- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: More on House Intelligence committee amendment on crypto
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:38 PM 9/11/97 -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote: >So I'm reading through the 43-page amendment to SAFE that the House >Intelligence committee approved today. It includes: > >* Ban on sale of crypto without a backdoor. Five year & fine (maybe >$250,000?) if violated. Prosecutions can be held in closed-door >courtrooms, publishers of info about case to be held in contempt of court. Does the bill retain the 5 years first offense, 10 years second offense provisions for using crypto in the comission of a crime? Let's see: Lucky sells five copies of PGP. That's 5+(5+4*10)=50 years in prison. Or is it (5*5)+(5+4*10)=70 years? Doesn't make much of a difference at my age, I suppose. --Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. DES is dead! Please join in breaking RC5-56. http://rc5.distributed.net/

2 1

Docs in Bernstein converted to HTML
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've converted two of the newer documents in _Bernstein v. Dept of State_ into HTML; but I'd appreciate it if someone felt like proofreading/comparing them to the original images, it's late and my eyes are tired. Judge Patel's Order of 9/9/97, staying some of the injunctive relief: HTML at <http://www.parrhesia.com/bernstein/stay.html> image at <http://www.eff.org/pub/Legal/Cases/Bernstein_v_DoS/Legal/970909_stay_order. images/index.html> Declaration of William Reinsch in support of emergency motion for total stay: HTML at <http://www.parrhesia.com/bernstein/reinsch.html> image at <http://www.eff.org/pub/Legal/Cases/Bernstein_v_DoS/Legal/970910_reinsch_dec l.images/index.html> -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. |

1 0

More on House Intelligence committee amendment on crypto
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

So I'm reading through the 43-page amendment to SAFE that the House Intelligence committee approved today. It includes: * Ban on sale of crypto without a backdoor. Five year & fine (maybe $250,000?) if violated. Prosecutions can be held in closed-door courtrooms, publishers of info about case to be held in contempt of court. * Federal government computer purchases must use key escrow "immediate decryption" after 1998. Same with network established w/Federal funds. * Such products can be labeled "authorized for sale to U.S. government" * U.S. government may "not mandate the use of encryption standards" for the private sector * Export decisions aren't subject to judicial review * Defense & Commerce have controls of exports of crypto * Establishes Encryption Industry and Information Security Board * Internet providers, key recovery centers aren't liable if they turn over keys following legal standards * President can negotiate int'l agreements, perhaps punish noncompliant governments I'm still reading... More details shortly... -Declan

7 7

Information Please
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am interested in researching possible legal grounds for taking armed action against politicians governments and law enforcement agencies. I would appreciate any pointers anyone might be able to provide to any material of this nature. Of particular interest would be information as to the application of International law in this area. I am assuming of course that there must be some form of law somewhere which recognizes the right to resist oppression and violation of human rights by any government elected or not. Thank you. ps If possible I would like to receive this information before September 16th 1997 as it is a two day drive to southern California and I would like at least one day to rest.

5 4

Re: Taxless society concerns
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 11 Sep 1997, Warpy wrote: > First off. In such a society, who cares for the old, the sick, and the > infirm? How is such care going to be payed for? How will basic services be > maintained without the necessary taxes required to pay for them? Haven't you ever heard of ZPG? The problem with Medicare is that the taxpayers are paying to keep the old people alive, no matter how close to death they are!! Then, on top of that, we give them free money! Come on people, we already have nigh 6 billion people on this planet, I think we can stand to lose anybody over 65. > But the question remains. In such a taxless society, and little or no > government, how are those less fortunate than us going to be cared for? As for the less fortunate, welcome to Evolution 101: Survival of the Fittest, where fit means good education, good job, and enough money to giev your kids the same. -- Run.exe * Value Your Privacy? The Government Doesn't. Say 'No' to Key Escrow! * Adopt Your Legislator - http://www.crypto.com/adopt "If I had only known, I would have been a locksmith." -- Albert Einstein runexe(a)ntplx.net http://www.ntplx.net/~runexe/ PGP encrypted mail prefered

1 0

3% to Freedom
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just heard a Canadian MP state that he was voting in favour of gun registration because 52% of his constituents were in favor of it. Killing 3% of the people to save the rights of 48% of them seems like a fair trade-off to me. We could kill them with hammers until we killed enough that they passed hammer registration laws. Then we could switch to scissors. Then forks. Then rocks. Of course, it would be impossible to bust all the people who were in possession of unregisterd rocks in their yards, so they would probably have to use selective enforcement against just blacks and longhairs and the like. Am I ready to run for public office, or do I need to get stupider? If so, then I propose that we start killing people by filling their mouths with dirt, then we can pass dirt registration laws. Then we can kill people by filling their lungs with air until they burst and we can pass air registration laws. Then we can leave people out in the sun until they die and pass sun registration laws. "The reason I pulled you over, guys, is because the sun came up. Unless one of you cops to possessing it, I'm going to have to take you all in." Am I stupid enough to be a cop, now? If not, then we can kill people by taking them to the roofs of buildings and throwing them to the ground. Then we can pass roof and ground registration laws. "Hey, pal. Your feet are on the ground. You got a permit?" "Sorry pal, this permit is for a different piece of ground. I'm going to have to take you in. And, since the sun is out, you're going to get an extra five years for possession of the sun in the commission of a crime."

1 0

Re: Any talk of limiting _existing_ crypto?
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May wrote: > > OK, so the imminent legislation will ban sale or distribution unescrowed > crypto products after 1999 or 2000 or whatever. Exact details unclear. But > I see no language declaring existing products to be contraband. (Though > such language could still come, of course...nothing would surprised me at > this point.) Jesus Tim, are you getting senile? Bet the farm on the outlawing of existing crypto and you will have more money than Bill Gates in a couple of years. The new reality has become: any fascist, evil thing you can think of that it is possible for the government to do--ask *when*, not *if*. We are not arguing about the end of democracy in the US anymore. We are merely discussing the timetable, now. > If existing crypto is fully legal to use, then it could be years and years > before the Freeh-Reno-SAFE outlawing has any significant effect. Tim, you are forgetting about "the crisis." Which one? Name one. Make one up out of random Scrabble letters. Yup, that's the crisis that is going to require the outlawing of strong crypto. I would recognize it anywhere.

1 0

Official CypherPunks Decryption Software Breaks PGP !!!
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ANNOUNCEMENT: Official CypherPunks Decryption Software Now Available This is the first software package with the ability to Decrypt PGP in all of its forms. The package costs $1,000,000 and comes with an 80 lb. suitcase. We have attached the software to this file and will forward the suitcase upon receipt of the $1,000,000. Syntax: "cypherpunk.bat <filename>" echo "" echo "" echo " Official CypherPunk Decryption Software echo "" echo " Deciphered Message Is: echo "" echo "" NUKE D.C. !!! echo "" echo "" echo ""

1 0

Bean Counting II
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know if the government has released any firm figures on the number of lives that would be saved from terrorist activities with the outlawing of strong encryption and mandatory key escrow? If we had the proper figures to work with then we could make a valid judgment as to how many lives anti-GAK supporters would have to put in danger in order to tip the balance so that it would be in the best interests of the citizens to allow strong non-GAK'ed crypto. I, for one, would hate to see lives lost needlessly merely because those opposing GAK did not have the proper figures to work with. I think that in the interests of the greatest number of citizens, the government should supply solid figures as to the body count that would be required to negate the need for laws against strong encryption. Also, the government should provide a separate figure for how many lives of legislators would need to be lost in order to balance the threat of strong encryption. I imagine that it would take far fewer Congressman's lives to balance it out than it would average citizen's lives. Call your Congressman and ask if these figures are available. In order to get the most help possible, begin the conversation by asking the Congressman if he is in favor of saving lives. BeanCounter

4 4

Re: "random" number seeds vs. Netscape
by norm＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:29 PM 9/24/95, Ed Carp [khijol SysAdmin] wrote: .... >I learned the hard way - keep the transmitters away from a reverse-biased >doide acting as a noise generator. Only until I examined the output did >I realize it wasn't random. I fixed it, though, by looking at the output >and testing its randomness. .... Very interesting. I wouldn't be too sure that a transmitted signal at a single frequency is the only signal that an opponent could use to bias your random numbers. How do you "test for randomness". I think that signal to noise arguments, phrased in terms of entropy, can protect you against unknown and unwanted signal. (Ironically you want a very low signal to noise ratio!) Perhaps you merely take n/(S/N) bits from the HRNG when you need n bits and run them thru MD5. Here S is the signal strength of the maximum plausible unwanted signal, and N is the noise of the diode. I encourage both diode theorists and information theorists to quibble with the above formula!

2 1