- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption Technology
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:15 AM 8/10/96 -0400, Scottauge(a)aol.com wrote: >I was watched CBS reports a couple nights ago about how all these blue collar >and now white collar jobs are going across seas. > >So a possible way to protect jobs is to protect the knowledge on how to do >them. >In essence, knowledge is money, cuz that is what we usually want for it >now-a-days. "Oh you want me to do that for you, hmmmm, lets see...." The first axiom of economics is "Wants are unlimited." I'm glad that they're "shipping all those jobs overseas." The more people we have working the more goodies are produced. If the labor of US workers is freed up, then they can go about producing something else valuable that they didn't have time to produce before because those "third worlders" weren't doing their fair share back when they were trapped in feudalism or fabian socialism. You can't get more stuff (wealth) unless everyone is out there working to capacity (consistent with their desired work/leisure tradeoff). DCF

1 0

Re: Rumors of death of Anguilla Data are greatly exagerated.
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:20 PM 8/11/96, Perry E. Metzger wrote: >Timothy C. May writes: >> Selling fake passports seems not to be something Vince ought to even be >> paying attention to. Granted, pressure from outside states may put pressure >> on Vince, but this actually confirms my worst (OK, _nearly_ my worst) >> suspicions about the viability of such data havens. > >Vince has the right to run his business any way he likes. Of course. I never said otherwise, so this is a straw man argument. Ditto for remailers, ISPs, bookstores, blah blah blah. But this does not mean people should say nothing about what they learn the practices to be. >In some jurisdictions, "Fake" passports are legal. In some, they are >illegal. Vince feels that in his jurisdiction they are illegal. He has >every right to decide who to allow to run off of his web servers -- >even to be arbitrary about it. Of course. I never said otherwise. Those of us who have commented are not challenging his legal right to do so, only remarking that if he cancels accounts without stronger legal evidence, or without making it clear what is acceptable and what is not, he risks losing reptuation capital. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we 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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Rumors of death of Anguilla Data are greatly exagerated.
by Vincent Cate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perry E. Metzger <perry(a)piermont.com> > Vince has the right to run his business any way he likes. This is a very good libertarian point. > Vince has made it very clear that he is NOT a data haven. Anguilla is > a TAX HAVEN. That is, if you are selling copies of some software over > the net or what have you, and you run the business out of Anguilla, > you are not liable for any Anguillian taxes because there are none. > > Anguilla is *not* a data haven, drug haven, or any other sort of > haven. I would have thought that Vince made this clear. And Anguilla is first and foremost a taxhaven. But it tries hard to be a very clean taxhaven (does not want drug money etc). I think that "clean" corporations operating here tax free is a potentially huge market. Anguilla and OIS are not the data haven of cypherpunks wet dreams. Neither Anguilla nor I want "hit men for hire" advertising here. Sorry Tim. And I think the loss in clean business would outweigh any money from such by a long shot. The concept of a datahaven is still evolving. There are things that we can and will do from Anguilla. So while Anguilla may not really far along the cypherpunk datahaven scale at this point, I would not go so far as to say it is not a datahaven. One simple example is that OIS was given a project Gutenberg CD-ROM and may sell online copies of old books. Some countries are extending copyrights back further into the past. Anguilla is not. So we could sell books that have expired copyrights in Anguilla but not expired in USA etc. Think regulatory arbitrage. Taxhavens are a huge and well understood market. Datahavens are still new. Not counting gambling, they may only be $0/year rounded to the nearest million. -- Vince ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Vincent Cate vince(a)offshore.com.ai http://www.offshore.com.ai/vince/ Offshore Information Services http://www.offshore.com.ai/

1 0

Re: e$: I Never Meta-Certification...
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 18:30 8/11/96, Robert Hettinga wrote: >Anyway, it's clear we're moving from a world of insecure transactions on >private secure networks to one of secure transactions on insecure public >networks. CAs, SSL, and the whole enterprise of encrypting links between >accounting databases seem to be halfway measures to me. They're a way to >create, like our friend from MIT says, a temporary private secure network, >so you can send properly authorized, but still unsecure, book-entry down it. >For that "proper authorization", you need the biometric identity a CA >provides, so you can hunt down and jail miscreants who change the wrong book >entry. I've even made biometric-identity CA jokes about "X.BlaBla" and >"Numbers of the Beast", and all that. Beware of biometrics. They can give a false sense of security. Case in point: the other day, I picked up my girlfriend at an international airport that uses hand shape scanners to control access to restricted areas. I had her put her hand into the scanner, entered a random four digit code -- and the scanner displayed "Access granted"... We quickly walked away. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November. Vote Harry Browne for President.

1 0

re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption Technology
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:31 PM 8/11/96, Bart Croughs wrote: > But there is another axiom of economics which the >nationalist/socialist can use for his case against the free movement of >capital. This axiom states that the wages of workers depend on the amount >of capital invested. The more capital invested, the higher the wages are. >If American I agree strongly. In my Econ 101 class, lo those many years ago, I was constantly reminded to "Remember the Croughs Axiom!" It is why MacDonald's workers, who work at a company which has invested truly vast sums of money in the capital of its outlets, pays its workers so much more than do the legal firms, advertising firms, etc., which have invested almost nothing in the capital of their facilities. This is why so many lawyers choose to move into hamburger flipping. In fact, the lawyer who won the "hot coffee" lawsuit is now a Milkshake Trainee at the East Outback, Wisconsin MacDonalds. "Would you like fries with that?" --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we 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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption Technology
by Bart Croughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Duncan Frissell wrote: The first axiom of economics is "Wants are unlimited." I'm glad that they're "shipping all those jobs overseas." The more people we have working the more goodies are produced. If the labor of US workers is freed up, then they can go about producing something else valuable that they didn't have time to produce before because those "third worlders" weren't doing their fair share back when they were trapped in feudalism or fabian socialism. You can't get more stuff (wealth) unless everyone is out there working to capacity (consistent with their desired work/leisure tradeoff). I agree that 'shipping all those jobs overseas' will not cause the US workers to lose jobs. There is other work they can do. But there is another axiom of economics which the nationalist/socialist can use for his case against the free movement of capital. This axiom states that the wages of workers depend on the amount of capital invested. The more capital invested, the higher the wages are. If American companies are moving capital to Third World countries because of the low wages in these countries, then the workers in the Third World will of course be better off. But in the US, the amount of capital will be lowered. So the American workers will be able to get other jobs, but these jobs will pay less, because of the diminished amount of capital in the US. Of course there are advantages also for the US (shareholders will get higher returns, trade will increase), but how can you proof that these advantages will offset the disadvantage of the lowered amount of capital in the US? Anyone? Bart Croughs

3 3

Re: Clipper III on the table
by Omegaman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Allow me to say here that I do not belive that Netscape will be amongst > those fooled so easily. But IBM, HP, TIS, and others have already been > fooled. The USG does not need to get every software company to agree with > their proposal. Divide and conquer. Seems that the USG has done a > marvelous job of D&C so far. > If anything, it would not be in their best _marketing_ interests to support GAK. Rejecting GAK in favor of promoting strong crypto will make them look like "good guys". This is also true of Micro$oft. And contrary to an earlier opinion, I think Bill & Co. have been soured by their experiences with DoJ. While their are far larger motivations involve, I certainly don't think Micro$oft will skip at the chance to thumb their noses at the government if it's to their advantage. Both of these companies may be willing to support a DES-crack effort me -------------------------------------------------------------- Omegaman <mailto:omega@bigeasy.com> PGP Key fingerprint = 6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2 59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63 Send a message with the text "get key" in the "Subject:" field to get a copy of my public key. --------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Weaknesses in Smart Cards? (Re: FLA_wed)
by norm＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:04 PM 10/1/96, Lucky Green wrote: >There is no way to know for sure, since Mondex won't release the specs, >but just about everybody I talk with that knows at least something about >their system agrees that if you crack a Mondex card, you will likely be >able to mint money. Since Mondex allows transfers from card to card to >card, it may be a long time indeed before the breech is disovered. If I >were a Mondex issuer, I would be worried. Very worried. > >--Lucky I can imagine a protocol that would allow the Mondex card to issue several brands of card that would normally appear to be one uniform brand until fraud was suspected or proven. Then only money passed thru the compromised brand would be suspect. News of the counterfeit brand would be spread among cards by a contagion algorithm. One morning your card would greet you saying that $38 of your cash is counterfeit, or worse, that your card could issue no money to other cards, but could be returned to the issuer for a partial refund. I would not want to hide my Mondex card under the matress for my old age. I recall hearing something about Mondex that suggested to me that the card rembered recent large receits and that money had fingerprints so as to remember, to a degree, where it had been recently. When questioned about the privacy issues they responded that of course only the authorities would be able to retrieve such information.

1 0

Re: ITAR satellite provision
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:31 PM 10/1/96 -0700, Steve Schear wrote: >Does anyone on the list have the exact ITAR reg. text relating to the >exemption for space-launched crypto? I think you're talking about the definition of "export", located at 22 CFR 120.10: "Export means, for purposes of this subchapter: (a) Sending or taking defense articles out of the United States in any manner; or (b) Transferring registration or control to a foreign person of any aircraft, vessel, or satellite on the United States Munitions List, whether in the United States or abroad; or (c) Sending or taking technical data outside of the United States in any manner except by mere travel outside of the United States by a person whose personal knowledge includes technical data; or (d) Disclosing or transferring technical data to a foreign person, whether in the United States or abroad; or (e) The performance of a defense service on behalf of, or for the benefit of, a foreign person, whether in the United States or abroad. * A launch vehicle or payload shall not, by reason of the launching * of such vehicle, be considered an export for purposes of this * subchapter. Most of the requirements of this subchapter relate only to exports, as defined above. However, for certain limited purposes, the controls of this subchapter apply to sales and other transfers of defense articles and defense services (see, e.g., Sec. 126.1) of this subchapter." -- Greg Broiles | "We pretend to be their friends, gbroiles(a)netbox.com | but they fuck with our heads." http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | |

1 0

Export laws don't just affect crypto
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The recent posts about GPS made me research the state of the art of GPS receivers. Seems they are getting pretty good. Two pounds, sub-meter accuracy, attitude determination, all at altitudes up to 60,000 feet and speeds up to 1,000 nmph. But what really caught my eye was the fine print at the bottom of the spec sheet: "Higher altitude and velocities up to 25,000 nautical miles-per-hour options are available in the U.S." I gather from this that as long as you are in the US, you are welcome to use this technology for applications that require larger than 1,000 nmph speeds. Seems the software industry is not the only industry that's suffering from silly export control laws. --Lucky

5 5