- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: cryptography eliminates lawyers?
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:44 PM 9/8/95 -0400, you wrote: >We wish! We really wish! "Fill that lawyer with a few more slugs of encryption!" The argument that encryption will free us from all the legal ills of the world is pretty specious. If anything it will make more work for lawyers as the non-clue-endowed portion of the world tries to come to terms with the new technology. They will make rules and subsets of rules and exeptions to rules and variations to interpetations of rules that will make the current set look like the rules to "chutes and ladders". Part of the job of the lawyer class is to guarentee the existance of work for other lawyers (as well as themselves). It does not depend on what the medium of exchange is. Lawyers and government forces will try and figure out some way to try and extract it from you. The government is trying very hard to keep any scrap of power from creeping away from them. You can bet that they will try every thing they can think of, rational and irrational, to regulate and control the wilds of cyberspace. They will pump up every imaginary boogieman to help them get the public to swallow what they are fed. By the time they figure out they have been had, it will be too late. Cypherpunks must be the syrup of ipecac to the governments dose of poison to the body politic! (I need to start drinking more coffee in the morning. I cannot believe I wrote that...) Unfortunatly the public does not thrive on logic. They had been trained to react emotionally to things and not react logically. I am not certain what can be used to get them to realize why they need encryption. Dispelling the bogeymen is none need. The other thing is that the tools need to be made as simple as possible. The current tools for use require a fair bit of technical understanding. Until they have an integrated front-end that makes it about as easy to use as America On-Line, encryption will not gain widespread usage. This is the type of code that needs to be written. Making integrated tools like newsreaders and mail programs that support strong encryption directly is what is needed for widespread use. (As well as being usable programs in and of themselves. Many of the programs for news and mail are crap.) Making cryptography a "cool and fun thing to use" will help dispell many of the myths and may help to defuse the government created bogey men. (Of course they will claim that it aids "criminals and terrorists", but to them EVERYONE is a criminal and a terrorist.) | Visualize whirled keys | alano(a)teleport.com | |"It's only half a keyserver. I had to split the | Disclaimer: | |other half with the government man." - Black Art | Ignore the man | | -- PGP 2.6.2 key available on request -- | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.teleport.com/~alano | <fnord> |

1 0

Re: PRESS REPORT - IMPORTANT?????
by Ray Arachelian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is this for real or a troll??? On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Anonymous wrote: > *** London Times, 30/03/1997 *** > > >Factoring problem broken: > > > >One of the main systems used by computer privacy > >programs around the world such as those used on > >the internet to prevent third parties eavesdropping > >on credit card transactions has been proven insecure, > >The RSA algorithm, based on the difficulty of "factoring" > >large numbers appears to have a weakness, a press > >release by the IACR (International Association for cryptologic > >research) reads as follows: > > >"Leading researcher Ari Lenstra last night announced major > >progress had been made towards a solution to the factoring > >problem, a result obtained by Sergei Ripov, researcher at > >an obscure university in the former Soviet union, shows > >conclusively that there exists a solution to the problem > >that is of polynomial time complexity, although this solution > >has yet to be found this signals the beginning of the end for > >a number of cryptosystems based on this problem, please note > >a trivial solution to factoring also suggests a trivial solution > >to the ECDLP and therefore a number of other systems such as > >Diffie-Hellman and the El-Gamal group of cryptosystems should > >be considered insecure" > > > >We were unable to contact the IACR for futher information. > >The leading internet products company Netscape refused to > >comment saying only "We regularly review data security > >issues concerning all of our products". > > =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "If you're gonna die, die with your|./|\. ..\|/..|sunder(a)sundernet.com|boots on; If you're gonna try, just |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |stick around; Gonna cry? Just move along|\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |you're gonna die, you're gonna die!" |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| --Iron Maiden "Die With Your Boots on"|..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= For with those which eternal lie, with strange eons even death may die.

1 0

DC-area Meeting Sept 16
by Pat Farrell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The next DC-area cypherpunks meeting will be next Saturday afternoon at Digex's headquarters in suburban Maryland. Please mark your calendars. Directions, maps, and exact time will be published soon. Doug Humphrey says that the office is less than one mile from public transportation. Carpools worked for the last meeting, so I expect rides from Northern Virginia and even Baltimore can be arrainged. Pat Pat Farrell Grad Student http://www.isse.gmu.edu/students/pfarrell Info. Systems & Software Engineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA PGP key available on homepage #include <standard.disclaimer>

1 0

National Citizen-Unit Tracking Database coming soon
by Brad Dolan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

National Citizen Dossier System Being Quietly Set Up That's what the headlines should be saying, anyway. Instead they're saying things like: (_Knoxville Journal_, 3/27/97) Governor's Budget Includes Money to Set Up Gang-Tracking Network [...] [A]s part of the governor's anti-gang proposals, he's proposing to spend $625,000 worth of state and federal money to set up a gang-tracking computer database and network. Four agents of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation will be assigned to do nothing but gather and maintain information about gangs in the state's four regions. They will analyze and compile the information on computer for dissemination throughout the state, the Southeast, and the nation - but not for public use. Law enforcement agencies will be able to use it and update it. Information on the database could include a picture, a description, the gang affiliation, criminal convictions, crimes that a person is suspected in, and possible nicknames. [...] Other press reports have indicated that the database will include "domestic terrorist groups" and will incorporate a great deal of additional data, such as a roster of vehicles which should be given special attention at the now-innumberable roadblocks and checkpoints. The important thing to note is that - as I understand the description of the program - a person does not have to commit a crime to be included in the database. They just have to have contact with a person or group which is already in it. Didn't somebody named Jospeh McCarthy get himself in trouble over this kind of thing? bd

1 0

RE: Hard to Tax Scenario
by Vincent Cate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Robin Hanson, <hanson(a)hss.caltech.edu>, writes: > > > How well thought out is the notion that widespread crypto could > > allow a large fraction (>30%?) of the economy to avoid taxation? > [...] > > Imagine Ann is a doctor who wants to ply her trade without taxation. The good doctor Ann is not in the easy 30%, unless she is selling a medical book she wrote over the Internet, or something like that. There will be people who are much easier to tax than others, and I think Ann is one of those. Today painters, plumbers, etc often give big discounts for cash payments. The reason is they do not want to report their earnings. Today many many people on welfare do odd jobs and take their checks to places with signs like "Checks cashed - no ID required - 6%". They probably actually show ID, but the merchant cashing the check does not write down a social security number. The guy on welfare does not have this earning tied to his social security number. This is a very good thing for him, because if the government knew he earned $100 they would take $95 off his welfare check. So it is much like he is avoiding his 95% tax bracket. And it is amazing to me how many people think, "those evil businesses, taking advantage of those poor people who are too stupid to open a bank account and so pay 6% to cash checks". This is rational self interest at work here, not stupidity. If you add the painters, welfare people, drug dealers, etc. We could well be close to 30% of the economy long before all the cypherpunks form corporations in Anguilla. - Vince Cate

1 0

Re[4]: [NOISE/Fun] some 'special' primes
by sharborth＠hai-net.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

ALERT: White House denigrating your right to secure your privacy (3/28/1997)
by Shabbir J. Safdar 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

============================================================================== ___ _ _____ ____ _____ _ / _ \| | | ____| _ \_ _| | THE CRYPTO BATTLE HAS BEGUN! | |_| | | | _| | |_) || | | | CLINTON ADMINISTRATION PROPOSES CONTROL OF | _ | |___| |___| _ < | | |_| ENCRYPTION FOR AMERICANS ON U.S. SOIL |_| |_|_____|_____|_| \_\|_| (_) March 28, 1997 Do not forward this alert after May 1, 1997. This alert brought to you by: Center for Democracy and Technology Eagle Forum Electronic Frontier Foundation Voters Telecommunications Watch Wired Magazine _____________________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents What's Happening Right Now What You Can Do Now Background What's At Stake Supporting Organizations _____________________________________________________________________________ WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW On March 26, 1997, the Clinton Administration proposed draft legislation which would, for the first time, impose DOMESTIC RESTRICTIONS on the ability of Americans to protect their privacy and security online. In its current form, the draft bill seeks to impose a risky "key-recovery" regime which would compel American citizens to ensure government access to their private communications. Law enforcement and national security agents would not even need a court order to access private decryption keys. Congress is currently considering three separate bills which would prohibit the government from imposing "key-recovery" domestically, and encourage the development of easy-to-use, privacy and security tools for the Net. As more and more Americans come online, the Administration's plan is a giant step backwards and would open a huge window of vulnerability to the private communications of Internet users. Americans expect more when conducting private conversations with their doctors, families, business partners, or lawyers. Please read the Alert below to find out what you can do to protect your privacy online. ________________________________________________________________________________ WHAT YOU CAN DO 1. Adopt Your Legislator Now is the time to increase our ranks and prepare for the fight that lies a head of us in Congress. The time to blast Congress or the White House with phone calls and emails will come, but now is not the appropriate moment. Instead, please take a few minutes to learn more about this important issue, and join the Adopt Your Legislator Campaign at http://www.crypto.com/adopt/ This will produce a customized page, just for you with your own legislator's telephone number and address. In addition, you will receive the latest news and information on the issue, as well as targeted alerts informing you when your Representatives in Congress do something that could help or hinder the future of the Internet. Best of all, it's free. Do your part, Work the Network! Visit http://www.crypto.com/adopt/ for details. 2. Beginning Monday March 31, call the White House Internet public interest advocates continue to work the Hill in support of the three true encryption reform bills in Congress, Pro-CODE, SAFE, & ECPA II. If you still feel a need to voice your opinion, however, you can call the White House to express your opinion. Step 1 - Beginning Monday March 31, call the White House Call 202-456-1111 9am-5pm EST. Ignore the voice mail survey and press '0' to get a comment line operator. Step 2 - Tell them what you think about intrusions into your privacy! Operator: Hello, White House comment line! SAY YOU: I'm calling to oppose president's Internet encryption bill. THIS -> It infringes on the privacy of Americans. We need a solution to the encryption issue that protects privacy, and this is not it. Operator: Thank you, I'll pass that along to the President. 3. Spread the Word! Forward this Alert to your friends. Help educate the public about the importance of this issue. Please do not forward after May 1, 1997. _____________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND Complete background information, including: * A down-to-earth explanation of why this debate is important to Internet users * Analysis and background on the issue * Text of the Administration draft legislation * Text of Congressional proposals to reform US encryption policy * Audio transcripts and written testimony from recent Congressional Hearings on encryption policy reform * And more! Are all available at http://www.crypto.com/ ________________________________________________________________________ WHAT'S AT STAKE Encryption technologies are the locks and keys of the Information age -- enabling individuals and businesses to protect sensitive information as it is transmitted over the Internet. As more and more individuals and businesses come online, the need for strong, reliable, easy-to-use encryption technologies has become a critical issue to the health and viability of the Net. Current US encryption policy, which limits the strength of encryption products US companies can sell abroad, also limits the availability of strong, easy-to-use encryption technologies in the United States. US hardware and software manufacturers who wish to sell their products on the global market must either conform to US encryption export limits or produce two separate versions of the same product, a costly and complicated alternative. The export controls, which the NSA and FBI argue help to keep strong encryption out of the hands of foreign adversaries, are having the opposite effect. Strong encryption is available abroad, but because of the export limits and the confusion created by nearly four years of debate over US encryption policy, strong, easy-to-use privacy and security technologies are not widely available off the shelf or "on the net" here in the US. A recently discovered flaw in the security of the new digital telephone network exposed the worst aspects of the Administration's encryption policy. Because the designers needed to be able to export their products, the system's security was "dumbed down". Researchers subsequently discovered that it is quite easy to break the security of the system and intrude on what should be private conversations. This incident underscores the larger policy problem: US companies are at a competitive disadvantage in the global marketplace when competing against companies that do not have such hindrances. And now, for the first time in history, the Clinton Administration has DOMESTIC RESTRICTIONS on the ability of Americans to protect their privacy and security online. All of us care about our national security, and no one wants to make it any easier for criminals and terrorists to commit criminal acts. But we must also recognize encryption technologies can aid law enforcement and protect national security by limiting the threat of industrial espionage and foreign spying, promote electronic commerce and protecting privacy. What's at stake in this debate is nothing less than the future of privacy and the fate of the Internet as a secure and trusted medium for commerce, education, and political discourse. ______________________________________________________________________________ SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS For more information, contact the following organizations who have signed onto this effort at their web sites. Center for Democracy and Technology http://www.cdt.org Press contact: Jonah Seiger, +1.202.637.9800 Eagle Forum http://www.eagleforum.org Press contact: Phyllis Schlafly, +1.314.721.1213 Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.eff.org Press contact: Stanton McCandlish, +1.415.436.9333 Voters Telecommunications Watch http://www.vtw.org Press contact: Shabbir J. Safdar, +1.718.596.7234 Wired Magazine http://www.wired.com Press contact: Todd Lappin, +1.415.276.5224 ______________________________________________________________________________ end alert ==============================================================================

1 0

Re: WoT keyring
by uSuRa 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From Donald M. Kitchen: > > Due to problems distributing my Web of Trust keyring from my own site, > I have uploaded a .gz version. Please announce it to cpunks as soon > as you have changed the permissions. > > Thanks > > Don > It's available from: ftp.hacktic.nl/pub/pgp/pgp-key-ring total 946 1 drwxr-xr-x 2 pub pub 512 Sep 9 21:15 ./ 1 drwxr-xr-x 4 pub pub 512 Sep 9 21:14 ../ 944 -rw-r--r-- 1 pub pub 955577 Sep 9 21:15 donring.pgp.gz Regards, -AJ-

1 0

Sigh Re: not a flame please read and think about this
by Pat Farrell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subject line is bull*&^&, IMHO, of course In message Sat, 9 Sep 1995 16:40:00 UTC, an116512(a)anon.penet.fi writes: > to make my point: why is pat farrel helping the nsa and nist make Learn to spell my name. It is on my .sig, my keys, and in my userid. We blockheaded, Irish Catholic Americans are damn proud of our name. Farrell's (along with other cheap Irish labor) built the railroads from Chicago west. Please spell it correctly, even if you are flaming me. > hey why not just write the escorw code for them!!!??? > is mr farrel just being naive or is does he realize who hes working for? > sorry to single him out but this is just an example of what im talking > about. I doubt that this clown deserves a response, but... There were a number of cypherpunks there. I can't speak for all, but I expect movites include: - attempting to clarify vague and confusing wording so we could understand what they wanted. - seeing that working with them, rather than yelling at their stupidity, has a higher chance of getting results. - we got to meet influential folks from industry who agree with us. - some of us aren't completely apposed to CKE. I think it has value. If we could convert their plan for GAK into CKE, it would be a big win, well worth the effort. - they are going to promulgate a FIPS PUB standard next week, whether I like it or not, and whether I help or not. It is better to have that standard understandable and clear than fuzzy and subject to subective evaluation. - getting preposterous misstatements into the formal Federal Register so we can quote it back to them in the congressional hearings. Mr Geoff Greivelddinger's words should be handy to quote, for one example. - there are lots more, but I doubt that I can convince this clown. Pat Pat Farrell Grad Student http://www.isse.gmu.edu/students/pfarrell Info. Systems & Software Engineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA PGP key available on homepage #include <standard.disclaimer>

2 1

Re[2]: [NOISE/Fun] some 'special' primes
by sharborth＠hai-net.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

No, it's ocht hundert elf Skip ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: [NOISE/Fun] some 'special' primes Author: Michael <mike(a)uac.net> at internet Date: 09-09-95 00:34 > A bit more fun : German : 811 (dunno how to write it, but it starts > with an "a") acht hundert uenf (I think) --Michael

2 1