Vogt wrote: > Tim May wrote: > > Lighten up. It was a joke. > > > > (I even provided a hint, in the "honored in some cultures.") > > sorry, I've been working overtime on some stuff here lately, and I was > too tired to get it. also, I'm tired of the nitpicking some people here > exhibit as if there were nothing more important to do than ignore the > main point of a posting and nibble on the minor errors. Anyway, "methinks" is in Shakespeare ("The lady doth protest too much, methinks." - Hamlet, Act III, Scene 2), so perhaps "mewrote" might vaunt an illustrious pedigree... Enzo

1 0

Informations
by marco.bodina＠inwind.it 13 Dec '00

13 Dec '00

I am writing a Thesys concernig e-banking and risk anda I'll be very pleasued if you can give me some sites to fisit to found some informations. Thank you Marco

1 0

stock picker
by CindysP＠cs.net 13 Dec '00

13 Dec '00

Have you ever wondered if you can make money in the stock market. Let us send you a free video. Simple system explains how to get wealthy in the stock market. Do you know that MCI is at its low for the year. YES MCI the giant long distance company. Do you think MCI is going out of business. I dont think so! Thousands have paid $99 for this video now its available free. www.gethotstocks.bigstep.com FREE VIDEO / Learn how simple and predictable the stock market is. Stock brokers never tell there clients about these proven systems for investing. Protect a portfolio against adverse price changes profit by making slight adjustments. www.gethotstocks.bigstep.com INCLUDE ALL INFORMATION TO GET THE VIDEO! Name: Address: Phone: Email www.gethotstocks.bigstep.com If you wish to be removed please send mail to removeme(a)2251.com Message is sent in compliance.

1 0

THIS IS HUGE! WATCH OUT AOL
by AOL Busters 13 Dec '00

13 Dec '00

'America On Line Watch Out" You now have the opportunity to enroll FOR FREE in a new online community that PAYS YOU TO BE A MEMBER and were not talking peanuts. THIS IS NOT MLM or NETWORK MARKETING!!!!! How does $10,000 a month sound just for using their community? There is a new sheriff coming to town and their focus is to be bigger and better than AOL. This brand new community is coming out in about 30 days. It is a full service ISP, Internet Gateway, Search Engine/Directory, Shopping Mall, Virtual Office, and just about anything else you can think of, all rolled into one easy-to-use site.Besides your own email account, mailroom, marketing center and providing you with Internet tools that you never even dreamed existed. You'll have access to anything AND everything that the Internet has to offer. You'll OWN it, and the revenue that is generated from EVERY feature will be paid to YOU! What most Internet users don't realize is that from the moment that you log on to the moment you log off, you are generating a good deal of cash for someone else. Even if you do not buy or fill out anything!! Your membership in this company, will change your view of the Internet forever by enabling you to profit from it whether you are online or not. This company is developed by 250 professionals who ALL have Master Degrees in computer science. They spent the past 2 years in a "Think Tank" constructing this new community and what you will be introduced to will blow your mind. A major advertising company,one of the worlds largest has taken on the duties of spreading the word. they will be doing this in a BIG WAY!!!! Were talking T.V., Radio, Billboards, Newspaper, and magazines. They will be blasting it EVERYWHERE which will include internationally. Next thing to know is that this opportunity is owned by MAJOR companies such as MCI WorldCom which means to you and me that they have the financial backing to pull something like this off. If you had a chance to be in at the beginning of America On Line and the chance to buy into the company you would have made a HUGE amount of money. Well, here is your chance to get in on the ground floor and it will cost you nothing!!!! DO not hit reply it wont get read! for more info send a blank e-mail to easysuccess2000(a)yahoo.com with MORE INFO!! in the subject line. It is free to join. If you are interested in their affiliate program where you will earn even more money, the cost is a ONE TIME fee of ONLY $25 to join......... Or sign on for free and recruit 10 people to earn affilliate status!! GO ENROLL NOW!!!!!!!!!! Best regards, Accounts Manager ******************************************************************************************* this letter cannot be considered spam as long as we include: Contact information & a Remove Link. Refer to http://www.spamlaws.com/federal/hr3113.html If you were not the intended recipient of this message, please accept my apologies and delete. This message is sent in compliance of the new E-mail bill, SECTION 301, Paragraph (a) (2)(C) of S.1618.Transmissions to you by the sender of this email will be stopped promptly by sending an e-mail with REMOVE in the subject line to: easysuccess2000(a)yahoo.com Thank you

1 0