- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: It is getting easier
by Murray Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Fri, 15 Nov 1996 13:02:10 -0800, Bill Frantz wrote: >At 11:25 PM 11/14/96 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >>If I remember correctly, some of the newer transponders used on >>commercial aircraft actually transmit GPS data back to the controller in >>real time. I wonder how long it will be before the FAA will include such >>information in their database. > >I don't think new transponders make much difference. The old ones heighten >the radar image of the airplane which gives an accurate 2D position. This >position is automatically entered into the FAA computer which maintains the >ATC controller's display. In the old style, altitude is determined by an >altimeter on the airplane which encoded into the transponder signal. > >If newer transponders are returning GPS signals, the position may be more >accurate (but probably not unless they can decode the selective >availability signal). (OBCrypto for those who care.) > > >>"To obtain the position of any passenger flight in the US within 10 >>meters, click here." > >In either case, the Passenger Name Records for the flight are in the >airlines databases (and have been there for many years), and the airplane's >physical position is in the FAA's computer (and has been for many years). >The ability to find the current position of an airplane, or a passenger >remains dependent on the incentives and disincentives for database linking >and application development. There are no insurmountable technical >problems. The technical problems are those of getting old-technology >software to do something new. > Wouldn't it be a breach of privacy to alow anyone to know the location of a passanger? A plane maybe, but the roster of passangers is protected by the Privacy Act. just my 2 cents. mhayes(a)infomatch.com It's better for us if you don't understand It's better for me if you don't understand -Tragically Hip

1 0

Re: Extreme Left/Right
by amp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: jimo(a)astea.com, cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Tue Nov 19 01:59:15 1996 > I always had trouble understanding what people meant when they used the > terms "extreme left" and "extreme right". Then, about 4 months ago, I > saw a guy define the "political spectrum" the way (he said) it used to be > defined before the definitions were corrupted (by whomever wants to > divide - and conquer - the people). It made sense to me. A spectrum > afterall, at least when we're talking about colors, starts with one type > of color and graduates to other, DIFFERENT colors. The real problem you are having is that the political 'spectrum' is not 1 dimensional (a line). If you describe it in 2 dimensions, it makes a lot more sense. The libertarians have a diagram they call the worlds smallest political quiz that describes it fairly well. It can be found at http://www.libertarian.com/wwlp/docs/awspq.html?quiz I first saw mention of a chart similar to this in the 60s. It was a way of describing beliefs politically that was put forth by Jerry Pournelle. (Who is available on the net btw.) > When I used to listen to a certain "leftist" radio station broadcasting > out of New York City, they would talk about "left-wing", communist > dictatorships and "right-wing", fascist dictatorships. A dictatorship is > a dictatorship!!! The "wing" that it comes from makes no difference!! Yup. You hit the nail on the head here. This is something that any thinking person should recognise. The basic way we are taught to understand and reference politics =makes=no=sense=. > The > way the media defines these things makes no sense; you can't have a > dictatorship on BOTH sides of a POLITICAL SPECTRUM no more than you can > have YELLOW on both sides of the COLOR SPECTRUM. Take a gander at the libertarian's chart. I think it is a more accurqte way of describing people, and in fact is similar in some ways to what you describe. A philosophy is charted based on how one views personal and property rights. amp === amp(a)pobox.com Earth First! We'll strip mine the other planets later! === -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMpFo01UbR1RWr40pAQG9Xwf/YN1d9WYNjX4NG9J2O5w78+c1XWPXVVII b8vN9UmfsaG4fXvo+1RY2nwCm20riAQ+4KPpzANSMI5T7LePRuHHR6NcHIDbVnNv zb7mlxfsvgpUR+cvNDWOsi2gkJoxhJhBn9x3gvsdGKSz2fTUA+5LUgVIrkZjicll qro7d3omrf4OetDmkehYK1YeAJg3bv1yGj5HMxaMrT8RBzU625goyxz8MBc0PlkL NrXz7uUdFd1AAElmqenkRp2jjSiZ3dQkenOuaN8T8eV5hAAdnUKLQd36ffBclqKj D4ggCz27CCvTFtC/wFXFbKOhHXqARk06o4ELJBcVO/Ka8FBVi5+C4Q== =suQe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

"Meeks Unfiltered" on ISP-TV Wednesday nights
by ISP-TV Main Contact 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

*** ISP-TV Program Announcement: "Meeks Unfiltered" *** Wednesday, Nov. 20 *** *** 8:00 PM ET *** Brock N. Meeks, publisher of the 800,000 subscriber CyberWire Dispatch electronic news service, will bring his crusading style into real-time Internet video with "Meeks Unfiltered." The live uncensored hour-long show, produced and distributed through ISP-TV, will explore cyberspace and cyberpolitics Wednesdays at 8 PM Eastern Time. *** If you missed last week's show with Brock and Declan McCullagh, you can listen to a RealAudio version at: http://www.digex.net/isptv/meeks.html *** "Meeks Unfiltered" can be viewed on the ISP-TV main CU-SeeMe reflector at IP 205.197.247.33, or other ISP-TV affiliate reflectors listed at http://www.digex.net/isptv/members.html See URL http://www.digex.net/isptv for more information about the ISP-TV Network To obtain Enhanced CU-SeeMe software, go to: http://goliath.wpine.com/cudownload.htm

1 0

Securing Electronic Mail Within HMG
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We have received from an anonymous source a document titled: "Securing Electronic Mail Within HMG, Part I, Infrastructure and Protocol." 21 March 1996. >From the Introduction: "This document is the first part of CESG's recommendations for securing electronic mail within HMG. The main objective of the recommendations is to facilitate pan-government secure inter- operability of electronic mail, by simplifying the implementation of secure electronic mail within government, ensuring secure electronic mail between departments is possible, attempting to facilitate future inter-operability with commercial users, maximising the use of commercial technology in a controlled manner, whilst allowing access to keys for data recovery or law enforcement purposes if required." Other sections describe: 2. Authentication Framework 3. Confidentiality Framework 4. Security Protocol The document refers to the Royal Holloway program for TTP critiqued by Ross Anderson and others as "EuroClipper." Perhaps those with more knowledge could make an assessment. The document consists of 13 pages of text and diagrams, with a few gaps. ----- http://jya.com/sem.htm (35 kb with 7 jpg images)

2 1

Exposing GAK / Clipper III
by Tim Scanlon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(this is my preliminary .02 cents on a part of this so far) I've been giving the "how to deal with this" question some thought, as it seems the government strategy is to chip away at our right to privacy via extorting compromise and any other method they can come up with. It occurs to me that one of the things that has been going on, is that the Government (US) in it's discussion of crypto and what it will and won't allow, has been playing on the nature of the beast somewhat. In that many of the most tradtional uses of crypto are to keep the conversations of governments private, there is a neccesary tradition of quiet and secrecy that goes on about it. It appears to me that this aspect of "quiet" discussion has carried over into the discussions with the private sector over it. Well, the problem I see with that is that it makes little to no sense. There is no reason for it. In many, many other sectors of the government, with the defense industry perhaps being the most leading one, private entities of all sorts, and particularly corporations, go to a serious effort to openly lobby their positions as well as what they want PUBLICLY to the government. The recent spam of TV ads in the DC area by Lockheed Martin corp. is a very good example of this type of effort. My point being, what sorts of things the government is asking of industry should be far more openly disputed and discussed, and lobbied than they are. Crypto is not the black art, nor is it that-which-has-no name and should you say it you'll be struck by lightning type of thing that certain gov entities treat it as, it's a frakin tool to ensure privacy, and that's all. Granted, it's one hell of a hard tool to work on and with, but it's still just a tool. We need more openess from industry and interested corporations. Lame press confrences that come after the fact are not in their or the public's interest. Perhaps we as the public should try to encourage that more directly from corps as well. Tim

1 0

Rogue Governments Issuing Policy Tokens
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We've touched on this issue several times, in several contexts. The problem (for GAK) of "rogue governments" is this: a government such as Libya or Panama, henceforth to be known as "Rogueitania," issues policy cards to all of its citizens, and to all those visiting Rogueitania, and perhaps through the mail to anyone who pays some fee. So, unless the U.S. actually does implement _import controls_ on such things, the willingness of Rogouitania to freely issue policy cards with no restrictions, guts the U.S. system. (The crypto community does in fact call these issuers "rogue governments." For example, in the mid-80s this was the subject of some "Crypto" papers about rogue governments (like Libya) possibly being willing to issue false passports to agents, terrorists, etc. Gee, the U.S. would have no interest in doing such a thing, either for their own agents, their own covert action squads, or their own 50,000 people given false identities in the Witness Security Program.) We raised many issues similar to this during the Clipper I, Clipper II, etc., exercises. The whole issue of why foreign governments would willingly see the NSA with intercept capabilities for their traffic was never addressed by the Administration. Nor was the issue of rogue governments. Nor many other issues. (I don't even think Denning and her Blue Ribbon Panel ever issued their final report on their weekend-long study of Clipper....events sort of made it moot.) And I don't expect substantive answers to our questions on the latest Clipper announcement for years, if ever. --Tim May "The government announcement is disastrous," said Jim Bidzos,.."We warned IBM that the National Security Agency would try to twist their technology." [NYT, 1996-10-02] We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

FW: Unsubtroll
by Butler, Scott 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

FOR GOD'S SAKE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >---------- >From: piotrk@opnt.optimus.wroc.pl[SMTP:piotrk@opnt.optimus.wroc.pl] >Sent: 19 November 1996 05:04 >Subject: Unsubtroll > >>unsubtroll >

1 0

Re: Extreme Left/Right
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:59 AM 11/19/96 -0400, amp wrote: >I first saw mention of a chart similar to this in the 60s. It was a way of >describing beliefs politically that was put forth by Jerry Pournelle. (Who >is available on the net btw.) That must be one hell of a download... ]:> >> When I used to listen to a certain "leftist" radio station broadcasting >> out of New York City, they would talk about "left-wing", communist >> dictatorships and "right-wing", fascist dictatorships. A dictatorship is >> a dictatorship!!! The "wing" that it comes from makes no difference!! > >Yup. You hit the nail on the head here. This is something that any thinking >person should recognise. The basic way we are taught to understand and >reference politics =makes=no=sense=. The question is whether you wish to be tortured by the Government forces or the Peoples Revolutionary army. (I guess is comes down to which side has had more practice this week...) Also, will this be deliberate torture or the accidental kind. ("Oops. Sorry. We were actually after a dully elected representative of the four horseman. You just got in the way. Maybe it will grow back...") >> The >> way the media defines these things makes no sense; you can't have a >> dictatorship on BOTH sides of a POLITICAL SPECTRUM no more than you can >> have YELLOW on both sides of the COLOR SPECTRUM. > >Take a gander at the libertarian's chart. I think it is a more accurqte way >of describing people, and in fact is similar in some ways to what you >describe. A philosophy is charted based on how one views personal and >property rights. This assumes that there are only two basic axises that rights are based opon. Some of those can get pretty fuzzy. To properly describe how the system works would require an n-dimensional hyperpolygon of indeterminate size. (Kind of like describing the black budget. You know it is there, but looking at it is difficult, and if they catch you looking the hounds of tindalos will be coming at you out of every corner of the woodwork.) Personally, I am a political non-euclidean. --- | "Remember: You can't have BSDM without BSD." - alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ | alano(a)teleport.com |

1 0

Re: Extreme Left/Right
by amp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Tue Nov 19 04:35:41 1996 =snip= >I first saw mention of a chart similar to this in the 60s. It was a way of >describing beliefs politically that was put forth by Jerry Pournelle. (Who >is available on the net btw.) ao> That must be one hell of a download... ]:> I must be getting a bit dense. It took me a while for your comment to sink in... >Take a gander at the libertarian's chart. I think it is a more accurqte way >of describing people, and in fact is similar in some ways to what you >describe. A philosophy is charted based on how one views personal and >property rights. ao> This assumes that there are only two basic axises that rights are ao> based opon. Some of those can get pretty fuzzy. To properly ao> describe how the system works would require an n-dimensional ao> hyperpolygon of indeterminate size. (Kind of like describing the ao> black budget. You know it is there, but looking at it is difficult, ao> and if they catch you looking the hounds of tindalos will be coming ao> at you out of every corner of the woodwork.) Agreed. The problem is, how complicated do you want it to be? If we are going to be classifying people by their political philosophy, the sustem we use should at least be usable. An n-dimensional model would probably be a highly accurate representation if properly constructed, but who would sit through the grilling it requires? (perhaps someone might be willing to =force= you to be grilled, but it wouldn't be pleasant imo.) A third axis would probably pinpoint things a bit better than a 2-dimensional model, but I must admit, I'm at a loss as to exactly what this third line would be. I think 'personal' and 'economic' liberty are a pretty good barometer of someone's thinking. It's not, by any means, perfect, but it is easily understandable even by most people today. amp ao> Personally, I am a political non-euclidean. Indeed. Thank God the universe is non-euclidean and non-newtonian as well. === amp(a)pobox.com Earth First! We'll strip mine the other planets later! === -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMpGNflUbR1RWr40pAQEtyAf8DdM8I8wKHftp+wnm6McMPbCRWada8NNC cfvVMMmcowCEXbzXRli/+BU30YUan3Qr/Uf3nvqsT+yasfHJPEJIaIaUy7J+NC6w IX+FQqpuDi3Hrh2B805qeq6erc0KWEkJkxZuV1WU1Akt+qk7DWPdVbwSmBF6Ae3z 1K8KxH1Z53NZ8HtWAfPzD6OV+cvCo66a+JwFxrEt02IGoZ6L53p9oQeDY81siGtl xGmA+1xJ0cZtnqnUY6CuhG6As4iqr254ZdVSnszaI/lPrJCKG/w1aj9+5/UDoU1J VcJfrTsdYaWDyuhxqeIkPbRNkFNr47KVnnPw7Ebemqmz2RjVdo18xQ== =AlLl -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Securing Electronic Mail Within HMG
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ben Laurie wrote: >This document is available on the Web, at: > >http://www.xopen.org/public/tech/security/pki/casm/casm.htm > >see also my "addendum" to Anderson & Roe's paper (which is actually a critique >of the above proposal, rather than RH itself) at: > >http://www.algroup.co.uk/crypto/rh.html Ben rightly points to a complete and handsome forebear of our gap-toothed descendant. We withdraw ours. Thanks Ben. And thanks for your "addendum" to A&R.

1 0