- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

InfoWarCon
by winn＠Infowar.Com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

P L E A S E D I S T R I B U T E W I D E L Y InfoWarCon (Europe) '96 Defining the European Perspective Brussels, Belgium May 23-24 1996 Sponsored by: National Computer Security Association Winn Schwartau, President and CEO, Interpact, Inc. Robert David Steele, Chairman & CEO, OPEN SOURCE SOLUTIONS Information Warfare represents a global challenge that faces all late-industrial and information age nation states. It also represents the easiest and cheapest way for less developed nation-states and religious or political movements to anonymously and grieviously attack major nations and international corporations. Not only are the definitions of InfoWar unclear, but they span many areas and disciplines. This conference will examine the European perspectives on all three classes of Information Warfare while contributing some American lessons learned, mistakes made and successes enjoyed. Class I: Personal Privacy Class II: Industrial and Economic Spying and Warfare Class III: Global Conflict, Terrorism and the Military As at all other InfoWarCon, this special European Conference encourages active audience participation, contribution and debate. May 22, 1996 17:00 - 20:00 Pre-Registration 18:00 - 21:00 Hosted Cocktail Party with Music Most conference speakers will be in attendance. Meet Mr. Schwartau and Mr. Steele. May 23, 1995 07:00 - 08:30 Registration 07:00 - 08:30 Sponsored Continental Breakfast PLENARY SESSIONS 08:30 - 09:00 Keynote Speech Major General William Robbins Assistant Chief Of Staff, Command, Control, Communications, Computing, and Information Ministry of Defence, United Kingdom (Invited) 09:00 - 10:00 "Information Warfare: Chaos on the Electronic Superhighway" Winn Schwartau President and CEO, Interpact, Inc., USA An overview of Information Warfare from the civilian perspective by one of the world's leading experts on the subject. This will be an eye-opening presentation with time reserved for questions from the audience. Mr. Schwartau will be available throughout the conference for personal and private discussions as well as book signings. 10:00 - 11:15 Military View of Information Warfare Moderator: Captain Patrick Tyrell Assistant Director, Information Warfare Policy, Ministry of Defence, United Kingdom Panel: The German View The Russian View The Croatian View 11:15 - 11:45 Sponsored Break 11:45 - 13:00 Law Enforcement in Cyberspace: Cooperation is the Key: Panel Moderator: Winn Schwartau, Interpact, Inc. Panel: Interpol Surite FBI Netherlands How will global partners respect each other's laws and cooperate in their enforcement? Will extradition for cyber-crimes become necessary? Leading experts will walk us down the paths to success and offer lessons learned on failures and risks. 13:00 - 14:30 Lunch 13:30 - 14:00 Special Luncheon Presentation BREAKOUT SESSIONS 14:30 - 16:00 Breakout I: Threats to European Civil Prosperity Moderator: Admiral Lacoste/General Heinrich, France (Invited) Panel: Belgium Germany United Kingdom Europe is becoming as dependent upon its econo-technical infrastructure more than ever with the design and construction of the European Space Initiative. Communications systems create the basis for global commerce, transportation systems permit the distribution of goods, the financial infrastructure is a requisite component of any information based economy and the power grid glues it all together. But, the threats to their stability and integrity are many and must be dealt with on a continent that has a history of war and more recently terrorism. What are the risks? The rewards? And the solutions? Breakout II: Information Warfare: Support for Conventional War Fighting Moderator: TBD Panel: US - Gen. Jim McCarthy USAF (Ret) Russia Netherlands Conventional Wars and regional conflicts are replacing the fear of East-West conflict. Advanced Industrial and Information Age societies will supplement their armed forces with enhanced information processing capabilities. What are they and will they change the face of war? 16:00-16:30 Sponsored Break PLENARY SESSION 16:30 - 18:00 "Hackers: National Resources or Merely Cyber-Criminals?" Moderator: Mich Kabay, Ph.D. Director of Education, NCSA and Robert Steele, President, OSS, Inc. Panel: Hactic and The Digital City Experiment: Amsterdam, Netherlands (Invited) Hacker, United Kingdom CHAOS Computer Club, Germany Are hackers merely criminals operating under the guise of Internet freedom? Or are they national resources to be cultivated and who have served as an early warning system for Cyberspace? One group of American hackers have threatened to "Declare War on France" on behalf of American interests. How do we as nations deal with this? Mich Kabay and Robert Steele will debate the issue and then you will meet the hackers in person. The first Information Warriors invite your questions, comments and interaction. Learn first hand who they are, what they believe and how they function. 18:00 - 21:00 Hosted Reception 21:00 - 23:00 "Dutch Dinners" for Birds of a Feather Rallying points will be provided. May 24, 1996 07:00 - 8:30 Sponsored Continental Breakfast 08:30 - 9:00 Keynote Speech "Efforts to Maximize Information As New Age Weapon" (TBD) PLENARY SESSIONS 9:00 - 10:00 "Creating Smart Nations Through National Information Strategies: Intelligence And Security Issues" Robert David Steele, President, OSS, Inc. US Planning for the future requires new thinking and a new "triad" of defense: Open Source Intelligence, Electronic Home Defense and Information Warfare. 21st Century realities invite dozens more players whom must be monitored and controlled. Governments and the military should avail themselves of the publicly available open source information as part of their ongoing intelligence operations. Mr. Steele has suggested that nations should "draft" the civil sector by requiring 'due diligence' and very high standards of private sector communications and computing security. 10:00 - 11:15 "The Convergence of Military and Commercial Vulnerabilities" Moderator: Winn Schwartau, President and CEO, Interpact, Inc. Panel: Bob Ayers, DISA, Department of Defense, US Holland / Belgium UK France Much of military success depends upon the reliable operation of civilian and commercial systems. No longer do the government and military and private sector function in isolation. What levels of cooperation are required to assure proper defense and war fighting capability? How much of the private sector must be viewed as a national security asset - to be protected as much as is a forward deployed military unit? 11:15 - 11:45 Sponsored Break 11:45 - 13:00 Societal Impact of Information Warfare Moderator: Winn Schwartau, President and CEO, Interpact, Inc. Society is absolutely dependent upon technology; without networks and computers and communications, portions of society can collapse within days. If major systems fail, what will the reaction of a techno-reliant society be? And, what are the ethics of a military who instigates the collapse of an adversary's civilian infrastructure rather then resort to bombs and bullets? Is a techno-phobic society psychologically prepared for the consequences? 13:00 - 14:30 Lunch 13:30-14:00 Special Luncheon Presentation BREAKOUT SESSIONS 14:30 - 16:00 Breakout I: Legislation & Personal Privacy: A Global Electronic Bill of Rights? Moderator: General Pickering, Canada (Invited) Panel: Electronic Privacy International (Invited) Sweden The Vatican This panel will examine the different approaches governments take to protect the personal privacy of their citizens and what steps need to be taken to create a global consensus. How do differing privacy laws affect countries ability to do business? How will authoritarian regimes counter the perceived threat of free and open information flow? Breakout II: "Industrial Espionage: An Update" Moderator: DST, France (Invited) - (RS) Panel: Surite tells all Kroll Associates US Germany 122 Countries are actively engaged in industrial and economic espionage to the benefit of their respective states. It's a lot easier for a third world or agrarian society to steal intellectual and proprietary property than to invest time and resources develop their own. Who's involved and what are they doing? What steps need to be taken to defend such actions? 16:00 - 16:30 Sponsored Break PLENARY 16:30 - 18:00 Defining War in the Information Age "The New National Security" Brief comments by Winn Schwartau and Robert Steele - and then a lively interactive audience debate. An enemy bomb landing in any country can be easily construed as an act of war. However, in Cyberspace, anonymous acts of aggression that lead to war or replace conventional attacks are not so simple to classify. This highly charged subject will consider what war is and what it isn't: - Is an attack against a financial institution an act of war? - What about the intentional collapse of a communications infrastructure? - Is human lethality a necessary pre-requisite for war? - Do we need to redefine national security for the post Cold-War world? 18:00 - 18:10 Closing Comments 18:00 - 20:00 No-Host Reception Hotel Information: Hotel Palace rue Gineste 3 1210 Brussels Belgium +32 2 203 62 00 +32 2 203 55 55 (Fax) InfoWarCon (Europe) - 96 Registration Form: Name: ___________________________________________________________ Title: ___________________________________________________________ Org: ___________________________________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________________________ City: ___________________________________________________________ State: _______________________________ Zip: _____________________ Country: __________________________ Email: ________________________ Phone: __________________________ Fax: _________________________ FEES: Payment made BEFORE March 1, 1996: ( ) $845.00 NCSA Members/OSS Attendees ( ) $895.00 All others ( ) $795.00 3 people from same organization ( ) $745.00 5 or more people from same organization Payment made AFTER March 1, 1996: ( ) $895.00 NCSA Members/Paid OSS Attendees ( ) $995.00 All others ( ) $845.00 3 people from same organization ( ) $795.00 5 or more people from same organization Make checks payable to NCSA, or Charge to: ( ) VISA ( ) MasterCard AMEX ( ) Number: ___________________________________________ Exp date: ___________________________ Signature: ___________________________________________ MAIL OR FAX OR EMAIL REGISTRATION TO: National Computer Security Association 10 South Courthouse Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 Phone 717-258-1816 or FAX 717-243-8642 EMAIL: conference(a)ncsa.com To obtain the latest edition of this program, send EMail to: euroinfowar(a)ncsa.com For more information about NCSA: WWW: http://www.ncsa.com CompuServe: GO NCSA EMail: info(a)ncsa.com Sponsorships for various InfoWarCon (Europe) 96 events are still available. To find out how to sponsor portions: Contact Paul Gates at the NCSA: pgates(a)ncsa.com To reach: Winn Schwartau: Winn(a)Infowar.Com Robert Steele: ceo(a)oss.net V 1.1/12.7.95 Peace & Happy Holidays Winn Winn Schwartau - Interpact, Inc. Information Warfare and InfoSec V: 813.393.6600 / F: 813.393.6361 Winn(a)InfoWar.Com

1 0

Re: Text Analysis and Shakespeare
by cicho＠free.polbox.pl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >a friend gave me a book called "the cryptographic >shakespeare" in which he found some patterns in >shakespearean texts that might tend to suggest >some codes were embedded in it. In what sense? Most of the time, plain old lit analysis is looking for "keys" and then applying them to "unlock" the "hidden message". An allegory is a simple substitution cipher, and then it goes all the way up to lit equivalents of one time pads and steganography (say, 'Lolita' or Frank O'Hara's poetry). Concerning Shakespeare, I thought those involved in this discussion might be amused by the following. I would have posted it earlier but didn't have the book at hand, and then Lem's prose isn't particularly friendly for the translator. It's all taken out of context, but will speak for itself, I am sure. -------------- STANIS&Lstrok;AW LEM DIARY FOUND IN A BATHTUB (chapter IV, excerpt) Here goes, I said at last, opening my eyes. My ears have yet not drunk a hundred words of that tongue's utterance, yet I know the sound. Art thou not Romeo? Fine. The captain punched keys briskly, typing in the line I offered. A slot that looked like an ancient letterbox began spitting out paper ribbon which spun slowly in the air. Captain Prandtl held it gently and handed it to me. I held the tip of the ribbon, waiting patiently. The paper snaked out of the slot inch by inch and when I tugged at it carefully I could feel the feeding mechanism vibrate. Suddenly, the barely perceptible tremor ceased and the ribbon spun on, blank. I held it to my eyes. BAS TARD MAT HEWS BAS TARD DRAW HIM & QUARTER WITH HOLY DE LIGHT MAT HEWS PIG SEED MATH HEWS MATH. And what is this? I asked, not even trying to conceal my dismay. The captain nodded. I presume that when he wrote the scene, Shakespeare was unfavourably disposed towards a man named Mathews. . . and encoded the sentiment in the lines of his play. You expect me to believe that? Do you mean to say that he deliberately filled this wondrous, lyrical passage with crude interjections at some Mathews person? I never said he did so deliberately. A code is a code, no matter what the authors intent. Do you mind? I asked. I approached the control panel and keyed in the freshly obtained plaintext myself. The ribbon moved again, twisting into a spiral. I caught a brief, peculiar smile on Prandtls lips, but he didnt say a word. THAT ASS YEAH HER ASS FUN FAT ASS FUN FAT YEAH ASS HER ASS HEY THAT FAT ASS - read the tidily printed syllables. What is this? I demanded. What is it?! Another layer. Well, what did you expect? Weve exposed a deeper layer of the psyche of a 17th century Englishman, plain and simple. This cannot be! Youre telling me this beautiful poem is nothing but a vessel to conceal some pigs and asses?! And that if you feed the most sublime literary achievements, pinnacles of human genius, immortal epics, sagas - it will all come out hodgepodge? Hodgepodge it is, mister. Art... literature... do you realise what their purpose is? To divert attention! From what? You dont know? I dont. Thats too bad. You ought to know. What are you doing here, then?! I didnt answer. With skin on his face taut like a tents canvas stretched over sharp rocks, he continued in monotone: A broken code remains a code. Under the eye of a professional cryptographer it will shed one moult after another. It is inexhaustible. It has no end nor bottom. You can delve into progressively deeper, progressively more arcane strata, but this journey never terminates. -------------- (This 1960 novel is available in English translation, hopefully better than my attempt here, as "Diary Found in a Bathtub", though i *really* should be called The (Original) Puzzle Palace, 'coz that's what it's about. It's Kafka plus David Lynch plus TCMay rolled in one :) .marek -- General Frenetics, Discorporated: http://www.lodz.pdi.net/~eristic/

1 0

Joe Cypherpunk
by sixdegrees 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Name: Ivan Cypherpunk E-Mail Address: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com sixdegrees Password: listhome Hi. You've been sponsored as "Significant Other" by Joe Cypherpunk as part of something called sixdegrees, one of the fastest growing phenomena on the Web, located at http://www.sixdegrees.com You may have already heard of the six degrees of separation concept - where everyone on the planet is connected to each other through fewer than 6 people. Well, we haven't quite connected the whole world yet, but there are over a million people participating, and over 900,000 of them are connected in one giant chain. And, just by confirming your relationship with Joe, you can instantly tap into this interconnected community of interesting people from all over the world. So what? Well, by getting connected, you can come to the Web site (which is completely FREE) and use a whole variety of valuable, fun and intriguing services that make use of this massive chain of connections. You can come see who's logged on the site right now and when you find someone interesting, we'll show you exactly how you're connected no matter how many degrees it takes, and then you can instant message them. You can also find out how you're connected to that head of personnel at the big firm where you've been trying to get your foot in the door. You can chat with people from around the globe and then see who you know in common. You can post burning questions on your own personalized bulletin board and get valuable answers from your "circle" (your friends and friends of friends). You can even get Movie recommendations from the people you're connected to. So, stop by the site at http://www.sixdegrees.com to learn more and give it a try. (You can log in with this password: listhome). ==================================================================== You can also get things started and get yourself connected right from this e-mail: ** To confirm your relationship with Joe, just send a reply that says only CONFIRM on the first line of the message body * To deny this particular relationship (but keep open the possibility of joining sixdegrees if the concept intrigues you) send a reply that says only DENY * And, if you'd like to make sure you don't hear from us again (even if somebody else you know lists you as a contact) then simply send a reply which says REMOVE in the SUBJECT LINE so we can process your request right away Thanks, and we look forward to seeing you at sixdegrees. ==================================================================== And, if you're really ambitious, you can get your network of connections growing right away. Just list the people you think might be interested in participating in sixdegrees and we'll contact them with an e-mail like this one which mentions your name and invites them to join. Just follow these directions: * Click your mail program's REPLY button. * On the FIRST line of the message body of the reply e-mail that opens, type only the word CONFIRM to let us know that you are in fact Joe's Significant Other. * On the next line of the message body list the first and last names and e-mail addresses of the people you'd like to invite (you can list as many as you'd like - but we recommend you list at least two), and the relationship numbers that correspond with how those people are related to you. MAKE SURE: * That the first name, last name, e-mail address and relationship number are separated by SEMI-COLONS. * You follow the format of these examples: John; Smith; jsmith(a)fakeplace.com; 12 Jane; Doe; superjane(a)fakeplace.com; 3 * And that you define each relationship by choosing a number from this list: 1=wife 2=husband 3=life partner 4=significant other 5=mother 6=father 7=sister 8=brother 9=daughter 10=son 11=other family member 12=friend 13=employer 14=employee 15=co-worker 16=client 17=service provider 18=business contact 19=fellow alum 20=acquaintance We look forward to hearing from you! =================================================================== PLEASE NOTE: All replies to this address are processed by a computer. If you have any problems, questions or requests send an e-mail to issues(a)sixdegrees.com and you'll receive a prompt and courteous response. And, if you'd like to review our privacy statement just visit http://www.sixdegrees.com/Public/About/Privacy.asp ==================================================================== sixdegrees is Registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. E.DB.ANB.1

3 2

Re: Netscape speaks with a forked tongue:
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:11 AM 12/9/95 GMT, Dan Weinstein wrote: > You are quoting a reporter and attributing it to Jim Clark, do you > understand what is wrong with that? Jim Clark has had ample opportunity to clarify his statements. He has not clarified his statements and he has not disowned the reported version of his comments, despite repeated requests to do so. Once again I request him to do so. Once again I ask what he means, once again I complain that if that is not what he meant, he should now say something that is unambiguously different from what he was reported as saying. >It has been reported by those that attended the Clipper II meeting on >Monday(?) that the Netscape representative read an official statement >very much in opposition to GAK. I have not seen this statement, and I have asked for it: Once again I ask for it. In particular I ask that it be placed on their web if it says what they say that it says. > > Jim Clark's supposedly anti GAK statement was incomprehensible to me. > > Perhaps he needs a punchier ghostwriter: > Clark's statement was certainly something less than clearly in > opposition to GAK, but I think at worst he could be said to be resigned > to GAK, not a supporter of it. It was worse than that: he said nothing at all, the "clarification" statement was a cloudy fog. > > If Jim Clark wishes to persuade us that his heart is in the right > > place, he should put something like the following somewhere on the > > Netscape web pages: > > > > "Our customers do not want government access to > > their cryptographic keys. Mandatory government > > access to keys violates the rights of our > > customers. Therefore we will not foist > > government access to keys on those customers > > who have freedom to communicate securely. > > > > We will only build government access to keys > > into our products for those customers whose > > governments force them to provide such access. > > " > > > > If that really is Netscape's policy, then they should tell the world > > that that really is Netscape's policy, thus instantly relieving the > > fear, uncertainty, and doubt created by the unfortunate widespread > > misinterpretation of Jim Clark's original statements. > Jeff Weinstein has promised that when the representative from the > conference returns to Mountain View, they will publish his statement > on web. Still waiting. I am sure that by now Netscape knows what its policy is on government access to keys: I ask them to tell the world, and to tell the world in such a way that they cannot retract their words without some embarrassment. > Again, you seem fixated on making Clark's opinions equivelent to the > position of Netscape Communications Corp, this is not a reasonable > assumption. Clark is not a Netscape employee. Clark owns a controlling interest in Netscape and is chairman of the board. Netscape's policies are whatever he says they are, except in the highly unlikely event that he is opposed by both Jim Barksdale and Kleiner Perkins plus a substantial majority of the lesser shareholders. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: Netscape speaks with a forked tongue:
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:11 AM 12/9/95 GMT, Dan Weinstein wrote: > You are quoting a reporter and attributing it to Jim Clark, do you > understand what is wrong with that? Jim Clark has had ample opportunity to clarify his statements. He has not clarified his statements and he has not disowned the reported version of his comments, despite repeated requests to do so. Once again I request him to do so. Once again I ask what he means, once again I complain that if that is not what he meant, he should now say something that is unambiguously different from what he was reported as saying. >It has been reported by those that attended the Clipper II meeting on >Monday(?) that the Netscape representative read an official statement >very much in opposition to GAK. I have not seen this statement, and I have asked for it: Once again I ask for it. In particular I ask that it be placed on their web if it says what they say that it says. > > Jim Clark's supposedly anti GAK statement was incomprehensible to me. > > Perhaps he needs a punchier ghostwriter: > Clark's statement was certainly something less than clearly in > opposition to GAK, but I think at worst he could be said to be resigned > to GAK, not a supporter of it. It was worse than that: he said nothing at all, the "clarification" statement was a cloudy fog. > > If Jim Clark wishes to persuade us that his heart is in the right > > place, he should put something like the following somewhere on the > > Netscape web pages: > > > > "Our customers do not want government access to > > their cryptographic keys. Mandatory government > > access to keys violates the rights of our > > customers. Therefore we will not foist > > government access to keys on those customers > > who have freedom to communicate securely. > > > > We will only build government access to keys > > into our products for those customers whose > > governments force them to provide such access. > > " > > > > If that really is Netscape's policy, then they should tell the world > > that that really is Netscape's policy, thus instantly relieving the > > fear, uncertainty, and doubt created by the unfortunate widespread > > misinterpretation of Jim Clark's original statements. > Jeff Weinstein has promised that when the representative from the > conference returns to Mountain View, they will publish his statement > on web. Still waiting. I am sure that by now Netscape knows what its policy is on government access to keys: I ask them to tell the world, and to tell the world in such a way that they cannot retract their words without some embarrassment. > Again, you seem fixated on making Clark's opinions equivelent to the > position of Netscape Communications Corp, this is not a reasonable > assumption. Clark is not a Netscape employee. Clark owns a controlling interest in Netscape and is chairman of the board. Netscape's policies are whatever he says they are, except in the highly unlikely event that he is opposed by both Jim Barksdale and Kleiner Perkins plus a substantial majority of the lesser shareholders. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: CP: Mailing List Subjects
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Fri, 8 Dec 1995, Michael Handler wrote: > Learn procmail. It'll save you hours upon hours of time. > > :0: > * (^From owner-cypherpunks(a)toad\.com|^Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad\.com) > lists/cypherpunks Would the following work?? :0 * (^From|^Sender).*owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com |/usr/bin/contrib/procmail -m ~/.punk_rc Does anyone know where the procmail archives are?? That might help some of us out, especially those of use who are lousy at managing our very, very precious resources. Alice de 'nonymous ... <an455120(a)anon.penet.fi> ...just another one of those... P.S. This post is in the public domain. C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E.

2 1

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to > > > a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that > > > they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a > > > reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should > > > be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are > > > heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. > > > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. > > I'm not precisely sure, but remember, I'm not saying that your typical > suburban, well-to-do, successful gay male falls into this category. > > There are, OTOH, a lot of people in the city who have lifestyles which > are not represented accurately in the prime-time sitcoms, and the ones > who fall into the greatest health-risk category are IV drug users and > gay males (in the city, remember - i.e., Santa Monica boulevard). > > Remember too those ads for male sexual lubricants - you cannot use > a condom with those lubricants. Safe sex, I don't think so. That does not come close to a theory that would explain HIV away. > > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > > has that been proven? > > You're kidding, yes? Anything besides good food, exercise, sleep etc. > is bad for the immune system. Antibiotics (usually "dead" germs of > some sort) are horrendous things to inject directly into your system. This may very well be true. I try to never use antibiotics, because I had allergy when I was a child and I also do not like taking any medications. There needs to be something more convincing than these generic statements, if you want to create some plausible theory. > In October 1959, after lapsing into a coma from a massive sinus > infection, I was given "a million units of penicillin" in the > children's hospital when first admitted. I recovered OK after > two weeks, so I'm certainly not opposed to antibiotics for those > who really need them. OTOH, our U.S. economy today is antibiotic- > and-hormone crazy, injecting cows, pigs, and chickens to name a few > animals, all in the hopes of raising production. So why is the rate > of cancer going up so high? It seems nearly everyone I know is > getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the > videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. > One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". As far as I understand, 1) no one really understands why cancer rates are up so much and 2) since people live longer, they are more likely do have cancer. What you said is one of the hypotheses. I personally feel that environment and bad greasy food are other major contributors. The way they cook all these fries, with overheated grease, is very bad. - Igor.

3 2

Netscape announces position against GAK
by Jeff Weinstein 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've included below the official Netscape position against GAK. This page is now available on our web site at the URL below. I'm sorry that we were not able to get this out earlier in the week, but we ran into some delays due to travel schedules (people attending the NIST meeting), and some logistical problems due to large changes on our web site. There is a link to this document on our home page, http://home.netscape.com/, which gets accessed more than 1 million times per day. I would appreciate it if people who forwarded parts of the recent Netscape/GAK discussion to other forums would at least send them the URL for this page. --Jeff http://home.netscape.com/newsref/ref/encryption_export.html > NETSCAPE PRESENTS POLICY ON ENCRYPTION EXPORT TO KEY MEMBERS OF THE > ADMINISTRATION AND CONGRESS > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > This week Netscape representatives attending a government presentation > of the administration's proposed Key Escrow Policy for Export detailed > the company's firm opposition to the proposed policy. Netscape is > opposed to this type of proposal for a number of reasons including its > failure to adequately address the issues of acceptability by foreign > governments and corporations, significant personal privacy concerns, > and the mandatory nature of tying the Exportable Key Size to the Key > Escrow Proposal. > > At present the proposed Key Escrow Policy for Export states that a > U.S. Government-approved key escrow process must be used by U.S. > software manufacturers if they wish to export commodity encryption > products of a key length up to 64 bits. Currently, Netscape can only > provide its non-U.S. customers with products containing a 40-bit key. > It has been Netscape's experience that non-U.S. customers demand > products as cryptographically strong as those that are available to > U.S. customers (i.e., at least 128-bit key length). Hence, the current > U.S. Government proposal is compelling software companies like > Netscape to manufacture two different versions of its products - an > inefficient and noncompetitive posture that does not meet the needs of > the foreign markets. > > Netscape believes that this division in the global marketplace is not > compatible with the nature, structure, and history of the Internet and > its users. In addition, the 64-bit key length size in the U.S. > Government proposal is inadequate for security purposes; recent > experience in the United States and other countries demonstrates that > a 64-bit key can be compromised. Therefore, Netscape believes that the > U.S. Government's proposal does not support the needs of industry. > > In particular: > > 1. The U.S. Government proposal imposes regulations that will not > scale up to the speed at which the information > technology/Internet software industry continues to develop. The > proposed process represents a regulatory burden that is not > consistent with the decentralized and agile nature of the > IT/Internet business. The proposal puts at risk significant > economic stability not just for U.S.-based IT firms but for the > U.S. economy as a whole as every sector's growth is fueled by the > increasing availability and innovative use of information > products and services. > > 2. The U.S. Government proposal would in effect result in the > mandatory use of these export-grade products within the United > States. The proposal includes a non-interoperability criteria > that would make it impossible for a non-escrowed software product > to talk to an escrowed software product. Thus, consumers inside > the United States would be forced to use a government-approved > key-escrow product if they value the ability to communicate with > others outside the United States. > > 3. Corporate and individual rights to privacy are placed in question > by the current U.S. Government escrow proposal and process. This > is so because of the mandatory nature of the proposal resulting > from the key escrow requirement itself and the oversight role > government proposes to play in the accreditation process and > business practices of an escrow agent. > > Netscape will continue to work with industry organizations, partners, > and customers who are in similar opposition to the government's > proposal to ensure that the current administration understands the > unacceptability of this plan. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Find out more about Netscape at info(a)netscape.com, or call > 415/528-2555. > Copyright © 1995 Netscape Communications Corporation -- Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist Netscape Communication Corporation jsw(a)netscape.com - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw Any opinions expressed above are mine.

2 1

Congress vs. the Internet
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

NY Times, 9 Dec 1995, Op-Ed. Congress vs. the Internet The courts have upheld free speech. Why won't legislators? By Shari Steele (EFF staff counsel) San Francisco. While the courts continue to uphold the freedom of speech on the Internet, the First Amendment is under attack on Capitol Hill. On Wednesday, House members of a House-Senate conference committee said they would support a stringent new measure that would not only bar words and ideas on the worldwide computer network that one might hear on TV or read in this newspaper, but would make criminals out of anyone transmitting these materials electronically, including on-line servces. This measure goes against the spirit of three sensible court decisions on copyright law handed down in recent weeks, all involving the Church of Scientology. The first decision, issued by a Federal judge in California last month, held that Internet service providers, the gatekeepers to the information highway, cannot be held liable for copyright infringement when they have no knowledge of the content of their users' messages. This decision is important, because, like the telephone company, the system's providers merely offer a conduit for communications. If they can be held liable for the content of messages, they are more likely to monitor those messages and censor any that include language that might get them in trouble. Just as we don't want the phone company censoring our telephone calls, we should be very troubled by any copyright law interpretation that would assign liability to those who provide Internet service. The second and third decisions were issued last week by a Federal judge in northern Virginia. In those cases, the judge, Leonie M. Brinkema, admonished the Church of Scientology for using lawsuits to silence its on-line critics. After two of its former members posted electronic criticism of Church of Scientology writings, the church brought charges against them, their Internet service providers and The Washington Post for including two sentences from church documents in an article on the case. Judge Brinkema dismissed The Washington Post and two of its reporters from the suit and held the Church of Scientology and its affiliate responsible for the newspaper's legal fees. "Although the Religious Technology Center brought the complaint under traditional secular concepts of copyright and trade secret law, it has become clear that a much broader motivation prevailed -- the stifling of criticism and dissent of the religious practices of Scientology and the destruction of its opponents," the judge wrote. The judge called this motivation "reprehensible." While the results of these preliminary decisions are encouraging, they provide little solace to the larger threat of on-line censorship. Court decisions in the copyright realm, as these are, do not address the damage Congress is doing to the First Amendment h the name of protecting children from obscenity, which remains ill-defind. These early court victories are important, and the on-line world breathed a collective sigh of relief over the wise judgments. But not all battles can be won in court. If Congress presses forward with its attempt to criminalize constitutionally protected speech, I fear that the First Amendment will be left behind as more and more of what we say is in the form of on-line communications. -----

1 0

No Subject
by prmoyer＠magpage.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Well, I'm discouraged. I'm looking for strongly encrypted cellular telephones, but I can't seem to find many. If you know of some, could you pass along some pointers for me? I would really like to avoid using a GAK enabled product, if there's any way to avoid it (even if it means paying lots of extra $$$). Cheers, Phil

1 0