- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Clipper and Traffic Analysis
by jim＠bilbo.suite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> The reason I ask is, I have this sense that one reason the > government likes Clipper is that the Law Enforcement > Access Field enables agents to draw inferences about > who's talking to whom and what they're saying, even > without decrypting the actual communications. > Is it true that law enforcement can obtain phone records from the phone company simply by asking? Or do they need a supena(sp)? It would not surprise me in the least to hear someday that the government will allow law enforcement to record LEAFs without having to obtain a warrant for a wiretap. If Clipper becomes widespread, and most conversations are encrypted, the government might conveniently redefine the term "wiretap" to mean "decrypting a Clipper conversation". This would open it up for the government to continuously monitor and record LEAFs, probably via the soon to be mandated "wiretap" capabilities the FBI is pushing for. "After all, the LEAF is just the electronic equivalent of your phone record. This new definition of "wiretap" does not give law enforcement any new capabilities. Since the actual contents of the conversation are encrypted, there is no invasion of privicy. We're just trying to keep up with the latest technological advances." Jim_Miller(a)suite.com

2 1

Re: Where to get Big Bro Stickers
by James Still 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>On Mon, 14 Feb 1994, Eric Hughes wrote: > >> Will someone put a few "Big Brother Inside" stickers inside a stamped >> #10 envelope and snail-mail it to Safire? >> >> It _will_ get mentioned in a column. > >Where can you get these stickers? I sent my donation to: Christian Douglas Odhner 14079 N. 34th Place Phoenix, AZ 85032 cdodhner(a)indirect.com But beware! I sent him $15 bucks about 6 months ago and have yet to see any stickers in the mail... Perhaps I'll try e-mailing him again to see what's up; or perhaps I should acknowledge a beautiful scam when I see one! (Or maybe the elusive tentacles have struck down another pesky cypherpunk...)

3 2

re: LEAF, SS7
by koontzd＠lrcs.loral.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> It might even be that Clipper hardware could be >installed right at the network interface. Isn't that nice, the phone >company is going out of its way to safeguard my privacy. Only thing >is, now every circuit I establish is tagged by an LEAF that identifies >me... Actually, providing link encryption via CLIPPER only allows identification of the link, still useful in traffic analysis. (As a quick means of identifying the link.)

1 0

?
by hansen＠Iowa.Physics.UIowa.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is this serious?

1 0

Re: LEAF, SS7
by smb＠research.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> But the LEAF itself is encrypted, including the session key, so > enemies can't do traffic analysis based on the LEAF. But the police can. They can decrypt the LEAF even without an escrow key. You use a family key to do that. Precisely my point.

1 0

CPSR Alert 3.04 (Clipper Update)
by Dave Banisar 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

============================================================== @@@@ @@@@ @@@ @@@@ @ @ @@@@ @@@@ @@@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@ @ @@@ @@@@@ @ @@@ @@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@ @ @@@ @ @ @ @ @@@@ @@@@ @ @ @ ============================================================= Volume 3.04 February 15, 1994 ------------------------------------------------------------- Published by Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Washington Office (Alert(a)washofc.cpsr.org) SPECIAL EDITION --- CLIPPER UPDATE ------------------------------------------------------------- Contents [1] Clipper Petition Tops 10,000 Mark [2] Safire Slams Clipper [3] A Tough Question [4] Clipper Facts: Definition of "Tesserea" [5] Sign the Clipper Petition! [6] New Files at the CPSR Internet Library ------------------------------------------------------------- [1] Clipper Petition Tops 10,000 Mark The electronic petition begun by CPSR to oppose Clipper has generated well over 10,000 responses in two weeks. The daily signature totals continue to increase, currently running at almost 2,000 per day! The number of people who have opposed Clipper already exceeds the current estimated government orders for Clipper chips. Other upcoming milestones: 12,000 Number of computer networks connected to the Internet 15,000 Estimated number of total lawful wiretaps, 1968-1994 70,000 Anticipated number of Clipper purchases this year More details on the petition are re-printed below, just in case you haven't already forwarded a copy to every person and mailing list you know. ------------------------------------------------------------- [2] Safire Slams Clipper For those of you who might have missed it, William Safire published a very good essay on the Clipper proposal yesterday (February 14). We're providing some excerpts here and recommend the piece in its entirety. Let's hope Safire can do for Clipper what he did for Bobby Inman. Well-meaning law and intelligence officials, vainly seeking to maintain their vanishing ability to eavesdrop, have come up with a scheme that endangers the personal freedom of every American. * * * The "clipper chip" --- aptly named, as it clips the wings of individual liberty --- would encode, for Federal perusal whenever a judge rubber-stamped a warrant, everything we say on a phone, everything we write on a computer, every order we give to a shopping network or bank or 800 or 900 number, every electronic note we leave our spouses or dictate to our personal-digit-assistant genies. Add to that stack of intimate data the medical information derived from the national "health security card" Mr. Clinton proposes we all carry. Combine it with the travel, shopping and credit data available from all our plastic cards, along with psychological and student test scores. Throw in the confidential tax returns, sealed divorce proceedings, welfare records, field investigations for job applications, raw files and C.I.A. dossiers available to the Feds, and you have the individual citizen standing naked to the nosy bureaucrat. * * * The only people tap-able by American agents would be honest Americans --- or those crooked Americans dopey enough to buy American equipment with the pre-compromised American code. Subsequent laws to mandate the F.B.I. bug in every transmitter would be as effective as today's laws banning radar detectors. * * * Cash in your clipper chips, wiretappers: you can't detect the crime wave of the future with those old earphones on. --------------------------------------------------------------- [3] A Tough Question During the briefing on February 4 at which the formal adoption of the Escrowed Encryption Standard (aka Clipper) was announced, Mark Richards, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, was asked the following hypothetical question: Suppose NSA goes to the key escrow agents and says, "We intercepted a Clipper-encrypted communication overseas. No U.S. persons were parties, so the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act does not apply and we don't need a warrant." How do the escrow agents determine whether or not to provide the keys? Doesn't this create a huge loophole in the system? Richards' response was that there would be "some" mechanism developed to ensure that there would be no abuse of the key escrow system, but added that any such procedures "might not be made public." The response was less than assuring. The development of secret procedures for foreign intelligence use of escrowed keys does nothing to assure the public of the system's integrity. It creates a very real possibility that the key escrow system will be based upon nothing more than NSA's unilateral representations concerning the circumstances of a particular interception. It was not at all apparent why these procedures couldn't be made public. Like so much of the Clipper proposal, valid concerns are met with the claim that "national security" precludes the disclosure of relevant information. This is why many of us believe this is a dangerous and ill-advised way to design our civilian communications infrastructure. --------------------------------------------------------------- [4] Clipper Facts: Definition of "Tesserea" The Defense Department reportedly plans to employ the Clipper technology in a device known as a "Tessera Card." We checked the dictionary and found the results to be kind of frightening: Terrerea n. Lat. (pl. tessereae). Literally, "four-cornered". Used to refer to four-legged tables, chairs, stools, etc. Also, a single piece of mosaic tile; a single piece of a mosaic. _Pol._: An identity chit or marker. Tessereae were forced on conquered peoples and domestic slaves by their Roman occupiers or owners. Slaves or Gauls who refused to accept a tesserea were branded or maimed as a form of identification. >From Starr's History of the Classical World and the Oxford Unabridged. (thanks to Clark Matthews) ---------------------------------------------------------------- [5] Sign the Clipper Petition! Electronic Petition to Oppose Clipper *Please Distribute Widely* On January 24, many of the nation's leading experts in cryptography and computer security wrote President Clinton and asked him to withdraw the Clipper proposal. The public response to the letter has been extremely favorable, including coverage in the New York Times and numerous computer and security trade magazines. Many people have expressed interest in adding their names to the letter. In response to these requests, CPSR is organizing an Internet petition drive to oppose the Clipper proposal. We will deliver the signed petition to the White House, complete with the names of all the people who oppose Clipper. To sign on to the letter, send a message to: Clipper.petition(a)cpsr.org with the message "I oppose Clipper" (no quotes) You will receive a return message confirming your vote. Please distribute this announcement so that others may also express their opposition to the Clipper proposal. ------------------------------------------------------------- [6] New Files at the CPSR Internet Library The following Clipper-related files are now available at the CPSR Internet Library: NIST Announcement of FIPS-185 (Escrowed Encryption Standard) /cpsr/privacy/crypto/clipper/fips_185_clipper_feb_1994.txt "Big Brother Inside" Postscript file parody of Intel's logo. Perfect for stickers, posters. Designed by Matt Thomlinson. /cpsr/privacy/crypto/clipper/big_brother_inside_sticker.ps All February 4 White House releases on Clipper are available at /cpsr/privacy/crypto/clipper An analysis of US cryptography policy by Professor Lance Hoffman commissioned by NIST /cpsr/privacy/crypto/hoffman_crypto_policy_1994 The CPSR Internet Library is a free service available via FTP/WAIS/Gopher/listserv from cpsr.org:/cpsr. Materials from Privacy International, the Taxpayers Assets Project and the Cypherpunks are also archived. For more information, contact ftp-admin(a)cpsr.org. ======================================================================= To subscribe to the Alert, send the message: "subscribe cpsr-announce <your name>" (without quotes or brackets) to listserv(a)cpsr.org. Back issues of the Alert are available at the CPSR Internet Library FTP/WAIS/Gopher cpsr.org /cpsr/alert Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility is a national, non-partisan, public-interest organization dedicated to understanding and directing the impact of computers on society. Founded in 1981, CPSR has 2000 members from all over the world and 22 chapters across the country. Our National Advisory Board includes a Nobel laureate and three winners of the Turing Award, the highest honor in computer science. Membership is open to everyone. For more information, please contact: cpsr(a)cpsr.org or visit the CPSR discussion conferences on The Well (well.sf.ca.us) or Mindvox (phantom.com) ------------------------ END CPSR Alert 3.04 -----------------------

2 1

Re: AT&T stopped talking to me
by smb＠research.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Steve B., since you are with AT&T is there any policy that you know about regarding sales of devices for use in crypto? I know of no such policy. To be sure, I wouldn't necessarily know of it if it existed, being enmeshed in the wilds of Research -- but I know of none.

1 0

EFF WANTS YOU TO CALL FOR SENATE HEARINGS ON CLIPPER
by Mike Godwin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

EFF WANTS YOU TO CALL FOR SENATE HEARINGS ON CLIPPER *** Distribute Widely *** Feb. 15, 1994 Dear Friends on the Electronic Frontier, Thank you for your efforts in fighting the government's ill-considered Clipper proposal. We have already delivered over 2250 messages supporting H.R. 3627 to Rep. Cantwell, and your messages have continued to flood in. We'd now like to ask you to help us call for Congressional hearings on Clipper by writing to Senator Patrick Leahy c/o leahy(a)eff.org. As we have previously reported, the Clinton Administration has announced that it plans to proceed on every front to make the Clipper Chip encryption scheme a national standard and to discourage the development and sale of alternative powerful encryption technologies. If the government succeeds in this effort, the resulting blow to individual freedom and privacy could be immeasurable. So far, the government has resisted requests that it explain its policy. When the Presidential Decision Directive calling for Clipper deployment first appeared last spring, the Administration promised a report that re-evaluated cryptography and privacy policy in light of technological changes, the coming of the National Information Infrastructure, and the end of the Cold War. The Administration also made a commitment to meaningful public dialog before taking any major action on escrow deployment or new legislation. Yet in spite of the efforts of EFF, CPSR, ACLU, and other groups to provide extensive input to the Administration, the promised policy report never arrived, and the Administration has now said there will be no report after all. This failure of public accountability makes Congressional hearings an absolute necessity. There are individuals in Congress willing to look into the Clipper proposal and related policies--if they hear from you. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), who chairs one of the key committees responsible for these issues, has asked for comments and concerns about the viability of the Clipper initiative. Here's where we need your help. *Please write Senator Leahy at leahy(a)eff.org and ask that the Senate hold hearings about Clipper.* Senate hearings may be the only means of ensuring public feedback about Clipper, and, just as important, they may be the only means of forcing the Administration to explain its Clipper policy. Please express your concerns about the United States' Clipper policy and cryptographic policy in general. Your letters in support of hearings will be printed out and delivered to the senator. And if you haven't written Rep. Maria Cantwell to show your support for H.R. 3627, her bill to relax export restrictions on encryption technology, now's the time to do so. Just send e-mail to cantwell(a)eff.org and put "I support H.R. 3627" in your Subject header. Letters in support of the bill will be printed out and delivered to Rep. Cantwell. Our fight to keep national encryption policy out in the open--and to continue allowing individuals to use encryption to ensure their own privacy--has only just begun. In the coming weeks and months, we will be working to give you more ways to make your voice heard on these vital public issues. Sincerely, Jerry Berman Executive Director Electronic Frontier Foundation

1 0

Re: ?
by walter kehowski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

yahoo seriuos!

1 0

The Difficulty of Source Level Blocking
by greg＠ideath.goldenbear.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- uunet!netcom.com!tcmay (Timothy C. May) writes: > Thus, so long as at least *one* remailer is not doing source > screening, and that at least some encryption is used (not all nodes > have to do it, obviously), then source-level screening will not work. It'd also be possible for two parties to collude; Alice agrees to pass Mallet's traffic, but tells the other remailers in the co-op that she'll filter Mallet's traffic. Digital signatures will allow her to pass only approved unapproved traffic (e.g., forged test-posts from Mallet won't be remailed by Alice). Where message tracing isn't possible, remailer operators will need to know and trust one another. > Very long term, when message costs are borne by the sender, this > problem goes away. (Others remain, such as death threats, extortion, > markets for murder, etc., but they're in a different category.) If you mean digital postage when you say "message costs", I don't see how charging Detweiler $.25 or so to send his messages is going to stop him; it might put a dent in the sheer volume, but probably not in the variety of inappropriate groups he chooses to annoy. If message costs are high enough to deter Detweiler, they're going to be high enough to deter legitimate and useful posts, too. The sender-of-record of inappropriate posts is still going to get heat from the net, whether or not they collected their digital postage. The best deal I've found so far for (bulk) mail delivery is UUPSI's $50/month flat-rate UUCP (local dialups many places) - is anyone aware of a cheaper alternative? Perhaps it's time to test the net's response to a remailer site whose response to complaints is "Sorry. People are rude. Nothing to be done about it." Have the owners of private remailers (rebma.mn.org, utter.dis.org, extropia.wimsey.com, according to Karl's list) taken flak from their service providers for remailing? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.4 iQCVAgUBLWFFlH3YhjZY3fMNAQH4WgP9FkWg2b0UXXLTiAYTJKVgCkOyOAaBc4Le b/JZ2DlFPTQQrKRQm4wYVxjZiOlnrVPlBu+uHYAIeAl5nKiNQBd82b/frYyFxHpt WD3zIlBLtfjdW8eOK+DZCswKPnpGPn5/i3EsxRzKYwKTTCPQwxL5ZwELBvFde+ER cebT75h4sgc= =Awkb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Greg Broiles ".. has bizarre Cyberanarchist theories relating greg(a)goldenbear.com to human punishment." -- L. Detweiler

2 1