- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Globally legal Netscape
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Fred Cohen wrote: > Law enforcement is almost universally used as an excuse to > collect information on individuals in the name of helping society, > but this power is easily abused. In addition to Fred's good examples of abuse of information, I'd like to add the use of census data to arrest Japanese-Americans during World War 2 - not only was the data collected under great promises that citizens could trust the government, and that it would only be accessible for lawful purposes, it was used to attack people who weren't doing anything illegal or wrong when it was collected. Everything you say on the nets sticks around, and if the government has master keys, then even what you said in private sticks around. It's not illegal to say "[expletive deleted]" in private mail today, and won't be even after Exon-II passes, but it _may_ be kept around so they'll know whose mail to get law enforcement access to to enforce the Verbal Morality Act of 2001. At 04:26 PM 12/3/95 -0600, rthomas(a)pamd.cig.mot.com (Robert Owen Thomas) wrote: >look, this is just a *bit* extreme. having been one of those folks sworn >to uphold the Constitution, I can tell all of you that there is no master >plan to rid the American people of their rights and freedom. Remember the fundamental job of any bureaucracy - self-preservation and growth, by whatever means necessary. No need for any master plan or conspiracy. Are there herds of opportunists interested in taking political advantage of anything that comes their way? You bet. Listen to Louis Freeh talk about the need to be able to eavesdrop on anybody they want to be able to catch narco-terrorist child pornographers, and think about whether you want the FBI able to tap your email - especially if you occasionally send email to people whose chronological age you don't know using language that Senator Exon might disapprove of. Reminds me a lot of Harry Anslinger talking state governments into banning Evil Marihuana in the waning days of Prohibition. >o Robert Owen Thomas: Corvette pilot. Cymro ydw i. User scratching post. o ^^^^^^^^^^^ Between the anti-encryption cops and the English-Only right-wingers, you may not be able to say that much longer - Welsh isn't quite as heavily encrypted as, say, Navajo, but it's bound to violate some law soon enough :-) #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, Freelance Information Architect, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # Phone +1-510-247-0663 Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # Anybody notice that Microsoft's Wide Open Road ad has barbed-wire fences # on both sides of the road?

1 0

Fwd: Corporate Crime and CDT Funding on behalf of so-called medical privacy
by JWRCLUM＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--------------------- Forwarded message: From: gcook(a)tigger.jvnc.net (Gordon Cook) Sender: med-privacy(a)essential.org Reply-to: gcook(a)tigger.jvnc.net To: med-privacy(a)essential.org (Multiple recipients of list) Date: 95-11-20 22:44:48 EST The following article appeared in the current issue of Corporate Crime Reporter (Volume 9, Number 44, November 20, 1995, page one). It is redisseminated on the Internet with the permission of CCR. SELF-PROCLAIMED "PUBLIC INTEREST" GROUP HEAVILY FUNDED BY COMPUTER, TELECOMMUNICATIONS, DATABANK CORPORATIONS THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM "MEDICAL PRIVACY" LEGISLATION GROUP SUPPORTS -- EQUIFAX, TRW, DUNN & BRADSTREET IN THE MIX The Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), a self- proclaimed "public interest organization," is in fact heavily funded by large private computer, telecommunications, and databank corporations. Funders of CDT, a two-year old Washington, D.C.-based advocacy organization, include Dunn & Bradstreet Corp., Equifax Inc., and TRW Information Services, three large databank corporations that stand to benefit from federal legislation CDT actively helped shaped and is shepherding through Congress. This year, CDT has received $699,643 from more than 30 large corporations, including $100,000 from Microsoft, $75,000 from AT&T, $60,000 from Bell Atlantic, $50,000 from Apple Computer, $25,000 from IBM, $10,000 from TRW Information Services, $10,000 from Dunn & Bradstreet, $5,000 from Direct Marketing Association, and $5,000 from Equifax Inc. (For a complete list of CDT's funders, see At A Glance, page 16) At a hearing before the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee last week, CDT deputy director Janlori Goldman said that CDT "strongly supports" legislation, S. 1360, sponsored by Senators Robert Bennett (R-Utah) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), because it represents "the most comprehensive and strong privacy bill the Congress has yet considered in this area." But opponents of the bill argue that the legislation is not a privacy statute at all, but instead is a vehicle that would legitimize the creation of large computerized databanks of personal medical information, thus benefitting those companies like TRW and Equifax that give financial support to CDT. The legislation would allow for broad, unauthorized searches of those databanks, opponents claim. In an interview, Goldman told Corporate Crime Reporter that all of CDT's corporate funding is earmarked for other projects and that none of the corporate funding is supporting her work on the medical privacy bill. "The corporate funding is not related at all, in any way shape or form to my work on this bill," Goldman said. "The reason we are doing this bill is that I've worked on privacy issues for a decade. The most important privacy issue to work on is the passage of the medical records privacy legislation. That is a very sincere issue for me." "None of the corporate support that CDT gets is related to my work on this bill," Goldman emphasized. "None. Zippo." CDT's executive director, Jerry Berman agreed. "We have no funding for the medical privacy project -- zero," Berman said. But critics of the CDT's position on the legislation were skeptical. "During the Senate hearing this week, Senator Bennett was angered at the suggestion that S. 1360 was an industry bill," said Jamie Love of Ralph Nader's Center for Study of Responsive Law. "He claimed that he had widely consulted with privacy groups and patient advocates. CDT's Janlori Goldman was the key person who decided who was in the loop, and who was not in the loop on this issue. Groups that were not receptive to the idea of massive database systems of personal medical records were excluded from deliberations." "To find out that CDT has been funded by companies such as Equifax, TRW, Dunn & Bradstreet, IBM and the telephone companies is remarkable, because these are among the groups who have the most at stake in legitimizing and preserving the current system of maintaining and managing medical records," Love said. "I think that Janlori Goldman should have mentioned in her Senate testimony that CDT was funded by corporations who have an interest in this issue." "If CDT were doing its job, TRW and Equifax wouldn't want to give it money," Love added. Harold Eist, president-elect of the American Psychiatric Association, said that "any datagathering and large computer company would clearly benefit from legislation that drives large amounts of individually identified data about American citizens into data banks without the knowledge and permission of those American citizens." "Selling that information would represent a gold mine for those companies," Eist said. "It is not surprising that an organization with a disingenuous name -- Center for Democracy & Technology -- would be supporting a bill with a disingenuous name -- The Medical Records Confidentiality Act," Eist said. "In fact, this bill represents an effort to give away the privacy of American citizens without their knowledge." "My understanding is that Janlori Goldman was involved in writing the bill," Eist said. "It seems to me that as a former civil libertarian, she should know very well that there are loopholes in that bill regarding protections to privacy that you could drive a Mack truck through." "Unless people can be assured that their privacy will be protected, there is little or no chance that they will reveal the kind of tormented and dark secrets that they have to reveal to recover from their illnesses," Eist said. "Confidentially is the sine qua non of medical treatment, and especially if it is psychiatric medical treatment." A driving force behind the effort to derail the Bennett/Leahy bill is Denise Nagel, a Boston physician who organized the Coalition for Patient Rights of New England "to restore confidentiality to the doctor-patient relationship." Nagel refused to comment on CDT's funding. At the Senate hearing last week, Nagel told the committee "I have no industry ties." Nagel charged that S. 1360 was written "to advance the interests of certain segments of the computer, telecommunications, data processing and health-care industries." "With this bill they would be able to careen full speed ahead to develop data networks that will give innumerable people access to our medical records legally and without our knowledge," Nagel said. "I am convinced that S. 1360 is not at all primarily concerned with the confidentiality of medical records," Nagel told the committee. "It is just the opposite. It talks about informed consent, but then authorizes the creation of databases without patient knowledge or consent. It talks about individual rights, and then allows police broad authority to search databases directly instead of obtaining a specific record from the patient's doctor. It talks about civil and criminal sanctions, and then pre-empts all common law and most existing and future state statutes. It talks about ensuring personal privacy with respect to medical records, and then sets a ceiling rather than a floor on medical confidentiality." AT A GLANCE: CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY FUNDING, 1994- 1995 American Advertising Federation 500.00 America Online, Inc. 25,000.00 Apple Computer Inc. 50,000.00 AT&T 75,000.00 Bell Atlantic 60,000.00 Business Software Alliance 6,000.00 Cellular Tellecomm Indust Assn 10,000.00 CompuServ 30,000.00 Delphi Internet Services Corp 10,000.00 Direct Marketing Association 5,000.00 Dunn & Bradstreet Corp 10,000.00 EMA 5,000.00 Equifax Inc. 5,000.00 John Gilmore 2,500.00 Hartford Foundation 153,000.00 IBM 25,000.00 Information Technology Industry 5,000.00 Interactive Digital Software 5,000.00 Lotus 6,250.00 MARC 80,000.00 MCI Telecommunications 15,000.00 Microsoft 100,000.00 National Cable Television Assn 15,000.00 Netscape Communications Corp 5,000.00 Newspaper Association of Am 5,000.00 Nynex Government Affairs 25,000.00 Pacific Telesis 25,000.00 Prodigy Service Company 10,000.00 Software Publishers Assn 10,000.00 Time Warner Inc 5,000.00 TRW Information Svcs 10,000.00 US Telephone Association 10,000.00 US West Inc 10,000.00 Total Funding 814,020.00 Received 1994 114,377.00 Received 1995 699,643.00 Total Funding 814,020.00 Russell Mokhiber russell(a)essential.org voice: 202/429-6928

1 0

Proving I'm not Bob.
by s1113645＠tesla.cc.uottawa.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I had an idea for an advertising based net-payment scheme that has a particular security flaw making it totally untrustworthy unless it is possible to prove that you are not a particular person (the publisher receiving the ad money) when consuming (viewing or otherwise) the ads. All its other flaws seem to based on the same sort of identity denial problem. Damn! Any protocols, cryptographic or otherwise? TIA

5 5

toolkits?
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Alice here ... No, *I* am the real Alice, and I refuse to use PGP signing. Alice de 'nonymous ... P.S. This post is in the public domain. C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E.

1 0

toolkits?
by anon-remailer＠utopia.hacktic.nl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

|Alice here ... | |No, *I* am the real Alice, and I refuse to use PGP signing. | |Alice de 'nonymous ... | | |P.S. This post is in the public domain. | C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E. No, *I* am the real Alice, and *I* refuse to use PGP signing. Alice de 'nonymous ... P.S. This post is in the public domain. C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E.

1 0

Quantum Snooping
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

New York Times' Markoff reports today on the latest in quantum computing, some of which was discussed here recently. Two points of note: IBM recently made a "snapshot" of the entire worldwide Web, eight trillion bytes of data, for an experimental database for searching and unnamed other manipulation by its quantum computers. Searching the database for a word by conventional computers would take a month, while quantum devices could do it in 27 minutes, a Beamer says. NSA is funding quantum computing at Los Alamos specifically for cryptographic investigation, "because QC could have a profound effect on modern cryptography." Others forms of warp speed snooping are discussed as well. --------- Restricted: "Snow Crash" is featured in a hot-selling book on the thought of the American Left, "Achieving Our Country," by philosopher Richard Rorty. The book is swell reading on the state of US thought, culture and politics whatever your disagreeable attitude. It's smallish, but for those completely broke and open to copyleft, grab it before IBM kicks it offshore: http://jya.com/161.htm (238K) http://jya.com/161.zip (89K)

1 0

The Congressional Mailbot
by carolann＠censored.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here's your chance to protest ITAR and whatever other CPUNK thing you feel worthwile. Enjoy! CONGRESSIONAL MAILBOT SERVICE This service is provided to make it easy for you to get your message to all members of the House or Senate that have E-Mail mailboxes. By sending a single message to the service addressed at HOUSE(a)MAILBOT.COM and/or SENATE(a)MAILBOT.COM, your single message will be expanded and resent to all members of those specified houses as if YOU had E-Mailed each and everyone of them yourself. Any E-Mail responses to your inquiries will be sent directly back to your own E-Mail box. WHERE DO I SEND MY E-MAIL TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN? In order to use this service, you need to address your E-Mail to one or both of the addresses listed below. FOR MEMBERS OF TU House(a)Mailbot.com FOR MEMBERS OF THE US SENATE: Senate(a)Mailbot.com WHO WILL RECEIVE THIS E-MAIL? Your incoming message is sent to all currently known members of congress that have E-Mail mailboxes. The Congressional Mailbot System updates it's list of members of both the Houses every 30 days. At that time, new email addresses are added to the Mailbot Server. WHAT TO INCLUDE IN YOUR MESSAGE? Most members of congress do not have the staff to deal with replies via both regular mail and E-Mail. Most would prefer to reply to your specific request by way of regular postal mail. In order for them to do that, you need to include your NAME, ADDRESS, CITY & STATE so that they can send you a response. WHAT NOT TO INCLUDE IN YOUR MESSAGE? Basically, your message should be short and to the point. It is not wise to include large amounts of text from other sources. If you want to point out to them about such sources, simply tell them where you saw it. Imagine getting hundreds of email messages containing the same material over and over. The meaning gets lost. Make your message clear and easy to read. WARNING Each member of the House or Senate which receives a message from you via the Mailbot, will respond with a reply message. THIS CAN GENERATE A LOT OF EMAIL INTO YOUR MAILBOX. If for example, at the time you send your request to the Mailbot, there are 130 members of the specific house you select, you will get back 130 reply messages from those members when they receive your message. Currently, the automatic replies are about 750 bytes in size and only contain a header with no message body. These replies are sent to let you know that the Congress Person you sent the message to, has received it in their E-Mailbox. Some users use systems that only allow so much email per month for free and then charge for email sent/received after that! IF YOU CANNOT HAVE THIS AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC IN YOUR MAILBOX PLEASE DO NOT USE THIS SERVICE! WHAT IF I WANT TO SEND A MESSAGE TO A SPECIFIC Congress Persons? THEN YOU SHOULD NOT USE THIS SERVICE! This service is for E-Mail intended for ALL members of the House and/or Senate. Individual messages to specific Congress Persons should be sent by other means. LIMITATIONS: This is a very popular tool.... Several rules need to be enforced to ensure that this service does not overburden the systems that are connected to it. The following rules are in place... 1 The Mailbot will reject any message that is larger than 5,000 bytes in size. This provides you with a total of 66 lines of 80 columns per line for your message which is a whole page of information to make your point. 2 Please limit usage of the mailbot to no more than one message per 72 hour period (one each to HOUSE and SENATE is ok). 3 Abusive and obscene messages violate the purpose and spirit of this service and WILL place the originator of such messages on a rejection list. Users who cannot abide by the above limitations will be placed permanently on a rejection list and all further attempts to use the service will result that user's messages being rejected by the service. PROBLEMS OR QUESTIONS? If you have any problems or questions about this service, please direct them to the following E-Mail address: Mailbot(a)Mailbot.Com TELL A FRIEND? If you should tell a friend or colleague about this service, PLEASE INCLUDE THIS MESSAGE. This will save them time in knowing what is permitted and will keep questions about the service down to a minimum. This Service is Provided By: MAILBOT SERVICES OF ARIZONA (c) 1995 Mailbot Services of Arizona. -- Member Internet Society - Certified BETSI Programmer - Webmistress *********************************************************************** Carol Anne Braddock (cab8) carolann(a)censored.org 206.42.112.96 My Homepage The Cyberdoc *********************************************************************** ------------------ PGP.ZIP Part [017/713] ------------------- M8H,),S$8G>&.WP(8IRA`-M['+`Q%&_C"">5-F%LX@<_Q$;*P'',Q$Z/AA[8M MF=O0H+*%(-S%&>S%+FS&<LS%3(Q&#W1"<]2%`H^;,]^1C$'HBN8PX$4SYAU^ MPGD<Q0ZLA0D+,`MCT!LA**4M[-JPAK9F?40!AJ,CW"'%DR#:'9?Q)3[%<DQ` ------------------------------------------------------------- for next chunk to export --> http://dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/export/

1 0

Syrinx Remailer is no more
by skaplin＠mirage.skypoint.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Effective immediately syrinx(a)c2.org is no more. I no longer have the time to keep this remailer up and running. Perhaps somewhere down the line I will set up another one. Please remove Syrinx from your chains. Sam

1 0

Re: PKZIP - Encryption
by L. DEkel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"L. DEkel" writes: >> PKZIP Encryption: >> >> PKZIP encryption is often said to be: Weak, "a joke" ,"a deception" etc. >> Maybe it's time to put things in the right perspective. >> >> One must realize (yet again) the difference between: >> Theoretical Cryptography - and - Practical Cryptography: "Perry E. Metzger" writes: > I could see why one would want to use a weak encryption system if it > bought you something. However, good encryption systems are as cheap to > use as bad ones. Therefore, why ever use a bad one? If the top of the > line lock costs the same amount as a toy lock, why buy a toy? Your remark is basically correct, here are few clarifications: I didn't recommended PKZIP for encryption, I said it's an Archiver that has an option to encrypt it's files, and that Practically this encryption is not so bad as people think. About costs: a complete system, including hardware, to support "full armor" for a computer, is far more expensive than using PKZIP, so the question is again of money, but that depends of what you're trying to encrypt. If you are a bank for example, it would make sense to spend several thousands on such a system, if you just send your friend a letter once in a while, containing a movies lists, than PKZIP is enough, you don't have do use say PGP. An good opposite example is PGP: you could define it as an Encrypter which has an archiving option (Of course it archives for the purpose of encryption), so why not use PGP as an archiver instead of PKZIP ? Because: There is the question of convenience (security=1/convenience - postulate), people don't like to pass their plaintext through several utils, where one compresses it, the other encrypts etc., they want a convenient util to use. But: Who says this old postulate (security=1/convenience) is correct today ? you can write a program/script/batch to do all sorts of dirty jobs, why not write a multi-purpose: compression/encryption/mailing/etc. system ? or just use a simple script/batch util to "glue" the different utils together ? Of course it has been done: (here are some examples) compression/encryption system - with HPACK archiver which uses PGP, the UC2 (PRO) archiver which uses 3DES. encryption/mailing(sometimes with compression) system - PEM, RIPEM etc. More problems there: These utils are not "standard" as yet, many people say they want a popular archiver where they know "everybody" use, and PKZIP is among the popular and multi-featured among the archivers, so why,they say, would they bother to adopt an esoteric encrypter or archiver ? The main problem: people are not "privacy protecting" oriented, they don't care too much about the subject. ("who will bother to crack this system just to read my mail ?") What do we do ? Educate them of course. That is why the spread of knowledge in the subject is so important. (Knowledge, not unsubstantiated rumors). All in all, there is no reason not to use a crypto system, if you think your privacy/safety are in danger. I claim that in this world of compromises, choosing PKZIP is not as bad as presented, knowledge should be passed to all user about the risks involving the use of one system or the other, but there is too much rumors that obscure the subject and can misguide a user, not versed in the field of cryptography. And if you "must", choose PKZIP (it is better encrypting then none, and better than some, like ARJ, but certainly not among the best). ,,,,,,,,,,,,, DEkel (noXys) '''''''''''''

2 1

Nicholas Negroponte interview in MEME
by banjo, lord of the sea monkeys 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The latest issue of MEME has a pretty good interview with Nicholas Negroponte of the MIT Media Lab. Some privacy issues are discussed, the idea of intellectual property is touched on, as well as some other good stuff. I'm not sure if it's on the web, but I'll forward the interview to anyone who would like to have it. K. Ellis OBCrypto: How's it going, Perry? <grin> Kathleen M. Ellis http://zeus.towson.edu/~kelli/ kelli(a)zeus.towson.edu Diverse Sexual Orientation Collec. Towson State University DSOC(a)zeus.towson.edu "Your friends are really just enemies who don't have the guts to kill you" -J. Tenuta

1 0