From snow at smoke.suba.com  Thu Aug  1 00:37:18 1996
From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 15:37:18 +0800
Subject: "An who shall guard the guardians?"
In-Reply-To: <199608010119.UAA24361@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960731232510.341C-100000@smoke.suba.com>


On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> Timothy C. May wrote:
> > ObClipper: "Who shall guard the guardians?" While the various Clipper
> > proposals have putative safeguards to limit access, think of Craig
> > Livingstone, a rent-a-cop the Clintons hire to work on their Enemies List.
> > And think of the dossiers of J. Edgar Hoover. And think of Nixon. And think
> > of what President Pat Buchanan would do with Government Access to Keys.
> What President Pat Buchanan would do with Government Access to Keys, I 
> wonder? (seriously)

     Probably the same as Herr Clinton.
  
Petro, Christopher C.
petro at suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow at smoke.suba.com






From jimbell at pacifier.com  Thu Aug  1 00:45:43 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 15:45:43 +0800
Subject: Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
Message-ID: <199608010522.WAA04374@mail.pacifier.com>


At 07:49 PM 7/31/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:
>
>The security guard Jewell is now confirmed to be the prime suspect. While
>NBC News is reporting that no evidence _directly_ links him to the bombing,
>the evidence against him is overwhelming:
>
>1. He is overweight. With the exception of The Unabomber, most perps in
>cases like this are fat.

Uh, just like that guy in Jurassic Park!

('Course, there's an explanation for this.   "The butler did it" went out over 30 years ago.  They're running out of butlers, and, well, many butlers were fat, so...)

>2. They found a _shotgun_ in his cabin.

No, no, Tim.   The proper way to deliver this to a TV audience is, "They 
found an ARSENAL in his COMPOUND!"

(see how much more exciting it is?!?  BTW, how many wives does he have?)


>3. He had an interest in guns. (Back issues of "Guns and Ammo" are bad
>enough, but possession of even a single issue of "Combat Handguns" is
>sufficient to convict in 39 of the 50 states.)

Any copies of that SUBVERSIVE publication Shotgun News?

>4. News sources are reporting that authorities who searched his apartment
>and his cabin "came up empty," which surely implies that he planned this
>crime with the help of others.

And he had to have scoured it clean JUST BEFORE the authorities arrived!  
Yeah, that's the ticket!


Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From ceridwyn at wolfenet.com  Thu Aug  1 00:48:05 1996
From: ceridwyn at wolfenet.com (Cerridwyn Llewyellyn)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 15:48:05 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960801051356.0069c5f8@gonzo.wolfenet.com>



>> Okay, so their boss is part of the law making process, subject to the checks
>> and balances that exist between the three branches of US government. They
>> are in a position to supply their boss with data and I am personally
>> impressed with their grasp of some of that data (it sounds to me like they
>> are telling their boss that hackers like the ones at Defcon are not the
>> problem).

It was interesting how the Agent made the point that the FBI was there to 
enforce laws, not make policy.  Then his Boss's role in the law making process
was brought up, the Agent said "but any of you can do the same thing, you
all have a voice" etc etc.  Then he refused to answer political questions 
based on the fact that he was there as a representative of the FBI, failing
to see that his Boss is also a representative of the FBI when recommending
legislation.  (Again, I realize he was "under orders" not to discuss it, I 
wish he wouldn't try to justify it with obviously faulty logic.)

>    I think what they are really saying is that they would love to
>bust most hackers, but since they can't they might as well use some of
>them to catch the bigger fish.  If they truly did believe in the laws they
>are supposed to uphold they wouldn't associate with hackers (who commit
>computer crimes) at all.

A more cynical view is that they are there to protect some of the biggest
institutions of "organized crime" (ie: Congress, At&t, Microsoft, etc) who
are ripping people off on a daily basis from the other organizations who
refuse to play by their rules.

//cerridwyn//







From ceridwyn at wolfenet.com  Thu Aug  1 01:16:27 1996
From: ceridwyn at wolfenet.com (Cerridwyn Llewyellyn)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:16:27 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960801053838.006a2bb4@gonzo.wolfenet.com>



>Most demands for ID and conformations with police involve the operation of
>motor vehicles.  I have never been "IDed" except at border crossings and
>when I was operating motor vehicles.  Clean and dressed up people are rarely
>IDed on foot.  Maybe you should mention some of the specific practices in
>Seattle that disturb you.

I was downtown Seattle at night time (early morning), walking around, minding 
my own business. Probably not actively maintaining public decorum, but
certainly 
not doing anything unorderly.  A cop approached me and asked what I was doing,
I told him none of his business.  He asked me for my ID, I said why, am I under
arrest?  He said no, but he needs to see my ID.  I told him he has no right to
ask me for my ID, especially when I've been doing nothing wrong, if I wanted to 
live in those conditions, I'd move to Iraq or China or something.  I got out my 
handy pocket tape recorder, and asked him to state his name and repeat his
request 
for the benefit of my lawyer who'd be contacting him. At this point the few
other 
people on the street had sort of gathered a few yards away, and the cop decided
he wasn't gonna win this one, so asked me to return to my home and left before
I could respond.  You are right, "Clean and dressed up people are rarely IDed 
[read harassed] on foot."  I'm not concerned for the clean and dressed up
people 
(with regards to police abuse), I'm concerned about the majority of people who 
aren't.  (For the record, I'm generally clean, but *rarely* dressed up. =) )  

>Or flying on a commercial flight.  So far, prosecutions for "failure to
>possess ID" have not succeeded.  You *can* be prosecuted for failure to
>identify yourself (which is *not* the same thing).  The Philadelphia airport
>was allegedly requiring *two* pieces of ID for flights.  If they are talking
>about two pieces of photo -- government-issued ID, I wonder where the 80% of
>Americans without a Passport (x the 90% of Americans who are not government
>employees) get the second piece of ID. [Is it a violation of something if
>you Heil Hitler od Sieg Heil the airline clerk when they ask to see your ID.
>It's not a threat, it's an expression of honor.]

When I flew from Philadelphia about a year ago, they required one picture ID
and one other ID, just like most stores when you want a check cashed.  I still
don't like it, but I have less of a problem presenting ID when I am seeking
a service of some kind.  It is unacceptable to be asked for ID when I am merely
walking around a public street.






From jimbell at pacifier.com  Thu Aug  1 01:26:41 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:26:41 +0800
Subject: "And who shall guard the guardians?"
Message-ID: <199608010551.WAA05766@mail.pacifier.com>


At 02:57 PM 7/31/96 -0700, Martin Minow wrote:

>This question is also relevant to escrowed encryption: how to
>prevent misuse of escrowed keys by file clerks and other people
>who need access to the keys as part of their legitimate duties.
>Since these keys will protect a very large amount of money (consider
>the encryption keys used for interbank clearing) and since we
>know from the Aldrich Ames case that $3,000,000 can buy a
>high-ranking CIA employee, there are significant problems that
>need to be addressed. I would suspect that a Baysian analysis
>would indicate that the risk of holding (and losing) a key is
>greater than the risk of not holding (and needing) a key.

 
However, even that is a somewhat skewed analysis.  Most of us realize that 
the  kinds of advanced surveillance systems that are being promoted these 
days have nothing to do with crimes that are, statistically, the most common 
and feared among ordinary citizens. Will a wiretap ever solve a burglary?  
Rarely.  Will a Clipper-type decrypt bring a rapist to justice?  Fairly 
unlikely.  How about a carjacking?  A strong-arm robbery?  An arson?

Sure, it's always possible, but we know what's really going on.  Governments 
are afraid that technology will not only replace the protections we've 
traditionally been told only came from government (and thus make them 
unnecessary), but also that technology will allow us to force those 
governments to shrink and possibly to disband.  

In other words, to a government-type most of the benefits of a Clipper 
system are to the government itself, certainly not to the person who owns 
the phone and not even to society as a whole.  That's one reason, I suspect, 
why those secret talks given to various people to convince them to support 
Clipper "usually" work if the person is a government-type, but will almost 
never work to an unbiased private citizen.  That's also why the lecture is 
secret:  That way, the government can push two different stories without a 
contradiction being obvious to the rest of us.  





Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From adamsc at io-online.com  Thu Aug  1 01:27:18 1996
From: adamsc at io-online.com (Chris Adams)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:27:18 +0800
Subject: Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
Message-ID: <199608010550.WAA19139@toad.com>


On 31 Jul 96 22:40:46 -0800, tcmay at got.net wrote:


>The security guard Jewell is now confirmed to be the prime suspect. While
>NBC News is reporting that no evidence _directly_ links him to the bombing,
>the evidence against him is overwhelming:
>
>1. He is overweight. With the exception of The Unabomber, most perps in
>cases like this are fat.

After all, who could *not* want to conform with crowd?  Anyone who isn't
obsessed with being thin must have something wrong with him.  There ought
to be a law against people like him!

>2. They found a _shotgun_ in his cabin.

Only a criminal would have a reason for that! After, what legitimate use
could a citizen have with one? If he wants to hunt, he should use a
rifle!

>3. He had an interest in guns. (Back issues of "Guns and Ammo" are bad
>enough, but possession of even a single issue of "Combat Handguns" is
>sufficient to convict in 39 of the 50 states.)

Particularly for a cop! Why would anyone in his position need *that*!

>4. News sources are reporting that authorities who searched his apartment
>and his cabin "came up empty," which surely implies that he planned this
>crime with the help of others.

We can take prime examples of this:  The Whitehouse hiring dilemna - if
they can't figure out who hired him, there must be someone in on the job!
 Maybe it's the dead guy. Maybe it's those evil Internet users...

___
Sorry about breaking your sarcasm-meter...
___
>(P.S. I, too, was convinced Jewell was the guy. But in recent hours it is
>looking like a "rush to judgment" could be involved. There is strong
>pressure to "solve the crime" by the close of the Olympics on Sunday.)

I think we could track this to the replacement of literature and culture
with TV - if everyone from T.J. Hooker to Agents Sculley and Mulder solve
a mystery in 30 minutes, surely they can do it in real life, too.

How much do you want to bet that if it is a frame and it is successful,
they'll "find" a PGP encrypted file with plans and use it to promote GAK?

# Chris Adams <adamsc at io-online.com> - Webpages for sale! Se habla JavaScript!
# Automatically receive my resume or PGPKEY by sending email with a subject
# of 'send PGPKEY' or 'send resume'. Capitalization counts so be careful!
# Web site: http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htm
 








From alanh at infi.net  Thu Aug  1 01:28:42 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:28:42 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960731151242.0087632c@panix.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960801015212.23502D-100000@larry.infi.net>


On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Duncan Frissell wrote:

> You *can* be prosecuted for failure to
> identify yourself 

   Only if you were already under arrest. Arrestees have a duty to 
identify themselves when asked.





From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Thu Aug  1 01:32:51 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:32:51 +0800
Subject: Cracking RC4/40 for massive wiretapps
Message-ID: <199608010603.XAA19276@toad.com>


At 11:13 AM 7/30/96 -0700, frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) mused paranoidly:
>I combine the above with Whit Diffie's observation that, while crypto users
>are interested in the security of *each* message, organizations which
>monitor communications want to read *every* message.  A TLA interested in
>monitoring communications would need to crack RC4-40 much faster than
>1/week.

When we discussed using FPGA machines to crack RC4/40 last year,
someone calculated the cost of cracking a message at 8 cents
if you're doing enough to amortize your machine, and Eric had designed
a system that should be able to crack it in about 15 minutes for $25-50K.
The two basic search approaches are to take a cyphertext and decrypt it
trying many keys to see if you get a likely plaintext, or to take known
plaintext and encrypt with many keys to see if you match the cyphertext.

But those designs are for one-at-a-time cracks.  An interesting question
is whether you can speed up performance substantially by cracking
multiple messages at once.  For instance, if you've got known plaintext,
such as a standard header format saying "FooVoice" or "BEGIN DSA-SIGNED..",
you can try many keys and compare them with _many_ cyphertexts,
which may not slow down the FPGA very much.  Also, even for
unknown-plaintext, since key scheduling is a relatively slow part of RC4/40,
you can split the key-schedule and the block-encryption phases, feeding
one keyschedule output to multiple decrypt-and-compare sessions in parallel.
So the cost per victim of cracking many sessions may be much lower.

>Now expensive specialized cracking equipment can certainly speed up the
>process, but there may be a better way.  If cryptanalysis of RC4 yields
>techniques which make the process much easier, then it is the ideal cypher
>to certify for export.
>The paranoid conclusion is that there is a significant weakness in RC4.

Just keeping the key length down to 40 bits on a fast cypher is a good start.

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 
#			Dispel Authority!






From rich at c2.org  Thu Aug  1 01:35:19 1996
From: rich at c2.org (Rich Graves)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:35:19 +0800
Subject: Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
In-Reply-To: <ae25687f0102100499f1@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.95.960731224213.20404G-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>


On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> The security guard Jewell is now confirmed to be the prime suspect. While
> NBC News is reporting that no evidence _directly_ links him to the bombing,
> the evidence against him is overwhelming:
> 
> 1. He is overweight. With the exception of The Unabomber, most perps in
> cases like this are fat.

Au contraire:

 Let me have men about me that are fat;
 Sleek-headed men, and such as sleep o' nights:
 Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look;
 He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
[...]
        He reads much;
 He is a great observer, and he looks
 Quite through the deeds of men: he loves no plays,
 As thou dost, Antony: he hears no music:
 Seldom he smiles; and smiles in such a sort
 As if he mock'd himself, and scorn'd his spirit
 That could be mov'd to smile at anything.

Which member of the Dream Team does this remind you of?

> (P.S. I, too, was convinced Jewell was the guy. But in recent hours it is
> looking like a "rush to judgment" could be involved. There is strong
> pressure to "solve the crime" by the close of the Olympics on Sunday.)

All I know is:

1. At least one person is dead, and lots more injured.
2. For nothing.

Ferchrissakes, guys, take a step back and look at yourselves. You're playing
the spin control game just as fast and furious as the "bad guys" (?). First
the glee over how easy it was to find bomb-making instructions anywhere,
then saying it was a provocation by the government, now it becomes a
conspiracy against fat people who read gun magazines. 

-rich
 [blue-ribbon disclaimer: it's called sarcasm, son, SARCASM]
 censor the internet! http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/potw2/
 boycott fadetoblack! http://www.fadetoblack.com/prquest.htm






From alanh at infi.net  Thu Aug  1 01:36:25 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:36:25 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club"
In-Reply-To: <ae24e2ee02021004242f@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960801015918.23502E-100000@larry.infi.net>


> When the local cops adjust my attitude with a billy club for dressing like
> a hippie and lounging around in a public place

   I am a defender of your right to not be harrassed by legal-definition 
nuisances, not a fashion cop.  I gave up on trying to clean up the 
unwashed masses, a long time ago.

But if your definition of "lounging" includes (say) playing your boombox as 
loud as you want in the park - then mine includes making a buck by burning 
toxic waste.






From alanh at infi.net  Thu Aug  1 01:52:38 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 16:52:38 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19960731223430.006cdb98@pop.atl.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960801022119.23502I-100000@larry.infi.net>


John Brothers,

Which locality do you live in?  I've got all this toxic waste that I've 
been collecting in return for receiving large sums of money, I'd like to 
get rid of it as cheply as possible. I thought I might just burn it in a 
good  "true" libertarian neighborhood.

You don't mind, do you?





From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 02:11:26 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 17:11:26 +0800
Subject: Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
Message-ID: <ae25a290040210043ec2@[205.199.118.202]>


At 5:53 AM 8/1/96, Rich Graves wrote:

>Ferchrissakes, guys, take a step back and look at yourselves. You're playing
>the spin control game just as fast and furious as the "bad guys" (?). First
>the glee over how easy it was to find bomb-making instructions anywhere,
>then saying it was a provocation by the government, now it becomes a
                                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>conspiracy against fat people who read gun magazines.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Rich, maybe you're spending too much time amongst the Zundelsite Neo-Nazis.
You no longer recognize humor even when it's pretty damned obvious.


--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 at 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."









From shamrock at netcom.com  Thu Aug  1 02:50:11 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 17:50:11 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question
Message-ID: <v02120d08ae25ff4436d1@[192.0.2.1]>


At 11:12 7/31/96, Duncan Frissell wrote:

>Most demands for ID and conformations with police involve the operation of
>motor vehicles.  I have never been "IDed" except at border crossings and
>when I was operating motor vehicles.  Clean and dressed up people are rarely
>IDed on foot.  Maybe you should mention some of the specific practices in
>Seattle that disturb you.

I have been IDed numerous times for no other reason than walking on the
sidewalk at a late hour in an area where most people use cars to go to the
7/11 down the block. Southern California is especially bad in this regard.
A friend, who had the same problem, finally got a dog. After that the cops
left her alone. Seems walking your dog is a legitimate reason to be out at
night...



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From shamrock at netcom.com  Thu Aug  1 02:53:11 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 17:53:11 +0800
Subject: Violation or Protection? [OLYMPICS]
Message-ID: <v02120d09ae26039239a3@[192.0.2.1]>


At 12:03 7/31/96, David Rosoff wrote:
[...]
>On the local news I saw footage of a couple schmoozing in the Olympic
>(Centennial?) Park after its reopening. The voice-over said that all
>bags are being searched, and the couple said that rather than be
>alarmed or nervous, they "appreciated" it.
>
>I'm not quite sure what to think about this. I don't have enough
>experience to form a well thought-out opinion. I'd like to hear some
>of everyone's thoughts on this: Is this bag-searching a violation,
>(which was my immediate reaction) or is it not, because you have to
>already be going into the controlled area to get searched?

You are confused because you wonder how it could be that the couple could
appreciate having their bags searched, something you intuitively regard as
a violation of their rights. The very simple answer is that, generally
speaking, individuals enjoy to have their rights violated, provided that
they are given a (often false) sense of security in return.

Surveys from a few years ago showed that a majority of Americans would
approve of warrantless house-to-house searches, including their own, to
combat the use of narcotics.

ObCrypto:
The public will cheer the day that strong, non-escowed crypto is outlawed.


-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From shamrock at netcom.com  Thu Aug  1 03:12:07 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:12:07 +0800
Subject: Smart cards "a giant leap backwards" - Canadian Privacy	  Commissioner
Message-ID: <v02120d07ae25fd16b3a4@[192.0.2.1]>


At 11:12 7/31/96, Duncan Frissell wrote:
>At 02:23 PM 7/30/96 -0400, Richard Martin wrote:
>>Very little that might be new or enlightening to the world; attendees
>>of CFP '96 will remember [fuzzily, in my case] the closest thing to
>>Bruce's counterpart in the states admitting that the USA doesn't actually
>>have much of a counterpart to the privacy commissioner.
>
>Most Central European countries have both privacy commissioners and legal
>requirements that everyone register their addresses with the police.  I'll
>do without the former if I can also avoid the latter.

I remember a time when Privacy Commissioners were a new thing. Their
primary purpose seemed to be to sanction government access to (and keeping
of) large databases on the activities of the population. Their secondary
purpose was to prevent the private sector competition from doing the same.
Eliminating access to such data by the individual in the process.

Things may have changed for the better, but I doubt it.


-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From ceridwyn at wolfenet.com  Thu Aug  1 04:55:07 1996
From: ceridwyn at wolfenet.com (Cerridwyn Llewyellyn)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 19:55:07 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defc
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960801091751.006a9430@gonzo.wolfenet.com>



> Since they were speakers, could they be part of the Spot The Fed contest?

They said that every other time their comrades had come to defcon, they had
tried to come incognito, and got caught every time.  This time, they wore
FBI t-shirts, and the only response was "Hey! Where'd ya get the T-Shirt?!?".
They said "We hacked 'em from the FBI" and that was it, noone suspected... =)
//cerridwyn//






From gnu at toad.com  Thu Aug  1 04:58:03 1996
From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 19:58:03 +0800
Subject: NSA/ARPA/DISA joint research office Memo of Agreement
Message-ID: <199608010857.BAA21140@toad.com>


[I found this at the ARPA web site while looking up the programs there
that are trying to deploy crypto in the Internet.  You can read it as
plain text, the HTML crud peters out after the first page.  If you
look at it on the web, they have reproduced the signatures from the
signature page in a GIF file.  -- John]

<BASE HREF="http://www.ito.darpa.mil/ResearchAreas/Information_Survivability/MOA.html">

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>MOA - Information Systems Security Research Joint Technology
Office</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
 


<CENTER>
<H3>Memorandum of Agreement<BR>
Between<BR>
The Advanced Research Projects Agency,<BR>
The Defense Information Systems Agency, and<BR>
The National Security Agency<BR>Concerning<BR>
The Information Systems Security Reseach Joint Technology Office</H3>
</CENTER>

<H3>Purpose</H3>

The Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), the Defense Information
Systems Agency (DISA), and the National Security Agency (NSA) agree to
the establishment of the Information  System Security Research Joint
Technology Office (ISSR-JTO) as a joint activity.  The ISSR-JTO is
being established to coordinate the information systems security
research programs of ARPA and NSA.  The ISSR-JTO will work to optimize
use of the limited research funds available, and strengthen the
responsiveness of the programs to DISA, expediting delivery of
technologies that meet DISA's requirements to safeguard the
confidentiality, integrity, authenticity, and availability of data in
Department of Defense information systems, provide a robust first line
of defense for defensive information warfare, and permit electronic
commerce between the Department of Defense and its contractors.

<H3>Background</H3>

In recent years, exponential growth in government and private sector
use of networked systems to  produce and communicate information has
given rise to a shared interest by NSA and ARPA  in focusing
government R&D on information systems security  technologies.  NSA and
its primary network security customer, DISA, have become increasingly
reliant upon commercial information technologies and services to build
the Defense Information Infrastructure, and the inherent security of
these technologies and services has become a vital concern.  From
ARPA'S perspective, it has become increasingly apparent that security
is critical to the success of key ARPA information technology
initiatives.  ARPA's role in fostering the development of advanced
information technologies now requires close attention to the security
of these technologies.<P>

NSA's security technology plan envisions maximum use of commercial
technology for sensitive but unclassified applications, and, to the
extent possible, for classified applications as well.  A key element
of this plan is the transfer of highly reliable government-developed
technology and techniques to industry for integration into commercial
off-the-shelf products, making quality-tested security components
available not only to DoD but to the full spectrum of government and
private sector users as well.  ARPA is working with its contractor
community to fully integrate security into next generation computing
technologies being developed in all its programs, and working with the
the research community to develop strategic relationships with
industry so that industry will develop modular security technologies
with the capability of exchanging appropriate elements to meet various
levels of  required security.<P>

NSA and ARPA now share a strong  interest in promoting the development
and integration of security technology for advanced information
systems applications.  The challenge at hand is to guide the efforts
of the two agencies in a way that optimizes use of the limited
research funds available and maximizes support to DISA in building the
Defense Information Infrastructure.<P>

NSA acts as the U.S. Government's focal point for cryptography,
telecommunications security, and information systems security for
national security systems.  It conducts, approves, or endorses
research and development of techniques and equipment to secure
national security systems.  NSA reviews and approves all standards,
techniques, systems, and equipment related to the security of national
security systems.  NSA's primary focus is to provide information
systems security products, services, and standards in the near term to
help its customers protect classified and national security-related
sensitive but unclassified information.  It develops and assesses new
security technology in the areas of cryptography, technical security,
and authentication technology; endorses cryptographic systems
protecting national security information; develops infrastructure
support technologies; evaluates and rates trusted computer and network
products; and provides information security standards for DoD.  Much
of the work in these areas is conducted in a classified environment,
and the balancing of national security and law enforcement equities
has been a significant constraint.<P>

ARPA's mission is to perform research and development that helps the 
Department of Defense to maintain U.S. technological superiority over
potential adversaries.  At the core of the ARPA mission is the goal to
develop and demonstrate revolutionary technologies that will
fundamentally enhance the capability of the military.  ARPA's role in
fostering the development of advanced computing and communications
technologies for use by the DoD requires that long term solutions to
increasing the security of these systems be developed.  ARPA is
interested in commercial or dual-use technology, and usually
technology that provides revolutionary rather than evolutionary
enhancements to capabilities. ARPA is working with industry and
academia to develop technologies that will enable industry to provide
system design methodologies and secure computer, operating system, and
networking technologies.  NSA and ARPA research interests have been
converging in these areas, particularly with regard to protocol
development involving key, token, and certificate exchanges and
processes.<P>

One of the key differences between ARPA's work and NSA's is that
ARPA's is performed in unclassified environments, often in university
settings.  This enables ARPA to access talent and pursue research
strategies normally closed to NSA due to security considerations.
Another difference is that while NSA's research is generally built
around developing and using specific cryptographic algorithms, ARPA's
approach is to pursue solutions that are independent of algorithm used
and allow for modularly replaceable cryptography.  ARPA will, to the
greatest extent possible, allow its contractor community to use
cryptography developed at NSA, and needs solutions from NSA on an
expedited basis so as not to hold up its research program.<P>

DISA functions as the Department of Defense's information utility.
Its requirements for information systems security extend beyond
confidentiality to include protection of data from tampering or
destruction and assurance that data exchanges are originated and
received by valid participants.  DISA is the first line of defense for
information warfare, and needs quality technology for detecting and
responding to network penetrations.  The growing vulnerability of the
Defense information Infrastructure to unauthorized access and use,
demonstrated in the penetration of hundreds of DoD computer systems
during 1994, makes delivery of enabling security technologies to DISA
a matter of urgency.

<H3>The Information Systems Security Research Joint Technology
Office</H3>

This MOA authorizes the ISSR-JTO as a joint undertaking of ARPA, DISA,
and NSA.  It will perform those functions jointly agreed to by these
agencies.  Each agency shall delegate to the ISSO-JTO such authority
and responsibility as is necessary to carry out its agreed functions.
Participation in the joint program does not relieve ARPA, DISA, or NSA
of their respective individual charter responsibilities, or diminish
their respective authorities.<P>

A Joint Management Plan will be developed to provide a detailed
definition of the focus, objectives, operation, and costs of the Joint
Technology Office.  The ISSR-JTO will be jointly staffed by ARPA,
DISA, and NSA, with respective staffing levels to be agreed upon by
the three parties.  Employees assigned to the JTO will remain on the
billets of their respective agency.  Personnel support for employees
assigned to the JTO will be provided by their home organization.  The
ISSR-JTO will be housed within both ARPA and NSA, except as agreed
otherwise by the three parties.  To the greatest extent possible, it
will function as a virtual office, using electronic connectivity to
minimize the need for constant physical co-location.  Physical
security support will be provided by the party responsible for the
specific facilities occupied.  Assignment of the ISSR-JTO Director,
Deputy Director, and management of other office elements will be made
by mutual agreement among the Directors of ARPA, DISA, and NSA upon
recommendation of their staffs.<P>

<H3>Functions</H3>

By mutual agreement of ARPA, DISA, and NSA, the ISSR-JTO will perform
the following joint functions:
<OL>
<LI>Review and coordinate all Information System Security Research
programs at ARPA and NSA to ensure that there is no unnecessary
duplication, that the programs are technically sound, that they are
focused on customer requirements where available, and that long term
research is aimed at revolutionary increases in DoD security
capabilities.

<LI>Support ARPA and NSA in evaluating proposals and managing projects
arising from their information systems security efforts, and maintain
a channel for the exchange of technical expertise to support their
information systems security research programs.

<LI>Provide long range strategic planning for information systems
security research.  Provide concepts of future architectures which
include security as an integral component and a road map for the
products that need to be developed to fit the architectures, taking
into account anticipated DoD information systems security research
needs for command and control, intelligence, support functions, and
electronic commerce.  The long range security program will explore
technologies which extend security research boundaries.

<LI>Develop measures of the effectiveness of the information systems
security research programs in reducing vulnerabilities.

<LI>Work with DISA, other defense organizations, academic, and
industrial organizations to take new information systems security
research concepts and apply them to selected prototype systems and
testbed projects.

<LI>Encourage the U.S. industrial base to develop commercial products
with built-in security to be used in DoD systems.  Develop alliances
with industry to raise the level of security in all U.S. systems.
Bring together private sector leaders in information systems security
research to advise the JTO and build consensus for the resulting
programs.

<LI>Identify areas for which standards need to be developed for
information systems security.

<LI>Facilitate the availability and use of NSA certified cryptography
within information systems security research programs.

<LI>Proactively provide a coherent, integrated joint vision of the
program in internal and public communications.
</OL>
<H3>Program Oversight and Revisions</H3>

The Director, ISSR-JTO, has a joint reporting responsibility to the
Directors of ARPA, DISA, and NSA.  The Director, ISSR-JTO, will
conduct a formal Program Status Review for the Directors of ARPA,
DISA, and NSA on an annual basis, and will submit mid-year progress
reports between formal reviews.  Specific reporting procedures and
practices of the JTO to ARPA, DISA, and NSA will be detailed in the
Joint Technology Management Plan.  This MOA will be reviewed at least
annually, and may be revised at any time, based on the mutual consent
of ARPA, DISA, and NSA, to assure the effective execution of the joint
initiative.  Any of the parties may withdraw from participation in the
MOA upon six months written notice.  The MOA is effective 2 April,
1995.<P>


<IMG
SRC="http://www.ito.darpa.mil/ResearchAreas/Information_Survivability/sigs4.gif"
ALT="Signatures of Dr. Gary L. Denman, Director ARPA; LtGen Albert J.
Edmonds, Director, DISA; VADM John M. McConnell, Director, NSA; Dr.
Anita K. Jones, Director, DDR&E; Emmett Paige, Jr., Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence"><P>

<P>

<address>
<HR>
<A
HREF="http://www.ito.darpa.mil/ResearchAreas/Information_Survivability.html">Return
to Information Survivability Page</A> <BR>
Direct comments concerning this WWW site to: <A
HREF="mailto:Webmaster at ito.darpa.mil">Webmaster at ito.darpa.mil</A></address>
</BODY>
</HTML>





From jsw at netscape.com  Thu Aug  1 05:12:22 1996
From: jsw at netscape.com (Jeff Weinstein)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 20:12:22 +0800
Subject: The "Secure" version of Netscape for Linux is *NOT*
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960801033402.00fc1ab8@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: <32007B4F.300@netscape.com>


Alan Olsen wrote:
> 
> I just installed the "secure" version of Netscape off of the "US Only"
> download site.
> 
> Seems that it is actualy the international version and not the 128 bit version.
> 
> How many people have downloaded this version only to find that they
> downloaded something that they could have downloaded faster from a mirror
> site?  How many people have had their downloads slowed down due to people
> downloading insecure Linux versions from the US only site?
> 
> I think I have a justifiable reason to be pissed.
> 
> Another waste of my time...

  I just downloaded the tar file for linux, and it does contain
the US version.  What makes you think that you got the export
version?

	--Jeff

-- 
Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist
Netscape Communication Corporation
jsw at netscape.com - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw
Any opinions expressed above are mine.





From schryver at radiks.net  Thu Aug  1 05:40:15 1996
From: schryver at radiks.net (Scott Schryvers)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 20:40:15 +0800
Subject: FPGAs and Heat (Re: Paranoid Musings)
Message-ID: <199608010938.EAA02670@sr.radiks.net>


>At 12:42 AM 7/31/96 -0700, David Wagner wrote:
>>Those estimates assume that a single FPGA can break RC4 in hours.  I think
>>that is an extremely optimistic assumption, given the available public
>>information.  But perhaps NSA is orders of magnitude ahead of us in chip
>>design (unlikely) or orders of magnitude ahead of us in RC4 cryptanalysis
>>(and we're back to paranoid musings).
>
>>> If we assume a machine designed to break *every* message, NSA's response
>>> makes more sense.
>
>I feel like I'm leaning over backwards to defend NSA's response, an
>extremely uncomfortable position (and I could crack my skull when I fall)
>:-).  The most important issue is, what is NSA's state of the art.  If we
>accept their $1000/FPGA chip, then they are indeed at the bleeding edge,
>and suffering from the associated low chip yields.  If they are at the best
>cost-performance point for 2-3 years ago or whenever they started approving
>the export of RC4-40, then they are certainly subject to David Wagner's
>performance limits.
Sorry about mangling quotes. :(
This was about a year and a half ago.
I can't remember the name of it,  but this chip fab industry mag was
talking about how the NSA was obtaining out side help in fabricating what
was at the time a type of ram that did processing off chip in parrallel.

If the chip was basically routing the problem to different sectors and
the same sectors of ram did their own processing on different parts of the 
same problem how many powers of processing time would this increase the 
same amount of acerage?* 

* NSA term for processing. 

Side note: Wired just recently talked about IRAM or Intelligent ram, and 
how it seems to be the future of high speed computation.
PGP encrypted mail preferred.  
E-Mail me for my key.
Scott J. Schryvers <schryver at radiks.net>






From schryver at radiks.net  Thu Aug  1 06:19:20 1996
From: schryver at radiks.net (Scott Schryvers)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 21:19:20 +0800
Subject: New Clinton Administration Ping Policy
Message-ID: <199608011028.FAA03370@sr.radiks.net>


At 01:22 PM 7/31/96 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Press release:
>
>CLINTON ADMINISTRATION FACT SHEET: U.S. PING POLICY
>(Industry, international cooperation urged)
>
The sad thing here is that I can't tell if this is a joke or not.
:(
PGP encrypted mail preferred.  
E-Mail me for my key.
Scott J. Schryvers <schryver at radiks.net>






From daw at cs.berkeley.edu  Thu Aug  1 06:51:02 1996
From: daw at cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 21:51:02 +0800
Subject: Cracking RC4/40 for massive wiretapps
In-Reply-To: <199608010603.XAA19276@toad.com>
Message-ID: <4tq268$nsk@joseph.cs.berkeley.edu>


In article <199608010603.XAA19276 at toad.com>,
Bill Stewart  <stewarts at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> When we discussed using FPGA machines to crack RC4/40 last year,
> someone calculated the cost of cracking a message at 8 cents

That was the keylength paper.  I think their estimate is way off.

But that's ok-- I do so like the ring of ``8-cent encryption'', even
if I think the derivation is technically dubious :-)

> is whether you can speed up performance substantially by cracking
> multiple messages at once.  For instance, if you've got known plaintext,
> such as a standard header format saying "FooVoice" or "BEGIN DSA-SIGNED..",
> you can try many keys and compare them with _many_ cyphertexts,

Not with SSL.

SSL uses a random 88-bit salt which is different for every session.
This attack doesn't work.  Fun to think about, though, eh? :-)

[ Unsalted 40-bit RC4 is super-dangerous, and there are all sorts of
nasty games one can play with it.  That's why you should avoid it. ]

>                                              Also, even for
> unknown-plaintext, since key scheduling is a relatively slow part of RC4/40,
> you can split the key-schedule and the block-encryption phases, feeding
> one keyschedule output to multiple decrypt-and-compare sessions in parallel.
> So the cost per victim of cracking many sessions may be much lower.

Same deal.


Keep those ideas flowing-- one of 'em is bound to work.
-- Dave Wagner





From meredith at ecid.cig.mot.com  Thu Aug  1 06:51:29 1996
From: meredith at ecid.cig.mot.com (Andrew Meredith)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 21:51:29 +0800
Subject: Security of Web registration of Lview Pro
Message-ID: <32008FD6.9A5@ecid.cig.mot.com>


Dear Sirs,

I was happy to find that you have put up an SSL form through which one
can register Lview Pro. I filled it in and pressed the button. My
browser then warned me that although the form was sent to me securely,
the data I was sending back was in the clear!

I had a look at the page source for:

  https://commerce.mindspring.com/www.lview.com/iregform.htm

and there is was:

<FORM METHOD="POST"
ACTION="http://www.std.com/Newbury/leonardo/cgi-bin/fp.exe"><P>
        ^^^^

Therefore the only thing protected by this "Secure Form" is the original
text of the form, rather than the credit card details. I know that:

    "If using an SSL Web browser such as Netscape or Microsoft
     Explorer, please click here to access a secure document."

doesn't actually *say* that your customers card details are secure, but
at first glance it sounded like it to me.

Whatever others may think about the rights and wrongs of it, my personal
policy is not to commit credit card details to open networks, unless
under strong encryption.

I look forward to your comments.

Andy Meredith





From gary at systemics.com  Thu Aug  1 06:52:05 1996
From: gary at systemics.com (Gary Howland)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 21:52:05 +0800
Subject: Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
In-Reply-To: <ae25687f0102100499f1@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <320090AF.4DAA423A@systemics.com>


Timothy C. May wrote:
> 
> (P.S. I, too, was convinced Jewell was the guy. But in recent hours it is
> looking like a "rush to judgment" could be involved. There is strong
> pressure to "solve the crime" by the close of the Olympics on Sunday.)

Yes, a public hanging would be a fine way to end the Olympics.

After all, this is Georgia we're talking about ...

Gary
--
pub  1024/C001D00D 1996/01/22  Gary Howland <gary at systemics.com>
Key fingerprint =  0C FB 60 61 4D 3B 24 7D  1C 89 1D BE 1F EE 09 06 
^S
^A^Aoft FAT filesytem is extremely robust, ^Mrarely suffering from^T^T





From gary at systemics.com  Thu Aug  1 07:07:54 1996
From: gary at systemics.com (Gary Howland)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 22:07:54 +0800
Subject: Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
In-Reply-To: <199608010522.WAA04374@mail.pacifier.com>
Message-ID: <3200924C.64880EEB@systemics.com>


jim bell wrote:
> 
> At 07:49 PM 7/31/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:
> > 
> >2. They found a _shotgun_ in his cabin.
> 
> No, no, Tim.   The proper way to deliver this to a TV audience is, "They
> found an ARSENAL in his COMPOUND!"

Alternatively, describe the shotgun as a 50 caliber cannon.

Gary
--
pub  1024/C001D00D 1996/01/22  Gary Howland <gary at systemics.com>
Key fingerprint =  0C FB 60 61 4D 3B 24 7D  1C 89 1D BE 1F EE 09 06 
^S
^A^Aoft FAT filesytem is extremely robust, ^Mrarely suffering from^T^T





From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com  Thu Aug  1 07:34:17 1996
From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Deranged Mutant)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 22:34:17 +0800
Subject: Cracking RC4/40 for massive wiretapps
Message-ID: <199608011151.HAA07754@unix.asb.com>



Wait a minute: RC4 is an OFB cipher.  The previous plaintext has no 
effect on the ciphertext.  Hence, an attacker with shitloads of 
storage capacity can generate some initial output for each key and 
test each pre-stored key against ciphertext for possible hits.  Using 
'flaws' in the key schedule (esp. if the key is based on a password 
rather than a hash of a password) one could search for 'more likely 
keys' first.

Rob
---
No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help"
Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (root at magneto)
Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.





From wwoelbel at midwest.net  Thu Aug  1 08:51:33 1996
From: wwoelbel at midwest.net (W.K. Woelbeling)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 23:51:33 +0800
Subject: crypto++ help
Message-ID: <199608011226.HAA27596@cdale1.midwest.net>


I recently downloaded the crypto++ class library and am having a bit of
trouble getting things to happen.  I have read the text on the
source-filter-sink concept and was able to create a DES file encryptor.
What I would like to do is use either blowfish or IDEA to encrypt a variable
length data stream.  Does anybody have experience with this library?  A
short code snippet or similar help would be appreciated.

Bill Woelbeling
wwoelbel at midwest.net






From rah at shipwright.com  Thu Aug  1 11:14:07 1996
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 02:14:07 +0800
Subject: Let's Say "No!" to Single, World Versions of Software
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.960731154700.578A-100000@gak>
Message-ID: <v03007812ae266148e5d8@[206.119.69.46]>


At 5:16 PM -0400 7/31/96, Tom Weinstein wrote:
> The only thing they can revoke is their permission to provide it for
> download over the internet.  They can't revoke our permission to sell
> it in stores or via snail mail.

Which, of course, would kill your business.



Cheers,
Bob Hettinga


-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/







From rah at shipwright.com  Thu Aug  1 11:14:33 1996
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 02:14:33 +0800
Subject: Micali's rights to lightweight certificates etc.
Message-ID: <v03007827ae266b55420b@[206.119.69.46]>



--- begin forwarded text


Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 17:28:56 -0400
From: Silvio Micali <silvio at sunspot.tiac.net>
To: cme at cybercash.com, d.adams at xopen.co.uk, frantz at netcom.com, hallam at w3.org,
        rodney at sabletech.com, rsalz at osf.org, silvio at sunspot.tiac.net,
        spki at c2.org
Subject: Micali's rights to lightweight certificates etc.
Sender: owner-spki at c2.org
Precedence: bulk

Dear Carl:

Last April I was forwarded by Ron (Rivest) the
following e-message addressed to you:

     "[Re: Micali's lightweight certificates with hash chains]

      The mechanism maybe patented, but who owns the patent?
      I am aware of claims by two european groups who have
      payment schemes using a combined s/key and signed cert
      technique

      Pghill"


As I do not know the context of your conversation, it is hard for me
to guess which technology's rights the  above question refers to.
There are (at least) two possible technologies the question refers to.
Let me thus answer it in either case. I would appreciate if you could
pass this information to people you feel may be interested in it.
(I am trying to CC all the people CCed in the original message,
but  I am not sure that this reaches all the right people.)


                       RIGHTS INFORMATION

My efficient certificate revocation technology is itself based on my
off-line digital signature technology.

The efficient certificate certificate revocation technology has
been invented by me alone. I have filed for patent protection,
and the patent is currently pending with the U.S. Patent Office.

The underlying off-line signature technology has been invented
by Shimon Even, Oded Goldreich and me. The technology is protected by
U.S. Patent No. 5,016,274. The rights to this technology are only with me.

(The latter technology, among other things, covers the process of separating
the signing process into two stages: a OFF-LINE one --that can be performed
before knowing what the message to be signed is--- and an ON-LINE one
--which is typically performed when one knows exactly what he/she wishes
to sign. In the preferred embodiment,  in the off-line step,
the  signer uses the secret key SK of a first, conventional secret-public key
pair (SK,PK) to digitally sign the publick key, pk, of a
second, restricted but very fast, signature  scheme. In the on-line step,
the signer uses the second secret key --i.e., the one associated with pk--
in order to sign the desired message.

In particular, the second public key, pk, can be
obtained by evaluating k times a given one-way hash function on input
sk. After doing so, one can sign in an off-line step pk together with
a certificate serial number (and other information).
Then, in an on-line step, one can sign  that a certificate is being valid
for at at least i days --where i is between 1 and k--
by releasing the ith inverse of pk; that is, by releasing a value that,
hashed i times, yields pk.
You can thus see the connection between the two technologies.)

Both technologies are available for licensing.
If you or someone in your discussion group is aware of a company
using either technology, I would appreciate if you could facilitate a
contact between me and such a company, so that we can discuss possible
licensing arrangements.

The Efficient Certificate Revocation Paper is presented in
MIT Technical MIT/LCS/TM-542, dated November 95. A better version
appears in a March 1996 manuscript. Either version could be obtained
from me, if more convenient.

Off-Line Digital Signatures also appear in the Proceedings of
Crypto 89.  A better version can be found in
The Journal of Cryptography (1996) 9; pp. 35-67.
Any version is also obtainable from me, if more convenient.

Hope this helps answering the above ``rights'' question.
Thank you also in advance for forwarding the above information
to whomever you believe may be interested in it.

All the best,

Silvio

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/







From editor at cdt.org  Thu Aug  1 11:29:46 1996
From: editor at cdt.org (Bob Palacios)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 02:29:46 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 2.29 - Administration, Congress Propose Sweeping Anti-TerrorismInitiatives
Message-ID: <v02140b07ae26690e102b@[204.157.127.16]>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _____ _____ _______
   / ____|  __ \__   __|   ____        ___               ____             __
  | |    | |  | | | |     / __ \____  / (_)______  __   / __ \____  _____/ /_
  | |    | |  | | | |    / /_/ / __ \/ / / ___/ / / /  / /_/ / __ \/ ___/ __/
  | |____| |__| | | |   / ____/ /_/ / / / /__/ /_/ /  / ____/ /_/ (__  ) /_
   \_____|_____/  |_|  /_/    \____/_/_/\___/\__, /  /_/    \____/____/\__/
   The Center for Democracy and Technology  /____/     Volume 2, Number 29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      A briefing on public policy issues affecting civil liberties online
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 CDT POLICY POST Volume 2, Number 29                        August 1, 1996

 CONTENTS: (1) Clinton Administration, Congress Propose Sweeping
               Anti-Terrorism Initiatives
           (2) How to Subscribe/Unsubscribe
           (3) About CDT, contacting us

  ** This document may be redistributed freely with this banner intact **
        Excerpts may be re-posted with permission of <editor at cdt.org>
         ** This document looks best when viewed in COURIER font **
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, CONGRESS PROPOSE SWEEPING ANTI-TERRORISM
    INITIATIVES

In the wake of the recent bombing at the Olympics and the suspected
terrorist involvement in the TWA crash, the Clinton Administration and
members of Congress are proposing a set of sweeping counter-terrorism
initiatives. If enacted into law, these proposals will dramatically
increase law enforcement surveillance authority over the Internet and other
advanced communications technologies. An outline of the Administration's
proposal was circulated on Capitol Hill on Monday July 29.

President Clinton has urged Congress to pass new counter-terrorism
legislation before the Congressional recess at the end of this week.  While
several prominent Republican members of Congress, including House Speaker
Newt Gingrich (R-GA), have said publicly that Congress should not rush into
any new counter-terrorism legislation, most observers believe there is a
strong possibility that some or all of the Administration's proposal will
be enacted before the August recess.

The draft proposal contains several measures which were rejected by
Congress as part of the previous counter-terrorism initiative proposed
last year after the Oklahoma City bombing, as well as several new measures
including as-yet unspecified changes to U.S. encryption policy and funding
for the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA, a.k.a.
Digital Telephony).

CDT is concerned that the latest counter-terrorism efforts on Capitol Hill
are occurring without appropriate deliberation.  Major policy decisions
expanding the surveillance powers of law enforcement should not be made
without careful consideration of the necessity of such proposals and the
relative benefit to society. In the coming days and weeks, CDT will work
with Congressional leaders, privacy advocates, and the net.community to
ensure that constitutional civil liberties and the openness of the Internet
are protected as Congress considers counter-terrorism measures.
________________________________________________________________________

MAJOR POINTS OF THE COUNTER-TERRORISM PROPOSALS CIRCULATING ON THE HILL

The administration's new counter-terrorism initiative and other amendments
circulating this week in Congress contain numerous provisions, but four
are of particular concern to the net.community:

* New Threats to Encryption, Opposition to the Pro-CODE Bill
* Funding for Digital Telephony Without Public Accountability
* Amendment to Criminalize 'Bomb-Making' Information on the Internet
* Expanded Authority for Multi-Point, "Roving" Wiretaps

The full text of the Administration's proposal and background information
are available at CDT's counter-terrorism Web Page:

    http://www.cdt.org/policy/terrorism/

       --------------------------------------------------------

I. NEW THREATS TO ENCRYPTION, OPPOSITION TO THE PRO-CODE BILL

The Administration's outline contains the following statement on encryption:

 "* Encryption -- We will seek legislation to strengthen our ability to
    prevent terrorists from coming into the possession of the technology
    to encrypt their communications and data so that they are beyond the
    reach of law enforcement.  We oppose legislation that would eliminate
    current export barriers and encouraging the proliferation of encryption
    which blocks appropriate access to protect public safety and the
    national security."

While no specific legislative language has yet been proposed, this
represents the first statement by the Administration that they will seek
legislation to further restrict encryption.  Even more troubling, the
Administration is clearly attempting to use the recent suspected terrorist
incidents to push for a new and more restrictive encryption policy.

This new proposal comes as Congress is finally beginning to seriously
consider major changes in U.S. encryption policy. Bipartisan legislation
in both the House and Senate to relax encryption export controls is gaining
momentum.  The Senate Commerce Committee has held 3 hearings in the last 6
weeks, and is preparing to vote to send the Burns/Leahy "Pro-CODE" bill (S.
1726) to the floor of the Senate.  The Administration's attempt to leverage
the public's concern about terrorism to block passage of the Pro-CODE bill
is disturbing, and poses a significant threat to privacy and security on the
Internet.

CDT is working with members of Congress, privacy advocates, and the
communications and computer industries to oppose any attempt by the
Administration to impose new restrictions on encryption, and we continue to
work to move the bipartisan export relief legislation through Congress.

       --------------------------------------------------------

II. FUNDING FOR DIGITAL TELEPHONY WITHOUT PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY

The Administration is also seeking to override the public accountability
provisions of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA
- a.k.a. 'Digital Telephony') by providing a funding for the law in a way
that prevents public oversight of the FBI's surveillance ability.

Enacted in October of 1994, granted law enforcement new authority to
influence the design of telecommunications networks (the Internet,
Commercial online services, and BBS's were exempted) in order to preserve
their ability to conduct court authorized electronic surveillance.

Congress balanced this new authority with a number of mechanisms to ensure
public accountability over law enforcement surveillance ability.
While complicated, the public accountability mechanisms are designed to
work as follows:

* Law enforcement provides telecommunications carriers, the Congress,
  and the public with notice of its surveillance capacity needs (i.e.,
  the number of simultaneous wiretaps in a given geographic location)
  with an opportunity for public comment.

* Based on an assessment of the reasonableness of the law enforcement
  surveillance capacity request, Congress appropriates money to cover
  the cost of modifications.  If Congress does not believe law
  enforcement has adequately justified its request, money will not be
  appropriated.

* Telecommunications carriers are not obligated to comply with the
  statute or make any capacity modifications without government
  reimbursement.

In October 1995, the FBI published its first notice of surveillance
capacity (see CDT Policy Post Vol. 1, No. 26).  The telecommunications
industry and privacy advocates used the public accountability provisions of
CALEA to respond to the FBI's request and argued that the FBI had not
adequately justified the extensive surveillance capability contained in the
request.  As a result, Congress has not yet appropriated funds and no
modifications have been made.

The FBI clearly believes that the public accountability provisions of CALEA
are working **too well**, and appears to be using the recent focus on
terrorism to push for a new funding mechanism which does not contain public
oversight.

CDT is fighting hard to ensure that the public accountability provisions of
CALEA, which have until now prevented the FBI from acquiring unnecessary
surveillance capacity, remain a part of the law, and will vigorously oppose
any effort by the FBI and the Clinton Administration to remove the last
opportunity for public oversight over law enforcement power.

       --------------------------------------------------------

III. THE AVAILABILITY OF 'BOMB-MAKING' INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) has reintroduced an amendment to make it
illegal to disseminate information on how to construct explosives knowing
that the information will be used in furtherance of a federal crime.  The
amendment was adopted by the Senate earlier this month as part of a
Department of Defense Appropriations bill.  CDT believes that the vague
provisions of the Feinstein amendment could have a chilling effect on online
speech, needlessly duplicate existing criminal statutes, and should be
removed.

Feinstein first proposed the amendment as part of the 1995
counter-terrorism bill. The initial Feinstein amendment was extremely broad
and would have resulted in a flat ban on certain constitutionally protected
speech online.  After civil liberties advocates objected, Feinstein
narrowed her amendment substantially, although it was ultimately dropped
from the final terrorism bill signed in April 1996.

       --------------------------------------------------------

IV.  EXPANDED WIRETAP AUTHORITY

The Administration's proposal would also significantly expand current
wiretapping authority to allow multi-point (or "roving") wiretaps. This
would dramatically change surveillance authority to include wiretaps of
INDIVIDUALS instead of LOCATIONS.

This proposal would do away with the delicate balance between privacy and
law enforcement that Congress has struck over 30 years of wiretapping
legislation. Federal law has always required that wiretaps issue for a
specific location, to meet Fourth Amendment requirements. In 1986 Congress
introduced a narrow exception to this rule, only for cases where it could
be shown that the target was intentionally evading wiretaps by changing
facilities. The Administration proposal would completely remove this
standard, allowing so-called "roving taps" for any persons whose behavior
makes wiretapping difficult for law enforcement.

The administration proposed similar provisions in the spring of 1995 in the
wake of the Oklahoma City bombing. These provisions proved controversial in
Congress and were dropped from the final bill.

________________________________________________________________________

FOR MORE INFORMATION

For more information on the counter-terrorism proposals and their impact on
the Internet check out:

CDT's Counter-Terrorism Page:     http://www.cdt.org/policy/terrorism/
CDT's Encryption Policy Page:     http://www.cdt.org/crypto/
CDT's Digital Telephony Page:     http://www.cdt.org/digtel.html
Encryption Policy Resource Page:  http://www.crypto.com/

------------------------------------------------------------------------

(4) SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION

Be sure you are up to date on the latest public policy issues affecting
civil liberties online and how they will affect you! Subscribe to the CDT
Policy Post news distribution list.  CDT Policy Posts, the regular news
publication of the Center For Democracy and Technology, are received by
nearly 10,000 Internet users, industry leaders, policy makers and
activists, and have become the leading source for information about
critical free speech and privacy issues affecting the Internet and other
interactive communications media.

To subscribe to CDT's Policy Post list, send mail to

     policy-posts-request at cdt.org

with a subject:

     subscribe policy-posts

If you ever wish to remove yourself from the list, send mail to the
above address with a subject of:

     unsubscribe policy-posts

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

(5) ABOUT THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY/CONTACTING US

The Center for Democracy and Technology is a non-profit public interest
organization based in Washington, DC. The Center's mission is to develop
and advocate public policies that advance democratic values and
constitutional civil liberties in new computer and communications
technologies.

Contacting us:

General information:  info at cdt.org
World Wide Web:       URL:http://www.cdt.org/
FTP                   URL:ftp://ftp.cdt.org/pub/cdt/

Snail Mail:  The Center for Democracy and Technology
             1634 Eye Street NW * Suite 1100 * Washington, DC 20006
             (v) +1.202.637.9800 * (f) +1.202.637.0968

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
End Policy Post 2.29                                             8/1/96
-----------------------------------------------------------------------







From hfinney at shell.portal.com  Thu Aug  1 11:34:02 1996
From: hfinney at shell.portal.com (Hal)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 02:34:02 +0800
Subject: Cracking RC4/40 for massive wiretapps
In-Reply-To: <199608011151.HAA07754@unix.asb.com>
Message-ID: <199608011445.HAA06675@jobe.shell.portal.com>


RC4 is a stream cypher, so it produces a random stream which is XOR'd
with the plaintext to produce the cyphertext (and vice versa).  With the
old SSL there were spots of known plaintext, but I don't know if that is
the case now.  If you do have some, then you can recover the output of
the cypher.

5 bytes (40 bits) of output should generally determine the key.  So you
could build a massive lookup table indexed by the output which produces
the key.  This would have 2^40 entries (indexed by output values) each
of which was 5 bytes long (key values).  This would take approximately
5K gigabyte disks plus some PC's to attach them to.  Total cost, one to
a few million dollars, perhaps a bit less if you get them wholesale!
(The task of constructing the table is left as an exercise for the
reader.)

Then given that you know output you can quickly find the key.  No
search is involved, you just go to the PC which holds the range of
output values you are interested in, and do a single disk access.

Note that the known plaintext doesn't have to be contiguous, any five
bytes will do.  With fewer known bytes you can do a similar thing but
have a list of possible keys which can generate that set of output
bytes.

Hal





From cts at deltanet.com  Thu Aug  1 12:01:16 1996
From: cts at deltanet.com (Kevin Stephenson)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 03:01:16 +0800
Subject: VISA Travel Money
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960801045505.00695c6c@gonzo.wolfenet.com>
Message-ID: <3200CBB7.74DE@deltanet.com>


Cerridwyn Llewyellyn wrote:
> 
> >> It's not as anonymous as cash, but it might draw a lot less
> >> attention in my circumstances.  I think it has a place in one's
> >> aresenal of privacy enchancing technologies.
> >
> >     This card has the value "written" when you "purchase" it right?
> >
> >    Any one wanna bet on how long it will take the "Hacker" Community
> >to figure out how to "refill" it? Otherwise all you have is a
> >debit card.
> 
> Interesting related story about DefCon:  for those of you who have been
> to Las Vegas, you know that many casinos have mag stripe cards that are
> issued for a variety of reasons, that are just as good as cash in the
> casino, but can't be used anywhere else.  Many use them as a sort of
> debit card for slot machines.  The story goes that a few DefCon attendies
> acquired a few of these cards from the Tropicana, and re-wrote the stripe
> to read that they had over 60,000 "points".  I guess they discovered that
> the card was re-written each time it was used.  Unfortunately for them,
> what they didn't discover was that the system also kept track on a
> computer somewhere, and the large difference between the computer's tally
> and the card's value set off numerous red flags, they found out relatively
> quickly when two Casino Security guards escorted them to the police station.
> Oops.  I can't help but wonder what would've happened if they only made
> the difference like 10 points instead of 60K?  These two people were not
> too bright, as they were staying at the Tropicana, and probably had all
> the equipment in their rooms.  If they were of age, I believe (depending
> on what they found in the room) they can each get multiple 15 year federal
> sentences.
> 
> Moral of the Story: Mag Stripe cards are never secure by themselves (the
> credit card companies mistakenly relied on security by obscurity and are
> feeling the painful effects still today), but have the potential to be secure
> if backed up by that kind of system.  However, it would only really be
> practical
> in a closed environment like a Casino.
> 
> Thus, for the sake of all the lovely banks I know and love, I hope they
> either A. choose something other than mag. stripes, or B. use them only as
> debit cards that are checked against a bank account when used.
> 
> //cerridwyn//

Those cards are not debit cards. They are used to track a players time
and money spent playing slots and other games. I have a stack of them. 
Whenever I go to the blackjack tables, I give mine to the pit boss
and he writes down the amount of money I am gambling with and time spent
at the table. 

The only thing the cards are used for is "comps". I get a free prime rib
dinner after playing for "x" amount of points. I think the case will
either get thrown out of court, or the casino will drop charges. Since
the points have no monetary value, the fraud charge probably will not
stick (if that is what they were charged with). The two hackers will
probably get a call from "Guido" reminding them never to step foot back
in Vegas.





From rpowell at algorithmics.com  Thu Aug  1 12:12:47 1996
From: rpowell at algorithmics.com (Robin Powell)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 03:12:47 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club"
In-Reply-To: <ae24e2ee02021004242f@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <96Aug1.115045edt.20493@janus.algorithmics.com>


>>>>> In article <ae24e2ee02021004242f@[205.199.118.202]>, tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) writes:

    > At 6:28 AM 7/31/96, Alan Horowitz wrote:
    >> I am a strong libertarian. Sell crack cocaine, rent your pussy to horny
    >> middle-aged businessmen, do any non-violent,
    >> non-damaging-to-others-property you want, but damn well maintain public
    >> order and decorum. Or I will scream to my councilman for the cops to
    >> adjust your attitude with their billy club.

Someone please, please, please tell me this guy was being facetious.
Please?  Even if it's not true?  Pretty Please???

In a libertarian society, so-called "public decorum" is dictated by
who owns the property you are sitting on.  If my building code
(i.e. the code of laws set by the person who owns the building I live
in) says I can blast my boombox, your opinion can go to hell: find
another place to live if you don't like it.  Or petition the person
who owns the place.

Burning toxic waste is intrisically damaging to other people,
blasting your boombox is not (unless it is so loud as to actually
cause ear damage to bystanders, but given the volume of music
tolerated at rock concerts, I find this highly unlikely).

-Robin






From rpowell at algorithmics.com  Thu Aug  1 12:19:07 1996
From: rpowell at algorithmics.com (Robin Powell)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 03:19:07 +0800
Subject: "An who shall guard the guardians?"
In-Reply-To: <sNoyRD6w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: <96Aug1.113051edt.20490@janus.algorithmics.com>


>>>>> In article <sNoyRD6w165w at bwalk.dm.com>, dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) writes:

    > Duncan Frissell <frissell at panix.com> writes:
    >> At 02:46 AM 8/1/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:
    >> >
    >> >The Latin maxim "And who shall guard the guardians?" has some relevance to
    >> >the headlong rush into converting the U.S. into even more of a security
    >> >state than it is now.
    >> 
    >> Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

    > Who custodiates the custodians?

Is this not slightly better translated as "who watches the watchers?"?
This is the way I have heard it stated, and it is _WAY_ too long since
I have studied Latin.  One of my great dissapointments is that,
despite having spent my entire school career (less university: I'm
only 20) in private schools, I couldn't take latin or greek except one
year of latin, after which the course was dropped.  Sigh.

-Robin, who really wanted a classical eduation.





From hua at chromatic.com  Thu Aug  1 12:23:54 1996
From: hua at chromatic.com (Ernest Hua)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 03:23:54 +0800
Subject: algorithms for verifying U.S. IP address ...
Message-ID: <199608011606.JAA23574@ohio.chromatic.com>


How does one verify that an IP address is coming from a U.S. site?
How do most FTP site (e.g. those which carry crypto) determine the
origins of a connection?

It seems to me that if the NSA/DoS is serious about keeping crypto
strong for U.S. internal use, then they would help establish a
method for U.S.-only interchange of this sort of software.  It is
clear, however, that they do NOT have an interest in helping with
this identification effort as it will thwart their own efforts at
tapping U.S. (er ... oh gee ... they're NOT suppose to do that,
right?  okay, they must not be doing it then ...)

Ern





From bdavis at thepoint.net  Thu Aug  1 12:54:56 1996
From: bdavis at thepoint.net (Brian Davis)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 03:54:56 +0800
Subject: Photo IDs (Re: A Libertine Question)
In-Reply-To: <ae24e032010210047fab@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960801114946.8158A-100000@mercury.thepoint.net>


> ... 
> 
> And just what is a "true name" for the purposes of this law, anyway? Birth
> name? And what is that? What about people who marry, change names, etc.?
> Given that there is no "standard" for photo I.D.s, will my Official
> Cypherpunks Card count?
> 
> I can easily make my own photo I.D.s, or even order "fake I.D.s" from
> various mail-order outlets advertising in the Usual Places. If I show up at
> the airline with two photo I.D.s, one showing me to be "Security Officer
> Mickey Mouse" and the other showing me to be "Mickey Mouse, Internal
> Security Agency," will I be violating any laws?
> 
> --Mickey Mouse (I just changed my name--if you don't like it, FAA, fuck off)

Uh oh.  The hell with the FAA.  What about the Disney people?  Michael 
Eisner may sent Goofy to lean on you!

EBD
No longer a federal prosecutor!





From frissell at panix.com  Thu Aug  1 12:59:33 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 03:59:33 +0800
Subject: Brain Tennis with Dorthy
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960801155921.0085f7c0@panix.com>


I'm following the Brain Tennis Match between Dorothy Denning and John
Gilmore on encryption and the right to absolute privacy on Hot Wired
(http://www.hotwired.com/braintennis/96/31/index0a.html).

Were I a participant in this exercise, I would lob the following to Dorothy:

I have to assume that Dorothy believes in absolute privacy (in some areas).
I am assuming, for example, that she does not believe in torture as an
interrogation technique.  I assume, therefore, that she believes in absolute
privacy in the individual brain.  While she may support imprisonment (or the
threat of imprisonment) as an interrogation technique (jailing for
contempt), I think she would oppose bringing out the hot pokers.

I have a wider point to make but please indulge me for a moment.  The fact
that many wiretapping advocates oppose torture raises a host of absolutely
*fascinating* questions:

1)  If it were technically possible to compel us (without pain) to disclose
the contents of our mind, would Dorothy support the application of such
techniques to suspects (under judicial warrants or other lawful authority)?
That is, does the opposition to torture arise from squeamishness about pain
or from some residual recognition of the right of personal autonomy. 

2)  Would those who support wiretapping but oppose torture waive their
opposition to torture in certain cases.  That is, if the continued existence
of the United States or indeed Life on Earth were dependent on a bit of
information stored in the brain of a single person, would those who
countenance some invasions of privacy in the social interest allow torture
in these (admittedly) rare cases?

Back to the main thread:

Dorothy, if you oppose torture then you have granted the validity of John's
belief in absolute privacy.  You are merely quibbling about where that zone
of privacy ends.  You might say that the zone of privacy ends at the brain
but that is too narrow a range.  Personal autonomy exists in the technical
sense because only I command my thoughts.  Only I can order my muscles to
move.  I can be chained and tortured and even hooked up to some sort of
electrical apparatus to attempt to short circuit my muscular control and get
my hand to jump but such coercion is pretty crude.  If someone else wants me
to dance a Waltz smoothly or write a paragraph of original material, they
are going to need my cooperation (however secured).  My zone of absolute
privacy extends to those things I can directly control with my thoughts.  

This area also extends to communications.  If I arrange things such that no
one else can overhear me and whisper something to another person, then we
both share knowledge that can only be secured by others through torture (and
not always then) or through the decision of one of us to give it up.  The
same thought in two heads is still as much within the zone of privacy as
that thought within one head.  And so on multiplied by 1000.  The zone of
privacy arises from the inability of other people to directly command the
mind of one person or a thousand persons.  We have the control.  Absent
torture, you can't get it if we choose not to give it to you.

Note that this zone already extends beyond the brain case.  It travels down
our nerves to the tips of our fingers and toes.  We command those nerves and
that wiring represents an extension of our brain.  One of the things that we
can do with those nerves is to use them to generate signals of various
kinds.  This signal generation is *also* an extension of our brain.  It is
under our control.  If we like, we can arrange things so that no one else or
only the intended recipient can know our thoughts.  We have that power.  We
have used our zone of privacy to extend its scope.  We have done (continue
to do) it all from inside our brains.  We have not left that sanctuary --
that fortress built by the rejection of torture by advanced societies.

Therefore, if we develop the technical means to *extend* that zone of
privacy beyond our heads, bodies, and those we can whisper to, you can only
break the zone by the torture which you have already eschewed.  The nature
of the zone of privacy is not a grant from the State, it is the result of
our nature as independent *actors* and our collective decision (in the West
at least) to minimize the use of torture by governments.  

The Internet itself is an example of individual cooperation to extend
communications channels from one person to many (it was built by its users).
Those same users can, if they choose, use their autonomy to build in
security features of their collective design.  It belongs to them as their
minds belong to them.  It is an extension of those minds.

Dorothy, you or I may not like the thoughts or communications of specific
people but they have the same right to secure those thoughts and
communications if they choose to.

Now in reading all this, you may wonder what this has to do with key escrow
and Gang of Seven (G7) crypto policy.  Dorothy, as virtually the sole
non-government employee who supports Clipper and SKE, I believe you to be
unique in another way.  I think that you can be "saved" from tyranny (which
is always rough on the tyrants).  Unlike the government employees on your
side of the argument, you have generally not favored outlawing private use
of strong crypto.  We would like to separate you from them on this
fundamental question of personal autonomy.  The Century of Blood that the
world has just lived through at the hands of its governments (160 million
murdered) causes many of us to believe that some of your allies (who BTW
currently include the Kingdom of the Saud and the People's Republic of
China) would use torture and other very inhumane means to violate even our
traditional zone of privacy.

If you will merely grant to us the *morality* of our attempt to use the zone
of privacy which you have granted to us to extend that zone of privacy, we
will grant you an understanding of your fears of this new world (which many
of us share).  

Please, separate yourself absolutely from the torturers.

DCF






From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 13:25:24 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 04:25:24 +0800
Subject: FPGAs and Heat (Re: Paranoid Musings)
Message-ID: <ae262b5b050210046227@[205.199.118.202]>


At 9:39 AM 8/1/96, Scott Schryvers wrote:

>This was about a year and a half ago.
>I can't remember the name of it,  but this chip fab industry mag was
>talking about how the NSA was obtaining out side help in fabricating what
>was at the time a type of ram that did processing off chip in parrallel.

This was a company in Bowie, Maryland, closely linked with the NSA and with
the "supercomputer centers." The idea of "processing in memory" has been
explored by various companies.

By the way, on the subject of using FPGAs for computers, here's a URL I
found that's interesting:

http://www.io.com/~guccione/HW_list.html

>Side note: Wired just recently talked about IRAM or Intelligent ram, and
>how it seems to be the future of high speed computation.

Side side note: I worked on Intel's "iRAM," standing for "intelligent RAM,"
in 1980-81. It found little market success. The idea of changing the
architecture of RAM bubbles up every few years, but has not yet succeeded
(except in some video-specific applications).

Cautionary Note: Bubble memories, laser pantography, integrated injection
logic, e-beam addressed memory, neural nets, Josephson junctions....

When you've watched the industry for enough years you'll learn to cast a
jaundiced eye on pronouncements that a technology is the Next Big Thing.
The above list--which covers only chips, not similar Next Big Things in
software--is a list of some of the things "Wired" would've hyped, had it
been published back then.

Most such announcements come out public relations departments at major
public labs, or from over-enthusiastic VCs. Or from claims made in papers
presented at the International Solid State Circuits Conference and similar
conferences. Reporters seeking stories then push the story.

The usual form of the press release goes something like this:

"The discovery of foobartronic switches may mean chips that are ten times
faster and one hundred times denser. Researchers say the foobartronic
revolution could reshape the entire industry..."

Few of the advances reported in "Wired" will ever see the light of day....
Some will, of course, but it's useful to remember that most of it is hype.

--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 at 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."









From jimbell at pacifier.com  Thu Aug  1 13:39:35 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 04:39:35 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <199608011621.JAA28782@mail.pacifier.com>


At 10:13 PM 7/31/96 -0700, Cerridwyn Llewyellyn wrote:

>A more cynical view is that they are there to protect some of the biggest
>institutions of "organized crime" (ie: Congress, At&t, Microsoft, etc) who
>are ripping people off on a daily basis from the other organizations who
>refuse to play by their rules.

Speaking of AT+T, as I recall one of the incidents which preceded the 
introduction of Clipper was the news that AT+T was going to introduce an 
encrypted telephone using DES as the encryption algorithm.  According to the 
story, AT+T was "bought off" by the US government.   I haven't looked into 
that for a couple of years, but if we're looking for co-conspirators that 
would be a good place to start.  

Also:  Clipper was fabbed by VLSI Technology.  A few pointed inquiries might 
work wonders here.

Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 13:41:58 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 04:41:58 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <ae26305c070210048f37@[205.199.118.202]>


At 7:30 AM 8/1/96, Lucky Green wrote:
>At 11:12 7/31/96, Duncan Frissell wrote:

>>Most Central European countries have both privacy commissioners and legal
>>requirements that everyone register their addresses with the police.  I'll
>>do without the former if I can also avoid the latter.
>
>I remember a time when Privacy Commissioners were a new thing. Their
>primary purpose seemed to be to sanction government access to (and keeping
>of) large databases on the activities of the population. Their secondary
>purpose was to prevent the private sector competition from doing the same.
>Eliminating access to such data by the individual in the process.

I'm with Duncan and Lucky on this one. Nations with a "Privacy Ombudsman"
are almost always nations with extensive files on individuals, their
habits, and their political activities.

Having a "Privacy Ombudsman" is a bone thrown to the proles. I suspect a
police state like Singapore has such a person.

And related to the "photo I.D." discussion, most of these nations demand
that passports be left at hotel desks when checking in. (At least they did
when I spent 6 weeks travelling through Europe in 1983.) Perhaps the theory
is that this stops people from running out on their bills, though credit
cards do the same thing (*). However, the police reportedly inspect these
passports and enter them into data bases to track movements.

(* As the credit card companies increase their cooperation with law
enforcement, a la the links between FinCEN and the Big Three credit
reporters,  the passports will no longer be necessary, and the process of
tracking movements can be done just with the credit cards. Those without
credit cards...well, they'll think of something.)

Question (a la "Wired"): "When will the United States introduce an internal
passport?"

May: "2005, but they won't call it 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 at 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."









From sameer at c2.net  Thu Aug  1 13:42:59 1996
From: sameer at c2.net (sameer)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 04:42:59 +0800
Subject: Let's Say "No!" to Single, World Versions of Software
In-Reply-To: <31FFCD1E.3F54@netscape.com>
Message-ID: <199608011714.KAA08903@clotho.c2.org>


> The only thing they can revoke is their permission to provide it for
> download over the internet.  They can't revoke our permission to sell
> it in stores or via snail mail.

	Where do you get this idea? Got an inside track into the minds
of the supreme court?

-- 
Sameer Parekh					Voice:   510-986-8770
Community ConneXion, Inc.			FAX:     510-986-8777
The Internet Privacy Provider
http://www.c2.net/				sameer at c2.net





From frissell at panix.com  Thu Aug  1 13:43:12 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 04:43:12 +0800
Subject: Welcome Back
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960801164920.0087e858@panix.com>


At 11:51 AM 8/1/96 -0400, Brian Davis wrote:

>Uh oh.  The hell with the FAA.  What about the Disney people?  Michael 
>Eisner may sent Goofy to lean on you!
>
>EBD
>No longer a federal prosecutor!

Welcome back.  I missed your posts.

Do you have an honest job or are you still taking the King's Shilling?

DCF






From bdavis at thepoint.net  Thu Aug  1 14:02:53 1996
From: bdavis at thepoint.net (Brian Davis)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 05:02:53 +0800
Subject: Welcome Back
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960801164920.0087e858@panix.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960801125001.8158H-100000@mercury.thepoint.net>



> At 11:51 AM 8/1/96 -0400, Brian Davis wrote:
> 
> >Uh oh.  The hell with the FAA.  What about the Disney people?  Michael 
> >Eisner may sent Goofy to lean on you!
> >
> >EBD
> >No longer a federal prosecutor!
> 
> Welcome back.  I missed your posts.

Thanks.

> 
> Do you have an honest job or are you still taking the King's Shilling?

I have opened a law practice.  Just this morning, I visited a client (in 
jail) charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine  ...  in other words, 
one of the Four Horsemen. They checked me for weapons, etc., upon entry, 
but no one asked about any cryptographic munitions.

Brian


> 
> DCF
> 
> 





From vinnie at webstuff.apple.com  Thu Aug  1 14:08:07 1996
From: vinnie at webstuff.apple.com (Vinnie Moscaritolo)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 05:08:07 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question
Message-ID: <v03007808ae26a39f39a2@[17.203.21.77]>


I think Bob Dole understands the needs for privacy rights for animals..

the following verbatim account of a segment of a Bob Dole appearance a week
or so ago at a cotton cooperative in Bakersfield, California

"My wife was here six days last week, and she'll be back next week,
and she does an outstanding job. And when I'm elected, she will not be
in charge of health care. Don't worry about it. Or in charge of
anything else. (Muffled crowd gasp.) I didn't say that. It did sort of
go through my mind. But she may have a little blood bank in the White
House. But that's all right. We need it. It doesn't cost you anything.
These days, it's not all you give at the White House - your blood. You
have to give your file. I keep wondering if mine's down there. Or my
dog. I got a dog named Leader. I'm not certain they've got a file on
Leader. He's a schnauzer. I think he's been cleaned. We've had him
checked by the vet but not by the FBI or the White House. He may be
suspect, but in any event, we'll get into that later. Animal rights or
something of that kind. But this is a very serious election."


Vinnie Moscaritolo
"Law - Samoan Style"
http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/
Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A







From ichudov at galaxy.galstar.com  Thu Aug  1 14:16:30 1996
From: ichudov at galaxy.galstar.com (Igor Chudov)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 05:16:30 +0800
Subject: IPSEC for Linux
Message-ID: <199608011800.NAA29524@galaxy.galstar.com>


Hello,

Is there an implementation of IPSEC for Linux?

Thanks,

	- Igor.





From hfinney at shell.portal.com  Thu Aug  1 14:17:20 1996
From: hfinney at shell.portal.com (Hal)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 05:17:20 +0800
Subject: Cracking RC4/40 for massive wiretapps
In-Reply-To: <199608011151.HAA07754@unix.asb.com>
Message-ID: <199608011709.KAA17457@jobe.shell.portal.com>


When I wrote my previous message about the use of lookup tables, I forgot
about the use of salt, extra key bits which vary per message and are sent
in the clear.  That defeats the table lookup approach for searching for
messages which were encrypted with a given key.  There are really 128 key
bits per message, with 40 of them kept secret.

Hal





From jimbell at pacifier.com  Thu Aug  1 14:21:13 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 05:21:13 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 2.29 - Administration, Congress Propose Sweeping Anti-Terrorism Initiatives
Message-ID: <199608011743.KAA03854@mail.pacifier.com>


At 10:03 AM 8/1/96 -0400, Bob Palacios wrote:

>   The Center for Democracy and Technology  /____/     Volume 2, Number 29
> CDT POLICY POST Volume 2, Number 29                        August 1, 1996
>I. NEW THREATS TO ENCRYPTION, OPPOSITION TO THE PRO-CODE BILL
>The Administration's outline contains the following statement on encryption:
> "* Encryption -- We will seek legislation to strengthen our ability to
>    prevent terrorists from coming into the possession of the technology
>    to encrypt their communications and data so that they are beyond the
>    reach of law enforcement.  We oppose legislation that would eliminate
>    current export barriers and encouraging the proliferation of encryption
>    which blocks appropriate access to protect public safety and the
>    national security."
>
>While no specific legislative language has yet been proposed, this
>represents the first statement by the Administration that they will seek
>legislation to further restrict encryption.  Even more troubling, the
>Administration is clearly attempting to use the recent suspected terrorist
>incidents to push for a new and more restrictive encryption policy.

Even though it may be obvious to the crypto-savvy people in CP, since this 
press release is directed at a somewhat wider audience it would be useful to 
point out that none of these recent terrorist incidents involved encryption 
at all.  

>The Administration's attempt to leverage
>the public's concern about terrorism to block passage of the Pro-CODE bill
>is disturbing, and poses a significant threat to privacy and security on the
>Internet.

Same point.  Unless you mention that encryption wasn't a factor at all, you 
risk leaving the (unsophisticated) reader with the implication that there 
was, indeed, some crypto angle to these incidents.  Like it or not, that's 
the way public discourse seems to be done these days:  Unless a point is 
specifically challenged, implicitly it is deemed ceded to the claimant.  

Sure, Clinton did not actually claim that encryption was a factor, but it 
was there by implication, and the average citizen seeing his proposals would 
come to that conclusion.   Denying this specifically, you'd be "points 
ahead" and would be in a better position to shut down those trying to 
restrict encryption.





Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From m5 at vail.tivoli.com  Thu Aug  1 14:24:49 1996
From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 05:24:49 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <ae26305c070210048f37@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <3200ED63.C96@vail.tivoli.com>


Timothy C. May wrote:
Tim wrote:
> I'm with Duncan and Lucky on this one. Nations with a "Privacy Ombudsman"
> are almost always nations with extensive files on individuals, their
> habits, and their political activities.

That reminds me:  I thumbed through BiBi's terrorism book (the one D.S.
certified as prerequisite reading for particpation in intelligent
discussions about something-or-other) at B&N the other day.  It's a
pretty thin book.  Most of it seems to be about the rise of the Moslem
Menace and how the Sultan's hordes will soon be upon us all.  The last
chapter outlines all the "necessary measures" governments must take
to stamp out the wildfire of terrorism.  Same old same old, mostly,
like allowing suspects to be held without charges, allowing warrantless
searches (I think), thorough weapon registration, and so on.  The last
one (or next-to-last; I think the last one is "brainwash the populace
into thinking this is all a good idea") is about establishing a 
periodic "civil liberties review panel".

Yeah right.


______c_____________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX    * For the time being,
       m5 at tivoli.com * m101 at io.com          *    
      <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101>         *    three heads and eight arms.





From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 14:28:22 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 05:28:22 +0800
Subject: Blurring the Chains of Causation
Message-ID: <ae2633210802100435c1@[205.199.118.202]>



An unusual thread name, "Blurring the Chains of Causation."

What I mean is this:

- the U.S. legal system has been blurring, or confusing, the chain of
cause-and-effect in crimes

- Example: allowing suits by insurance companies and states against tobacco
companies. A smoker gets cancer by his actions, and it used to be that this
was his action, his responsibility. Now, we hold tobacco companies liable,
and perhaps will someday hold executives of these companies criminally
liable. (This for a product which is not illegal, mind you.)

(There are a bunch of related examples. "Civil liability" is a major way
this blurring is happening. Gun manufacturers being sued for crimes
committed with their guns, ladder makers sued by the families of criminals
who leaned ladders up against electrified fences, and so on. How long
before a bookstore is sued for "allowing" a book to be bought by someone
who later is "inspired" to commit a crime--actually, John Grisham ("The
Firm") is involved in a lawsuit against Oliver Stone for his film, "Natural
Born Killers," which Grisham claims "inspired" a murder. This has got to
stop, in my opinion.)

- "They made me do it" defenses. Hostess Twinkies are implicated in the
brutal murder of San Francisco's mayor and a city councilman. Childhood
abuse is exculpatory in other cases. Psychobabblers blather about what
caused people to behave as they did. A mass murderer says pornography made
him kill 25 women. A lawyer claims his client's son committed suicide after
listening to heavy metal music. And so it goes.

This blurring has links to cryptography, bomb-making instructions on the
Net, availability of porn on the Net, and many other things.

To cut to the chase:

- a librarian who "allows" a person to check out "The Anarchist Cookbook"
is *not* causing a crime, though much of the rhetoric one hears is
otherwise.

- the _author_ of that book (Powell, allegedly) is *also* not causing a crime.

- the _publishers_ of that book (Lyle Stuart, as I recall--my copy is not
handy) also have not committed any crime

To make things clear, some of the language being proposed in the
rush-to-law about anti-terrorism, wiretapping, anti-encryption, etc. As
Sen. Feinstein puts it, "We hope we can wrap up the repeal of the Bill of
Rights and have it on President Clinton's desk before the close of the
Olympics on Sunday." :-(

- if I _advocate_ strong crytography, avoidance of taxes, undermining of
government power, crypto anarchy, etc., I have not committed any crime
(Caveat: advocating the violent overthrow of the U.S. government apparently
is a crime, as are certain forms of conspiracy, a la RICO, tax evasion,
etc.)

- if I _use_ strong cryptography, I have not committed any crime, ipso
facto, nor am I necessarily conspiring to commit any crime

And so on.

Many of the proposed restrictions seek to further blur this chain of
causation, by making someone who provides access to materials which _may_
later be used in a crime, or which may "inspire" someone to crime, a kind
of criminal.

The trend picked up steam with the "deep pockets" precedents in the 70s
(*), was fed by the blame-passing psychobabble of the same decade, and has
now reached its present state by a willingness of the courts to hear such
cases.

People who actually commit real crimes are the criminals, not those who
sold them Hostess Twinkies without first checking their blood sugar level.
Not those who let a library patron look at a "dangerous" book. And not
those who provided strong cryptographic tools which _might_ be used by
terrorists, pedophiles, and money launderers.

--Tim May

(* "deep pockets" -- If there are N parties in a lawsuit, and one of them
shares only 5% of the (putative) blame but has 95% of the overall assets,
go after the party with the "deepest pockets." This forced Cessna and
Piper, the leading light aircraft firms at one time, to stop selling light
aircraft. The example with Oliver Stone being sued is a clear case of
this.)

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 at 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."









From usura at replay.com  Thu Aug  1 14:50:07 1996
From: usura at replay.com (Alex de Joode)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 05:50:07 +0800
Subject: algorithms for verifying U.S. IP address ...
Message-ID: <199608011712.TAA15658@basement.replay.com>


Ernest Hua (hua at chromatic.com) wrote:
: How does one verify that an IP address is coming from a U.S. site?
: How do most FTP site (e.g. those which carry crypto) determine the
: origins of a connection?

What's the use ? It makes it only nominally more difficult to access
an US crypto site, one needs first to esthablish an US beachhead ie.
open an US account, and ftp the eleet crypto warez using the newly
created US account as an intermediary. 

So the next step will be a tag that a user is an 'alien' ?

bEST Regards,
--
  Alex de Joode  | Replay IP Service & Web DZign  --  The Netherlands
usura at replay.com | http://www.replay.com       mailto:info at replay.com






From anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com  Thu Aug  1 14:59:16 1996
From: anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com (anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 05:59:16 +0800
Subject: A funny thing happend to my data on the way to the bank
Message-ID: <199608011745.KAA19325@jobe.shell.portal.com>


---------- Forwarded message ----------

The Prime Minister's Social Security Number
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's US Social Security Number is
172-42-6111, according to the Boston  Consulting Group in Massachusetts,
which employed Netanyahu for about one-year during 1979-80.=20

The number indicated by the marketing firm contradicts information contained
in a credit report by  the US federally-regulated Transunion Company, pulled
from company files during the first days of July.  According to that report,
Netanyahu and an American named   John J. Sullivan both used Social Security
number 020-36-4537.

Questions were raised in the reports as to whether  Netanyahu had attempted
to create a false identity or had used a number which was not his.
Publication of the credit report findings, and later  reports indicating
that Netanyahu's name had suddenly been deleted from Transunion's files,
raised additional questions about possible computer break-ins into the
company's records.

Netanyahu aides have repeatedly claimed that the prime minister does not
remember his number. In order to untangle Netanyahu from the issue, aides
three weeks ago,   asked US officials to provide his number. According to
the Prime Minister's Office, that request has yet to be answered.
(Jerusalem Post e-mail Edition..7/31.. heather at jpost.co.il).
=20








From froomkin at law.miami.edu  Thu Aug  1 15:15:31 1996
From: froomkin at law.miami.edu (Michael Froomkin)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 06:15:31 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] domain name server needed
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95.960801145635.1688O-100000@viper.law.miami.edu>


Does anyone have access to a DNS server that they can use to list a very
small number of start of authority records for me for a minor experiment? 

[This message may have been dictated with Dragon Dictate 2.01. 
Please be alert for unintentional word substitutions.]

A. Michael Froomkin        | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)
Associate Professor of Law | 
U. Miami School of Law     | froomkin at law.miami.edu
P.O. Box 248087            | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin
Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's hot here!  And humid!






From mpd at netcom.com  Thu Aug  1 15:41:23 1996
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 06:41:23 +0800
Subject: FPGAs and Heat (Re: Paranoid Musings)
In-Reply-To: <ae262b5b050210046227@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <199608011848.LAA11828@netcom13.netcom.com>


Timothy C. May writes:

> This was a company in Bowie, Maryland, closely linked with the NSA and with
> the "supercomputer centers." The idea of "processing in memory" has been
> explored by various companies.

That's one of the things that killed Thinking Machines.  It turned out
that a standard supercomputer with PIM chips for memory could give the
same performance for less money.  The PIMs did the massively parallel
computation with the standard architecture redistributing data as needed
using high bandwidth scatter-gather operations and moves.

At the time Thinking Machines went under, Seymour Cray had a big contract
for Cray Computer to deliver a PIM Cray machine to the government, but he
missed some deadlines, got cancelled, and his company went down the tubes
as well.  Too bad, it would have been a nice box. 

BTW, I gave up trying to predict innovations after being dragged down to 
see an early version of Visi-Calc running on an Apple, and horribly 
insulting the developers with comments like "But why would anyone want 
to emulate a ledger sheet?" and "I hope you guys didn't spend a lot of
time on this."  After repeating such performances at startups like Lotus
and Infocom, I realized that predictive history was not one of my talents.

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     mpd at netcom.com     $    via Finger.                      $







From m1tca00 at FRB.GOV  Thu Aug  1 15:42:25 1996
From: m1tca00 at FRB.GOV (Thomas C. Allard)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 06:42:25 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 2.29 - Administration, Congress Propose   Sweeping Anti-Terrorism Initiatives
In-Reply-To: <199608011743.KAA03854@mail.pacifier.com>
Message-ID: <3200FAEB.92A@frb.gov>


jim bell wrote:
> 
> At 10:03 AM 8/1/96 -0400, Bob Palacios wrote:
> 
> >   The Center for Democracy and Technology  /____/     Volume 2, Number 29
> > CDT POLICY POST Volume 2, Number 29                        August 1, 1996
> >I. NEW THREATS TO ENCRYPTION, OPPOSITION TO THE PRO-CODE BILL
[...]
> 
> Sure, Clinton did not actually claim that encryption was a factor, but it
> was there by implication, and the average citizen seeing his proposals would
> come to that conclusion.   Denying this specifically, you'd be "points
> ahead" and would be in a better position to shut down those trying to
> restrict encryption.

When Clinton closed Pennsylvania Avenue to vehicular traffic, he cited
the
private plane that crased on the South Lawn as one of the reasons for
the
tighter security.  But closing the road north of the White House would
surely
not have kept an airplane at bay.

If the Feinstein amendment passes (outlawing "bomb-making information"),
will
the Congressional Record be censored?  Will Joe Biden be held
accountable for
making the material available?

-- 
rgds-- TA  (tallard at frb.gov)
I don't speak for the Federal Reserve Board, it doesn't speak for me.
pgp fingerprint: 10 49 F5 24 F1 D9 A7 D6  DE 14 25 C8 C0 E2 57 9D





From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 15:47:28 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 06:47:28 +0800
Subject: Attempted balance... too far on the security side
Message-ID: <01I7RK3PK2HG8Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	Mixed messages, definitely. For one thing, people appear not to be
realizing that even with terrorism, trains and airplanes are still safer per
passenger mile than automobile. Driving people to drive more (no pun intended)
isn't going to save any lives. Besides which, if I've got an emergency flight
to catch, I may be willing to take the risk. Is there some reason that all
flights must be held to the same security, so long as everyone getting on
knows what level of security that is? Moreover, the suggestion of greater
humint bears with it infiltration (and possible agent procacateurship of)
any group that the government doesn't like.
	-Allen

>America's dilemma: Balancing security and an open society

>   _(c) Copyright 1996 Nando.net_
   
>    Associated Press
    
>   WASHINGTON -- after the bombing at the olympics and the loss of twa
>   flight 800, americans grappled sunday with how to maintain security in
>   a society that prizes individual liberty above all.
   
>   Travelers said they would accept longer delays for better baggage
>   checks and politicians reopened debate over thorny provisions cut from
>   an antiterrorism bill. But many weighed the desire for safety against
>   the pleasures of an open society.
   
>   "We must never accept as a fact of life that we will have to live with
>   terrorism," said Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick. "We must and
>   will come up with the tools to prevent these events."
   
>   But Gorelick conceded there may be a price. "Balancing the competing
>   interests in openness and security will be something that will be a
>   subject for all of us for many years to come," she told NBC's "Meet
>   the Press."
   
[...]

>   Joyce Lee, catching a train home to Newark, Del., from Washington's
>   Union Station on Sunday, said she's "a little leery about travel these
>   days."
   
>   "You don't know when you're going to get it. A bomb could go off
>   anywhere, anytime," she said. "I would definitely be willing to go
>   through more security because safety and having to wait a few extra
>   minutes is worth it."
   
>   Security consultants predicted public pressure would force greater
>   restrictions in public places and increased scrutiny at airports. But
>   others noted that security was tight at the Olympics before the
>   bombing, and warned that adopting a police-state mentality would
>   represent defeat.
   
>   "I don't want to see the terrorists win by, in effect, revoking our
>   Constitution," Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said on Fox's "News Sunday."
   
>   A terrorist can always move on to the next target. If airports are
>   sealed, will train stations be safe? How about movie theaters?
   
>   "Ultimately the question is, can you protect perfectly in public
>   places?" said Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell. "And the answer is no."
   
[...]

>   The antiterrorism bill that Clinton signed earlier this year applied
>   the death penalty to terrorism convictions and provided $1 billion for
>   law enforcement to fight terrorists.
   
>   But a provision to allow the FBI to wiretap all phones used by a
>   suspected terrorist was dropped and one requiring explosives
>   manufacturers to insert chemical tracers in their products was
>   weakened.
   
>   Gingrich said Sunday that he was willing to revisit those issues, but
>   that a proposal to allow police to conduct so-called "roving wiretaps"
>   was too great an intrusion of privacy.
   
>   "Our system is designed to go slowly, frankly, to protect freedoms,"
>   he said on "Meet the Press."
   
>   Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Ga., said that despite the recent incidents, the Cold
>   War's end has produced a period of relative safety for the United
>   States.
   
[...]

>   But he warned that unless steps were taken to block terrorists from
>   obtaining weapons-grade uranium or chemical weapons, Americans might
>   soon be longing for the days of the simple pipe bomb.
   
>   The key to fighting terrorism, he said, was increasing the United
>   States' ability to gather human intelligence -- information often
>   gathered covertly by infiltrating terrorist groups or spying on their
>   sponsors.





From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 15:51:35 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 06:51:35 +0800
Subject: Three on Clinton, one not crypto-related but positive
Message-ID: <01I7RL42XWAO8Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	This first one is about as expected. I'm disappointed in Gingrich for
being so conciliatory, and not pointing out (as the person from the ACLU did)
that there's no evidence whatsoever that such expanded governmental powers
would have done anything to stop the TWA (possible) bombing - and evidence that
it would do nothing whatsoever to stop events like the Olympic bombing.

>Clinton calls for expanded measures against terrorism

>   _(c) Copyright 1996 Nando.net_
   
>    New York Times
    
>   NEW ORLEANS -- Spurred by the bombing at the Atlanta Olympics,
>   President Clinton Sunday called on Congress to pass expanded measures
>   against terrorism -- including new federal wiretapping authority --
>   that were dropped from the anti-terrorism bill passed last spring.
   
>   Clinton called on the congressional leadership from both parties to
>   join him and the director of the FBI, Louis J. Freeh, at the White
>   House on Monday to discuss additional steps the government might take
>   to combat terrorism. Speaker Newt Gingrich expressed willingness to
>   consider such measures and said he believed some agreement could be
>   worked out.

[...]

>   Clinton originally proposed such markers, and expanded authority to
>   let the FBI wiretap suspected terrorists or groups who are moving from
>   place to place, after the Oklahoma City bombing in April 1995, but the
>   measures were among those that fell out of the final bill. In an
>   unusual alliance, civil liberties groups and advocates of gun rights
>   joined forces to argue that the wiretapping expansion, in particular,
>   would violate constitutional rights of privacy and free association.
   
[...]

>   Speaking Sunday morning on the NBC News program, "Meet the Press,"
>   Gingrich said there was "a possibility" of reaching an agreement on
>   both issues, given the bombing in Atlanta and the suspicions that a
>   bomb may have brought down Trans World Airlines Flight 800.
   
>   He said that he thought Congress should "re-approach" the issue of
>   wiretapping, and that questions concerning the chemical markers were
>   "going to be negotiated." The Olympic bomb, he said, "shows you why
>   people are looking at that particular solution."
   
>   "I believe that the more there is terrorism, the more pressure we're
>   under to find systematic ways to solve it," said Gingrich, who had
>   opposed the proposals on chemical markers and wiretapping when the
>   administration made them.
   
[...]

>   Clinton said the Group of 7 industrialized nations will meet on the
>   issue of terrorism in a few weeks. Announced at the summit of the
>   group in Lyons, France, last month, the meeting is intended to promote
>   international cooperation among police and intelligence agencies,
>   traditionally reluctant to share information, even among allies.
   
[...]

>   In an interview Sunday, Schumer said that law-enforcement agencies
>   needed to be able to obtain telephone records of both incoming and
>   outgoing calls of suspects in international terrorism cases; to
>   monitor communications over digital networks, to keep up with
>   criminals who may activate a new cellular phone every few days, and
>   otherwise to stay abreast of the communications revolution.
   
>   Schumer said Gingrich was among those who "did everything they could
>   to weaken the bill" the first time it was passed. "Any time the NRA or
>   any of these far right groups sneezed, they jumped," he said.
   
>   Gingrich suggested Sunday that he favored an approach that would allow
>   monitoring of a suspect's calls across any number of telephones, but
>   said that should not mean that any phone that happened to be used by a
>   suspect could be monitored when other people were using it.
   
>   Ever since the TWA flight went down shortly after its departure from
>   John F. Kennedy Airport on July 17, FBI agents have been using the
>   attendant publicity to press the case for broader wiretapping
>   authority. The chief FBI officer on the scene of the disaster, James
>   Kallstrom, has repeated this plea.
   
>   But there continues to be some resistance to some of these ideas in
>   Congress.
   
>   "We're not prepared to extend wiretapping," said Sen. Arlen Specter, a
>   Pennsylvania Republican, in an interview on the CNN program Evans &
>   Novak on Saturday. "There was a judgment made in the Congress that
>   we're prepared to give up that bit of security for that bit of
>   freedom. And I think that's a wise judgment."
   
>   Laura W. Murphy, the director of the Washington office of the American
>   Civil Liberties Union, said the FBI was using terrorism to bolster its
>   arguments for techniques that it really wants to use in more typical
>   criminal cases.
   
>   "The idea that these roving wiretaps are going to lead to new
>   developments in our ability to fight terrorism is a big myth," she
>   said.
   
>   She said that only a minute fraction of wiretaps involve crimes of
>   terrorism, and that the new types of wiretaps the FBI seeks are more
>   invasive and more likely to track innocent parties than the old kinds.
   
	This one is the promised positive one on Clinton.

>   Centura

>     OLYMPIC IRAQI WEIGHTLIFTER WHO CARRIED FLAG DEFECTS TO UNITED STATES

>      Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net
>      Copyright &copy 1996 The Associated Press
      
>   Ahmed said Iraqi officials had told the country's delegation to turn
>   their heads away from President Clinton while marching in the opening
>   ceremony because Clinton and former President Bush "wanted to destroy
>   Iraq."
   
>   "Everybody else in our group looked away from President Clinton. They
>   were not men. But I turned my head and looked at him and I could not
>   believe my eyes. He was standing and applauding for us," the Times
>   quoted Ahmed as saying. "I know that if the games were in Iraq, Saddam
>   Hussein would not clap for the U.S."
   

	And in this one, Clinton (like other politicians) gets angry at the
thought that they might have to take some of that responsibility that they all
keep talking about. (My suggestion is to remove sovreign immunity and allow
wrongfully prosecuted persons to sue officials for their court and other costs.
It would certainly decrease prosecutions to the absolute minimum.)
	-Allen

>  Avis

>              CLINTON'S TEMPER FLARES WHEN NEWS CONFERENCE STRAYS

>      Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net
>      Copyright &copy 1996 Reuter Information Service
      
>   WASHINGTON (Aug 1, 1996 2:00 p.m. EDT) - President Clinton displayed a
>   fiery temper Thursday when at a news conference on the economy he was
>   asked about the White House travel office controversy and past drug
>   abuse by some staff members.
   
[...]

>   "There are a lot of people who were never charged with anything, much
>   less offering to plead guilty to anything, who have been dragooned and
>   pulled up and had thousands and tens of thousands of dollars of legal
>   expenses, who were completely innocent, but have been subject to
>   abject harassment.
   
>   "Are we going to pay their legal expenses, too. Are we going to pay
>   the legal expenses of every person in America who is ever acquitted of
>   an offense?" Clinton asked heatedly.





From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Thu Aug  1 15:52:29 1996
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 06:52:29 +0800
Subject: Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
In-Reply-To: <ae25a290040210043ec2@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.95.960801122744.24298D-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>


Anyone who thinks I can say "conspiracy against fat people who read gun
magazines" with a straight face, raise your hand. Sheesh.

But there was a serious point in there, as there was in Tim's joke.

-rich

On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> At 5:53 AM 8/1/96, Rich Graves wrote:
> 
> >Ferchrissakes, guys, take a step back and look at yourselves. You're playing
> >the spin control game just as fast and furious as the "bad guys" (?). First
> >the glee over how easy it was to find bomb-making instructions anywhere,
> >then saying it was a provocation by the government, now it becomes a
>                                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >conspiracy against fat people who read gun magazines.
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Rich, maybe you're spending too much time amongst the Zundelsite Neo-Nazis.
> You no longer recognize humor even when it's pretty damned obvious.
> 
> 
> --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 at 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."






From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 15:56:05 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 06:56:05 +0800
Subject: Again, disappointed in Gingrich
Message-ID: <01I7RL8DXKCK8Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	Again, I'm disappointed in Gingrich. This amplifies the earlier
comments.
	-Allen

>Clinton, congressional leaders to meet on terrorism

>   _(c) Copyright 1996 Nando.net_
   
>    Associated Press
    
[...]

>   Gingrich, interviewed on NBC's "Meet the Press," said, "I think that
>   we should have a provision that allows us to recognize that we now
>   live in the age of the cellular telephone and allows us to track an
>   individual person" He said the taggant requirement was "a
>   possibility."





From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 15:56:21 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 06:56:21 +0800
Subject: Jim Bell, stay out of Georgia....
Message-ID: <01I7RJRMNIE88Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	They're arresting this guy because he had one mention of a Molotov
Cocktail? Why am I reminded of the Haymarket trials? Where's a Governor
Altgeld when you need him? Admittedly, this guy doesn't seem too bright... but
if that were a reason to lock him up, the prisons would be even more crowded
than they are now.
	-Allen

>Anarchist charged with advocating government overthrow

>   _(c) Copyright 1996 Nando.net _
   
>    New York Times
    
   
   
>   JONESBORO, Ga. -- An 18-year-old self-styled anarchist who allegedly
>   distributed a free, homemade pamphlet with anti-government rhetoric
>   has been charged with advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government.
   
[...]

>   Clayton County police Lt. Larry Gibson said Moreland turned himself in
>   Sunday. Authorities obtained an arrest warrant for Moreland Saturday
>   after the pipe bombing at Centennial Olympic Park, although police say
>   they don't think he played any role in the crime.
   
>   "He told us he was only interested in destroying property, and I don't
>   think he fully understands the ramifications," Gibson said. "Whatever
>   he was up to, we wanted to nip it in the bud."
   
>   Moreland had been under investigation since July 8 when authorities
>   received a copy of a pamphlet called "Rise Above." Police traced the
>   pamphlets to a mail box service in a shopping center allegedly rented
>   in Moreland's name.
   
>   The pamphlet was laced with with anti-police cartoons, obscenities,
>   and anarchist slogans. The one overt reference to violence was an
>   illustration of a "Molotov cocktail" on the same sheet with a recipe
>   for "soy milk" made from water-soaked soybeans, sugar and vanilla and
>   strained through a T-shirt.





From tomw at netscape.com  Thu Aug  1 15:57:10 1996
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 06:57:10 +0800
Subject: Let's Say "No!" to Single, World Versions of Software
In-Reply-To: <199608010243.WAA28665@pdj2-ra.F-REMOTE.CWRU.Edu>
Message-ID: <320101B9.500F@netscape.com>


Peter D. Junger wrote:
> 
> Tom Weinstein writes:
> 
> : The only thing they can revoke is their permission to provide it for
> : download over the internet.  They can't revoke our permission to
> : sell it in stores or via snail mail.
> 
> Why can't they?  What steps do you take to make sure that the people
> you sell it to aren't--gasp--foreign persons?

We only ship the domestic version to addresses inside the US.  They
State Department seems to think this is sufficient.  Of course, a
foreign person can always fly here and pick up a copy at Fry's, but
that's not our problem.

-- 
You should only break rules of style if you can    | Tom Weinstein
coherently explain what you gain by so doing.      | tomw at netscape.com





From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca  Thu Aug  1 16:01:33 1996
From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:01:33 +0800
Subject: [Editorial] Privacy commisioner right-Canada
Message-ID: <9607018389.AA838936610@smtplink.alis.ca>


Privacy commisioner right
Editorial
Ottawa Citizen, July 31

Bruce Phillips, the privacy commisioner, has again called for reinforcements to
defend personal privacy against the assaults of commercialism and technology. It
is a call that demands action-from the federal government, Parliament and every
Canadian.

The commisioner's annual report proposes two essential recommendations. First,
the government should make the protection of privacy a condition of sale
whenever a government enterprise is sold to the private sector. Second, the
government and Parliament must pass a law extending the enforcement of privacy
rights to private-sector businesses in federal jurisdiction.

Phillips is right. As thousands of public servants are transferred out of
government service, they lose the protection of the Privacy Act -- which covers
only government departments and agencies. And as more personal information about
all of us accumulates in the corporate sector, there is an intensified public
interest in extending legal protections.

*******
Phillips acknowledges the profitability of buying, selling and exploiting
personal data on employees and customers. And he sees the power of new
technologies to make privacy violations faster, cheaper, more comprehensive and
always more intrusive.
*******

But he insists that preserving personal privacy is both possible and necessary:
"If we discard the notion of privacy and simply treat one another as data
subjects, as objects of surveillance, we abandon that fundamental, democratic
notion of autonomy and self-determination."

Right Again.






From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 16:10:52 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:10:52 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
Message-ID: <01I7RKOB77H48Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	Well, dry ice bombs are in the rec.pyrotechnics FAQ, stored among other
places at:
http://www.nectec.or.th/pub/mirrors/faq/pyrotechnics-faq	

and everyplace else all the news.answers FAQs are stored. What, precisely, is
an acid bomb? Also note the standard blame-the-Internet (not, say, increased
irritation with government after the Republicans failed to reduce it) rhetoric.
	-Allen


>   Cobb Group - Netscape

>      NUMBER OF LEGITIMATE BOMB THREATS HAVE INCREASED IN L.A. OVER 1995

>      Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net
>      Copyright &copy 1996 Los Angeles Daily News

>   LOS ANGELES (Aug 1, 1996 10:11 a.m. EDT) -- A bomb threat closed the
>   entire roadway network within the Los Angeles International Airport
>   for 45 minutes, creating a massive traffic tangle that came on top of
>   delays from heightened security.

[...]

>   Police say the case is the latest in a rash of bomb threats and
>   suspicious package discoveries in Los Angeles borne of heightened
>   concern and publicity surrounding the recent bombing at the Olympics,
>   the mysterious crash of TWA Flight 800 and last year's Oklahoma City
>   bombing.
   
>   Each threat is taken seriously by law enforcement officials, who who
>   say they are responding to a greater number of calls -- and, in Los
>   Angeles County, finding a greater number of explosive devices.
   
>   A Sheriff's Department spokesman said 178 potentially explosive
>   devices have been found in the county out of a total of 273 calls
>   answered in the first six months of this year.
   
>   By contrast, only 86 such devices were found out of 259 calls in the
>   first half of 1995.

[...]
   
>   "We're going to top 70 for the month -- that is a record in this
>   unit," Spencer said. "And the actual devices that really cause damage
>   has gone up."
   
>   Among devices found by sheriff's deputies: nine pipe bombs, 53 pieces
>   of military ordnance, 44 Molotov cocktails, 12 fireworks-pyrotechnic
>   devices, two acid bombs and five dry ice bombs.
   
>   In the city, the Los Angeles Police Department's bomb squad responded
>   to 972 calls in 1995 -- up from 717 in 1994.
   
>   Of those calls last year, 181 were for either fireworks, ordnance or
>   other potentially threatening items, police said.
   
>   The squad destroyed 73 devices and investigated 41 explosions -- many
>   in mailboxes -- that occurred over the year. Most calls, however, were
>   for suspicious packages that turned out to be harmless.
   
>   "We have had an excessive amount of bomb calls on the heels of the
>   pipe bombing in Atlanta," said Lt. Tony Alba, an LAPD spokesman. "They
>   have been running around like crazy ever since the Atlanta incident, a
>   lot of suspicious package calls."
   
[...]

>   Also on Wednesday, 55 miles north of downtown Los Angeles in
>   Lancaster, the sheriff's bomb squad was summoned to the parking lot at
>   an Elks Lodge where deputies found a homemade device -- which included
>   half-sticks of dynamite and BBs.
   
[...]

>   And Monday, an Ensenada, Mexico-bound Carnival cruise ship, filled
>   with 1,846 passengers, was forced to turn around and head back to port
>   after a bomb threat was made. No bomb was found.
   
>   "To some it is a power thing," said Sgt. Al Humphries of the Sheriff's
>   Department bomb squad. "With 20 cents and a mean spirit you can make a
>   cruise ship turn around, or make an airplane turn back."
   
>   Spencer and security experts agree media attention that focused on
>   bombs in the aftermath of the Centennial Olympic Park and TWA
>   explosions have factored into the flurry of threats and reported
>   suspicious packages.
   
>   William Daly, managing director at Kroll Associates, a New York-based
>   security firm, said the activity will diminish as the spotlight fades.
   
>   "If you look after the World Trade Center bombing, there was a
>   dramatic increase the next day, unfortunately tied to the attention on
>   the issue," Daly said.
   
>   "These people who are on the fringe, they enjoy seeing emergency
>   service, knowing that it is going to disrupt a city," he said. "This
>   is the way they live out their fantasy. The more they see it being
>   received and responded to, the more it will continue."
   
[...]
  
>   Spencer said information about bomb-making on the Internet may be the
>   answer to the greater numbers of actual devices being made.
   
>   "This information is readily available on the Internet," he said.
>   "What we've noticed is that a lot of juveniles have gotten the
>   information off the Internet -- they admit it."
   
>   Alba said the most common devices found by the LAPD are pipe bombs and
>   dry ice bombs, often used to blow up mailboxes.
   
>    Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net





From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 16:21:00 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:21:00 +0800
Subject: Jew Bits, Credentials, and the Cypherpunk Way
Message-ID: <ae2659ce0b0210044c33@[205.199.118.202]>


At 5:12 PM 8/1/96, Alex de Joode wrote:
>Ernest Hua (hua at chromatic.com) wrote:
>: How does one verify that an IP address is coming from a U.S. site?
>: How do most FTP site (e.g. those which carry crypto) determine the
>: origins of a connection?
>
>What's the use ? It makes it only nominally more difficult to access
>an US crypto site, one needs first to esthablish an US beachhead ie.
>open an US account, and ftp the eleet crypto warez using the newly
>created US account as an intermediary.
>
>So the next step will be a tag that a user is an 'alien' ?

Along with the "Jew bit."

(Credit goes to Hugh Daniel, as I recall, for this one. At the CFP in '95
he made up various badges with things like this, including "Is your Jew bit
set?")

On a serious note, the whole thrust of the CDA discussion raised this
issue, of having "age bits" in all packets and/or credentials. There is the
very real danger, I fear, that the current swirl of topics (terrorism,
exports, G7 New World Order, pornography, bomb-making, etc.) will lead to
moves for "credentials" of various sorts.

(I'm sure the IETF folks can point out the problems with such schemes. I'm
not sure they'd fly, but they may get proposed.)

Such credentials--aka "the Internet Driver's License"--could have fields
for name, true name, key, age, sex, and perhaps even things like special
orders from courts (e.g., "Tim May is under court order in Idaho, U.S., not
to have access to aptical foddering information"). Many countries, which do
not have the nominal separation of church and state the U.S has, will want
fields for religious affiliation, etc.

We cannot fight this at the ballot box, as the trends are simply too strong
(as Lucky notes, Americans will cheer when strong crypto is outlawed). The
only way is the Cypherpunk Way: Direct Action Through Technology.

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 at 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."









From m5 at vail.tivoli.com  Thu Aug  1 16:27:34 1996
From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:27:34 +0800
Subject: Terror attack!
Message-ID: <32010AC5.1513@vail.tivoli.com>


"I think I see one outside my window!  Help!"


A breaking story from Reuters:

> FBI Chief Says U.S. Under Terrorist Attack

> WASHINGTON (Reuter) - FBI Director Louis Freeh warned Congress Thursday
> that the United States was under attack from foreigh terrorists and 
> said new counter-terrorism weapons were needed to fight back. 



Why don't they just be done with it and declare martial law?
	
______c_____________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX    * For the time being,
       m5 at tivoli.com * m101 at io.com          *    
      <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101>         *    three heads and eight arms.





From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 16:27:51 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:27:51 +0800
Subject: Republican convention security
Message-ID: <01I7RLOILMNG8Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	Why am I not reassured by what convention Chuck Vance participated in
in the 1960's? And why do I suspect that the ADF calls a militia any group of
people who have a political viewpoint different from theirs and might be
armed (including via martial arts)?
	-Allen

>   Cobb Group - Netscape

>     SECURITY OUTSIDE THE CONVENTION HALLS IS FOCUS IN SAN DIEGO, CHICAGO

>      Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net
>      Copyright &copy 1996 The Associated Press
      
[...]

>   WASHINGTON (Aug 1, 1996 10:29 a.m. EDT) -- Beach parties, concerts and
>   fund-raisers will lure delegates from the air-conditioned halls of the
>   Republican and Democratic conventions next month, and officials say
>   keeping these off-site venues safe will be one of their biggest
>   challenges.
   
[...]

>   Convention security used to focus on foiling a lone individual bent on
>   disrupting the meeting, but now groups like anti-government militias
>   are more of a worry, said Chuck Vance. The former Secret Service agent
>   helped coordinate security for the 1968 Democratic meeting in Chicago
>   that was punctuated by anti-war protests.
   
[...]

>   Statistics give little reason for security planners to breath easy.
   
>   A recent study by the Anti-Defamation League said the number of
>   antigovernment militia groups in California jumped from two in 1994 to
>   35 last year.
   
>   And in San Diego County, one to five actual or suspected pipe bomb
>   incidents are reported every week, and a total of 32 hand grenade
>   incidents were reported in the first four months of this year, the
>   sheriff's department said. Six pipe bombs have exploded already this
>   year; there were seven in all of 1995. None were targeted at
>   government buildings.

>    Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net





From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 16:30:00 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:30:00 +0800
Subject: More evidence that democracy is bunk
Message-ID: <01I7RLTJO3008Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	And some people think democracies secure civil liberties...
	-Allen

>Poll finds most Americans want broader authority to probe terrorism

>   _(c) Copyright 1996 Nando.net_
   
>    Associated Press
    
>   NEW YORK -- Americans overwhelmingly want the federal government to
>   have more authority to check out terrorist groups, according to a CBS
>   news poll released Tuesday.
   
[...]

>   As an antidote, 80 percent believe the federal government should have
>   more power to investigate terrorists, but just 52 percent believe
>   wiretaps should be expanded.
   
>   Three out of five said they still favor giving the government more
>   power even if that meant groups unrelated to terrorism were
>   investigated, too.
   
>   Even if it cost more, nearly nine out of 10 people surveyed want more
>   security checkpoints, guards and metal detectors -- and they'd be
>   willing to wait longer in lines -- at public events.





From nobody at REPLAY.COM  Thu Aug  1 16:32:54 1996
From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:32:54 +0800
Subject: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough?
Message-ID: <199608012016.WAA00739@basement.replay.com>


Is security provided by 1024-bit PGP key sufficient against most powerful
computers that are available today? Say if smoe organization spent 10
billions of dollars on a cracking machine, would it be possible to crack 
the keys in reasonable time?





From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 16:33:41 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:33:41 +0800
Subject: (Un)Freeh makes claims on wiretapping
Message-ID: <01I7RMDU1JC48Y4XOW@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	The usual governmental rhetoric. Again, I'm not seeing achnowledgement
from anyone except maybe the ACLU that there's no evidence that such tactics
would have stopped the TWA bombing - not that they would be justified even if
it would have. Legalized drugs, etcetera would free up quite enough law
enforcement to take care of the problem.
	-Allen

>   Cobb Group - Netscape

>           FBI DIRECTOR: WIRETAP PROPOSALS WON'T THREATEN LIBERTIES

>      Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net
>      Copyright &copy 1996 The Associated Press
   
>   WASHINGTON (Aug 1, 1996 1:41 p.m. EDT) -- FBI Director Louis Freeh
>   said today Americans are under increasing attack by terrorists and
>   proposed new wiretapping authority would not greatly expand
>   government's powers.
   
>   "The country and the American people have been experiencing an
>   increasing war against them by terrorists and terrorist-supported
>   activities," Freeh told a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.
>   Americans "are clearly under attack and we are the prime targets for
>   this kind of terrorism."
   
[...]

>   Freeh said the wiretap proposals do not involve "expansive powers" for
>   the government and would not lead to "an avalanche of new electronic
>   surveillance."
   
>   A leading GOP opponent of an earlier, more sweeping anti-terrorism
>   bill said today he didn't believe Congress could enact a new package
>   before its recess this weekend.
   
>   "I think it would be very difficult to do in light of the logistics
>   and the opposition," Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., told reporters. "The
>   (anti-terrorism) funding is there. No new laws are needed."
   
>   Asked about Barr's comments, Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, head of a
>   bipartisan task force that has been negotiating with administration
>   officials on the anti-terrorism proposals, said, "That's part of the
>   obstacle. It's what we have to deal with. What we do has to reach the
>   level of consensus."
   
>   The negotiators, led by Craig and White House chief of staff Leon
>   Panetta, said they hoped to have a package ready for a vote by week's
>   end before Congress leaves for its August recess.





From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 16:39:04 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:39:04 +0800
Subject: Looks like they may actually pass something... hell.
Message-ID: <01I7RLJW5WHK8Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	I had hoped that normal government incompetence would prevent them from
passing something. Well, there's still hope that it'll get clogged up, or that
the courts will toss it out - somehow I think they won't like the idea of
taps without a court order, for instance (giving up a judicial prerogative). I
am also somewhat puzzled by the racketeering law reference - I had thought that
federal racketeering laws allowed civil forfeiture sans conviction (shudder)?
The "funding" for telephone companies sounds suspiciously like funding Digital
Telephony.
	-Allen

>   School House
   
>         WHITE HOUSE, KEY LAWMAKERS AGREE ON ANTI-TERRORISM PROPOSALS

>      Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net
>      Copyright &copy 1996 The Associated Press
      
>   WASHINGTON (Aug 1, 1996 09:53 a.m. EDT) -- After wrangling with key
>   Republican lawmakers, the White House has won agreement on a package
>   of anti-terrorism measures that would expand wiretapping authority and
>   tighten airport security.
   
[...]

>   But omitted from the agreement was a central part of Clinton's
>   proposals, a study of chemical markers in explosives, called taggants,
>   which had been heavily criticized by some Republicans. Also rejected
>   was a provision to allow the FBI to get information on suspected
>   terrorists from hotels, telephone companies and storage facilities.
   
[...]

   The agreement also would allow prosecution of suspected terrorists
   under federal racketeering laws, which would make anyone convicted
   subject to asset forfeitures and longer sentences.
   
>   The negotiators, led by Panetta and Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, said
>   they hoped to have a package ready for a vote by week's end, before
>   Congress leaves for its August recess.
   
>   But Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., said earlier in the
>   day that final passage before the recess appeared unlikely. "I don't
>   see how in the world we can get it done" by then, Lott told reporters.
   
>   Lott and other GOP leaders summoned Attorney General Janet Reno,
>   Panetta and FBI Director Louis Freeh to a meeting today to explain why
>   some of the FBI's anti-terrorism funds haven't been spent.
   
>   "We are increasingly concerned that monies and authorities already
>   granted to the administration are not being used effectively or at
>   all," Lott, House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., and House Majority
>   Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, wrote in a letter to Clinton.
   
>   Justice Department spokesman Myron Marlin said the Republican
>   assertions were "misleading."
   
>   Gingrich and Lott also proposed that a blue-ribbon commission review
>   the government's anti-terrorism policy -- a move that would delay
>   congressional action. The new package includes such a commission for
>   longer-term legislative proposals, Craig said.
   
>   He said the lawmakers' aides planned to work through the night to
>   draft the proposals into a package that could be put to a vote before
>   week's end.
   
>   "I feel very positive at this moment," Craig told reporters Wednesday
>   night.
   
>   Craig said the proposals included multipoint wiretaps, which allow law
>   enforcement agents to monitor all phone calls made by a suspected
>   terrorist, rather than just those from a specific telephone, as well
>   as emergency wiretaps, which are valid for 48 hours without a court
>   order.
   
[... yeah, right]

>   Craig stressed that the new wiretap provisions would include "some
>   privacy language that will protect people."
   
>   Other proposals on which accord was reached include the use of special
>   technology to make it easier to trace telephone numbers called by
>   suspected terrorists and a trust fund to reimburse phone companies for
>   expenses they incur in that area.
   
>   Craig listed the proposals but gave few details, which had yet to be
>   worked out.
   
>    Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net





From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 16:43:56 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:43:56 +0800
Subject: A funny thing happend to my data on the way to the bank
Message-ID: <ae2657840a021004c287@[205.199.118.202]>


At 5:45 PM 8/1/96, anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com wrote:

>The Prime Minister's Social Security Number
>Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's US Social Security Number is
>172-42-6111, according to the Boston  Consulting Group in Massachusetts,
>which employed Netanyahu for about one-year during 1979-80.=20
>
>The number indicated by the marketing firm contradicts information contained
>in a credit report by  the US federally-regulated Transunion Company, pulled
>from company files during the first days of July.  According to that report,
>Netanyahu and an American named   John J. Sullivan both used Social Security
>number 020-36-4537.
>
>Questions were raised in the reports as to whether  Netanyahu had attempted
>to create a false identity or had used a number which was not his.
>Publication of the credit report findings, and later  reports indicating
>that Netanyahu's name had suddenly been deleted from Transunion's files,
>raised additional questions about possible computer break-ins into the
>company's records.

It is not likely to be a "break-in." Rather, the Big Three credit reporting
agencies, Transunion, TRW Credit, and Equifax, routinely are complicit in
creating false credit histories as part of the "legends" of agents, persons
in the Federal Witness Security Program, etc.

(Do you not think Equifax would "notice" a new identity which popped into
existence in 1995, complete with a 10-year credit history, a high school
diploma, a record of past employment, etc.? There is a good reason these
companies have close ties with the TLAs in the D.C. area...where, perhaps
coincidentally, they have major offices.)

My Cyphernomicon has more information about the roles the credit agencies
have played in creating false identities and maintaining their cover, and
the role of FinCEN and its ties to these nominally-private agencies.

What this report about Net-n-Yahoo has confirmed is his almost certain role
as an agent of the U.S. intelligence agencies. His role in the Pollard case
is likely to come out in the next few months.

(Look for legislation from Feinswine and others making it a felony to
disclose Social Security numbers....)

--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 at 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."









From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 16:48:45 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:48:45 +0800
Subject: Progress on online stock markets
Message-ID: <01I7RM6OZWJK8Y4XOW@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	Anyone know how secure this company's web servers, etcetera are?
	-Allen

>   Avis

>                 E-TRADE WANTS TO SELL IPOS OVER THE INTERNET

>     Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net
>     Copyright &copy 1996 San Francisco Examiner
      
>   SAN FRANCISCO (Aug 1, 1996 00:05 a.m. EDT) -- E-Trade Securities Inc.,
>   the Palo Alto, Calif., company that sells stocks over the Internet,
>   has asked the National Association of Securities Dealers for
>   permission to form an investment banking division to sell initial
>   public offerings over the Internet.
   
>   E-Trade executive vice president David Traversi said if the NASD
>   approves his request, the company would start bringing small firms
>   public and would also seek to co-underwrite big deals brought by large
>   investment banks.
   
>   Traversi said E-Trade's two-fold objective aimed to create a new way
>   to bring small companies public and give small investors a chance to
>   buy new stock issues that usually get bought by institutional
>   investors.

[...]

>   Traversi said E-Trade would also try to get listed as a co-underwriter
>   for big IPOs, like last September's Netscape offering. In the past,
>   small investors have complained that such big deals are sold to
>   institutional investors, who rake in huge profits before small
>   investors get a crack at the offering. To offer such deals online,
>   however, E-Trade would have to get the approval of the lead
>   underwriter on each offering.
   
>   "Right now, without naming names, there are large investment firms
>   that have indicated an interest in having us as a co-manager" of their
>   IPOs, Traversi said.
   
>   But before E-Trade can do anything more, its pending application to
>   form an investment bank has to be approved by the NASD, which
>   regulates small securities dealers. Traversi said he expected NASD
>   approval this fall.





From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Thu Aug  1 16:58:36 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:58:36 +0800
Subject: CDT
Message-ID: <01I7RM0CJM388Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _____ _____ _______
   / ____|  __ \__   __|   ____        ___               ____             __
  | |    | |  | | | |     / __ \____  / (_)______  __   / __ \____  _____/ /_
  | |    | |  | | | |    / /_/ / __ \/ / / ___/ / / /  / /_/ / __ \/ ___/ __/
  | |____| |__| | | |   / ____/ /_/ / / / /__/ /_/ /  / ____/ /_/ (__  ) /_
   \_____|_____/  |_|  /_/    \____/_/_/\___/\__, /  /_/    \____/____/\__/
   The Center for Democracy and Technology  /____/     Volume 2, Number 29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      A briefing on public policy issues affecting civil liberties online
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 CDT POLICY POST Volume 2, Number 29                        August 1, 1996

 CONTENTS: (1) Clinton Administration, Congress Propose Sweeping
               Anti-Terrorism Initiatives
           (2) How to Subscribe/Unsubscribe
           (3) About CDT, contacting us

  ** This document may be redistributed freely with this banner intact **
        Excerpts may be re-posted with permission of <editor at cdt.org>
         ** This document looks best when viewed in COURIER font **
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, CONGRESS PROPOSE SWEEPING ANTI-TERRORISM
    INITIATIVES

In the wake of the recent bombing at the Olympics and the suspected
terrorist involvement in the TWA crash, the Clinton Administration and
members of Congress are proposing a set of sweeping counter-terrorism
initiatives. If enacted into law, these proposals will dramatically
increase law enforcement surveillance authority over the Internet and other
advanced communications technologies. An outline of the Administration's
proposal was circulated on Capitol Hill on Monday July 29.

President Clinton has urged Congress to pass new counter-terrorism
legislation before the Congressional recess at the end of this week.  While
several prominent Republican members of Congress, including House Speaker
Newt Gingrich (R-GA), have said publicly that Congress should not rush into
any new counter-terrorism legislation, most observers believe there is a
strong possibility that some or all of the Administration's proposal will
be enacted before the August recess.

The draft proposal contains several measures which were rejected by
Congress as part of the previous counter-terrorism initiative proposed
last year after the Oklahoma City bombing, as well as several new measures
including as-yet unspecified changes to U.S. encryption policy and funding
for the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA, a.k.a.
Digital Telephony).

CDT is concerned that the latest counter-terrorism efforts on Capitol Hill
are occurring without appropriate deliberation.  Major policy decisions
expanding the surveillance powers of law enforcement should not be made
without careful consideration of the necessity of such proposals and the
relative benefit to society. In the coming days and weeks, CDT will work
with Congressional leaders, privacy advocates, and the net.community to
ensure that constitutional civil liberties and the openness of the Internet
are protected as Congress considers counter-terrorism measures.
________________________________________________________________________

MAJOR POINTS OF THE COUNTER-TERRORISM PROPOSALS CIRCULATING ON THE HILL

The administration's new counter-terrorism initiative and other amendments
circulating this week in Congress contain numerous provisions, but four
are of particular concern to the net.community:

* New Threats to Encryption, Opposition to the Pro-CODE Bill
* Funding for Digital Telephony Without Public Accountability
* Amendment to Criminalize 'Bomb-Making' Information on the Internet
* Expanded Authority for Multi-Point, "Roving" Wiretaps

The full text of the Administration's proposal and background information
are available at CDT's counter-terrorism Web Page:

    http://www.cdt.org/policy/terrorism/

       --------------------------------------------------------

I. NEW THREATS TO ENCRYPTION, OPPOSITION TO THE PRO-CODE BILL

The Administration's outline contains the following statement on encryption:

 "* Encryption -- We will seek legislation to strengthen our ability to
    prevent terrorists from coming into the possession of the technology
    to encrypt their communications and data so that they are beyond the
    reach of law enforcement.  We oppose legislation that would eliminate
    current export barriers and encouraging the proliferation of encryption
    which blocks appropriate access to protect public safety and the
    national security."

While no specific legislative language has yet been proposed, this
represents the first statement by the Administration that they will seek
legislation to further restrict encryption.  Even more troubling, the
Administration is clearly attempting to use the recent suspected terrorist
incidents to push for a new and more restrictive encryption policy.

This new proposal comes as Congress is finally beginning to seriously
consider major changes in U.S. encryption policy. Bipartisan legislation
in both the House and Senate to relax encryption export controls is gaining
momentum.  The Senate Commerce Committee has held 3 hearings in the last 6
weeks, and is preparing to vote to send the Burns/Leahy "Pro-CODE" bill (S.
1726) to the floor of the Senate.  The Administration's attempt to leverage
the public's concern about terrorism to block passage of the Pro-CODE bill
is disturbing, and poses a significant threat to privacy and security on the
Internet.

CDT is working with members of Congress, privacy advocates, and the
communications and computer industries to oppose any attempt by the
Administration to impose new restrictions on encryption, and we continue to
work to move the bipartisan export relief legislation through Congress.

       --------------------------------------------------------

II. FUNDING FOR DIGITAL TELEPHONY WITHOUT PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY

The Administration is also seeking to override the public accountability
provisions of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA
- a.k.a. 'Digital Telephony') by providing a funding for the law in a way
that prevents public oversight of the FBI's surveillance ability.

Enacted in October of 1994, granted law enforcement new authority to
influence the design of telecommunications networks (the Internet,
Commercial online services, and BBS's were exempted) in order to preserve
their ability to conduct court authorized electronic surveillance.

Congress balanced this new authority with a number of mechanisms to ensure
public accountability over law enforcement surveillance ability.
While complicated, the public accountability mechanisms are designed to
work as follows:

* Law enforcement provides telecommunications carriers, the Congress,
  and the public with notice of its surveillance capacity needs (i.e.,
  the number of simultaneous wiretaps in a given geographic location)
  with an opportunity for public comment.

* Based on an assessment of the reasonableness of the law enforcement
  surveillance capacity request, Congress appropriates money to cover
  the cost of modifications.  If Congress does not believe law
  enforcement has adequately justified its request, money will not be
  appropriated.

* Telecommunications carriers are not obligated to comply with the
  statute or make any capacity modifications without government
  reimbursement.

In October 1995, the FBI published its first notice of surveillance
capacity (see CDT Policy Post Vol. 1, No. 26).  The telecommunications
industry and privacy advocates used the public accountability provisions of
CALEA to respond to the FBI's request and argued that the FBI had not
adequately justified the extensive surveillance capability contained in the
request.  As a result, Congress has not yet appropriated funds and no
modifications have been made.

The FBI clearly believes that the public accountability provisions of CALEA
are working **too well**, and appears to be using the recent focus on
terrorism to push for a new funding mechanism which does not contain public
oversight.

CDT is fighting hard to ensure that the public accountability provisions of
CALEA, which have until now prevented the FBI from acquiring unnecessary
surveillance capacity, remain a part of the law, and will vigorously oppose
any effort by the FBI and the Clinton Administration to remove the last
opportunity for public oversight over law enforcement power.

       --------------------------------------------------------

III. THE AVAILABILITY OF 'BOMB-MAKING' INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) has reintroduced an amendment to make it
illegal to disseminate information on how to construct explosives knowing
that the information will be used in furtherance of a federal crime.  The
amendment was adopted by the Senate earlier this month as part of a
Department of Defense Appropriations bill.  CDT believes that the vague
provisions of the Feinstein amendment could have a chilling effect on online
speech, needlessly duplicate existing criminal statutes, and should be
removed.

Feinstein first proposed the amendment as part of the 1995
counter-terrorism bill. The initial Feinstein amendment was extremely broad
and would have resulted in a flat ban on certain constitutionally protected
speech online.  After civil liberties advocates objected, Feinstein
narrowed her amendment substantially, although it was ultimately dropped
from the final terrorism bill signed in April 1996.

       --------------------------------------------------------

IV.  EXPANDED WIRETAP AUTHORITY

The Administration's proposal would also significantly expand current
wiretapping authority to allow multi-point (or "roving") wiretaps. This
would dramatically change surveillance authority to include wiretaps of
INDIVIDUALS instead of LOCATIONS.

This proposal would do away with the delicate balance between privacy and
law enforcement that Congress has struck over 30 years of wiretapping
legislation. Federal law has always required that wiretaps issue for a
specific location, to meet Fourth Amendment requirements. In 1986 Congress
introduced a narrow exception to this rule, only for cases where it could
be shown that the target was intentionally evading wiretaps by changing
facilities. The Administration proposal would completely remove this
standard, allowing so-called "roving taps" for any persons whose behavior
makes wiretapping difficult for law enforcement.

The administration proposed similar provisions in the spring of 1995 in the
wake of the Oklahoma City bombing. These provisions proved controversial in
Congress and were dropped from the final bill.

________________________________________________________________________

FOR MORE INFORMATION

For more information on the counter-terrorism proposals and their impact on
the Internet check out:

CDT's Counter-Terrorism Page:     http://www.cdt.org/policy/terrorism/
CDT's Encryption Policy Page:     http://www.cdt.org/crypto/
CDT's Digital Telephony Page:     http://www.cdt.org/digtel.html
Encryption Policy Resource Page:  http://www.crypto.com/

------------------------------------------------------------------------

(4) SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION

Be sure you are up to date on the latest public policy issues affecting
civil liberties online and how they will affect you! Subscribe to the CDT
Policy Post news distribution list.  CDT Policy Posts, the regular news
publication of the Center For Democracy and Technology, are received by
nearly 10,000 Internet users, industry leaders, policy makers and
activists, and have become the leading source for information about
critical free speech and privacy issues affecting the Internet and other
interactive communications media.

To subscribe to CDT's Policy Post list, send mail to

     policy-posts-request at cdt.org

with a subject:

     subscribe policy-posts

If you ever wish to remove yourself from the list, send mail to the
above address with a subject of:

     unsubscribe policy-posts

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

(5) ABOUT THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY/CONTACTING US

The Center for Democracy and Technology is a non-profit public interest
organization based in Washington, DC. The Center's mission is to develop
and advocate public policies that advance democratic values and
constitutional civil liberties in new computer and communications
technologies.

Contacting us:

General information:  info at cdt.org
World Wide Web:       URL:http://www.cdt.org/
FTP                   URL:ftp://ftp.cdt.org/pub/cdt/

Snail Mail:  The Center for Democracy and Technology
             1634 Eye Street NW * Suite 1100 * Washington, DC 20006
             (v) +1.202.637.9800 * (f) +1.202.637.0968

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
End Policy Post 2.29                                             8/1/96
-----------------------------------------------------------------------







From johnbr at atl.mindspring.com  Thu Aug  1 17:08:40 1996
From: johnbr at atl.mindspring.com (John Brothers)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 08:08:40 +0800
Subject: Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960801205207.006acf90@pop.atl.mindspring.com>


At 10:20 PM 7/31/96 -0800, Jim Bell wrote:
>At 07:49 PM 7/31/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:
>>2. They found a _shotgun_ in his cabin.
>
>No, no, Tim.   The proper way to deliver this to a TV audience is, "They 
>found an ARSENAL in his COMPOUND!"
>(see how much more exciting it is?!?  BTW, how many wives does he have?)

None!  and he lives with his mother!  Obviously a complete sicko!

:)
---
John Brothers 
   Do you have a right not to be offended?






From johnbr at atl.mindspring.com  Thu Aug  1 17:17:22 1996
From: johnbr at atl.mindspring.com (John Brothers)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 08:17:22 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960801204953.006b2b7c@pop.atl.mindspring.com>


At 02:23 AM 8/1/96 -0400, you wrote:
>John Brothers,
>
>Which locality do you live in?  I've got all this toxic waste that I've 
>been collecting in return for receiving large sums of money, I'd like to 
>get rid of it as cheply as possible. I thought I might just burn it in a 
>good  "true" libertarian neighborhood.
>
>You don't mind, do you?

I live in the Alpharetta area of Georgia, a northern suburb of Atlanta.  You're
welcome to come here and burn whatever you like.  



Oh, of course, I assume that you'll be properly and safely capturing and
disposing the toxic ash.  Because, after all, if a single microgram
of those toxins were to land on my property, I would be forced to sue you, 
take all of that money, and set up a legal robot to continue to sue your
descendents for the next seven thousand generations.  

And, I guess if the investigation were to show that you were criminally
negligent in the proper disposal of those toxins, you would have to be
punished.   Speaking for myself as a darwinist libertarian, the only
fitting punishment to being criminally negligent on such a grand scale
would be to execute you, and sterilize every known trace of your genetic code 
in the gene pool - i.e. all genetic children, brothers, sisters, parents and
so forth.  You may have some illegitimate/secret offspring or siblings which
may survive, but we can't go around tracking everyone's genetic code.. It would
be an affront to privacy, and libertarianism in general.  

I'm sure that your lawyer could probably argue the case down to the point
where the only punishment would be your execution, and I guess that would
have to suffice - your family wasn't directly involved in the planning and
execution of this most heinous crime. 

But, I'm sure that you would be a properly responsible citizen, and clean
up carefully after yourself.  It might smell bad, and be a generally unpleasant
place, but as a libertarian, I don't have a right to control what you do
with your property, nor to object to bad smells - I can purchase filters
and such to avoid that.  And if it got unpleasant enough, I would just move
away, and leave you and your bad smells alone.  

Have a nice day,
 
---
John Brothers 
   Do you have a right not to be offended?






From merriman at amaonline.com  Thu Aug  1 17:19:15 1996
From: merriman at amaonline.com (David K. Merriman)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 08:19:15 +0800
Subject: Brain Tennis with Dorthy
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960801064418.006ccf7c@mail1.amaonline.com>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 11:59 AM 08/1/96 -0400, Duncan Frissell <frissell at panix.com> wrote:
>I'm following the Brain Tennis Match between Dorothy Denning and John
>Gilmore on encryption and the right to absolute privacy on Hot Wired
>(http://www.hotwired.com/braintennis/96/31/index0a.html).
>
>Were I a participant in this exercise, I would lob the following to Dorothy:
>

... <good questions excised> ...

One might wonder how Dorothy's opinions about privacy et al would change were it *her* communications/privacy/person at risk (be it through torture, GAK, etc.).

Were a government - duly elected - to come into power similar to that in 30's Germany or 70's Viet Nam, so that intellectuals or the educated became the targets of oppression, would she be as adamant about the perceived "rights" of Government to intrude in her private life, monitor her communications, and so on?

Inquiring minds want to know.... :-)

Dave Merriman

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgBe+MVrTvyYOzAZAQHoygP/ZeEn00d+uAuJXp29igeMTPe0U8muD3uy
tIZItV2e05D9VLaCNdzZKiK9pqGsjA6VzB1sUd8uRUtPu0GKVGrylgjuA/QoK/m6
xOMGLNcvPZVhVbqGMCkFXwR6U5KifMd1mAb14Au25MR7hpfzpCwMBQZ5y495AhRx
utMueAGDmIo=
=OARQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From warlord at MIT.EDU  Thu Aug  1 17:29:11 1996
From: warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 08:29:11 +0800
Subject: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough?
In-Reply-To: <199608012016.WAA00739@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <9608012108.AA17627@bart-savagewood.MIT.EDU>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hi,

> Is security provided by 1024-bit PGP key sufficient against most powerful
> computers that are available today? Say if smoe organization spent 10
> billions of dollars on a cracking machine, would it be possible to crack 
> the keys in reasonable time?

Well, this depends on a couple of definitions.  For example, how do
you define "reasonable time"?  The most concise answer I can give you
is "we don't know".  An answer that would make you feel more
comfortable is that we believe that factoring a 1024-bit key using
GNFS is about 300,000 times harder than factoring a 512-bit key using
GNFS.

This doesn't take into account increase in computer power.  If you
take into account increase in technology at the current rate, doubling
every 18 months, then a 1024-bit key should be breakable in about 100
years.

However this doesn't take into account increases in algorithms.  There
is no way to predict the discovery of a new factoring algorithm.  In
addition, there is no way to predict a computational discovery which
might increase the base technology faster than the current trend.

To get back to your question: If smoe [sic] organization spent 10
billions [sic] of dollars on a cracking machine, would it be possible
to crack the keys in a reasonable time?

Well, lets assume a P100 is 50 MIPS and costs $500.  Then the $10B
would purchase 20 million machines.  Discounting the storage
requirements (factoring a number this large will probably require on
the order of hundreds of GBs of storage) and end-time processing power
(unknown) required to factor a 1024-bit number, this set of machines
would provide "enough" relations for a 1024-bit number in about 1.5
years per key.

- -derek

PS: These are napkin-style numbers, and I'm making a lot of
assumptions here...  I assume no responsibility if you use these
numbers and they are wrong.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface

iQBuAwUBMgEcrTh0K1zBsGrxAQGNaALEDEtO8/pXZPp134SBcjUqD3NO2P3siirR
8a4pA6S15fwtVDrl2ZWeZb2XL65hbhcWpZ2s6Q3eaQOvFPOiytLtfcujUFV7ef+i
9zJKgUlUFMkOP9fmhZdjZXA=
=gPv4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From shabbir at vtw.org  Thu Aug  1 17:40:28 1996
From: shabbir at vtw.org (Voters Telecommunications Watch)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 08:40:28 +0800
Subject: ALERT: Congress rushing to pass surveillance plan!  Call now! (8/1/96)
Message-ID: <199608012049.QAA13473@panix3.panix.com>


======================================================================
 ____  _____ ____     ___  _     _____ ____ _____ 
|  _ \| ____|  _ \   / _ \| |   | ____|  _ \_   _|  CONGRESS RUSHING TO
| |_) |  _| | | | | | |_| | |   |  _| | |_) || |    ENACT SURVEILLANCE
|  _ <| |___| |_| | |  _  | |___| |___|  _ < | |    LEGISLATION.  CALL
|_| \_\_____|____/  |_| |_|_____|_____|_| \_\|_|    CONGRESS NOW! 8/1/96

		REPOST THIS ALERT WHERE APPROPRIATE
	     DO NOT REDISTRIBUTE AFTER AUGUST 7, 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of contents
	Introduction
	What you can do now	
	Background
	Participating organizations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION

Late Wednesday, Congress and the Clinton Administration reached a
preliminary agreement on a sweeping new surveillance initiative. The
President and several Congressional leaders are pushing for a vote on the
measure BEFORE CONGRESS RECESSES ON AUGUST 2.

If enacted, parts of the proposal would dramatically impact privacy and
security on the Internet and other advanced communications technologies.

Of particular concern are provisions which:

1. Allows law enforcement to wiretap "suspected terrorists" for up to
   48 hours BEFORE obtaining a court order
2. Provide funding for the Digital Telephony Proposal without any public
   accountability over how the FBI spends the funds

Other provisions are also circulating that would:

3. Threaten to impose new restrictions on encryption technologies
4. Seek to criminalize the distribution of 'bomb-making' information on
   the Internet that is legal in print.

Congress needs to hear from you.  Congress will rush through the passage
of massive new surveillance plans with privacy risks unless you
show them there is support for slow, deliberate, reasoned thought on
the issue.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW

	         CALL KEY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IMMEDIATELY!
	              NO LATER THAN FRIDAY (8/2/96)

Please contact as many elected officials on the list below as you can.
Urge them to "go slow" and carefully consider the impact these
surveillance proposals will have on the privacy and security of
all Internet users.

Tell them while you appreciate their concern about combating terrorism,
the measures being proposed have many potential side effects which must be
carefully considered.

1. Call the key members of Congress below and ask them to "go slow" and
   examine the issues before rushing into changing the delicate balance
   of law enforcement surveillance and the public.

2. If you are at a loss for words, use the following sample communique:

	SAMPLE COMMUNIQUE

	Dear _________,

	Please do not rush the passage of counter terrorism legislation;
	I'm concerned that Congress is rushing without carefully
	considering the implications of privacy.  I'm from <city, state>.

	Thanks, <click>

   You should call the following members of Congress because they
   are steering this legislation and need to hear there is support
   for slow, deliberate, thoughtful consideration of this issue.
   Some of thee members *have publicly expressed reservations* about this
   legislation, and we should support them in their efforts.

Senate members:

      P ST Name and Address           Phone           Fax
      = == ========================   ==============  ==============
      R MS Lott, Trent                1-202-224-6253  1-202-224-2262
      D DE Biden Jr., Joseph R.       1-202-224-5042  1-202-224-0139
      D SD Daschle, Thomas A.         1-202-224-2321  1-202-224-2047
      R UT Hatch, Orrin G.            1-202-224-5251  1-202-224-6331
      R PA Specter, Arlen             1-202-224-4254  1-717-782-4920
      D VT Leahy, Patrick J.          1-202-224-4242  1-202-224-3595

House members:

   Dist ST Name, Address, and Party       Phone            Fax
   ==== == ========================       ==============   ==============
      6 GA Gingrich, Newt (R)             1-202-225-4501   1-202-225-4656
      3 MO Gephardt, Richard A. (D)       1-202-225-2671   1-202-225-7452
      6 IL Hyde, Henry J. (R)             1-202-225-4561   1-202-226-1240
     14 MI Conyers Jr., John (D)          1-202-225-5126   1-202-225-0072

President William Clinton:
	White House Comment Line: 1-202-456-1414

3. If you get a response, take a moment and send mail to vtw at vtw.org
   with "feedback" in the subject line.

	$ Mail vtw at vtw.org
	Subject: my feedback from calling Congress
	They said they're not going to pass most of Clinton's package,
	because it upsets the delicate balance between law enforcement and
	the public. 
	^D
	Mail sent!
	
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND

Among other things, the law enforcement proposals circulating on Capitol
Hill include provisions which:

o WIRETAPPING WITHOUT COURT ORDER ALLOWED FOR 48 HOURS

  Congress and the President have already agreed to provisions which
  would dramatically expand law enforcement surveillance authority. Both
  of these provisions were proposed by the President as part of the 1995
  counter-terrorism legislation, but were dropped from the final bill
  after Republicans and civil liberties advocates objected.

  The current proposal would expand law enforcement surveillance
  authority in two ways:

  - Emergency 48 Hour Wiretap Authority: Current law requires law
    enforcement officials to get the affirmative consent of a judge
    before installing a wiretap.

    The current proposal would expand law enforcement authority to
    wiretap "suspected terrorists" for up to 48 hours before obtaining a
    court order, limiting a critical 4th amendment safeguard.

  - Multi-Point "Roving" Wiretaps: Current law allows law enforcement to
    tap only specific LOCATIONS (i.e., a telephone number). In certain
    very limited circumstances, law enforcement can tap a specific
    INDIVIDUAL if it can be shown to a judge that the suspect is moving
    from place to place with the specific intent of thwarting law
    enforcement.

  The current proposal would expand this so-called "roving" wiretap
  authority by making it much easier for law enforcement to tap specific
  INDIVIDUALS as opposed to specific physical locations.  This change
  would dramatically effect the balance between 4th Amendment privacy
  rights and public safety which has existed for nearly 30 years, and
  should not be enacted without careful consideration of the
  implications.

o FUNDING FOR DIGITAL TELEPHONY WITHOUT PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY

  The Administration and Congress are seeking funding to implement the
  Digital Telephony Law in a way which eliminates any opportunity for
  public oversight of law enforcement surveillance ability.

  The controversial law, known officially as the Communications
  Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), granted the FBI new
  authority to influence the design of telecommunications networks.  At
  the same time, the law provided substantial public oversight over the
  FBI's surveillance ability by requiring the FBI to state, on the
  public record, what its surveillance needs are.

  The FBI has faced stiff resistance from civil liberties groups and some
  members of Congress and has not yet been able to obtain funding to
  implement the requirements of the law.

  As part of the current proposal, the FBI is seeking a mechanism which
  will provide funding for CALEA in a way which skirts the public
  oversight provisions of the law.  This is an extremely troubling move
  by law enforcement which, if enacted, would allow law enforcement
  essentially unlimited authority to influence the design of
  telecommunications networks without any accountability.

Other provisions which could show up in legislation in the next 72 hours are:

o BOMB MAKING MATERIAL ON THE INTERNET

  In the wake of the recent public concern about terrorism, Senators
  Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Joseph Biden (D-DE) have renewed their
  efforts to pass legislation to restrict the availability of 'bomb-
  making' information on the Internet.

  The Feinstein/Biden amendment was added to the Senate Defense
  Appropriations bill (S. 1762) in early July, and is not currently part
  of the new law enforcement initiative.  However, the amendment poses a
  serious threat to chill the the free flow of information on the
  Internet.

o THREATEN TO IMPOSE NEW RESTRICTIONS ON ENCRYPTION TECHNOLOGIES:

  While no specific legislation has been proposed, the Clinton
  Administration has circulated an outline to Congress which states:

    "We will seek legislation to strengthen our ability to
    prevent terrorists from coming into the possession of the technology
    to encrypt their communications and data so that they are beyond the
    reach of law enforcement."

  This statement marks the first time that the Administration has
  suggested legislation to restrict encryption.  This is especially
  troubling because it comes at a time of growing Congressional support
  for legislation to promote privacy and security tools for the Net.
  Of even more concern, the Administration is clearly attempting to use
  the recent suspected terrorist incidents to push for a new and more
  restrictive encryption policy.

  If the Administration succeeds in passing new restrictions on
  encryption as part of the new surveillance legislation, the future
  of the Internet as a secure and trusted platform for commerce and
  private communication will be threatened.

Some or all of these provisions may be included in a package voted
on by both houses by August 3rd.  It is not clear what a final bill
will look like, and some of these provisions may not be considered by
Congress until later this summer.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATIONS

The following organizations all urge you to take this action to combat the
surveillance initiatives.   Check their pages for more background
information on these issues.

	American Civil Liberties Union (http://www.aclu.org)
	American Communication Association
	Center for Democracy and Technology (http://www.cdt.org)
	Electronic Frontier Foundation (http://www.eff.org)
	EF-Austin (http://www.efa.org)
	Electronic Privacy Information Center (http://www.epic.org)
	Feminists for Free Expression
	National Libertarian Party (http://www.lp.org)
	National Writers Union (http://www.nwu.org/nwu/)
	People For the American Way (http://www.pfaw.org)
	Voters Telecommunications Watch (http://www.vtw.org)
	Wired Ventures Ltd. (http://www.hotwired.com)
======================================================================





From jya at pipeline.com  Thu Aug  1 17:42:27 1996
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 08:42:27 +0800
Subject: PCC_war
Message-ID: <199608012131.VAA06059@pipe2.t2.usa.pipeline.com>


   7-29-96. EBNews: 
 
   "Encryption ICs Enable Ironclad Net Security." 
 
      New encryption ICs on PCMCIA cards will be unveiled 
      imminently to allow PC users to make transactions over 
      the Internet with ironclad security. "This will open up 
      electronic commerce pervasively and launch a new market 
      for PCs," said TIS's Bill Sweet. Both National 
      Semiconductor and VLSI Technology plan to unveil 
      affordable chips shortly for PCMCIA encryption cards. 
 
      National's thumb-scan project, which aims to provide an 
      additional security factor, is a joint effort with 
      Identix. In this system, a holographic laser chip on the 
      card would image a portion of the holder's thumbprint. 
      That image will be compared with the holder's digital 
      thumbprint pattern stored on a memory chip in the card. 
 
   7-31-96. Jane's: 
 
   "Future Warfare | Rise of the robots." 
 
      A US Defense Science Board (DSB) task force is putting 
      the final touches to a study that members promise will 
      be one of the most controversial ever produced by the 
      panel. The next century adversary will aggressively use 
      offensive information warfare, rely on underground and 
      covert urban facilities and have some ability to attack 
      low earth orbiting satellites. It will require a 
      "revolution in military affairs" achieved through 
      enhanced surveillance capabilities, weapons of mass 
      destruction, thousands of inexpensive missiles, a few 
      very low observable cruise missiles, mines and diesel 
      submarines. 
 
      The only aspect of tactics and technology that everyone 
      in the DoD seems to agree on is that the most important 
      developments for warfighting over the next 10 to 20 
      years will be related to information systems. 
 
   ----- 
 
   http://jya.com/pccwar.txt  (19 kb for 2) 
 
   PCC_war 
 
 
 
 
 
 





From drose at azstarnet.com  Thu Aug  1 17:53:33 1996
From: drose at azstarnet.com (David M. Rose)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 08:53:33 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <199608012006.NAA22850@web.azstarnet.com>


On 1 Aug 1996 (Timothy C. May) wrote:

>I'm with Duncan and Lucky on this one. Nations with a "Privacy Ombudsman"
>are almost always nations with extensive files on individuals, their
>habits, and their political activities.
>
>Having a "Privacy Ombudsman" is a bone thrown to the proles. I suspect a
>police state like Singapore has such a person.

My understanding is that the acceptable term is "ombud", or possibly
"ombuds".  Cf.: "chair", "anchor", "milk", "post", "g-", "colored",  "fire",
"police", "China", "French", etc.






From jim at ACM.ORG  Thu Aug  1 18:25:07 1996
From: jim at ACM.ORG (Jim Gillogly)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 09:25:07 +0800
Subject: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough?
In-Reply-To: <9608012108.AA17627@bart-savagewood.MIT.EDU>
Message-ID: <199608012238.PAA25123@mycroft.rand.org>



Somebody says:
>> Is security provided by 1024-bit PGP key sufficient against most powerful
>> computers that are available today? Say if smoe organization spent 10
>> billions of dollars on a cracking machine, would it be possible to crack 
>> the keys in reasonable time?

Derek Atkins <warlord at MIT.EDU> responds with some useful and authoritative
information -- thanks.

But the original author also needs to step back and understand his
security needs.  In particular, if you're trying to protect your
information against an enemy who is willing to spend $10B to get it,
they'll have a lot of options other than hiding in a back room with some
cracking equipment.  Would you be willing to sell them the information
you're trying to protect for (say) 10% of that $10B?  Would your partner?
Your wife?

	Jim Gillogly
	Hevensday, 9 Wedmath S.R. 1996, 22:37





From tomw at netscape.com  Thu Aug  1 18:35:55 1996
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 09:35:55 +0800
Subject: Let's Say "No!" to Single, World Versions of Software
In-Reply-To: <199608011714.KAA08903@clotho.c2.org>
Message-ID: <3201376A.2847@netscape.com>


sameer wrote:
> 
>> The only thing they can revoke is their permission to provide it for
>> download over the internet.  They can't revoke our permission to sell
>> it in stores or via snail mail.
> 
>         Where do you get this idea? Got an inside track into the minds
> of the supreme court?

The "they" mentioned above is the State Department.  Congress can try
to do anything.

-- 
You should only break rules of style if you can    | Tom Weinstein
coherently explain what you gain by so doing.      | tomw at netscape.com





From hua at chromatic.com  Thu Aug  1 18:36:44 1996
From: hua at chromatic.com (Ernest Hua)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 09:36:44 +0800
Subject: Freeh slimes again: Digital Telephony costs $2 billion now ...
Message-ID: <199608012258.PAA29066@ohio.chromatic.com>


Louis Freeh is now asking the Congress for $2 billion to fund
Digital Telephony.  Yes, that is FOUR TIMES what he said it
would cost the taxpayers to give up their own privacy.  Score
one for the cynics who said $500 million was not enough.

Ern





From jti at i-manila.com.ph  Thu Aug  1 18:41:25 1996
From: jti at i-manila.com.ph (Jerome Tan)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 09:41:25 +0800
Subject: ****Tacoma, Washington Starts Taxing Internet Access 07/30/96 (fwd)
Message-ID: <01BB8041.12365200@ip95.i-manila.com.ph>


Here in Philippines, the government tax for connecting to the Internet, the percentage is 10%.


Forwarded message:

> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 11:26:59 -0400
> From: "Joseph M. Reagle Jr." <reagle at rpcp.mit.edu>
> Subject: ****Tacoma, Washington Starts Taxing Internet Access 07/30/96
>   	  				 
> >WASHINGTON, DC, U.S.A., 1996 JUL 30 (NB) -- By Bill Pietrucha.  
> >Tacoma, Washington, has just gained the distinction of being the 
> >only municipality in the United States to tax Internet Access 
> >providers (IAPs) like telephone service providers. 
> >

Somebody needs to do their homework. Austin, TX has been taxing ISP's
for at least a year now. A recent Internet Provider meeting on this
issue resulted in a return to ISP's of a goodly amound of their taxes
because of various issues (read that I didn't go to meeting, I don't run an
ISP but a SOHO consultancy w/ Internet services).

> >The city of Tacoma has extended its six percent gross receipts tax on  
> >telecommunications services to include Internet services, Information 
> >Technology Association of America (ITAA) spokesperson Bob Cohen 
> >told Newsbytes. 

I have to pay the state 8.25% interest on any funds my customers deliver
to me.

> >If other cities attempted to follow Tacoma's lead in taxing IAPs,  
> >Miler said, it could cause the "Balkanization of the Internet, a 
> >hodgepodge of confusing, conflicting, and difficult to administer 
> >Internet tax rules and regulations. 

Agreed.

                                                       Jim Choate









From wb8foz at nrk.com  Thu Aug  1 18:42:11 1996
From: wb8foz at nrk.com (David Lesher)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 09:42:11 +0800
Subject: FPGAs and Heat (Re: Paranoid Musings)
In-Reply-To: <199608011848.LAA11828@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199608012313.TAA12748@nrk.com>


> 
> Timothy C. May writes:
> 
> > This was a company in Bowie, Maryland, closely linked with the NSA and with
> > the "supercomputer centers." 
> 
> That's one of the things that killed Thinking Machines.  It turned out
> that a standard supercomputer with PIM chips for memory could give the
> same performance for less money.  

See:

http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/beuwolf/beuwolf.html

Don is doing interesting things with less...

-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433





From adamsc at io-online.com  Thu Aug  1 18:42:59 1996
From: adamsc at io-online.com (Chris Adams)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 09:42:59 +0800
Subject: Tolerance
Message-ID: <199608012148.OAA21170@cygnus.com>


Just a comment to all of the 'true libertarians' out there, especially
the "defend to the death" types:  How many of you defended Mr.
Sternlight's recent membership?

# Chris Adams <adamsc at io-online.com> - Webpages for sale! Se habla JavaScript!
# Automatically receive my resume or PGPKEY by sending email with a subject
# of 'send PGPKEY' or 'send resume'. Capitalization counts so be careful!
# Web site: http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htm
 








From jimbell at pacifier.com  Thu Aug  1 18:46:38 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 09:46:38 +0800
Subject: Welcome Back
Message-ID: <199608012151.OAA17837@mail.pacifier.com>


At 12:52 PM 8/1/96 -0400, Brian Davis wrote:

>> Do you have an honest job or are you still taking the King's Shilling?
>
>I have opened a law practice.  Just this morning, I visited a client (in 
>jail) charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine  ...  in other words, 
>one of the Four Horsemen. They checked me for weapons, etc., upon entry, 
>but no one asked about any cryptographic munitions.

Joke of the day:

A swarthy fellow was in jail, and was visited by his sister and nerd brother 
in law.  He tells them, "next time you show up, bring me something with a file 
in it."  His bro in law brought a floppy disk...

Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From steve at miranova.com  Thu Aug  1 18:51:11 1996
From: steve at miranova.com (Steven L Baur)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 09:51:11 +0800
Subject: Terror attack!
In-Reply-To: <32010AC5.1513@vail.tivoli.com>
Message-ID: <m2u3um7le9.fsf@deanna.miranova.com>


>>>>> "Mike" == Mike McNally <m5 at vail.tivoli.com> writes:

Mike> Why don't they just be done with it and declare martial law?
	
Wait 'til after the election.
-- 
steve at miranova.com baur
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be proofread for $250/hour.
Andrea Seastrand: For your vote on the Telecom bill, I will vote for anyone
except you in November.





From gary at systemics.com  Thu Aug  1 18:55:20 1996
From: gary at systemics.com (Gary Howland)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 09:55:20 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <ae26305c070210048f37@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <3201257B.31D2DE92@systemics.com>


Timothy C. May wrote:
> 
> Having a "Privacy Ombudsman" is a bone thrown to the proles. I suspect a
> police state like Singapore has such a person.
> 
> And related to the "photo I.D." discussion, most of these nations demand
> that passports be left at hotel desks when checking in. (At least they did
> when I spent 6 weeks travelling through Europe in 1983.) Perhaps the theory
> is that this stops people from running out on their bills, though credit
> cards do the same thing (*). However, the police reportedly inspect these
> passports and enter them into data bases to track movements.

Many still do.  Even ski hire shops in France require a passport, credit
card
or drivers licence to be _left_ with the shop (even hire car companies
don't
do this! - I suppose they've figured out you need your driving licence
...)

I was recently at a hotel in the Netherlands, and they required me to
fill
out a form asking for date and place of birth, passport number etc. etc.
I asked "What do you want this for?" and they replied "Oh, don't worry,
it's not for us, it's for the government"!!!  I look around me at the
dozen
or so people happily giving away these details, including my girlfriend
who later has to be given a lesson on misinformation ... (am I the only
one who fills out every form as Alexei Sayle with bad handwriting?)

Alexei
--
pub  1024/C001D00D 1996/01/22  Gary Howland <gary at systemics.com>
Key fingerprint =  0C FB 60 61 4D 3B 24 7D  1C 89 1D BE 1F EE 09 06 
^S
^A^Aoft FAT filesytem is extremely robust, ^Mrarely suffering from^T^T





From bdolan at use.usit.net  Thu Aug  1 19:07:10 1996
From: bdolan at use.usit.net (Brad Dolan)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 10:07:10 +0800
Subject: Terror attack!
In-Reply-To: <32010AC5.1513@vail.tivoli.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960801175240.3254A-100000@use.usit.net>


On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Mike McNally wrote:
> 
> Why don't they just be done with it and declare martial law?
> 	

Be patient.  They're working on it.

bd

Reuters, 8/1/96:

FBI Director Louis Freeh warned Congress on
Thursday that the United States was under attack from foreign terrorists and
said new counter-terrorism weapons were needed to fight back.

...

On the Atlanta bomb that caused two deaths and wounded 111 people, he said
the FBI had no evidence "of an international terrorist group or a 
sophisticated group targeting the Olympics in general with respect to 
that incident."

But he said the United States was clearly vulnerable to possible future
terrorist attacks involving nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. He said 
he had recently met Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Charles Krulak to discuss a
possible joint FBI-Marine study on ways of countering weapons of mass
destruction.

...







From wb8foz at nrk.com  Thu Aug  1 19:21:30 1996
From: wb8foz at nrk.com (David Lesher)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 10:21:30 +0800
Subject: Let's Say "No!" to Single, World Versions of Software
In-Reply-To: <320101B9.500F@netscape.com>
Message-ID: <199608012327.TAA12824@nrk.com>



Tom Weinstein writes:

> We only ship the domestic version to addresses inside the US.  They
> State Department seems to think this is sufficient.  Of course, a
> foreign person can always fly here and pick up a copy at Fry's, but
> that's not our problem.

Or just walk out of a Mission, and buy one on K Street.

But it's easier to just get an account on an ISP.

I recall several chats with a .nl UN Mission Staffer. He was on
Panix or PSI or such. Maybe we should require proof of citizenship
before granting a license to use IP.

(The irony was, he did not realize the Vienna Convention
covered his rented residence as well as the Mission...)


-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433





From wb8foz at nrk.com  Thu Aug  1 19:30:45 1996
From: wb8foz at nrk.com (David Lesher)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 10:30:45 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
In-Reply-To: <01I7RKOB77H48Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Message-ID: <199608012350.TAA12975@nrk.com>


> What, precisely, is an acid bomb? 

It may be:
	acid delay fuse;
or
	a "spray acid around" device...

-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433





From sandfort at crl.com  Thu Aug  1 20:08:10 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 11:08:10 +0800
Subject: POLL
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960801171855.20425I-100000@crl3.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

The electronic newsletter put out by the TV show, C-NET Central, 
had this item in the most recent issue:

------------------------------------------------------------------

5. "YOUR TURN": SHOULD YOU BE ABLE TO READ BOMB-MAKING INFO?

The United States and seven other governments are moving to
"felonize" distribution of bomb-making information on the Net
and other electronic media. Yet censorship of the Net was
recently dealt a double blow by twin defeats of the
Communications Decency Act. Is this strictly a free speech
issue? Or is there a difference in your mind between pictures of
naked people and blueprints for a pipe bomb? And can the Net
know the difference?

To contribute your opinion, phone CNET at 415/395-7805, enter
extension 5400, and leave a message. We'll listen to the
responses and broadcast some of the best on CNET radio.

Each week Digital Dispatch brings you the new "your turn"
question, and each Wednesday you can hear the responses to the
previous week's question on CNET radio:

		http://www.cnet.com/Content/Radio/

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Some of you may have a comment about this subject.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








From tomw at netscape.com  Thu Aug  1 20:11:50 1996
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 11:11:50 +0800
Subject: The "Secure" version of Netscape for Linux is *NOT*
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960801033402.00fc1ab8@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: <32014B0A.41C6@netscape.com>


Alan Olsen wrote:
> 
> I just installed the "secure" version of Netscape off of the "US Only"
> download site.
> 
> Seems that it is actualy the international version and not the 128 bit
> version.

What makes you think you got the export version?

Here's one way to find out.  If you look in the Security Preferences
panel under the Options menu, there are two "Configure" buttons for
configuring what ciphers are enabled for SSL 2 and SSL 3.  The domestic
version supports a greater variety of options, including triple DES.

-- 
You should only break rules of style if you can    | Tom Weinstein
coherently explain what you gain by so doing.      | tomw at netscape.com





From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Thu Aug  1 20:29:18 1996
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 11:29:18 +0800
Subject: crypto CD source
In-Reply-To: <199607311213.OAA19633@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <199608011855.TAA02027@server.test.net>



Alex de Joode <usura at replay.com> writez:
> [..]
> : They have a large supply of crypto software available on-line as well.
> : (No mention of ITAR on their software down load pages (78 Mb of
> : security related software they claim), and it looks you could download
> : the lot even if you weren't in the US).
> 
> ftp.replay.com has 220 Mb of crypto software available for download
> at no charge ....

I didn't make clear: their was no charge for down loading their
on-line stuff.  I think they are in the US, and mentioned their crypto
down load as having no restrictions because of the ITAR implications.

Just wondering if anyone outside the US had downloaded `PGP262.ZIP'
from their freely accessible ftp area.

I get my crypto from US sites also, and your's is on the list :-)

	ftp.dsi.unimi.it
	ftp.ox.ac.uk
	ftp.replay.com
	http://www.cs.hut.fi/crypto/

(a few more too that's all I can remember off the top of my head).

Now if their CD cost $10, and they weren't in the US, I might've
bought one.

Adam
--
#!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj
$/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1
lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)





From mpd at netcom.com  Thu Aug  1 20:29:22 1996
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 11:29:22 +0800
Subject: Tolerance
In-Reply-To: <199608012148.OAA21170@cygnus.com>
Message-ID: <199608020041.RAA07308@netcom19.netcom.com>


Someone wrote:

> Just a comment to all of the 'true libertarians' out there, especially
> the "defend to the death" types:  How many of you defended Mr.
> Sternlight's recent membership?

There is nothing to defend.  Anyone, including Dr. Sternlight, may
join this list at any time by mailing a "Suscrive" message to 
toad.com, and may leave it at any subsequent time by sending another 
message that says "unSuscrive."  

It's totally user-operated.  No intervention by anyone else required. :)

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     mpd at netcom.com     $    via Finger.                      $







From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 20:39:12 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 11:39:12 +0800
Subject: Tolerance
Message-ID: <ae26a3bb0d021004aa87@[205.199.118.202]>


At 10:46 PM 8/1/96, Chris Adams wrote:
>Just a comment to all of the 'true libertarians' out there, especially
>the "defend to the death" types:  How many of you defended Mr.
>Sternlight's recent membership?
>

I certainly did, as you all know.

But, to clear things up, I don't think I've ever in my life uttered the
phrase "defend to my death your right...."

(I don't think asking the 1000+ members of this list to say one way or
another is a good idea.)

--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 at 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."









From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Thu Aug  1 20:51:54 1996
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 11:51:54 +0800
Subject: Cracking RC4/40 for massive wiretapps
In-Reply-To: <199608010603.XAA19276@toad.com>
Message-ID: <199608020034.BAA02423@server.test.net>



Bill Stewart <stewarts at ix.netcom.com> writes:
> But those designs are for one-at-a-time cracks.  An interesting question
> is whether you can speed up performance substantially by cracking
> multiple messages at once.

For known plaintext attack on pure RC4 this would work marvelously,
should get close to linear speed up I think as the greatest overhead
is the key setup.

This was discussed some during the netscape SSL break, it didn't apply
to 40 bit SSL because it was really 128 bit, just with 88 bits
disclosed, so the 88 bits functioned as a salt.  But it applies just
fine to pure RC4-40, ... or even to ECB DES...

This is interesting as applied to DES, does anyone have any banking or
funds transfer protocols handy which use DES in ECB mode :-)

Perhaps we could get DES down to a manageable number of bits, together
with the argument that the attacker wouldn't care who's money he stole.

> For instance, if you've got known plaintext, such as a standard
> header format saying "FooVoice" or "BEGIN DSA-SIGNED..", you can try
> many keys and compare them with _many_ cyphertexts, which may not
> slow down the FPGA very much.

Thinking of software attacks and RC4-40, if you were attacking pure
RC4-40, you would collect your 16k known-plaintext / ciphertext pairs,
xor them, and sort the xored texts and store them in some kind of
dictionary lookup structure .  Then you'd do the key schedule, then
traverse the btree with each byte that the RC4_encrypt_byte would have
xored with the text being encrypted.  As soon as you took a branch
which didn't exist in the btree you'd move on to the next key and
keyschedule.

[hacking interlude]

I got bored so I hacked up a test of this of the overheads of lookups,
using bsearch under linux I get lookups / sec against number of known
plaintexts:

  known	plaintext/
  ciphertext			actual		avg time to 
  pairs		lookups/s	keys/s	keys/s	find a key
  ========================================================
  16k		71k		23k	376M	24 mins
  8k		77k		24k	193M	48 mins
  4k		91k		25k	101M	1.5 hrs
  2k		100k		25k	52M	2.9 hrs
  1k		125k		27k	27M	5.6 hrs
  1		-		34k	34k	187 days

The tests were done on an AMD 486 dx/4 120 (a 120Mhz i486 clone), the
keys/s for pure rc4-40 are from a hand optimised assembly version
which I'd been playing with.

`actual keys' is the keys from the search space of 2^40.

`lookups/s' is the number of bsearches per second for the given sized
pre-xored table.  (Known plaintext xored with ciphertext allows the
check for correct key to be done with memcmp).

`keys/s' is the number of keys tested at once * the actual keys/s

`avg time..' is the expected time before find a key.

So based on one machine, if you had 1000 known plaintexts, you would
get a key in around 5 hours.  Multiply by 100 machines, some faster
some slower and it gets interesting.

Our only problem now is to find someone dumb enough to use pure RC4-40,

Adam
--
#!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj
$/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1
lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)





From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 21:00:27 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 12:00:27 +0800
Subject: Viet Nam Considered Less Harmful than Cambodia
Message-ID: <ae26a67e0f021004507b@[205.199.118.202]>


(Welcome back, David...I haven't seen you post in a long while)

At 6:44 AM 8/1/96, David K. Merriman wrote:

>Were a government - duly elected - to come into power similar to that in
>30's Germany or 70's Viet Nam, so that intellectuals or the educated
>became the targets of oppression, would she be as adamant about the
>perceived "rights" of Government to intrude in her private life, monitor
>her communications, and so on?

Though I am no defender of the People's Benovolent and Democratic
Government of Viet Nam, I think you must be thinking of Cambodia.

It was Cambodia, in the form of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, which decided
to exterminate all educated persons (except themselves, of course). Those
wearing eyeglasses were considered Enemies of the People, because
presumably they knew how to read.

Compared to Cambodia, Viet Nam was a paradise. In fact, I cheered in '79
when Viet Nam invaded Cambodia.

--Tim May, who wonders if anyone with access to the Net will become part of
the mountains of skulls in Pax Americana

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 at 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."









From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 21:01:29 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 12:01:29 +0800
Subject: Freeh slimes again: Digital Telephony costs $2 billion now ...
Message-ID: <ae26a88610021004cab0@[205.199.118.202]>


At 10:58 PM 8/1/96, Ernest Hua wrote:
>Louis Freeh is now asking the Congress for $2 billion to fund
>Digital Telephony.  Yes, that is FOUR TIMES what he said it
>would cost the taxpayers to give up their own privacy.  Score
>one for the cynics who said $500 million was not enough.

And when this $2 B is defeated by encryption, look for dramatic, drastic,
and draconian restrictions on crypto.

(With the Internet Phone deals--even Intel is entering the market--why are
there no widespread uses of PGP or S/MIME? Yes, I know about about PGPhone,
and also the Nautilus product, but none seem to be used by anyone I know.
Maybe we should spend some time talking about the practical realities of
these tools.)

--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 at 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."









From m5 at vail.tivoli.com  Thu Aug  1 21:19:29 1996
From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 12:19:29 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
In-Reply-To: <199608012350.TAA12975@nrk.com>
Message-ID: <32015CE7.3EF0@vail.tivoli.com>


David Lesher wrote:
> 
> > What, precisely, is an acid bomb?
> 
> It may be:
>         acid delay fuse;
> or
>         a "spray acid around" device...

Remember what Friday said on Dragnet:

	Marijuana is the match,
		Heroin is the fuse,
			And LSD is the BOMB.

Maybe that's what they meant.
	
______c_____________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX    * For the time being,
       m5 at tivoli.com * m101 at io.com          *    
      <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101>         *    three heads and eight arms.





From m5 at vail.tivoli.com  Thu Aug  1 21:28:08 1996
From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 12:28:08 +0800
Subject: Tolerance
In-Reply-To: <199608012148.OAA21170@cygnus.com>
Message-ID: <32015C84.4775@vail.tivoli.com>


Chris Adams wrote:
> 
> Just a comment to all of the 'true libertarians' out there

What does being a libertarian, or true libertarian, have to do with
wanting Sternlight on the list?

I strongly suspect you have a dramatic misunderstanding of 
libertarianism.

> Sternlight's recent membership?

For what it's worth, I had no problem with D.S. being on the list.  That
opinion has very, very little to do with my libertarian leanings, I assure
you.

______c_____________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX    * For the time being,
       m5 at tivoli.com * m101 at io.com          *    
      <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101>         *    three heads and eight arms.





From drose at AZStarNet.com  Thu Aug  1 21:37:21 1996
From: drose at AZStarNet.com (David M. Rose)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 12:37:21 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <199608020153.SAA00324@web.azstarnet.com>


Mike McNally wrote:

>That reminds me:  I thumbed through BiBi's terrorism book (the one D.S.
>certified as prerequisite reading for particpation in intelligent
>discussions about something-or-other) at B&N the other day.  It's a
>pretty thin book.  Most of it seems to be about the rise of the Moslem
>Menace and how the Sultan's hordes will soon be upon us all.  The last
>chapter outlines all the "necessary measures" governments must take
>to stamp out the wildfire of terrorism.  Same old same old, mostly,
>like allowing suspects to be held without charges, allowing warrantless
>searches (I think), thorough weapon registration, and so on.  The last
>one (or next-to-last; I think the last one is "brainwash the populace
>into thinking this is all a good idea") is about establishing a 
>periodic "civil liberties review panel".
>
>Yeah right.

OK.  But I sure would like to have an automatic weapon for
self/home/"national" defense w/o going through a tremendous amount of B.S.
(as Israelis are excused from).  I believe that you Texans and we Arizonans
have the privilege; in "urban" states, where the need truly is, good luck.

Also, I don't know what your experience in the Middle East is.  Me, I worked
in Iran and exited just before the Jan. '79 "revolution".  Menace & murder.
You *really* have no idea.  Hint:  I'm alive.

If you still (I don't know your age) think that humans are all the same, but
we juss gots diffrunt colors 'n' cultures, I *strongly* recommend an
extended period of travel to the third world.

In all sincerity,

Dave






From gcg at pb.net  Thu Aug  1 21:43:46 1996
From: gcg at pb.net (Geoffrey C. Grabow)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 12:43:46 +0800
Subject: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough?
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802021606.00697f50@mail.pb.net>


At 15:38 08/01/96 PDT, Jim Gillogly wrote:
>
>Somebody says:
>>> Is security provided by 1024-bit PGP key sufficient against most powerful
>>> computers that are available today? Say if smoe organization spent 10
>>> billions of dollars on a cracking machine, would it be possible to crack 
>>> the keys in reasonable time?
>
>Derek Atkins <warlord at MIT.EDU> responds with some useful and authoritative
>information -- thanks.
>
Also, remember that although the PGP key is 1024 bits, it generates a much
smaller IDEA key with 56 bits (I think... anyone?).  The 56 bit key is
vunerable to that $1 mil mystery machine that the NSA may or may not have.
 
                                                     G.C.G.

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | Geoffrey C. Grabow       |      Great people talk about ideas.       |
 | Oyster Bay, New York     |     Average people talk about things.     |
 | gcg at pb.net               |      Small people talk about people.      |
 |----------------------------------------------------------------------|
 |     PGP 2.6.2 public key available at http://www.pb.net/~wizard      | 
 |          and on a plethora of key servers around the world.          |
 |----------------------------------------------------------------------|
 | That which does not kill us, makes us stranger.   - Trevor Goodchild |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From JonWienk at ix.netcom.com  Thu Aug  1 22:00:06 1996
From: JonWienk at ix.netcom.com (JonWienk at ix.netcom.com)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 13:00:06 +0800
Subject: Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
Message-ID: <199608020217.TAA22834@dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com>


On Thu, 01 Aug 1996, Gary Howland <gary at systemics.com> wrote:
>jim bell wrote:
>> 
>> At 07:49 PM 7/31/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:
>> > 
>> >2. They found a _shotgun_ in his cabin.
>> 
>> No, no, Tim.   The proper way to deliver this to a TV audience is, "They
>> found an ARSENAL in his COMPOUND!"
>
>Alternatively, describe the shotgun as a 50 caliber cannon.
>
>Gary

[snip]

Actually, a 12-gage shotgun is approximately .73 caliber.  Maybe it was a 
16-gage?  BTW, many "real terrorist incidents" are acknowledged by the group 
committing them, so that they will win support for their "cause," or notoriety, 
or whatever other gratification their sick minds might derive from carnage.  The 
fact that no one has claimed responsibility for the bombing skews the 
perpetrator probabilities more toward a single disturbed individual or a 
Reichstag rehash.

Ernest Hua (hua at chromatic.com) wrote:
>: How does one verify that an IP address is coming from a U.S. site?
>: How do most FTP site (e.g. those which carry crypto) determine the
>: origins of a connection?

>What's the use ? It makes it only nominally more difficult to access
>an US crypto site, one needs first to esthablish an US beachhead ie.
>open an US account, and ftp the eleet crypto warez using the newly
>created US account as an intermediary. 

>So the next step will be a tag that a user is an 'alien' ?
[snip]

The chupa-cabras, Grays, and the Art Bell Fan Club would file an EEOC 
class-action lawsuit, citing preferential treatment for beings that "the average 
citizen" actually BELIEVES in.  More lawyer-bait.
Jonathan Wienke

"1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full 
gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the 
world will follow our lead in the future!"
--Adolf Hitler

"46.  The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, 
transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. ...Consider the 
following statement:  I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist 
confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government."
--The 29 Palms Combat Arms Survey  
http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/Palms.htm

1935 Germany = 1996 U.S.?

Key fingerprint =  30 F9 85 7F D2 75 4B C6  BC 79 87 3D 99 21 50 CB






From markm at voicenet.com  Thu Aug  1 22:05:17 1996
From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 13:05:17 +0800
Subject: Tolerance
In-Reply-To: <199608012148.OAA21170@cygnus.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.960801221910.5827A-100000@gak>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Chris Adams wrote:

> Just a comment to all of the 'true libertarians' out there, especially
> the "defend to the death" types:  How many of you defended Mr.
> Sternlight's recent membership?

I had absolutely no problem with Sternlight subscribing to cpunks.  In fact,
I would be opposed to any action that attempted to remove him from the list.
I also have the right to killfile whomever I want to, and I will defend that
right, also.  However, if cpunks was a "closed" list with a definitive charter,
I would not be displeased with any of the list owners who would prevent David
Sternlight from subscribing or posting to the list.

- -- Mark

PGP encrypted mail prefered
Key fingerprint = d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348
http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/  


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBMgFnUrZc+sv5siulAQGY3AP9GngPhL570IceIr+Ls8OaE3gIrTRWQVU6
4gvozv/4g0nEUmT/S+KcnM5ySIQACB2E8LlwG8F2Fb8fLHquywS9Ql28mwx0oCfY
OjO/hycM4UGGx5W0nGli8dJ95mpzIm9VDZNsRbrIPKbo8s5bi55Dlx9BwsG28PY5
BVKWCMk+U/g=
=mSZs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From nobody at c2.org  Thu Aug  1 22:45:25 1996
From: nobody at c2.org (Anonymous User)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 13:45:25 +0800
Subject: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough?
Message-ID: <199608020305.UAA11868@infinity.c2.org>


> But the original author also needs to step back and understand his
> security needs.  In particular, if you're trying to protect your
> information against an enemy who is willing to spend $10B to get it,
> they'll have a lot of options other than hiding in a back room with some
> cracking equipment.  Would you be willing to sell them the information
> you're trying to protect for (say) 10% of that $10B?  Would your partner?
> Your wife?

The idea is simple. Since it is easy to increase the size of the
pgp key -- certainly easier than improving my wife -- it is not
uneconomical to be a little overly paranoid over the size of my
key. All it costs me is a couple of seconds of CPU time!






From jgrasty at gate.net  Thu Aug  1 22:45:34 1996
From: jgrasty at gate.net (Joey Grasty)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 13:45:34 +0800
Subject: South Florida Cypherpunks Meeting
Message-ID: <199608020315.XAA66046@osceola.gate.net>


Y'all:

The South Florida Cypherpunks will meet at Hops Grill & Bar
in Boynton Beach, FL on Saturday, August 17 at 2:00 PM.  As
always, our meeting place is at a microbrewery, and this one
has some very fine brews.

In addition, the Cypherpunks Brewmaster, Jim Ray, is brewing 
up a special "summer dark" brew for the meeting.  We will 
enjoy his swill^H^H^H^H^Hfine beer at my house following the
meeting.*

I'll post directions to Hops as we get closer to the meeting
time and put a map on my web page at:

  http://www.c2.net/~winsock/

Please send me a note if you plan to attend so that I can alert
the NSA^H^H^Hrestaurant on how many will attend.  Send me your
key and fingerprint for keysigning if it hasn't been signed by any
subversives^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcypherpunks before.

* All joking aside, Jim is a very fine brewmaster.  I just wish
he'd spend a few bucks and ferment in something other than 2 liter
coke bottles that explode in someone's truck...

Regards,

--
Joey Grasty
jgrasty at gate.net [home -- encryption, privacy, RKBA and other hopeless causes]
jgrasty at pts.mot.com [work -- designing pagers]
"Anyone who considers arithmetical methods of producing random digits is,
of course, in a state of sin." -- John Von Neumann
PGP = A7 CC 31 E4 7E A3 36 13  93 F4 C9 06 89 51 F5 A7





From alano at teleport.com  Thu Aug  1 22:49:09 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 13:49:09 +0800
Subject: The "Secure" version of Netscape for Linux is *NOT*
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802033114.00e9ed38@mail.teleport.com>


At 05:25 PM 8/1/96 -0700, Tom Weinstein wrote:
>Alan Olsen wrote:
>> 
>> I just installed the "secure" version of Netscape off of the "US Only"
>> download site.
>> 
>> Seems that it is actualy the international version and not the 128 bit
>> version.
>
>What makes you think you got the export version?
>
>Here's one way to find out.  If you look in the Security Preferences
>panel under the Options menu, there are two "Configure" buttons for
>configuring what ciphers are enabled for SSL 2 and SSL 3.  The domestic
>version supports a greater variety of options, including triple DES.

I connected to my site running Stronghold 1.3b1.  Only got 40 bit
encryption.  I then connected to Netscape's Store site.  Only got 40 bit
encryption.  I checked the info box (or about box, I don't remember which)
for the connection and it claimed to be running the "exportable" version.
(The Win95 version connects properly to both sites with no tweaking needed.)

I will double check, but neither site would connect with 128 bits straight
out of the tar file.
---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 22:54:38 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 13:54:38 +0800
Subject: Let's Say "No!" to Single, World Versions of Software
Message-ID: <ae26a9fa11021004221a@[205.199.118.202]>


At 11:27 PM 8/1/96, David Lesher wrote:
>Tom Weinstein writes:
>
>> We only ship the domestic version to addresses inside the US.  They
>> State Department seems to think this is sufficient.  Of course, a
>> foreign person can always fly here and pick up a copy at Fry's, but
>> that's not our problem.
>
>Or just walk out of a Mission, and buy one on K Street.
>
>But it's easier to just get an account on an ISP.
>
>I recall several chats with a .nl UN Mission Staffer. He was on
>Panix or PSI or such. Maybe we should require proof of citizenship
>before granting a license to use IP.

I know some Russians, through various connections in the Valley. They
routinely stock up on software at Fry's, in Sunnyvale, Palo Alto, etc.,
load up their suitcases, and then fly back to Moscow. (Of course, the bulk
is not too great, because they only buy one copy of each program....)

--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 at 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."









From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 23:10:23 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 14:10:23 +0800
Subject: Pipe bombs
Message-ID: <ae26cc41120210042fbf@[205.199.118.202]>



So now we are to spend the next six or eight months putting instructions on
how to build pipe bombs in our .sigs, reading endless analyses of how the
"Antiterrorism and Safety Act of 1996" is unconstitutional, following the
CDA-type emergency challenge mounted by VTW/ACLU/NRA, and wondering who
will be arrested first.

Fuck them. Fuck Swinestein, Klinton, Gingrich, and all the rest. And fuck
Dole. (On second thought, don't--it might not be a survivable experience.)

I say they've all earned only our contempt.

It's time to accelerate our efforts to undermine this foolish experiment in
pandering to the masses.

--Tim May

Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
Do not pack
the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it settle.  You want
the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need dry, fine powder
sitting loose in a very rigid container.







From markm at voicenet.com  Thu Aug  1 23:29:31 1996
From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 14:29:31 +0800
Subject: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough?
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960802021606.00697f50@mail.pb.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.960802001105.5991A-100000@gak>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Geoffrey C. Grabow wrote:

> Also, remember that although the PGP key is 1024 bits, it generates a much
> smaller IDEA key with 56 bits (I think... anyone?).  The 56 bit key is
> vunerable to that $1 mil mystery machine that the NSA may or may not have.

Nope.  The IDEA key is 128 bits long and is probably much harder to break than
a 3000-bit RSA modulus.  Of course, the comparison is really useless, since
nobody knows how advanced the NSA's factoring capabilities are.

- -- Mark

PGP encrypted mail prefered
Key fingerprint = d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348
http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/  


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBMgGAtrZc+sv5siulAQGDSAP9HDXWsAPMzR/WUc29OLvYs+gg78HWsewH
raZSNPP+O80Kjub/K5vmvz83b227H6wapyzOQpeVByGu+IafKi74ZTO0KhkrMLdK
FX93eY0AKFYLU/PVgxGvTsIJt1SISK5URfSLhymYVbulW/Cevute7nHvf+ZmysHy
YEY6ZQhx3Eo=
=Veh2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From tcmay at got.net  Thu Aug  1 23:34:36 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 14:34:36 +0800
Subject: Southern Cracker Beer Bombs in Trucks
Message-ID: <ae26d13d140210045b7e@[205.199.118.202]>


At 11:16 PM 8/1/96, Joey Grasty wrote:
>* All joking aside, Jim is a very fine brewmaster.  I just wish
>he'd spend a few bucks and ferment in something other than 2 liter
>coke bottles that explode in someone's truck...

"Explode"?

Is this one of those southern cracker beer bombs?

Let's see...circumstantially, we've got:

- a southerner

- a truck

- an explosion

I'd say that if Jim is either overweight or has ever fired a gun, we've got
an arrest before dawn. But we've got to hurry--NBC wants Katie Couric
present at the bust.

--Louis Freeh


Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
Do not pack
the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it settle.  You want
the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need dry, fine powder
sitting loose in a very rigid container.







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Aug  2 00:59:07 1996
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 15:59:07 +0800
Subject: An example of KKKlintonista harrassment and censorship
In-Reply-To: <199608020040.RAA24954@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <P0k1RD1w165w@bwalk.dm.com>


>From mwohler at ix.netcom.com  Thu Aug  1 20:40:35 1996
Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf)
	via UUCP; Thu, 01 Aug 96 22:34:41 EDT
	for dlv
Received: from [206.214.98.6] by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via SMTP;
        id AA25392 for dlv at bwalk.dm.com; Thu, 1 Aug 96 20:40:35 -0400
Received: from Marc's Station (nyc-ny20-18.ix.netcom.com [205.186.166.210]) by dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA24954 for <dlv at bwalk.dm.com>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 17:40:33 -0700
Message-Id: <199608020040.RAA24954 at dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com>
X-Sender: mwohler at popd.ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.1.1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 20:42:45 -0400
To: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
From: "Marc J. Wohler" <mwohler at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: RE:Clinton is a terrorist and a murderer.

At 05:22 PM 8/1/96 EDT, you wrote:
>"Marc J. Wohler" <mwohler at ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
>> At 10:43 PM 7/29/96 EDT, you wrote:
>>
>> >Clinton is a terrorist and a murderer.
>>
>> Can you explain or expand on this?
>>
>
>How much will you pay me for my time?

Just as  I suspected.*Ignorant bullshit*






From alanh at infi.net  Fri Aug  2 02:10:45 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 17:10:45 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960731130157.0069c420@mail.io.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960802005945.11780D-100000@larry.infi.net>


We require people who have syphilis to divulge who their sex partners
were. I don't know if it's a good idea or not, but I haven't heard of any
activist movement against it in the past 80-odd years it's been in effect. 

We require property owners who don't have city-sewage hookups, to install 
their septic tanks and maintain them in certain defined configurations 
which estop them from contaminating the neighbor's well. I don't know if 
that's a good idea or not - but I haven't seen sentiment against sewage 
regulation of property owners.


So why should we be terribly upset about an ordinance which makes it 
illegal to operate a residential kitchen and a residential sewge-disposal 
operation in a city park or a city sidewalk?





From alanh at infi.net  Fri Aug  2 02:50:29 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 17:50:29 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club"
In-Reply-To: <96Aug1.115045edt.20493@janus.algorithmics.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960802013310.11780G-100000@larry.infi.net>


On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Robin Powell wrote:

> Burning toxic waste is intrisically damaging to other people,
> blasting your boombox is not (unless it is so loud as to actually
> cause ear damage to bystanders, but given the volume of music
> tolerated at rock concerts, I find this highly unlikely).


"Given the loss of privacy tolerated by 99.9999% of American citizens in 
the past twenty years, no one has a right to complain about the 
government taking new powers for itself."


You cannot have it both ways. If you are free to define what is or is not 
a public nuisance when you do it; likewise am I.





From jimbell at pacifier.com  Fri Aug  2 04:06:36 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 19:06:36 +0800
Subject: Southern Cracker Beer Bombs in Trucks
Message-ID: <199608020607.XAA14971@mail.pacifier.com>


At 09:23 PM 8/1/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:

>Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
>ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
>stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
>good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
>on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
>Do not pack
>the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it settle.  You want
>the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need dry, fine powder
>sitting loose in a very rigid container.

For "safety" purposes (at least for the builder!) I would add that the 
threads on the pipe should be covered with a generous quantity of vaseline, 
grease, wax, or other similar material.  Otherwise, the final tighten-up 
might cause an explosion if granules of powder get stuck in the threads and 
ignite due to friction.


Evidence reduction tips:  

Discard drill bit used to make hole in pipe.  Carefully avoid leaving any 
drill shavings in work area.

Completely use/discard any extra powder/fuse not used in the bomb.  
(Chemical analysis will reveal similarity...)

When tightening the pipe/cap, shield the work with a thick layer of 
folded-up paper towel or other material, so your Vice-Grips (or other such 
wrench, or vice) don't leave "tool marks" on the pipe.  (Discard, by burning, such paper after use.)


Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From snow at smoke.suba.com  Fri Aug  2 04:59:05 1996
From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 19:59:05 +0800
Subject: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough?
In-Reply-To: <199608012016.WAA00739@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960802002837.833A-100000@smoke.suba.com>


On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Anonymous wrote:

> Is security provided by 1024-bit PGP key sufficient against most powerful
> computers that are available today? Say if smoe organization spent 10
> billions of dollars on a cracking machine, would it be possible to crack 
> the keys in reasonable time?


     I'd bet if they wanted it that bad they'd spend a half million on 
buying the key.


Petro, Christopher C.
petro at suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow at smoke.suba.com






From snow at smoke.suba.com  Fri Aug  2 05:02:11 1996
From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 20:02:11 +0800
Subject: Again, disappointed in Gingrich
In-Reply-To: <01I7RL8DXKCK8Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960802003342.833C-100000@smoke.suba.com>


On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:

> 	Again, I'm disappointed in Gingrich. This amplifies the earlier
> comments.
> 	-Allen
> >Clinton, congressional leaders to meet on terrorism
> >   _(c) Copyright 1996 Nando.net_
> >    Associated Press
> [...]
> >   Gingrich, interviewed on NBC's "Meet the Press," said, "I think that
> >   we should have a provision that allows us to recognize that we now
> >   live in the age of the cellular telephone and allows us to track an
> >   individual person" He said the taggant requirement was "a
> >   possibility."

     Night of the long knives anyone? I'd bet Mr. Bell has a solution for 
this.

Petro, Christopher C.
petro at suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow at smoke.suba.com






From ogren at cris.com  Fri Aug  2 05:13:34 1996
From: ogren at cris.com (David F. Ogren)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 20:13:34 +0800
Subject: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough?
Message-ID: <199608020517.BAA12270@darius.cris.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

To: cypherpunks at toad.com
Date: Fri Aug 02 01:13:30 1996
>Somebody says:
>>> Is security provided by 1024-bit PGP key sufficient against 
most powerful
>>> computers that are available today? Say if smoe organization spent
 10
>>> billions of dollars on a cracking machine, would it be possible to
 crack 
>>> the keys in reasonable time?

I'll defer to Mr. Atkin's numbers here, although I think that TLA's may 
have more computing power than his rough estimates.  No matter what the 
exact numbers are, it seems that the answer is the same. 1024 bit keys 
appear to be secure for 1996, at least for individuals.

You also have to remember that even if a 1024 bit key could be cracked for 
a mere [sic] million dollars, you have succeeded in making it easier for an 
organization to break into your house and bug your computer than crack your 
RSA key. Or use some other method (bribery, extortion, violence) to obtain 
that information.

> Also, remember that although the PGP key is 1024 bits, it generates a
>  much
> smaller IDEA key with 56 bits (I think... anyone?).  The 56 bit key is
> vunerable to that $1 mil mystery machine that the NSA may or may not
>  have.
>  

IDEA keys are 128 bits long. (DES keys are the ones with 56 bits.) However, 
symmetric cryptosystems, such as IDEA, are harder to break by brute force. 
It is currently estimated that a 128 bit IDEA key is the equivalent of a 
2304 bit RSA key.

So, even though the 128 bit IDEA session key is shorter than the 1024 bit 
RSA key, the RSA key is easier to break using brute force.

- --
David F. Ogren                |
ogren at concentric.net          | "A man without religion is like a fish
PGP Key ID: 0x6458EB29        |  without a bicycle"
- ------------------------------|----------------------------------------
Don't know what PGP is?       | Need my public key?  It's available
Send a message to me with the | by server or by sending me a message
subject GETPGPINFO            | with the subject GETPGPKEY
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBMgGOfOSLhCBkWOspAQEpzgf/Tn1gI8rjg+RxNbor9uIHMZgLWxGHcoMu
WleZrgd2O/K6JNcBySpeLCVe+xgUwbdXPThLO6jP4eSwqpuNtZTLWmaU2LZond+O
XIWSXRzEcvdFPoFISDpxLyLEJtZu122bc1xdlI8zhbO2CqeOcJmJ47WAaTul3wg7
MIyl7zZAvrXrzZ8ByYTpoG7C5d11kEeKCLw7ObxYXCaXXhWFphbxO8Kq3/C597H1
rb9cRu2zyt5OmN1ySMifTbrfMJvkeb9cNsSijv3q5m+ciIX5DKoH07kO82RxjT98
ndpyGbZkbZLWjKvDeNvrh2EtJRV6mfOIIZr2zaQyuyKlYmoP+VKuDA==
=QN4L
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




From grafolog at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 05:15:05 1996
From: grafolog at netcom.com (jonathon)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 20:15:05 +0800
Subject: A funny thing happend to my data on the way to the bank
In-Reply-To: <199608011745.KAA19325@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95.960802063901.24383A-100000@netcom9>




On Thu, 1 Aug 1996 anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com wrote:

> 172-42-6111, according to the Boston  Consulting Group in Massachusetts,
> which employed Netanyahu for about one-year during 1979-80.=20

	It was around then that the Social Security Administration
	was issuing advisories that Social Security Numbers not
	be used for identification purposes, because of errors 
	made in isseing the numbers.

	Specifically, 5% of the numbers were issued to two or more
	people.  3% of numbers were issued to people who allready
	had one or more numbers.  A further 3% to 5%  were issued
	in error for other reasons.

        xan

	Illiterate: adj.  Inability to read write or speak five 
	or less languages.
	Funksioneel Ongeleerd:  a.  Die wat kon nee elf or meer tale 
	lees, skryf and gesprek. 







From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Fri Aug  2 05:34:13 1996
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 20:34:13 +0800
Subject: Viet Nam Considered Less Harmful than Cambodia
In-Reply-To: <ae26a67e0f021004507b@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.95.960802000239.27368C-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>


On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> --Tim May, who wonders if anyone with access to the Net will become part of
> the mountains of skulls in Pax Americana

I once gave an account on my workstation to a Jesuit priest who was later
assassinated in El Salvador, but it was mostly for access to a few things,
not really "on the net." Does that count?

-rich






From alano at teleport.com  Fri Aug  2 05:46:16 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 20:46:16 +0800
Subject: The "Secure" version of Netscape for Linux is *NOT*
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802054049.00b19604@mail.teleport.com>


At 08:31 PM 8/1/96 -0700, Alan Olsen wrote:
>At 05:25 PM 8/1/96 -0700, Tom Weinstein wrote:
>>Alan Olsen wrote:
>>> 
>>> I just installed the "secure" version of Netscape off of the "US Only"
>>> download site.
>>> 
>>> Seems that it is actualy the international version and not the 128 bit
>>> version.
>>
>>What makes you think you got the export version?
>>
>>Here's one way to find out.  If you look in the Security Preferences
>>panel under the Options menu, there are two "Configure" buttons for
>>configuring what ciphers are enabled for SSL 2 and SSL 3.  The domestic
>>version supports a greater variety of options, including triple DES.
>
>I connected to my site running Stronghold 1.3b1.  Only got 40 bit
>encryption.  I then connected to Netscape's Store site.  Only got 40 bit
>encryption.  I checked the info box (or about box, I don't remember which)
>for the connection and it claimed to be running the "exportable" version.
>(The Win95 version connects properly to both sites with no tweaking needed.)
>
>I will double check, but neither site would connect with 128 bits straight
>out of the tar file.

My apologies to everyone involved!

I fucked up!

There was a period of time between when I downloaded and when I installed.
The version I installed was not the one I installed from the secure site.
(I had thought I had not downloaded the 3.0b5 version for Linux, except for
the secure version.  It seems that I had downloaded it when the first
version of 3.0b5 came out, not the 3.0b5a version...)

Sorry again!

---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 05:58:27 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 20:58:27 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <v02120d18ae2769138b69@[192.0.2.1]>


At 13:06 8/1/96, David M. Rose wrote:
>On 1 Aug 1996 (Timothy C. May) wrote:
>
>>I'm with Duncan and Lucky on this one. Nations with a "Privacy Ombudsman"
>>are almost always nations with extensive files on individuals, their
>>habits, and their political activities.
>>
>>Having a "Privacy Ombudsman" is a bone thrown to the proles. I suspect a
>>police state like Singapore has such a person.
>
>My understanding is that the acceptable term is "ombud", or possibly
>"ombuds".  Cf.: "chair", "anchor", "milk", "post", "g-", "colored",  "fire",
>"police", "China", "French", etc.

Ombudsman is a Swedish term. I suppose the modern day English
deconstruction/reconstruction would be ombudsperson.



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 06:03:12 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 21:03:12 +0800
Subject: Brian quit the feds! [was:Re: Photo IDs]
Message-ID: <v02120d13ae275d20bcd2@[192.0.2.1]>


At 11:51 8/1/96, Brian Davis wrote:

>No longer a federal prosecutor!

Congratulations, Brian. Though I will miss having a confessed 'real' Fed on
the list. Well, "former federal prosecutor" still sounds pretty good.



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 06:38:35 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 21:38:35 +0800
Subject: Tolerance
Message-ID: <v02120d1aae276b170492@[192.0.2.1]>


At 14:46 8/1/96, Chris Adams wrote:
>Just a comment to all of the 'true libertarians' out there, especially
>the "defend to the death" types:  How many of you defended Mr.
>Sternlight's recent membership?

There was nothing to defend. To the best of my knowledge, nobody suggested
that DS be thrown off the list. One joker unsubed Sternlight, but that was
hardly something that he couldn't fix himself. Did I want him on the list?
Hell no. Do I believe he has a right to join the list? Yes, with one
possible exception. The list owner can ban anybody, since the list is using
the owner's resources. In this case, from a libertarian standpoint, not
even an explanation of such an action would be required.



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 06:43:57 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 21:43:57 +0800
Subject: Southern Cracker Beer Bombs in Trucks (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608021124.GAA09477@einstein>



Hi all,

I work with Hi Performance and Experimental rockets and I am somewhat
familiar with explosives and the handling thereof. I have a couple of
comments to add to the pipe bomb building thread...

Forwarded message:

> Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 23:06:14 -0800
> From: jim bell <jimbell at pacifier.com>
> Subject: Re: Southern Cracker Beer Bombs in Trucks
> 
> >Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
> >ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
> >stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
> >good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
> >on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
> >Do not pack
> >the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it settle.  You want
> >the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need dry, fine powder
> >sitting loose in a very rigid container.
> 
> For "safety" purposes (at least for the builder!) I would add that the 
> threads on the pipe should be covered with a generous quantity of vaseline, 
> grease, wax, or other similar material.  Otherwise, the final tighten-up 
> might cause an explosion if granules of powder get stuck in the threads and 
> ignite due to friction.

Do this and you will get a reaction which can cause a spontaneous explosion.
In short keep all greases and other such products away from explosives. If
you must use threads on a pipe in such a situation make VERY shure they are
clean and dry. I would use water to first wash the water solubles away and
then would use alcholol to clean the threads of the remaining debree.
Also, always use a cotten rag otherwise you run the risk of building up a
static charge sufficient to set it off.

> When tightening the pipe/cap, shield the work with a thick layer of 
> folded-up paper towel or other material, so your Vice-Grips (or other such 
> wrench, or vice) don't leave "tool marks" on the pipe.  (Discard, by burning, such paper after use.)

If you must use metal tools in the constructio of your bomb make shure of
two things. First, there is another person to call the ambulance. Also be
shure to use a non-sparking tool (read that as expensive) do NOT use steel
or iron tools. You would just be asking to blow yourself up from sparks.
Most tool catalogs will have a small section of Beryllium based tools or
something similar.

                                              Jim Choate






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 06:48:45 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 21:48:45 +0800
Subject: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough?
Message-ID: <199608020836.BAA05655@toad.com>


At 10:16 PM 8/1/96 -0400, "Geoffrey C. Grabow" <gcg at pb.net> wrote:
>Also, remember that although the PGP key is 1024 bits, it generates a much
>smaller IDEA key with 56 bits (I think... anyone?).  The 56 bit key is
>vunerable to that $1 mil mystery machine that the NSA may or may not have.

The PGP RSA keysize is user-selectable.
The IDEA key is not 56 bits (that's DES) - it's 128 bits,
and remember that you currently need to use brute force keysearch on it,
unlike RSA keys which have to be much longer because they 
have special forms and can be cracked by prime-number searching,
which is a much faster process that doesn't have to try
anything near to every 1024-bit number.

As somebody else pointed out, the 128-bit IDEA key is about as 
strong as a 3000-bit RSA key - though that was before the latest
factoring algorithm was demonstrated to work so well,
which means that it's probably about as strong as a 4-5000-bit RSA key.

> | That which does not kill us, makes us stranger.   - Trevor Goodchild |
:-)
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 
#			Dispel Authority!






From ravage at einstein.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 06:53:52 1996
From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 21:53:52 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608021118.GAA09469@einstein>



Hi All,

Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 01:35:00 -0700
> From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
> Subject: Re: Tolerance
> 
> Hell no. Do I believe he has a right to join the list? Yes, with one
> possible exception. The list owner can ban anybody, since the list is using
> the owner's resources. In this case, from a libertarian standpoint, not
> even an explanation of such an action would be required.

If the person joining the public list is warned that the list owner reserves
that right I would agree. It would require such a warning to be issued at
the time the person received their notification of successful joining. If
that warning is not present and the list is advertised as PUBLIC then NO,
not even the list operator can ethicaly refuse membership to anyone for
any reason other than criminal activity by a member. Otherwise it isn't
public.

Just because you provide a service does not give you unlimited or even
limited control if you make it clear it is public and therefore open to
anyone.

Libertarian views should be basicaly if it doesn't harm anothers person or
property without their prior consent then it should be legal and
permissible. A public list means that the owner does not reserve any rights
of moderation or cencorship. This is the way public is applied to the
government and it is the way it MUST be applied to private individuals.
This is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. In
short the ethical situation is the same as if a city declares a park to be
public and then begins to bar people from sleeping there at night.


                                                  Jim Choate






From sparks at bah.com  Fri Aug  2 06:59:41 1996
From: sparks at bah.com (Charley Sparks)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 21:59:41 +0800
Subject: Who the hell is ....
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802100835.0069d380@pop1.jmb.bah.com>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

OK, I'v been on the list a bit now. I see a lot of the same
people posting to it, 
My question is " Who the Hell is Sternlight" At first I thought
it was a pen name ( the light on the end of a boat ?? )

Thanks
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCXAwUBMgHOEeJ+JZd/Y4yVAQEu4gQLB0BjGZB+ezonyMrzCEE4+FWA/l18CeLz
tIyRRuLiCKw/IO/sNAJeaCQP0D0IsFcMVnjs6rlQ5hiVX09+P4P8IlNfFjH6TdN0
HezEsU9yupltcNpje9PoxnGI38QgN3yQbjB06+xHf37KPxdIzBr+/7/pRyash5dl
z5StfU0SSZIhPg==
=cUAP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 07:00:56 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 22:00:56 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608021138.GAA09504@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:53:57 -0700 (MST)
> From: drose at AZStarNet.com (David M. Rose)
> Subject: Re: Internal Passports
> 
> OK.  But I sure would like to have an automatic weapon for
> self/home/"national" defense w/o going through a tremendous amount of B.S.
> (as Israelis are excused from).  I believe that you Texans and we Arizonans
> have the privilege; in "urban" states, where the need truly is, good luck.

We have to go through the same BS that you do to get automatic weapons.

> Also, I don't know what your experience in the Middle East is.  Me, I worked
> in Iran and exited just before the Jan. '79 "revolution".  Menace & murder.
> You *really* have no idea.  Hint:  I'm alive.
> 
> If you still (I don't know your age) think that humans are all the same, but
> we juss gots diffrunt colors 'n' cultures, I *strongly* recommend an
> extended period of travel to the third world.

I do and I have.


                                                     Jim Choate






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 07:05:32 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 22:05:32 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608021135.GAA09497@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 01:13:26 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alan Horowitz <alanh at infi.net>
> Subject: Re: A Libertine Question
> 
> We require people who have syphilis to divulge who their sex partners
> were. I don't know if it's a good idea or not, but I haven't heard of any
> activist movement against it in the past 80-odd years it's been in effect. 

Clear and present danger to possibly unknowing persons lives. People have a
right to know if their sex partners have communicable diseases. In the case
of a 'Typhoid Mary' type disease then everyone has a right to know that
person is infected.

> We require property owners who don't have city-sewage hookups, to install 
> their septic tanks and maintain them in certain defined configurations 
> which estop them from contaminating the neighbor's well. I don't know if 
> that's a good idea or not - but I haven't seen sentiment against sewage 
> regulation of property owners.

Clear and present danger. Once a well is contaminated that contamination can
spread through the whole local water table and infect hundreds if not
thousands of people with disease without warning.

> So why should we be terribly upset about an ordinance which makes it 
> illegal to operate a residential kitchen and a residential sewge-disposal 
> operation in a city park or a city sidewalk?

As long as they have a license to operate a food dispencing facility (in
other words they are certifying they are aware of the correct processes for
such operations) then nobody should have the right to interfere with their
operation unless with probable cause (ie proof of danger such as bad weenies
in their hot dogs). This would not apply to individuals or families making
such food in the same place for their own and NOT public consumption.

A person or group has a right to swing their fists all they want, just not
in my face. This also applies to the government which is nothing more than
our elected representatives. We also can not give them rights we ourselves
don't posses.

                                                    Jim Choate






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 07:11:51 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 22:11:51 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608021128.GAA09487@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 01:36:56 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alan Horowitz <alanh at infi.net>
> Subject: Re: "adjust your attitude with their billy club"
> 
> "Given the loss of privacy tolerated by 99.9999% of American citizens in 
> the past twenty years, no one has a right to complain about the 
> government taking new powers for itself."
> 
> You cannot have it both ways. If you are free to define what is or is not 
> a public nuisance when you do it; likewise am I.

			AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION 
 
	Articles in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the 
United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the 
Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the 
original Constitution. 
 
 
				ARTICLE IX. 
 
	The enumeration of the Constitution, of certain rights, shall 
not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. 
 
 
 
				ARTICLE X. 
 
	The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, 
nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, 
or to the people. 
 
 
 
[The first ten amendments went into effect on 15 December 1791.] 
 





From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 08:01:01 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 23:01:01 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608021218.HAA09568@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 01:36:56 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alan Horowitz <alanh at infi.net>
> Subject: Re: "adjust your attitude with their billy club"
> 
> "Given the loss of privacy tolerated by 99.9999% of American citizens in 
> the past twenty years, no one has a right to complain about the 
> government taking new powers for itself."
> 
> You cannot have it both ways. If you are free to define what is or is not 
> a public nuisance when you do it; likewise am I.

To the first comment, numerical superiority is not sufficient reason in a
democracy to justify actions by that democracy. One of the basic ideas
behind  democracy is that certain aspects of individuals are inherent and
uncontrollable by that democracy (ie rights). To my mind democracy is the
only form of government which recognizes a priori that everyone is not alike
and therefore will want different things. This can be said of no other form
of government which treats persons as identical cogs in a government
machine. In short, democracy is not mob rule however much the majority might
like that idea. I would say that the first comment above can be said another
way,

"If you have been raped once then you should not complain any about
subsequent rapes." 

Clearly utter bullshit. This is pure and simple victim-speak.

As to the second, you are not free to define public nuisance, only nuisances
to yourself. The burden of proof rests on the individual to prove that such
actions by a third party are a public nuisance. For something to be a public
nuisance its effects MUST extend to property or persons other than the
instigator AND it must be shown that damage occurs without prior permission.
Simply because they do something that irks you does not make it public let
alone a nuisance.


                                               Jim Choate






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Aug  2 08:07:16 1996
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 23:07:16 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <v02120d18ae2769138b69@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <XR71RD1w165w@bwalk.dm.com>


shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) writes:
>
> Ombudsman is a Swedish term. I suppose the modern day English
> deconstruction/reconstruction would be ombudsperson.

Indeed, City University of New York has an ombudsperson.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





From daw at cs.berkeley.edu  Fri Aug  2 08:38:33 1996
From: daw at cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 23:38:33 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
In-Reply-To: <01I7RM0CJM388Y4XIK@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Message-ID: <4tsfjm$oi6@joseph.cs.berkeley.edu>


In article <01I7RM0CJM388Y4XIK at mbcl.rutgers.edu>,
E. ALLEN SMITH <EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU> wrote:
> 
> The Administration's proposal would also significantly expand current
> wiretapping authority to allow multi-point (or "roving") wiretaps. This
> would dramatically change surveillance authority to include wiretaps of
> INDIVIDUALS instead of LOCATIONS.
> 

I don't get it.  Help me out here-- how can this possibly be constitutional?

I'm reading the Fourth Amendment to our honored Constitution of the United
States, which proclaims

	[...]
	no warrants shall issue,
	but upon probable cause,
	supported by oath or affirmation,
	and *particularly describing the place to be searched*,
	and the persons or things to be seized.

Are we just to strike out that emphasized phrase?  What's going on here?
Someone tell me I'm not just having a bad nightmare.

Apologies if these are silly questions,
-- Dave Wagner

P.S.  Do police really need a search warrant to wiretap cellular phones?





From liberty at gate.net  Fri Aug  2 09:00:07 1996
From: liberty at gate.net (Jim Ray)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 00:00:07 +0800
Subject: Dole does Bush-speak [Was:Re: A Libertine Question]
Message-ID: <199608021242.IAA31580@osceola.gate.net>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Vinnie Moscaritolo <vinnie at webstuff.apple.com> wrote:

>I think Bob Dole understands the needs for privacy rights for animals..
>
>the following verbatim account of a segment of a Bob Dole appearance a week
>or so ago at a cotton cooperative in Bakersfield, California

[Verbatim Account elided.]

Is anyone else wondering if Dole's handlers are dosing him with that
"Halcyon" stuff that (partially) caused Bush to be such an easy mark
for David Letterman et al.? We have a *severe* drug problem in this
country...

P.S.
I tell you...one little mishap involving a little bit too much sugar,
and now I'll _never_ get to live it down...:) Those wishing to attend
my "Pennies For Perot" Party at Hooters in Cocowalk, at 6:00PM, on
Saturday, August 3rd please e-mail me.

P.P.S.
Idea: Wiretap citizen-unit Ray for 47 hours and 59 minutes, give him
one minute of non-surveilance (more than he deserves, actually) and
then repeat process, with no pesky judges. Citizen-unit Ray is known
to enjoy firearms, and has said "It's easier to make a bomb than it
is to make a lasagna" in the past. He's also a known cardcarrying
member of the Libertarian Party.
JMR  -- Who privately defends Mr. Sternlight's (or anyone's) right
to cypherpunks list _membership_, while alternately being offended
and amazed by the tone/number of his trolls. Try to imagine if _I_
posted that often...This kind of misunderstanding of Libertarians
is usually caused by a subscription to Time, etc. -- rather than a
careful listening to Libertarians themselves, but believe whatever
you want.

Regards, Jim Ray -- DNRC Minister of Encryption Advocacy
 [The Ministry is An equal opportunistic encryptor.]

"Big business never pays a nickel in taxes, according to Ralph
 Nader, who represents a big consumer organization that never
 pays a nickel in taxes." -- Dave Barry 

 Defeat the Duopoly! Vote "NOTA," not Slick/Dull in November.
 Harry Browne for President. Jo Jorgensen for Vice-president.
 http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/
___________________________________________________________________
PGP id.E9BD6D35 51 5D A2 C3 92 2C 56 BE  53 2D 9C A1 B3 50 C9 C8
<mailto:liberty at gate.net> http://www.shopmiami.com/prs/jimray Coming
soon, the "Pennies For Perot" page. Keep billionaires off welfare!
___________________________________________________________________


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Freedom isn't Freeh.

iQCVAwUBMgH2k21lp8bpvW01AQHhnQQAlip0PV1m4Th0fJIlAog0TZOhyPghJ0qd
q0mJ9SFG2XInX8CcgWX18s3ZXJtna6nRRcyqZHZEczffMs0jbA6pdzmqDvZTm3HW
ToIcDgFb7MxV56chzLykGDwF4wdykGQNkLZH6xpk+2+1NjljjYObmsJO30S6XMp3
YQV1C3udlJY=
=MKCK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From pjb at ny.ubs.com  Fri Aug  2 09:04:51 1996
From: pjb at ny.ubs.com (Paul J. Bell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 00:04:51 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <9608021250.AA06412@sherry.ny.ubs.com>


i, for one, and perhaps others on the list as well, would be interested in hearing
what you mean when you say, "At&t, Microsoft, etc) who are ripping people off on a 
daily basis". 

for example, in what way is AT&T ripping people off? and what about
microsoft? 

i have no use at all for microsoft, and, being a unix person i don't even
use their stuff, but, i wonder how many people use word, excel, powerpoint, etc
that they ripped-off from someone else, without paying microsoft what they are
due for having developed the products. 

in general, i suspect that the rip-off is going the other way. after all, 
no one forces anyone buy from microsoft, AT&T, etc., but people do steal from
them, whenever they have the opportunity. not everyone, of course, but certainly
some do.  

these companies provide products and/or services that you are free to 
purchase or not, as you see fit or can afford.

	-paul

> From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Thu Aug  1 18:31:50 1996
> X-Sender: ceridwyn at gonzo.wolfenet.com
> X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32)
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type> : > text/plain> ; > charset="us-ascii"> 
> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:13:56 -0700
> To: cypherpunks at toad.com
> From: Cerridwyn Llewyellyn <ceridwyn at wolfenet.com>
> Subject: Re: fbi, crypto, and defcon
> Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com
> Content-Length: 1579
> 
> 
> >> Okay, so their boss is part of the law making process, subject to the checks
> >> and balances that exist between the three branches of US government. They
> >> are in a position to supply their boss with data and I am personally
> >> impressed with their grasp of some of that data (it sounds to me like they
> >> are telling their boss that hackers like the ones at Defcon are not the
> >> problem).
> 
> It was interesting how the Agent made the point that the FBI was there to 
> enforce laws, not make policy.  Then his Boss's role in the law making process
> was brought up, the Agent said "but any of you can do the same thing, you
> all have a voice" etc etc.  Then he refused to answer political questions 
> based on the fact that he was there as a representative of the FBI, failing
> to see that his Boss is also a representative of the FBI when recommending
> legislation.  (Again, I realize he was "under orders" not to discuss it, I 
> wish he wouldn't try to justify it with obviously faulty logic.)
> 
> >    I think what they are really saying is that they would love to
> >bust most hackers, but since they can't they might as well use some of
> >them to catch the bigger fish.  If they truly did believe in the laws they
> >are supposed to uphold they wouldn't associate with hackers (who commit
> >computer crimes) at all.
> 
> A more cynical view is that they are there to protect some of the biggest
> institutions of "organized crime" (ie: Congress, At&t, Microsoft, etc) who
> are ripping people off on a daily basis from the other organizations who
> refuse to play by their rules.
> 
> //cerridwyn//
> 
> 
> 





From m5 at vail.tivoli.com  Fri Aug  2 09:12:47 1996
From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 00:12:47 +0800
Subject: Pipe bombs
In-Reply-To: <ae26cc41120210042fbf@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <3201FE3A.2274@vail.tivoli.com>


Timothy C. May wrote:

> 
> Buy a section of metal water pipe ...

And be *real, real careful* when screwing the second cap on the pipe.
Brush any powder off the screw threads on the pipe with a fine-bristled
brush.  Also, watch out for static electricity.  Use a flash bulb as a
detonator.


[ Just doing my part. ]

______c_____________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX    * For the time being,
       m5 at tivoli.com * m101 at io.com          *    
      <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101>         *    three heads and eight arms.





From frissell at panix.com  Fri Aug  2 09:57:25 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 00:57:25 +0800
Subject: Jim Bell, stay out of Georgia....
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802135437.0086dfc4@panix.com>


At 02:35 PM 8/1/96 EDT, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:

>>Anarchist charged with advocating government overthrow
>
>>   JONESBORO, Ga. -- An 18-year-old self-styled anarchist who allegedly
>>   distributed a free, homemade pamphlet with anti-government rhetoric
>>   has been charged with advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government.


Boy some people have all the luck.  It is really rough to get the
authorities to arrest you in circumstances where you can make them look
absolutely ridiculous.  They usually refuse to play.  I suppose they busted
this guy because they thought they could in the current atmosphere and they
figured he's a schlubb who wouldn't give them any grief.

It would not be a pleasant experience for the geheime staats polizei to try
an arrest like this of someone who was capable of mounting a verbal and
legal defense.

"We Shall Overcome," "You copraphageous cretins," "Haven't you
<anglo-saxonism> idiots read Cohen vs. California,"  "I think if you mental
defectives read the Supremes in the Smith Act cases you'd find that I can
advocate blowing you <anglo-saxonism> up all I like as long as I am not part
of an immediate conspiracy to do so."  Do you *like* carrying 300-pound
people around?  Why should I assist in my own oppression by walking?  You
Nazis are always trying to get the Jews to *walk* into the gas chambers."
"You know you're going to have to let me loose sooner or later so why not
make it sooner.  It will be easier on everyone."  "You know the DA is going
to dismiss.  This dog don't hunt.  Won't you look like right fools."  "It's
going to be super fun to have you on the witness stand in the false arrest
suit.  It's going to be great to get the chance to cross-x you in public."
"Boy, finally a chance to build up some prison time for my memoirs."
"Great, I've really needed some quality time to catch up on my reading.
I've still got 13 Aubrey/Maturin novels to finish."

Repeat endlessly in a loud voice. 

Brian -- why do the cops do busts like this where they know they will be
thrown out?

DCF







From frissell at panix.com  Fri Aug  2 10:41:32 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 01:41:32 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802141356.00886864@panix.com>


At 08:50 AM 8/2/96 EDT, Paul J. Bell wrote:
>i, for one, and perhaps others on the list as well, would be interested in
hearing
>what you mean when you say, "At&t, Microsoft, etc) who are ripping people
off on a 
>daily basis". 

I don't know about Microsoft but certainly AT&T long benefitted from local
telephone monopolies that resulted in increased prices and slower innovation
than would otherwise have been delivered.  Even today, long distance
carriers are licensed and there are substantial regulatory barriers to
entry.  International calls still are made under the control of an
international cartel of governments that keep prices way above competitive
levels.  This benefits AT&T and the rest.  Since it costs 2 cents a minute
to *produce* a call to London from New York the 45 cents to $1 a minute
charged represent an excessive price protected by the government regulated
cartel status of telecoms even in the Age of Deregulation.

AT&T should get honest work as should the others.

Maybe when I get a 10 (25?) mbps cable connection to the nets, I'll start
offering my neighbors net connections and LD phone service.  I could make a
pretty penny even savagely cutting the telco's markup.  Lots of challenges
ther but doable.

DCF






From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com  Fri Aug  2 10:41:43 1996
From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Deranged Mutant)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 01:41:43 +0800
Subject: More evidence that democracy is bunk
Message-ID: <199608021417.KAA27112@unix.asb.com>


On  1 Aug 96 at 15:34, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote:

> 	And some people think democracies secure civil liberties...
> 	-Allen

And some people think polls are an accurate representation of 
anything.  Chances are it's really a poll of people with telephones 
who just finished watching news reports about increased threats of 
terrorism.  Depends on the exact questions that were asked of them, 
too...

[..]
> >   As an antidote, 80 percent believe the federal government should have
> >   more power to investigate terrorists, but just 52 percent believe
> >   wiretaps should be expanded.

Note that 'more power to investigate terrorists' is vague.  Very 
vague, especially if the actual question was "should the federal 
government be given a greater ability to investigate terrorists?" 
(which is not the same as 'more power'... greater ability could be 
more funds or manpower, for instance.)

Often time pollsters will introduce the question with a short 
paragraph or statistics explaining the situation... often these will 
cue someone in to be more likely to answer a certain way.  If the 
pollster says "with the increase in terrorist activisties in the 
United States and new communications technologies, should the federal 
government..." a respondant will be more likely to agree that the 
gov't should have more power.

> >   Three out of five said they still favor giving the government more
> >   power even if that meant groups unrelated to terrorism were
> >   investigated, too.

That's vague too. What was the question: "...even if it meant a 
charity that was exploited by a terrorist group was investigated" or 
a "political group which a suspected terrorist belonged too" etc.?

> >   Even if it cost more, nearly nine out of 10 people surveyed want
> >   more security checkpoints, guards and metal detectors -- and
> >   they'd be willing to wait longer in lines -- at public events.

If they were asked if they minded random searches of their bags and 
belongings or required to carry photo-ID wherever they went, to be 
presented on demand, would they still be willing?

Rob

 
---
No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help"
Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (root at magneto)
Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.





From wb8foz at nrk.com  Fri Aug  2 10:41:46 1996
From: wb8foz at nrk.com (David Lesher)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 01:41:46 +0800
Subject: Tolerance
Message-ID: <199608021412.KAA02133@nrk.com>


At 14:46 8/1/96, Chris Adams wrote:
>Just a comment to all of the 'true libertarians' out there, especially
>the "defend to the death" types:  How many of you defended Mr.
>Sternlight's recent membership?


Why should I? Was his membership under attack by the body?

I merely predicted how he would act. In the words of Click&Clack,
that's not rocket science. Almost anyone who has spent anytime
on Usenet knows, for example, that SternFUD will keep dragging
sci.crypt back in, and he will engage in personal slams, while
claiming he is above same. 

In the words of a net attorney I respect, SternFud is an
intellectual fraud.

[BTW, if you caught my post on same, he seems to regarded as a
buffoon & joke even within the inner circles of the Intelligence
Community...]

But I AM glad he left. Now, I do not have to feel quezyness over
agreeing (even on but one issue...) with Perry.



-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433





From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com  Fri Aug  2 10:41:51 1996
From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Deranged Mutant)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 01:41:51 +0800
Subject: Keeping America safe from Soy Milk
Message-ID: <199608021417.KAA27115@unix.asb.com>


On  1 Aug 96 at 14:35, E. ALLEN SMITH forwarded:

> >   JONESBORO, Ga. -- An 18-year-old self-styled anarchist who allegedly
> >   distributed a free, homemade pamphlet with anti-government rhetoric
> >   has been charged with advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government.
> [...]
> >   The pamphlet was laced with with anti-police cartoons, obscenities,
> >   and anarchist slogans. The one overt reference to violence was an
> >   illustration of a "Molotov cocktail" on the same sheet with a recipe
> >   for "soy milk" made from water-soaked soybeans, sugar and vanilla and
> >   strained through a T-shirt.

Nuff said.

Rob
 
---
No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help"
Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (root at magneto)
Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.





From rsalz at osf.org  Fri Aug  2 10:58:28 1996
From: rsalz at osf.org (Rich Salz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 01:58:28 +0800
Subject: My crypto-export URL was in the wrong place
Message-ID: <9608021433.AA26186@sulphur.osf.org>


I typo'd on the URL.
	http://www.osf.org/~rsalz/crypto-export.html
Sorry for any confusion.





From sandfort at crl.com  Fri Aug  2 11:09:57 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 02:09:57 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960802005945.11780D-100000@larry.infi.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802071447.3551A-100000@crl3.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Alan Horowitz wrote:

> We require people who have syphilis to divulge who their sex
> partners were...
> 
> We require property owners...to install their septic tanks...
> [to] estop them from contaminating the neighbor's well...
> 
> So why should we be terribly upset about an ordinance which
> makes it illegal to operate a residential kitchen...in a city
> park or a city sidewalk?

Alan's analogies(?) are not parallel.  In his syphilis example,
the requirement exists so that sex partners can be warned that
they may have contracted the disease.  A parallel requirement
might be that feeding programs for street people would have to
divulge that the food was prepared in uninspected home kitchens.

In his second case, you are simply dealing with the property
rights of adjacent land owners.  The case for regulation of
septic tanks is that the contamination from absent or improperly
installed tanks does not reveal itself as would, say, burning
toxic waste in the back yard.  

I find it amusing that the law is supposedly so concerned with
food purity for the "homeless."  Hang out near a fast-food place
sometime and watch the street people dumpster dive for the
half-eaten remains of other people's Big Macs.  That is the true
alternative to volunteer feeding programs.  (That, or getting a
job.)

The truth is that local officials are perverting the health codes
to harass these operations, not to "protect the homeless."  At
it's core, it is a hypocritical abuse of power, not unlike the
invocation of the Four Horseman to keep strong crypto out of the
hands of average Americans.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~









From ceridwyn at wolfenet.com  Fri Aug  2 11:42:54 1996
From: ceridwyn at wolfenet.com (Cerridwyn Llewyellyn)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 02:42:54 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802152315.0069de48@gonzo.wolfenet.com>


Jim Choate <ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com> argued:

>As long as they have a license to operate a food dispencing facility (in
>other words they are certifying they are aware of the correct processes for
>such operations) then nobody should have the right to interfere with their
>operation unless with probable cause (ie proof of danger such as bad weenies
>in their hot dogs). This would not apply to individuals or families making
>such food in the same place for their own and NOT public consumption.

I believe the issue with Food Not Bombs is they didn't get the appropriate
permits, etc, or were denied them, or something.  However, I disagree with
you on this point.  I think they shouldn't be required to obtain a license,
but everyone whom they serve food to should know that they don't have such a
license.  This would equal informed consent.  Also, with Food Not Bombs, many
of the people that the food is being served to is also involved in cooking,
distributing food, and cleaning up.  I've been told it's exactly like a big
picnic, except for anyone is invited to help and/or eat.







From sandfort at crl.com  Fri Aug  2 11:50:09 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 02:50:09 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608021118.GAA09469@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802074847.3551B-100000@crl3.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Jim Choate wrote:

> If the person joining the public list is warned that the list
> owner reserves that right [to kick people off] I would agree.
> It would require such a warning to be issued at the time the
> person received their notification of successful joining. If
> that warning is not present and the list is advertised as
> PUBLIC then NO, not even the list operator can ethicaly refuse
> membership to anyone for any reason other than criminal
> activity by a member. Otherwise it isn't public.

Here I have to respectfully disagree, totally, with Jim.  One
does not have to "reserve" one's rights.  They are inherent and
my be exercised pretty much at will (I say "pretty much" because
there are situations where "implied contract" applies).

A restaurant or bookstore is a public place in that it is open
to the public.  Nevertheless, without first "reserving the right"
to do so, the owners may tell you to leave if they don't like 
the way you sound, look or smell.  Criminal activity is not
required legally nor ethically.  Your ejection may, in fact, be
totally arbitrary.  I don't see a privately maintained, "public"
list as being philosophically any different.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








From brock at well.com  Fri Aug  2 12:07:07 1996
From: brock at well.com (Brock N. Meeks)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 03:07:07 +0800
Subject: Freeh slimes again: Digital Telephony costs $2 billion now ...
In-Reply-To: <199608012258.PAA29066@ohio.chromatic.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9608020836.A15150-0100000@well>



On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Ernest Hua wrote:

> Louis Freeh is now asking the Congress for $2 billion to fund
> Digital Telephony.  Yes, that is FOUR TIMES what he said it
> would cost the taxpayers to give up their own privacy.  Score
> one for the cynics who said $500 million was not enough.

I broke the story about how much Digital Telephony would *really* cost in 
CyberWire Dispatch more than two years ago.  The price tag in my piece:  
"... at least $2 billion..."  In that Dispatch I wrote that the Clinton 
White House had made the decision to support the bill based on a flawed 
cost/benefit analysis study the FBI had done.

--Brock





From gkuzmo at ix.netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 12:10:13 1996
From: gkuzmo at ix.netcom.com (George Kuzmowycz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 03:10:13 +0800
Subject: Corporate e-mail policy
Message-ID: <199608021611.JAA13044@dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com>


  The company I work for has set up a committee to draft a security 
policy involving, among other things, e-mail. Since I'm responsible 
for our networking and e-mail, I'm part of this group. Unfortunately, 
I'm outnumbered by legal, auditing and HR types who, basically, want 
to have access to everything.

  I am aware that there's a line of thinking which holds that what you
do or say on company time, using company equipment is the company's
business. I do not subscribe to this line of thinking, and believe
that employees expect a "zone of privacy" in which their telephone
calls will not be listened to and their e-mail will not be read or
monitored. I am also aware that recent court cases have not
supported this "zone of privacy" and have pretty much held that the
employer can do whatever it wants with e-mail. 

  What I want out of this process is to keep myself and my staff out 
of this business. As a practical matter, I'm sure the company could 
bring in a hired gun to do whatever they want; since our e-mail 
system does not easily support strong crypto, it's all there for the 
taking.

  In an ideal world, the rest of the group would agree with me and say
"Yup, we have no business reading e-mail." Since that's not likely,
I'm looking for examples of "privacy-friendly" corporate policies
that I can put on the table in our meetings, and end up with a
minority report.  

        -gk-






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 12:12:41 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 03:12:41 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608021614.LAA10026@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca
> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 96 11:19:52 EST
> Subject: RE: Tolerance (fwd)
> 
> Jim Choate <ravage at einstein.ssz.com> wrote:
> >Libertarian views should be basicaly if it doesn't harm anothers person or
> >property without their prior consent then it should be legal and >permissible.
> 
> It is important to consider cultural factors when deciding how groups will react
> to differing standards of legal and permissible actions. For example, a brief
> summary of the basic tenets held by some different European cultures are given
> below:
> 
> British: Everything is permitted, unless it is forbidden.
> German: Everything is forbidden, unless it is permitted.
> France: Everything is permitted, especially if it is forbidden.
> 

Culture has nothing to do with inherent civil liberities, you have them
simply for being alive. People create social contracts to limit those
rights. You have the cart before the horse.

                                                    Jim Choate






From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca  Fri Aug  2 12:14:22 1996
From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 03:14:22 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
Message-ID: <9607028390.AA839009975@smtplink.alis.ca>



Jim Choate <ravage at einstein.ssz.com> wrote:
>Libertarian views should be basicaly if it doesn't harm anothers person or
>property without their prior consent then it should be legal and >permissible.

It is important to consider cultural factors when deciding how groups will react
to differing standards of legal and permissible actions. For example, a brief
summary of the basic tenets held by some different European cultures are given
below:

British: Everything is permitted, unless it is forbidden.
German: Everything is forbidden, unless it is permitted.
France: Everything is permitted, especially if it is forbidden.

Au revoir,
James






From artichoke at null.dev.com  Fri Aug  2 12:16:23 1996
From: artichoke at null.dev.com (artichoke bill)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 03:16:23 +0800
Subject: privacy is a SMOKESCREEN.
Message-ID: <3202307A.1DF3@null.dev.com>


from eff:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Subject: ALERT: Congress Rushing to Enact Anti-Privacy Bill - Call 
Congress NOW!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 **** Last minute update ****

Just before ye editor was about to send this issue out, reports are
filtering in that negotiations on the bill that is the subject of the
alert below, have collapsed.

CNN reports: "Key members of the Senate blamed House conservatives for 
the
failure, saying they had insisted on linking proposed new
wiretapping authority for the FBI to an expansion of privacy laws."

CNN quotes Rep. Charles Schumer (D-NY) as saying that House Republican
leaders "have come up with this smokescreen called privacy".  You may
wish to let Rep. Schumer know how you feel about your right to privacy
being labelled "a smokescreen":

     9th Dist. NY   Schumer, Charles E. (D)
     1-202-225-6616 (voice), 1-202-225-4183 (fax)

The full text of the CNN article is available at:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9608/01/wh.terror.bill/index.html

The article also reports that "lawmakers said there is hope for
agreement after the month long" Congressional recess beginning at the 
end
of this week.

THIS MEANS THAT THE ALERT BELOW IS STILL URGENT, and still important.
We just have a short breathing space now.





From pjb at ny.ubs.com  Fri Aug  2 12:25:21 1996
From: pjb at ny.ubs.com (Paul J. Bell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 03:25:21 +0800
Subject: Blurring the Chains of Causation
Message-ID: <9608021314.AA06420@sherry.ny.ubs.com>


in my view the ultimate foolishness of this sort was bringing Cessna Aircraft
to it's knees by sueing them on behalf of people who crashed because of
their inability to handle the airplane in the conditions into which
they put themselves.

	-paul

> From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Thu Aug  1 18:32:44 1996
> Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:39:12 -0700
> X-Sender: tcmay at mail.got.net
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type> : > text/plain> ; > charset="us-ascii"> 
> To: cypherpunks at toad.com
> From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
> Subject: Blurring the Chains of Causation
> Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com
> Content-Length: 4559
> 
> 
> An unusual thread name, "Blurring the Chains of Causation."
> 
> What I mean is this:
> 
> - the U.S. legal system has been blurring, or confusing, the chain of
> cause-and-effect in crimes
> 
> - Example: allowing suits by insurance companies and states against tobacco
> companies. A smoker gets cancer by his actions, and it used to be that this
> was his action, his responsibility. Now, we hold tobacco companies liable,
> and perhaps will someday hold executives of these companies criminally
> liable. (This for a product which is not illegal, mind you.)
> 
> (There are a bunch of related examples. "Civil liability" is a major way
> this blurring is happening. Gun manufacturers being sued for crimes
> committed with their guns, ladder makers sued by the families of criminals
> who leaned ladders up against electrified fences, and so on. How long
> before a bookstore is sued for "allowing" a book to be bought by someone
> who later is "inspired" to commit a crime--actually, John Grisham ("The
> Firm") is involved in a lawsuit against Oliver Stone for his film, "Natural
> Born Killers," which Grisham claims "inspired" a murder. This has got to
> stop, in my opinion.)
> 
> - "They made me do it" defenses. Hostess Twinkies are implicated in the
> brutal murder of San Francisco's mayor and a city councilman. Childhood
> abuse is exculpatory in other cases. Psychobabblers blather about what
> caused people to behave as they did. A mass murderer says pornography made
> him kill 25 women. A lawyer claims his client's son committed suicide after
> listening to heavy metal music. And so it goes.
> 
> This blurring has links to cryptography, bomb-making instructions on the
> Net, availability of porn on the Net, and many other things.
> 
> To cut to the chase:
> 
> - a librarian who "allows" a person to check out "The Anarchist Cookbook"
> is *not* causing a crime, though much of the rhetoric one hears is
> otherwise.
> 
> - the _author_ of that book (Powell, allegedly) is *also* not causing a crime.
> 
> - the _publishers_ of that book (Lyle Stuart, as I recall--my copy is not
> handy) also have not committed any crime
> 
> To make things clear, some of the language being proposed in the
> rush-to-law about anti-terrorism, wiretapping, anti-encryption, etc. As
> Sen. Feinstein puts it, "We hope we can wrap up the repeal of the Bill of
> Rights and have it on President Clinton's desk before the close of the
> Olympics on Sunday." :-(
> 
> - if I _advocate_ strong crytography, avoidance of taxes, undermining of
> government power, crypto anarchy, etc., I have not committed any crime
> (Caveat: advocating the violent overthrow of the U.S. government apparently
> is a crime, as are certain forms of conspiracy, a la RICO, tax evasion,
> etc.)
> 
> - if I _use_ strong cryptography, I have not committed any crime, ipso
> facto, nor am I necessarily conspiring to commit any crime
> 
> And so on.
> 
> Many of the proposed restrictions seek to further blur this chain of
> causation, by making someone who provides access to materials which _may_
> later be used in a crime, or which may "inspire" someone to crime, a kind
> of criminal.
> 
> The trend picked up steam with the "deep pockets" precedents in the 70s
> (*), was fed by the blame-passing psychobabble of the same decade, and has
> now reached its present state by a willingness of the courts to hear such
> cases.
> 
> People who actually commit real crimes are the criminals, not those who
> sold them Hostess Twinkies without first checking their blood sugar level.
> Not those who let a library patron look at a "dangerous" book. And not
> those who provided strong cryptographic tools which _might_ be used by
> terrorists, pedophiles, and money launderers.
> 
> --Tim May
> 
> (* "deep pockets" -- If there are N parties in a lawsuit, and one of them
> shares only 5% of the (putative) blame but has 95% of the overall assets,
> go after the party with the "deepest pockets." This forced Cessna and
> Piper, the leading light aircraft firms at one time, to stop selling light
> aircraft. The example with Oliver Stone being sued is a clear case of
> this.)
> 
> 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 at 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."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 





From pjb at ny.ubs.com  Fri Aug  2 12:37:42 1996
From: pjb at ny.ubs.com (Paul J. Bell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 03:37:42 +0800
Subject: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough?
Message-ID: <9608021339.AA06431@sherry.ny.ubs.com>


actually, the IDEA key is 128 bits.
	-paul

> From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Fri Aug  2 03:06:24 1996
> X-Sender: gcg at mail.pb.net
> X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32)
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type> : > text/plain> ; > charset="us-ascii"> 
> Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 22:16:06 -0400
> To: jim at ACM.ORG
> From: "Geoffrey C. Grabow" <gcg at pb.net>
> Subject: Re: Is 1024-bit PGP key enough? 
> Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com
> Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com
> Content-Length: 1454
> 
> At 15:38 08/01/96 PDT, Jim Gillogly wrote:
> >
> >Somebody says:
> >>> Is security provided by 1024-bit PGP key sufficient against most powerful
> >>> computers that are available today? Say if smoe organization spent 10
> >>> billions of dollars on a cracking machine, would it be possible to crack 
> >>> the keys in reasonable time?
> >
> >Derek Atkins <warlord at MIT.EDU> responds with some useful and authoritative
> >information -- thanks.
> >
> Also, remember that although the PGP key is 1024 bits, it generates a much
> smaller IDEA key with 56 bits (I think... anyone?).  The 56 bit key is
> vunerable to that $1 mil mystery machine that the NSA may or may not have.
>  
>                                                      G.C.G.
> 
>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  | Geoffrey C. Grabow       |      Great people talk about ideas.       |
>  | Oyster Bay, New York     |     Average people talk about things.     |
>  | gcg at pb.net               |      Small people talk about people.      |
>  |----------------------------------------------------------------------|
>  |     PGP 2.6.2 public key available at http://www.pb.net/~wizard      | 
>  |          and on a plethora of key servers around the world.          |
>  |----------------------------------------------------------------------|
>  | That which does not kill us, makes us stranger.   - Trevor Goodchild |
>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> 





From alanh at infi.net  Fri Aug  2 12:38:35 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 03:38:35 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608021128.GAA09487@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960802112429.19637D-100000@larry.infi.net>


<<  9th & 10th AMendments to the Conmstitution >>

Cute, you left out the Third.

We are referring to the Sovereign power of the State of Washington to 
allocate to the municipality of Seattle, a general Police Power to 
maintain the Peace.  Every lawyer seems to think that Seattle has the 
power to forbid people from using sidewalks as latrines and kitchen sinks.

I am in bed with the government, so I have better knowledge than most of 
the people on this list, about how bad it is. Nonetheless, I recall the 
aphorism from the Talmud: "Pray for the health of the government, lest 
the people eat other alive".

If someone wants to dress shabbily, go ahead, I'm sure you're making a
powerful and meaningful statement of your devotion to liberty. I don't
recall saying otherwise.  I might secretly recall the TRUE and
OVERWHELMING poverty I've seen in the Third World, which didn't prevent
the barely-fed mothers from assuring that their kid's third-hand,
threadbare school uniforms were nevertheless clean and pressed.  Everyone
has different standards of pride. Some people don't EVER say "please", or
"thank you". Suit yourself. 

If you want to walk into the public library after a six-month moratorium 
on bathing - well, the courts are divided on this, but _I_ stand for the 
proposition that this is an assault on the other patrons and I will lobby 
_my_ city councilman for there to be rules against it.

If you want to blast your Walkman into your own ear through an earphone, 
go ahead, blow your hearing away, perhaps (insh'allah) it will somehow 
operate to prevent you from depositing your genes into the next 
generation.

But if you want to play your boombox loud near me, make damn sure you do
it behind soundproof walls. Where I live, the cops will respond to that 
kind of complaint and shut down the nuisance, with nightsticks if need be 
(in my little rural area, it's seldom necessary). Maybe you California or 
NYC folks don't have police forces that will mitigate nuisances. Enjoy 
your progressive radical-chic neighborhood, folks.





From alanh at infi.net  Fri Aug  2 12:45:19 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 03:45:19 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608021218.HAA09568@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960802115406.23822A-100000@larry.infi.net>


On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Jim Choate wrote:

> to yourself. The burden of proof rests on the individual to prove that such
> actions by a third party are a public nuisance.

   Bzzt, wrong anser. Thanks for playing.  A state and it's political 
subdivisions does have the power to enact an ordinance DEFINING what 
constitutes a public nuisance. They need merely protect 
constitutionally-protected rights.


The City of Seattle may not define the act of disseminating anonymous 
pamphlets as a nuisance. They may define the act of dissemination by 
throwing them out the window of a moving vehicle, as a nuisance.

YOu are disconnected from reality. I am not going to waste further 
keystrokes on this topic. My side already controls the electoral college 
on this one. It's not my problem.





From ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu  Fri Aug  2 12:48:54 1996
From: ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu (Simon Spero)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 03:48:54 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
In-Reply-To: <32015CE7.3EF0@vail.tivoli.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802121035.25935C@tipper.oit.unc.edu>


On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Mike McNally wrote:
> 
> 	Marijuana is the match,
> 		Heroin is the fuse,
> 			And LSD is the BOMB.

Wasn't that Radioactive Goldfish?

IP is the Flame, TCP is the Fuse, HTTP is the Bomb

---
Cause maybe  (maybe)		      | In my mind I'm going to Carolina
you're gonna be the one that saves me | - back in Chapel Hill May 16th.
And after all			      | Email address remains unchanged
You're my firewall -    	      | ........First in Usenet.........





From adam at homeport.org  Fri Aug  2 13:01:04 1996
From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 04:01:04 +0800
Subject: FPGAs and Heat (Re: Paranoid Musings)
In-Reply-To: <199608011848.LAA11828@netcom13.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199608021711.MAA01770@homeport.org>


Mike Duvos wrote:

| That's one of the things that killed Thinking Machines.  It turned out
[...]
| At the time Thinking Machines went under, Seymour Cray had a big contract

	Just a nit, but Thinking Machines is still in business, and has
had their first few profitable quarters. www.think.com

Adam

-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume






From jseiger at cdt.org  Fri Aug  2 13:04:08 1996
From: jseiger at cdt.org (Jonah Seiger)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 04:04:08 +0800
Subject: More on the latest Surveillance Bill...
Message-ID: <v02140b07ae27da2f4dbb@[204.157.127.4]>


The outline below is from a document produced by the House Republican
Conference.  It is ONLY A SUMMARY of the proposed bill and is NOT actual
legislation.  No one I have spoken with has seen any specific legislative
language yet.

The outline is confusing on several points, particularly the "FBI DIGITAL
TELEPHONY" Section, which says:

 "The bill authorizes the FBI to use enhanced telephone technology to
  investigate suspected terrorist activity.  Funding for equipment purchase was
  provided in the 1996 omnibus appropriations measure enacted earlier this
  year."

The first sentence above is not at all clear, and probably won't be until
we can get our hands on the actual text of the bill. It could be additional
wiretap authority (ie, roving wiretaps), or it could be nothing.  As far as
the funding goes, the "1996 omnibus appropriations measure" DID NOT contain
funding for implementation of the law - but it did appropriate $37 million
to cover new equipment for the FBI.

The rest looks like it is a scaled back version of a measure the
Administration and members of Congress were pushing earlier this week, but
the scope of the new bill depends a lot on what the actual text says.

I will post additional information as soon as I get it.

Jonah

--


                Bipartisan Antiterrorism Initiative
                                HR__

                     Committee on the Judiciary
                          No Report Filed
                         To Be Introduced

Floor Situation:

The House is scheduled to consider HR__ on Friday August 2, 1996. On
Thursday August 1, the Rules Committee granted a rule to allow the bill to
be considered under suspension of the rules. It is debatable for 40
minutes, may not be amended, and requires a two-thirds vote for passage.

Summary:

HR__ includes several bipartisan initiatives intended to bolster federal
efforts to combat domestic terrorism in addition to those already enacted
earlier this year as part of the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death
Penalty Act (P.L. 104-132).  The bill contains the following
counter-terrorism provisions:

Aviation SECURITY MEASURES: The bill enables domestic airports to
aggressively search for and prevent explosives from causing destruction and
harm to individuals or property through enhanced explosive detection
procedures, baggage and passenger screening, and FBI authority to improve
airport security training and standards to ensure that provisions of the
1990 Aviation Security Act (P.L 101-604) are implemented expeditiously.
Specifically, the bill (1) requires the FAA to implement increased
explosives section methods immediately, (2) strengthen the level of
training and expertise possessed by security personnel who are assigned to
domestic airports, (3) allows airports to use available funding to
reinforce such training for security personnel, and (4) extends criminal
background requirements to include a greater number of airport employees.

IMPLEMENTATION OF EXISTING ANTI-TERRORISM LAWS: The bill urges
implementation of provisions enacted in the 1996 Antiterrorism and
Effective Death Penalty Act (P.L. 104-132), such as designating and
freezing the assets of foreign terrorist organizations and implementing
expedited removal procedures for aliens convicted of a crime.

BIPARTISAN "BLUE RIBBON" COMMISSION: The bill establishes a special
commission to review all aspects of U.S. anti-terrorism policy and make
legislative recommendations about methods to most effectively establish a
long-term defense against terrorist threats, including enhancing the
nation's human intelligence capabilities.

PRIVACY ACT AMENDMENTS: The bill includes provisions which grant a cause of
action against the U.S. if in the course of a wiretap investigation
damaging information is willfully disclosed to the detriment of an innocent
party by the federal government.  The cause of action includes monetary
damages to the plaintiff if a favorable decision is rendered in federal
court.

EXPLOSIVES STUDY: The bill authorizes a study on black and smokeless powder
by an independent agency selected by the National Institute of Justice.

FEDERAL RACKETEERING STATUTE CRIMES: The bill permits federal prosecutors
to deem those acts determined to be terrorist in nature as substantial
enough to invoke criminal prosecution under existing criminal racketeering
(RICO) statutes.

FBI DIGITAL TELEPHONY: The bill authorizes the FBI to use enhanced
telephone technology to investigate suspected terrorist activity.  Funding
for equipment purchase was provided in the 1996 omnibus appropriations
measure enacted earlier this year.

--

  ** THE FIGHT FOR FREE SPEECH ONLINE CONTINUES TO THE SUPREME COURT **
      It's not too late to be a part of history -- Join the Lawsuit
         <http://www.cdt.org/ciec>   --    <ciec-info at cdt.org>

--
Jonah Seiger, Policy Analyst           Center for Democracy and Technology
<jseiger at cdt.org>                           1634 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100
                                                      Washington, DC 20006
PGP Key via finger                                     (v) +1.202.637.9800
http://www.cdt.org/                                    (f) +1.202.637.0968
http://www.cdt.org/homes/jseiger/









From svmcguir at syr.edu  Fri Aug  2 13:06:29 1996
From: svmcguir at syr.edu (Scott McGuire)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 04:06:29 +0800
Subject: Information gathering by news servers
Message-ID: <ML-2.2.839003612.7349.scott@homebox>


How much information about what someone reads can be gathered
by a news server?  Is there an anonymous way to read a public
news server, or would a server have to be set up intentionally
to allow anonymous reading?

Scott






From JeanPaul.Kroepfli at ns.fnet.fr  Fri Aug  2 13:12:20 1996
From: JeanPaul.Kroepfli at ns.fnet.fr (Jean-Paul Kroepfli)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 04:12:20 +0800
Subject: Tao Renji Public Key system
Message-ID: <01BB80A1.2447DD00@JPKroepsli.S-IP.EUnet.fr>


Dear Bruce,
I was testing the Raike's Public Key software, when I remembered a section of your excellent book.
In Applied Cryptography, second edition, section 19.10 (page 482) you present the Renji's work about a public key algorithme based on finite automata.
Where could we found the FAPKC1 and FAPKC2 algorithms, their implementations, and executable versions (you mention an Intel486 test).
Many thanks,
With kindest regards
Jean-Paul
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Jean-Paul et Micheline Kroepfli      (our son: Nicolas and daughter: Celine)
eMail: JeanPaul.Kroepfli at utopia.fnet.fr    Also Compuserve and MSNetwork
Phone: +33  81 55 52 59  (F)          PostMail: F-25640 Breconchaux (France)
   or: +41  21 843 27 36 (CH)               or: CP 138, CH-1337 Vallorbe
  Fax: +33  81 55 52 62                                        (Switzerland)
Zephyr(r) : InterNet Communication and Commerce, Security and Cryptography consulting
PGP Fingerprint : 19 FB 67 EA 20 70 53 89  AF B2 5C 7F 02 1F CA 8F
"The InterNet is the most open standard since air for breathing"







From conrad at walton.com  Fri Aug  2 13:43:04 1996
From: conrad at walton.com (Conrad Walton)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 04:43:04 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
Message-ID: <1373144101-347077@industrial-artworks.com>


>
>and everyplace else all the news.answers FAQs are stored. What, precisely, is
>an acid bomb? Also note the standard blame-the-Internet (not, say, increased
>irritation with government after the Republicans failed to reduce it) 
>rhetoric.

i'm not exactly sure what an acid bomb is, but according to my book, The 
Anarchist Cookbook, that I bought in 1972 (was the internet around back 
then?), there is a compound called "picric acid" that is "more powerful 
than TNT, but has some disadvantages". 

if you'd like the recipe, I'll be more than happy to mail you it through 
the US Postal system. Wouldn't want to give the Internet any more of a 
bad name for distributing subversive materials.

There is also instructions on using an inverted vial of sulpheric acid, 
that will then eat thu the stopper at the top (bottom) of the vial. when 
the acid makes it thru, then is mixes with Potassium Chloride and causes 
a small explosion which sets off the larger explosion in the dynomite 
packed around it. 

just thot you'd like to know.



thanks,
conrad



__________I_N_D_U_S_T_R_I_A_L___A_R_T_W_O_R_K_S__________
Conrad Walton         http://www.industrial-artworks.com/
POB 2815, El Segundo, CA 90245             1-310-640-3365
---------------------------------------------------------







From jseiger at cdt.org  Fri Aug  2 14:00:22 1996
From: jseiger at cdt.org (Jonah Seiger)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:00:22 +0800
Subject: URGENT: Surveillance Bill Gets New Life - House Vote lLikely TODAY!
Message-ID: <v02140b02ae27c94754e5@[204.157.127.4]>


(please forward where appropriate)

It's not over yet....

The House has scheduled a vote on "suspension" for a 'counter-terrorism'
bill TODAY (Friday).

Despite media reports that the negotiations had stalled out, house
Republicans have apparently worked out their differences and are set to
vote on the bill today.  The Senate may or may not vote on the measure on
Saturday.

No one I've talked to knows for sure what's in the bill, though I have
heard that there are no encryption provisions and that some of the wiretap
proposals have been scaled back.

I will post details as I get them. In the mean time, keep those calls
coming into Congress.

Jonah

  ** THE FIGHT FOR FREE SPEECH ONLINE CONTINUES TO THE SUPREME COURT **
      It's not too late to be a part of history -- Join the Lawsuit
         <http://www.cdt.org/ciec>   --    <ciec-info at cdt.org>

--
Jonah Seiger, Policy Analyst           Center for Democracy and Technology
<jseiger at cdt.org>                           1634 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100
                                                      Washington, DC 20006
PGP Key via finger                                     (v) +1.202.637.9800
http://www.cdt.org/                                    (f) +1.202.637.0968
http://www.cdt.org/homes/jseiger/









From mpd at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 14:00:23 1996
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:00:23 +0800
Subject: FPGAs and Heat (Re: Paranoid Musings)
In-Reply-To: <199608021711.MAA01770@homeport.org>
Message-ID: <199608021708.KAA21925@netcom6.netcom.com>


Adam Shostack wrote:

> | That's one of the things that killed Thinking Machines.  It turned out
> [...]
> | At the time Thinking Machines went under, Seymour Cray had a big contract
> 
> 	Just a nit, but Thinking Machines is still in business, and has
> had their first few profitable quarters. www.think.com

The current Thinking Machines is a software firm, and Daniel Hillis is no
longer amongst the top management.  The name lives on, but the business
of designing, building, and selling exotic supercomputers is kaput.

Not an uncommon story in the computer business.  Even Control Data 
Corporation still exists in a transmogrified form, although their
mainframe business went up in smoke ages ago. 

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     mpd at netcom.com     $    via Finger.                      $






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Aug  2 14:07:05 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:07:05 +0800
Subject: Licensing, Permits, and Freedom
Message-ID: <ae27837a000210043380@[205.199.118.202]>


At 3:23 PM 8/2/96, Cerridwyn Llewyellyn wrote:
>Jim Choate <ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com> argued:
>
>>As long as they have a license to operate a food dispencing facility (in
>>other words they are certifying they are aware of the correct processes for
>>such operations) then nobody should have the right to interfere with their
>>operation unless with probable cause (ie proof of danger such as bad weenies
>>in their hot dogs). This would not apply to individuals or families making
>>such food in the same place for their own and NOT public consumption.
>
>I believe the issue with Food Not Bombs is they didn't get the appropriate
>permits, etc, or were denied them, or something.  However, I disagree with
>you on this point.  I think they shouldn't be required to obtain a license,
>but everyone whom they serve food to should know that they don't have such a
>license.  This would equal informed consent.  Also, with Food Not Bombs, many
>of the people that the food is being served to is also involved in cooking,
>distributing food, and cleaning up.  I've been told it's exactly like a big
>picnic, except for anyone is invited to help and/or eat.

It was in fact "Food Not Bombs" which I was referring to in my post a few
days ago.

My point to the City Council was one of inconsistency (picnic groups not
similarly hassled). Also, the use of "permits" to harass/muzzle a group.

"Permits" are often used to stop speech and acts which are not considered
acceptable. Drawing on my own community for an example, Santa Cruz tried to
regulate palm readers, astrologers, mystics, and seers. This eventually
fell apart, possibly when the implications became clear to the bureaucrats
(the future was already clear to the Cassandras, but nobody believed them).

My "Licensed Ontologist" line in my .sig was added during one of the
debates about the claimed need to license and regulate persons in various
professions.

(There are of course the usual other examples, where job unions and cartels
stop "outsiders" from participating. Often for ostensibly good reasons, but
"guilds" nonetheless. The implications of crypto anarchy for these guilds
are left as exercises for the student.)


--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 at 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."









From farber at central.cis.upenn.edu  Fri Aug  2 14:12:55 1996
From: farber at central.cis.upenn.edu (Dave Farber)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:12:55 +0800
Subject: Freeh slimes again: Digital Telephony costs $2 billion now ...
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802172157.0072be14@linc.cis.upenn.edu>


And I testified in front of the House that their estimate was grossly
understated. I think it is more like 4-5 Billion . I called it the Software
Full Employment Act of 94. (copy of testimony available). djf

At 08:52 AM 8/2/96 -0700, Brock N. Meeks wrote:
>
>On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Ernest Hua wrote:
>
>> Louis Freeh is now asking the Congress for $2 billion to fund
>> Digital Telephony.  Yes, that is FOUR TIMES what he said it
>> would cost the taxpayers to give up their own privacy.  Score
>> one for the cynics who said $500 million was not enough.
>
>I broke the story about how much Digital Telephony would *really* cost in 
>CyberWire Dispatch more than two years ago.  The price tag in my piece:  
>"... at least $2 billion..."  In that Dispatch I wrote that the Clinton 
>White House had made the decision to support the bill based on a flawed 
>cost/benefit analysis study the FBI had done.
>
>--Brock
>
>






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 14:34:18 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:34:18 +0800
Subject: Let's Say "No!" to Single, World Versions of Software
Message-ID: <199608021800.LAA10722@toad.com>


At 02:16 PM 7/31/96 -0700, Tom Weinstein <tomw at netscape.com> wrote:

>The only thing they can revoke is their permission to provide it for
>download over the internet.  They can't revoke our permission to sell
>it in stores or via snail mail.

They _could_ refuse to give export permission for new RC4/40 versions,
and threaten prosecution if it's placed on the Internet.
It would be highly bogus, of course, but that's one of the "benefits"
of using selective enforcement and having the export strength limitations
be an individual-case-basis rather than a defined law they can be held to.

Tim wrote:
> Actually approving of disapproving a piece of software for sale 
> to U.S. citizens is not currently possible.

Sure.  The Commerce Klaus of the Constitution lets them do it
if they want to, though that required Congressional cooperation.


	TRUST NO ONE!






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 14:36:45 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:36:45 +0800
Subject: "And who shall guard the guardians?"
Message-ID: <199608021800.LAA10727@toad.com>



>On Cyperpunks recently, Tim May wrote:
>
>>The Latin maxim "And who shall guard the guardians?" has some relevance to
>>the headlong rush into converting the U.S. into even more of a security
>>state than it is now.

The English-Only bill just passed in the House bans the use of
non-English languages by government officials.  Does Tim's sudden 
avoidance of the Latin mean that _he_'s the Fed??  

At 02:57 PM 7/31/96 -0700, Martin Minow <minow at apple.com> wrote:

>I would suspect that a Baysian analysis
>would indicate that the risk of holding (and losing) a key is
>greater than the risk of not holding (and needing) a key.

Cui bono?  Or, in this case, risk to _whom_?
The damage from losing a key is done to the key's owner,
who's a mere Subject, while the dangers of needing a key
that one doesn't have are interference with the Custodians
doing the jobs they want to do.  Sounds like a no-brainer,
from the Government's viewpoint.

	TRUST NO ONE!






From briant at atlantic.net  Fri Aug  2 14:40:15 1996
From: briant at atlantic.net (Brian T Hancher)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:40:15 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
Message-ID: <199608021149.LAA24441@rio.atlantic.net>


>P.S.  Do police really need a search warrant to wiretap cellular phones?

It is my understanding that police need a warrant to tap *cellular* 
phones, but not *wireless* phones.

One should understand that monitoring cellular traffic is *much* more 
difficult than tapping a conventional phone, because as the user 
moves around in the service area the phone switches to different 
repeaters, often several times during a conversation.

I am curious as to the language of the proposed law, as it is also my 
understanding that the government already has the (technical) means to monitor 
cellular traffic (but it requires a warrant, just like tapping a 
regular phone).

              Brian T. Hancher

       http://rio.atlantic.net/~briant

              briant at ocala.com
             briant at atlantic.net
      Brian.Hancher at lmi.fdles.state.fl.us





From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 14:55:39 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:55:39 +0800
Subject: SECURITY WARNING - D0 N0T D0WN0AD "New Clinton Administration Ping Policy"
Message-ID: <199608021800.LAA10715@toad.com>


WARNING!  DO NOT DOWNLOAD THE E-MAIL MESSAGE LABELED
         "New Clinton Administration Ping Policy"

IT C0NTAINS EVIDENCE 0F SECURITY VI0LATIONS IN THE HEADERS AND 
D0WNLOADING IT RISKS C0NTAMINATION 0F Y0UR MACHINE:
> X-Authentication-Warning: server1.chromatic.com: hua owned process doing -bs
> X-Authentication-Warning: server1.chromatic.com: Host hua at localhost didn't
use HELO protocol

> Return-Path: <cypherpunks-errors at toad.com>

FURTHERMORE, IT IS DISTRIBUTED BY THE THE CYPHERPUNKS-ERRORS LIST, 
AN 0RGANIZATION KN0WN T0 HAVE BR0KEN US EXP0RT-GRADE SECURITY 
AND APPARENTLY LED BY THE KN0WN FEL0N ``KLAUS'' AND AN ANARCHIST
W00DW0RKER BRIEFLY SUSPECTED IN THE UNAB0MBER CASE.




	TRUST NO ONE!






From umwalber at cc.UManitoba.CA  Fri Aug  2 14:55:41 1996
From: umwalber at cc.UManitoba.CA (Sean Walberg)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 05:55:41 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
In-Reply-To: <1373144101-347077@industrial-artworks.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960802130921.10502D-100000@merak.cc.umanitoba.ca>


I remember seeing an item on TV that had mentioned an acid bomb (it was a
news report about a public access TV show that was showing people how to 
make bombs).  In this example, some common chemicals were mixed together, 
tightly closed, and moments later an explosion occured.  They never said 
the chemicals, for all I know it could have been lemon juice and baking 
soda in a sealed container, a la Dry Ice bomb...  It didn't look like a 
bomb of mass destruction, more of a loud bang and a smallish explosion...

Sean


On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Conrad Walton wrote:

> >and everyplace else all the news.answers FAQs are stored. What, precisely, is
> >an acid bomb? Also note the standard blame-the-Internet (not, say, increased
> >irritation with government after the Republicans failed to reduce it) 
> >rhetoric.
> 
> i'm not exactly sure what an acid bomb is, but according to my book, The 
> Anarchist Cookbook, that I bought in 1972 (was the internet around back 
> then?), there is a compound called "picric acid" that is "more powerful 
> than TNT, but has some disadvantages". 

------------------------------------------------------------------
Sean Walberg                              umwalber at cc.umanitoba.ca
The Web Guy                  http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~umwalber 
UNIX Group, U. of Manitoba          PGP Key Available from Servers






From markm at voicenet.com  Fri Aug  2 15:00:47 1996
From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:00:47 +0800
Subject: Information gathering by news servers
In-Reply-To: <ML-2.2.839003612.7349.scott@homebox>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.960802141613.1319A-100000@gak>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Scott McGuire wrote:

> How much information about what someone reads can be gathered
> by a news server?  Is there an anonymous way to read a public
> news server, or would a server have to be set up intentionally
> to allow anonymous reading?

It depends on how much logging the news server software does.  For INN, it
logs the hostname of every client that invokes the "group" command.  This
means that if you are on a machine that uses identd or on a SLIP/PPP account,
it is possible to also find out the complete email address.  I suppose hacking
the news software could allow a news admin to find out every article you read,
but the log would be very large.  The best way to read news anonymously is
to either get an anonymous shell account that has a full news feed, or get an
account on a trusted NNTP server.  An NNTP server could be setup to not log
at all by commenting out all the calls to syslog().

- -- Mark

PGP encrypted mail prefered
Key fingerprint = d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348
http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/  


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBMgJHT7Zc+sv5siulAQHZ8gP+NywhqrmlOls1ibbpdXac0qp7/LacT+2j
UXiBare4Lk0qOJAM9UUAc+xbyzxAugdWwLAyo2NW8Bi5ZK1QojFvCKvHcQzWYNA6
baz7Qmy9x7Beup6HG+7M/bOmGonjml+ZSXbWAFMuSmItd5V2vZRmqBGdu8oglY7m
MiGmXLaLkFw=
=To5D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca  Fri Aug  2 15:23:25 1996
From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:23:25 +0800
Subject: Courtesy, Clubs and Clinton
Message-ID: <9607028390.AA839024095@smtplink.alis.ca>


Excerpt from http://www.msnbc.com/news/21324.asp
Clinton's golf war 
Teed-off clubbers grumble president plays too slow, disrupts things

Congressional Country Club Secretary Tim May confirms that 
some members have complained about the president, but insists that 
"more members are delighted the president is playing at our club."
_________

Is there something that Tim isn't telling us? ;-)






From pjb at ny.ubs.com  Fri Aug  2 15:27:22 1996
From: pjb at ny.ubs.com (Paul J. Bell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:27:22 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <9608021922.AA06774@sherry.ny.ubs.com>


> From grafolog at netcom.com Fri Aug  2 11:48:53 1996
> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 15:48:47 +0000 (GMT)
> From: jonathon <grafolog at netcom.com>
> X-Sender: grafolog at netcom10
> To: "Paul J. Bell" <pjb at ny.ubs.com>
> Subject: Re: fbi, crypto, and defcon
> X-No-Archive: yes
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type> : > TEXT/PLAIN> ; > charset=US-ASCII> 
> Content-Length: 772
> 
> 	Paul:
> 
> On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Paul J. Bell wrote:
> 
> > in general, i suspect that the rip-off is going the other way. after all, 
> > no one forces anyone buy from microsoft, AT&T, etc., but people do steal from
> 
> 	When I purchased my computers, I had to pay $150 to not have
> 	Windows and Dos installed on them.  That $150 went to Microsoft.
> 	It seemed to me that I was being ripped off, by Microsoft.
> 
> 	As far as AT&T goes, do you know how to determine what their
> 	lowest residential rate is?   Secondly, do you know how to
> 	sign up for it?  
> 	
> 
>         xan
> 
>         jonathon
>         grafolog at netcom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 	Illiterate: adj.  Inability to read write or speak five 
> 	or fewer languages.
> 	Funksioneel Ongeleerd:  a.  Die wat kon nee elf or meer tale 
> 	lees, skryf and gesprek. 
> 
> 
> 

as i said, i have no use for microsoft, whats more, i don't use microsoft. 
that said, if a person really must pay to not have their products installed, 
i agree that that is intorelable, and at the least calls for finding a new vendor
for computers. if you really don't plan to use dos or windows, there is 
no reason why you should pay for them. frankly, this sounds like a real stupid
move on the part of your hardware vendor. maybe you need to shop around.

as for at&t, no, i don't know the lowest residential rate, but i'm sure that
the rate varies depending on your long distance calling pattern. i'm sure that
the rate is less for someone who rarely makes an ld call but wants to have the 
ability to do so when and if the need/desire arises then for someone who makes 
a few call per month and for another user who makes a lot of call each month. 
at any rate, all you need to do is to ask them for the lowest rate for your 
calling pattern, and if you don't like the answer, hang up and call mci, s
print, etc. at least thats better than microsoft, where you don't have a lot 
of choice.

take a quick look around the world, paying particular attention to those many 
countries where the telephone company was directly controlled by the government. 
was the service they provided really great? was it cheap? did they every provide 
anything new or improved?  as one who has spent a lot of time in some of these
countries i can answer from experience, hell no.  a one time, in the late 50's 
i lived and worked in a certain west african country. th erule was, taht the first
person in the office in the morning would take the phone off the hook, and maybe 
by 10:30 or 11:00 we would get a dial tone. of course, you would never hang the 
thing up again taht day, just pass it along to anyone else that needed to make a 
call.  egypt and all of france was not a lot better. as late as 1983 it was a real 
challenge to get a phone installed or make a long distance call in france.  
no matter what the french say, telecommunications services still suck in france.

i agree with you that a lot of companies do gouge the customer for all that they
can get, and maybe AT&T is one of them, but maybe not.  

i have spent my entire working life providing for myself, asking and taking nothing 
from anyone, other than what i earned for myself. i payed for my education and for 
everything else that i ever had.  however, once i had the money to invest, i did 
so, in, among others, AT&T, and since i take a chance with the money that i worked 
for by investing in them, i, by god, expect a return on my investment, and if AT&T 
can't provide it, i will dump them and take my chances elsewhere.  however, 
whether its AT&T or someone else, if i risk my money, i expect something in 
return, and i can only expect that if the company (AT&T or who ever) makes a
profit.  profit is not a dirty word, it is what makes it all possible. AT&T did 
not build the worldwide network that serves us all for fun, not did they invent 
the transistor or UNIX, or all the other thinks that we take for granted just for 
the fun of it, or without risk.  if you take the risk, you deserve a return on 
your investment.  i have yet to meet a stockholder who said that they were satisfied with any given profit level and wished the company to give away goods or services 
rather then increase the dividends to the stockholders.  the name of the game is 
PROFIT, its what keeps us all alive and employed. the real saving grace is in having a choice.

i am not suggesting that as long as a company makes a profit that anything goes.  
what i am suggesting is that a company, or an individual for that matter is
only obliged to see to there own well being.  if an individual so chooses, they
may spend their life, or any portion thereof, working for the good of someone
else, or giving the results of all their labors to others, as they choose.  in 
many ways this is a good thing and is what makes civilized life.  however, i
do not believe that it is ever permissable to dictate to an individual or to 
a company which is, after all, only the sum of it's employees and stockholders,
the requirement or terms of how they will dispense the profits of their labors.

if AT&T or any other company doesn't give you what you want, tell them to fuck-off,
and take your business elsewhere.

oh that we could so easily deal with a government that provides so little of what
the people want.  i think that it is rare for a company to forget who is really
calling the shots, but our very own government seems to be completly unaware
that they exist to serve us, not the other way around. they seem to have forgotten
that the purpose of the constitution is not to define what rights are given to the 
people, but rather to define what powers the people give to the government.


cheers,
	-paul







From tcmay at got.net  Fri Aug  2 15:37:46 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:37:46 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
Message-ID: <ae27a13f03021004323f@[205.199.118.202]>


At 9:33 AM 8/2/96, Conrad Walton wrote:

>i'm not exactly sure what an acid bomb is, but according to my book, The
>Anarchist Cookbook, that I bought in 1972 (was the internet around back
>then?), there is a compound called "picric acid" that is "more powerful
>than TNT, but has some disadvantages".

The ARPANET (or ARPANet, or Arpanet...) was around then. (I had an account
on it, circa 1973...not very useful for me.)

I also got my copy of "The Anarchist Cookbook" back around then. It was in
the news locally when the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's office attempted
to have it removed from the local bookstores....this removed it all right,
as the stacks of copies sold out as quickly as they could be received and
unpacked.

(As others have noted over the years, much of the advice is probably bogus
and even dangerous. Not being an explosives dabbler, I wouldn't know.)

If Feinswine gets her ban on bomb-making information passed, and this is
upheld by the courts (doubtful), the sites will be swamped with information
queries, and fooling around with bombs will become more popular amongst the
teenage set that has not expressed much interest in such things the past
couple of decades.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

--Tim May, an I-bomb-throwing crypto anarchist

Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
Do not pack
the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it settle.  You want
the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need dry, fine powder
sitting loose in a very rigid container.







From tcmay at got.net  Fri Aug  2 15:40:49 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:40:49 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
Message-ID: <ae27864d01021004dd81@[205.199.118.202]>


At 8:52 AM 8/2/96, David Wagner wrote:

>I don't get it.  Help me out here-- how can this possibly be constitutional?
>
>I'm reading the Fourth Amendment to our honored Constitution of the United
>States, which proclaims
>
>        [...]
>        no warrants shall issue,
>        but upon probable cause,
>        supported by oath or affirmation,
>        and *particularly describing the place to be searched*,
>        and the persons or things to be seized.
>
>Are we just to strike out that emphasized phrase?  What's going on here?
>Someone tell me I'm not just having a bad nightmare.


The same way the Second Amendment has been turned into a shadow of itself
by creative lawyering.

("The Founders did not mean to include AR-15s and .45 Automatics as "guns,"
as these did not even exist in 1791. Likewise, cellular phones did not
exist in 1791, so the Fourth Amendment could not possibly apply to them.
Have a nice day.")

--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 at 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."









From frissell at panix.com  Fri Aug  2 15:41:44 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:41:44 +0800
Subject: privacy is a SMOKESCREEN.
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802193411.0087b680@panix.com>


See.  Right-wing nuts are good for something.

>from eff:
>
>CNN reports: "Key members of the Senate blamed House conservatives for 
>the failure, saying they had insisted on linking proposed new
>wiretapping authority for the FBI to an expansion of privacy laws."
>
>CNN quotes Rep. Charles Schumer (D-NY) as saying that House Republican
>leaders "have come up with this smokescreen called privacy".






From perry at piermont.com  Fri Aug  2 15:42:34 1996
From: perry at piermont.com (Perry E. Metzger)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:42:34 +0800
Subject: Tolerance
In-Reply-To: <199608012148.OAA21170@cygnus.com>
Message-ID: <199608021936.PAA10161@jekyll.piermont.com>



"Chris Adams" writes:
> Just a comment to all of the 'true libertarians' out there, especially
> the "defend to the death" types:  How many of you defended Mr.
> Sternlight's recent membership?

Libertarianism means that you oppose *government* censorship -- not
that you feel obligated to listen to every idiot who comes down the
street.

In other words -- I defend to the death the right of David Sternlight
to say anything he likes. However, thats very different from feeling
that anyone is required to listen, or saying that a privately run
forum must tolerate him.

Perry





From jimbell at pacifier.com  Fri Aug  2 15:44:16 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:44:16 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
Message-ID: <199608021942.MAA17510@mail.pacifier.com>


At 09:33 AM 8/2/96 -0000, Conrad Walton wrote:

>i'm not exactly sure what an acid bomb is, but according to my book, The 
>Anarchist Cookbook, that I bought in 1972 (was the internet around back 
>then?), there is a compound called "picric acid" that is "more powerful 
>than TNT, but has some disadvantages". 

Picric acid is 2,4,6 trinitrophenol, easily produced by the nitric/sulfuric 
acid nitration of phenol.

If picric acid contains about 15% of water or more, it is rather stable and 
innocuous.  If it is allowed to completely dry out, it then becomes 
sensitive to detonation with a blasting cap.

One disadvantage of picric acid is that it reads with heavy metals (copper, 
lead, etc) to form unstable picrate salts.


>There is also instructions on using an inverted vial of sulpheric acid, 
>that will then eat thu the stopper at the top (bottom) of the vial. when 
>the acid makes it thru, then is mixes with Potassium Chloride 

Potassium _Chlorate_

and causes 
>a small explosion which sets off the larger explosion in the dynomite 
>packed around it. 

It would probably require a booster...

Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From pjb at ny.ubs.com  Fri Aug  2 15:54:50 1996
From: pjb at ny.ubs.com (Paul J. Bell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:54:50 +0800
Subject: my message Re: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <9608021947.AA06865@sherry.ny.ubs.com>


in my earlier message of this date, i said:

>"i have spent my entire working life providing for myself, asking and taking nothing
>from anyone, other than what i earned for myself. i payed for my education and for
>everything else that i ever had."

maybe i should have taken something, then i would have learned to spell. yes, i
know that the correct spelling is 'paid', not 'payed', but sometimes, (often?),
my fingers outrun my brain. does this, you ask, also account for the lack of
uppercase characters? no, it's just my style, maybe its really laziness.

cheers,
	-paul


ps. you will undoubtly also find a few tath, thta, teh, and the like.
 maybe if i used that microsoft stuff with the spell checker rather than the 
sun mailtool i could present myself without the plethora of typos. sigh. 





From omega at bigeasy.com  Fri Aug  2 15:58:46 1996
From: omega at bigeasy.com (Omegaman)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:58:46 +0800
Subject: Silliness on cypherpunks
Message-ID: <199608021958.OAA02684@betty.bigeasy.com>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> The first issue is the seemingly sincere attempts at answering questions
> that are obviously irrelevant.  IMO cypherpunks are not "Mr. Answer Man"
> for every question someone has regarding computers or electrical
> engineering.  Sure, most of us are pretty capable of answering these
> questions - that doesn't mean that we should.  

At most, they might be privately directed to the appropriate URL or 
other reference.  Some take the time to answer such questions by 
providing an exercise which should lead the individual to the answer.  

Chances are, though, that they're perfectly aware of Schneir's book 
and numerous other FAQ's of relevance.  That means most likely we're 
dealing with laziness - which does not deserve a response

> Whenever I asked a silly
> question at home, my dad used to tell me - "look it up".  The process of
> finding the answer was actually far more important than the answer itself. 
> We should attempt to ignore these kinds of questions.  Maybe eventually
> they will go away.

I believe that's called "learning."  Unfortunately, far too many 
people engage in what I call "willful ignroance."   

I'm not an engineer.  I'm not a mathmetician.  I don't fully 
understand everything I've read here.  If I'm interested, however, I 
look further and read up on the subject so I can make informed 
queries if needed.

Some seem to think that this list is cruel to newcomers by posting 
sarcastic responses to newbie inquiries.  This list assumes some 
amount of prior knowledge on the part of it's members.  It is not the 
place for "what does PGP stand for?" questions.

> My other "peeve of the day" is the wonderful introduction of the "mee too"
> postings to cypherpunks. 

me too.

 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgJSYab3EfJTqNC9AQHXqwP/YUx5mtuDZTV4G6T//DsOZHtWqKo19+sN
mUEWKFa0DkErukEXnNIhSXgQjtkknp/AJEP2UQ04JE5cIoVB8ti2tpeB+qLFJUvi
pd149EYzQC+da0l0rSDWARtciWv642ZX5fdrCn7388tpxnCsTlnSLziaQVM7E9+S
ZZ2etwMCQd8=
=796N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Omegaman <omega at 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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 16:00:43 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 07:00:43 +0800
Subject: Freeh slimes again: Digital Telephony costs $2 billion now ...
Message-ID: <v02120d00ae280f477ab7@[192.0.2.1]>


At 18:29 8/1/96, Timothy C. May wrote:

>(With the Internet Phone deals--even Intel is entering the market--why are
>there no widespread uses of PGP or S/MIME? Yes, I know about about PGPhone,
>and also the Nautilus product, but none seem to be used by anyone I know.
>Maybe we should spend some time talking about the practical realities of
>these tools.)

The sound quality really isn't there, unless you have a fast machine or a
fat pipe. In addition, the vast majority of Intel based computers lack the
crucial (for user acceptance) full-duplex soundcard. Add to that the
physical impossibility of getting decent real time services over a
non-isochronous network, such as the Internet, I'net phones just don't
provide suffcient speech quality for business/serious personal use even
without the added overhead of crypto.



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From wwoelbel at midwest.net  Fri Aug  2 16:24:50 1996
From: wwoelbel at midwest.net (W.K. Woelbeling)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 07:24:50 +0800
Subject: List for crypto minus political rubbish
Message-ID: <199608022025.PAA02349@cdale1.midwest.net>


I am looking for a source of info on crypto.  While this list is of interest
to (many) people, I find that the amount of political ranting outweighs any
nuggets of information concerning cryptography.  Pointers?

Bill






From tcmay at got.net  Fri Aug  2 16:48:33 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 07:48:33 +0800
Subject: URGENT: Surveillance Bill Gets New Life - House Vote lLikely TODAY!
Message-ID: <ae27bf7d050210044d20@[205.199.118.202]>


At 3:06 PM 8/2/96, Jonah Seiger wrote:

>It's not over yet....
>
>The House has scheduled a vote on "suspension" for a 'counter-terrorism'
>bill TODAY (Friday).
>
>Despite media reports that the negotiations had stalled out, house
>Republicans have apparently worked out their differences and are set to
>vote on the bill today.  The Senate may or may not vote on the measure on
>Saturday.
>
>No one I've talked to knows for sure what's in the bill, though I have
>heard that there are no encryption provisions and that some of the wiretap
>proposals have been scaled back.

I doubt any of the Congressjerks know what's in the thing they've voting
on, either. This is the American way: wait 'til the last minute, pull a
couple of "all nighters," go on vacation, and then claim ignorance. It
worked when we were in school, so, hey, why not run the government the same
way?

("I had no idea of what was in the Communications Decency Act...it just
sounded like the "decent" thing to vote for."....."You mean the
Anti-Terrorism Bill suspends habeus corpus? What's that? I'll ask my
staffers to look into it.")

Fuck 'em all. Fawkes had it wrong...they're not worth the powder to blow
'em to hell.

All we can do is work on technological workarounds. Making their $2 billion
Wiretap Boondoggle a worthless exercise is a start.

--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 at 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."









From frissell at panix.com  Fri Aug  2 17:03:58 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:03:58 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802192913.0087dccc@panix.com>


At 12:13 PM 8/2/96 -0400, Simon Spero wrote:

>IP is the Flame, TCP is the Fuse, HTTP is the Bomb

That'd be HTTPS wouldn't it.
              ^
DCF






From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 17:05:32 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:05:32 +0800
Subject: Pipe bombs
Message-ID: <v02120d02ae281b5c5141@[192.0.2.1]>


At 21:02 8/1/96, Timothy C. May wrote:

>Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
>ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
>stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
>good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
>on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
>Do not pack
>the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it settle.  You want
>the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need dry, fine powder
>sitting loose in a very rigid container.

I do believe you forgot the fuse... Electrical ignition elements, such as
the ones used to launch model rockets should work just fine.



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From tcmay at got.net  Fri Aug  2 17:09:34 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:09:34 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS
Message-ID: <ae27b98904021004e701@[205.199.118.202]>


At 2:39 PM 8/2/96, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

>I find it amusing that the law is supposedly so concerned with
>food purity for the "homeless."  Hang out near a fast-food place
>sometime and watch the street people dumpster dive for the
>half-eaten remains of other people's Big Macs.  That is the true
>alternative to volunteer feeding programs.  (That, or getting a
>job.)

I thought the point you were about to make when you said "Hang out near a
fast-food place..." is that a _lot_ of "roach coaches" are much filthier
than any "Food Not Bombs" soup kettle I've ever seen.

(Fortunately, people survive all kinds of dirt and germs. If dogs and cats
can eat stuff off the floor, and our ancestors did before hot water, soap,
and autoclaves, then so can we. Not to mention children. But I digress.)

The use of zoning and health code ordnances to harass certain classes of
people is nothing new. Like I said, the Boy Scout Cookout and similar
"good" events are not bothered by City Inspectors descending on them to
shut them down.

>The truth is that local officials are perverting the health codes
>to harass these operations, not to "protect the homeless."  At
>it's core, it is a hypocritical abuse of power, not unlike the
>invocation of the Four Horseman to keep strong crypto out of the
>hands of average Americans.

Further, in time past the operation of a "street food" service (hot dogs,
ice cream, various knoshing items, etc.) was a way for otherwise poor
persons to start a business. My own city, Santa Cruz, has no pushcart
vendors, and only one officially-approved sidewalk hotdog vendor. A loss
for us, a loss for would-be vendors, and with no gain in "food safety" that
I can plausible see.

I actually think this shows another side of the harassment of food
giveaways and low-cost vendors: it cuts down on competition with the
established food entities. While I tend to dismiss "corporate conspiracy"
theories about how Giant Corporations are repressing and suppressing the
Little Guys, there is little doubt that licensing, zoning, and other
governmental restrictions are often used by established entities to keep
out competition. Licenses get used for what economists call "rent-seeking"
behavior.

(Examples abound in other areas, too, such as where large chip companies
like Intel actually relish the vast amounts of paperwork they are required
to fill out, becuase this overhead and legal burden can be handled by their
buildings full of paper pushers, but helps to keep small companies from
entering the market. Intel has actually insisted that small companies file
the same environmental impact reports, labor reports, etc., that they have
to fill out. Understandable at one level, but also an example of using "the
system" to put pressure on upstarts. Or, the rent-seeking of professional
guilds, well-known to all of us.)

As to Alan Horowitz's bizarre notion that "public streets" are not to be
used for giving away food, does he believe the same to be true of giving
away speech, giving away ideas, passing books to other people, etc.? "There
are bookstores for selling or buying books, and anyone who engages in this
sort of action on a public street will have his attitude adjusted with my
billy club."

"Public" areas cause problems for analysis of rights, I will grant. The
"commons problem" is well known. But I think that the specific cases we've
been discussing, of whacking bums with nightsticks for the crime of not
maintaining "proper decorum," and of Food Not Bombs being shut down while
the Boy Scouts are not, are clear cases where the law is being misapplied.

(Were I a lawyer, and had the Food Not Bombs case come to trial, I would've
collected evidence that a large number of other groups were not sanctioned
for not having food preparation permits, and I would've argued it was a
case of "selective enforcement" for political reasons.)

--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 at 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."









From root at charley.clark.net  Fri Aug  2 17:50:30 1996
From: root at charley.clark.net (root)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:50:30 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <199608022200.SAA02309@charley.clark.net>


reply to: sparks at bah.com
Subject: an endorsement ( sort of )
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802100643.24257A-100000 at psyche.the-wire.com>
X-Mailer: Ishmail-demo 1.2.2-960711-linux <http://www.ishmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

I just downloaded a copy of Ishmail ( http://www.ishmail.com) and I'm
really impressed. I have a few things to tweek ( I installed it in the
wrong directory so I have to be root for the moment ) but the interface
to PGP is transparent.. smooth as a baby's a** !! I had a couple of
questions, and they were answered very quickly.  I found something I
really like !! well worth the price for the UNIX / LINUX weenies (IMHO)

Charley Sparks


  Charles E. Sparks <sparks at bah.com>
In God We Trust, All Others we Encrypt
Public Key at:
http://www.clark.net/pub/charley/pc_1.htm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQCXAwUBMgJ6ZOJ+JZd/Y4yVAQFWXgQMD5LMIBHPa0lKJAT0zPXA4ykYSNTf5a0o
rpnoDFLlby5m+VdyJWLAwaQ1o3JiFP6q20u/lVh+Ixsgg2Yf27GGzur36jYjxNv8
Ist7uiDug3UHdmDZy6SYG6TM1MG6MARaixCE4HfV0DCZYt9ZAIWYAQWgRAOh7+fp
3QLUKATFJyeGTg==
=+Pyo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From koontz at netapp.com  Fri Aug  2 17:53:41 1996
From: koontz at netapp.com (Dave Koontz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:53:41 +0800
Subject: FPGAs and Heat (Re: Paranoid Musings)
Message-ID: <9608022229.AA07237@lada>


>The current Thinking Machines is a software firm, and Daniel Hillis is no
>longer amongst the top management.  The name lives on, but the business
>of designing, building, and selling exotic supercomputers is kaput.

>Not an uncommon story in the computer business.  Even Control Data
>Corporation still exists in a transmogrified form, although their
>mainframe business went up in smoke ages ago. 

MasPar still exists as a software company, they changed the name
however.





From smith at sctc.com  Fri Aug  2 17:53:52 1996
From: smith at sctc.com (Rick Smith)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:53:52 +0800
Subject: Corporate e-mail policy
Message-ID: <199608022151.QAA02114@shade.sctc.com>


George Kuzmowycz wrote:

:   The company I work for has set up a committee to draft a security 
: policy involving, among other things, e-mail. Since I'm responsible 
: for our networking and e-mail, I'm part of this group. Unfortunately, 
: I'm outnumbered by legal, auditing and HR types who, basically, want 
: to have access to everything.

First, figure out what *your* objective is. You can't achieve e-mail
privacy by implementing some idealized policy that says "Our company
won't snoop into e-mail."  It is the obligation of corporate
functionaries to act in the corporation's best interest, and if that
includes violating the privacy policy (as opposed to civil or criminal
statutes) then it's going to happen. If you write it into one policy,
they'll just find a different one that they can apply to override it.

As you pointed out, the courts agree with this interpretation.  Let us
focus on what we *can* fix.

You can make things better if you write the policy to reduce the risk
of abuse. Nip this nonsense about "access to everything" in the bud.
For example, the policy could provide oversight by requiring approvals
from affected people (the victim's manager if not the actual victim).
Then, access is granted to the victim's files and not to all the
files. Even if auditors want to do "random audit" of e-mail, they
don't really need "access to everything" to achieve it.  They can
randomly select messages somehow and only get readable copies after
the messages are selected.

You'd probably find lots of support for a more measured policy like
this. For example, mail from the CEO or the head of the Audit
department shouldn't be an open book just because Joe Blow from Audit
is "auditing e-mail today."

Also, your policymakers might think about the issues raised by the
recent skit, "FBI Files on Republicans Stored in the Democratic White
House." If they demand unlimited access to e-mail files, they might be
held responsible for making use of information contained therein
simply because they *could* have read them.

Rick.
smith at sctc.com         secure computing corporation





From wb8foz at nrk.com  Fri Aug  2 17:58:25 1996
From: wb8foz at nrk.com (David Lesher)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 08:58:25 +0800
Subject: "And who shall guard the guardians?"
In-Reply-To: <199608021800.LAA10727@toad.com>
Message-ID: <199608022215.SAA04249@nrk.com>


> The English-Only bill just passed in the House bans the use of
> non-English languages by government officials.  Does Tim's sudden 
> avoidance of the Latin mean that _he_'s the Fed??  

What about Navajo?


-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433






From wb8foz at nrk.com  Fri Aug  2 18:04:30 1996
From: wb8foz at nrk.com (David Lesher)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:04:30 +0800
Subject: "And who shall guard the guardians?"
In-Reply-To: <199608021800.LAA10727@toad.com>
Message-ID: <199608022211.SAA04204@nrk.com>


> The English-Only bill just passed in the House bans the use of
> non-English languages by government officials.  Does Tim's sudden 
> avoidance of the Latin mean that _he_'s the Fed??  

What about Navajo?


-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433





From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 18:14:41 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:14:41 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
Message-ID: <v02120d03ae2823f85701@[192.0.2.1]>


At 1:52 8/2/96, David Wagner wrote:

>I don't get it.  Help me out here-- how can this possibly be constitutional?
>
>I'm reading the Fourth Amendment to our honored Constitution of the United
>States, which proclaims
>
>        [...]
>        no warrants shall issue,
>        but upon probable cause,
>        supported by oath or affirmation,
>        and *particularly describing the place to be searched*,
>        and the persons or things to be seized.
>
>Are we just to strike out that emphasized phrase?  What's going on here?
>Someone tell me I'm not just having a bad nightmare.

The Fourth Amendment has been abolished by the Supreme Court for all
intends and purposes. It remains listed in the Constitution for historic
reasons only.



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From snow at smoke.suba.com  Fri Aug  2 18:15:09 1996
From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:15:09 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960802005945.11780D-100000@larry.infi.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960802164703.1649B-100000@smoke.suba.com>


On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Alan Horowitz wrote:
> We require property owners who don't have city-sewage hookups, to install 
> their septic tanks and maintain them in certain defined configurations 
> which estop them from contaminating the neighbor's well. I don't know if 
> that's a good idea or not - but I haven't seen sentiment against sewage 
> regulation of property owners.
> So why should we be terribly upset about an ordinance which makes it 
> illegal to operate a residential kitchen and a residential sewge-disposal 
> operation in a city park or a city sidewalk?

     As long as you are enforcing it on everyone, I don't think you'd have a 
problem, but to force some one from cooking food for homeless people, and 
allow a family barbeque, is IMO wrong. If it is unsafe/unsanitary to cook 
food in a certain way, it is unsafe/unsanitary. Selective enforcement is 
wrong. 

     Force the yuppies on a sunday afternoon barbeque to get a permit and 
see how long the law lasts.

Petro, Christopher C.
petro at suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow at smoke.suba.com






From sandfort at crl.com  Fri Aug  2 18:15:13 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:15:13 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS
In-Reply-To: <ae27b98904021004e701@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802153051.29996C-100000@crl14.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> I actually think this shows another side of the harassment of
> food giveaways and low-cost vendors: it cuts down on competition
> with the established food entities...there is little doubt that
> licensing, zoning, and other governmental restrictions are often
> used by established entities to keep out competition.

A most distastful example is the complicit silence of gun stores
when the gun grabbers regulate "kitchen table" gun dealers out of
economic existance.

	"When they came for the communists, I said nothing
	 because I wasn't a communist..."


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~







From snow at smoke.suba.com  Fri Aug  2 18:16:55 1996
From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:16:55 +0800
Subject: Pipe bombs
In-Reply-To: <ae26cc41120210042fbf@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960802111806.1649A-100000@smoke.suba.com>


On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:
> Fuck them. Fuck Swinestein, Klinton, Gingrich, and all the rest. And fuck
> Dole. (On second thought, don't--it might not be a survivable experience.)

    Unsurvivable for which party?

> 
> I say they've all earned only our contempt.

     A long time ago. 
 
> It's time to accelerate our efforts to undermine this foolish experiment in
> pandering to the masses.

    Tell us how o' wise one. 
  
> --Tim May
 
> Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
> ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
> stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
> good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
> on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
> Do not pack
> the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it settle.  You want
> the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need dry, fine powder
> sitting loose in a very rigid container.

     What about fusing? Mechinical detonation with a shotgun shell, or 
electrical with a model rocket engine?


Petro, Christopher C.
petro at suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow at smoke.suba.com






From pjn at nworks.com  Fri Aug  2 18:17:08 1996
From: pjn at nworks.com (pjn at nworks.com)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:17:08 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defc
Message-ID: <TCPSMTP.16.8.2.15.11.18.2645935021.658751@.nworks.com>


 In> They said that every other time their comrades had come to defcon,
 In> they had tried to come incognito, and got caught every time.  This
 In> time, they wore FBI t-shirts, and the only response was "Hey! Where'd
 In> ya get the T-Shirt?!?". They said "We hacked 'em from the FBI" and that
 In> was it, noone suspected... =) 

 I would love to get my hands on "I spotted the Fed" and "I am a Fed"
 (or whatever they say) T-Shirts...


 P.J.
 pjn at nworks.com




... A man without a religion is like a fish without a bicycle.

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR]







From alano at teleport.com  Fri Aug  2 18:20:25 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:20:25 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802202248.00b23440@mail.teleport.com>


At 12:13 PM 8/2/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:

>I also got my copy of "The Anarchist Cookbook" back around then. It was in
>the news locally when the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's office attempted
>to have it removed from the local bookstores....this removed it all right,
>as the stacks of copies sold out as quickly as they could be received and
>unpacked.
>
>(As others have noted over the years, much of the advice is probably bogus
>and even dangerous. Not being an explosives dabbler, I wouldn't know.)

There are a great number of errors in the book.  (Details of many can be
found at http://www.wam.umd.edu/~ctmunson/aol_cookbook_faq.html .)  

The one error I found in the book when I was in High School was the recipe
for Nitrogen Triodide. (sp?)  The Anarchist's Cookbook lists four steps for
making it.  The first two are correct.  The second two (running alchhol and
ether, if I remember correctly) dry the mixture out and probibly detonate it
in the process.  (The ether would make things much worse, as ether is pretty
volitile in and of itself.)

I found better formulas for simple explosives in "Lee's Priceless Recipes".
(Which was published in 1912.  Long before the Internet.)

Ah, memories of High School chemistry classes...
---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From snow at smoke.suba.com  Fri Aug  2 18:37:50 1996
From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:37:50 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
In-Reply-To: <4tsfjm$oi6@joseph.cs.berkeley.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960802165418.1649C-100000@smoke.suba.com>


On 2 Aug 1996, David Wagner wrote:
> In article <01I7RM0CJM388Y4XIK at mbcl.rutgers.edu>,
> I don't get it.  Help me out here-- how can this possibly be constitutional?

     It isn't, since when has that stopped them?

> I'm reading the Fourth Amendment to our honored Constitution of the United
> States, which proclaims
> Are we just to strike out that emphasized phrase?  What's going on here?
> Someone tell me I'm not just having a bad nightmare.

     You're not having a nightmare, it's reality. 

> Apologies if these are silly questions,

     It isn't the questions that are stupid, it is answers.              

> P.S.  Do police really need a search warrant to wiretap cellular phones?

     No, not to tap the phone, just to use it as evidence.

Petro, Christopher C.
petro at suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow at smoke.suba.com






From rich at c2.org  Fri Aug  2 18:53:43 1996
From: rich at c2.org (Rich Graves)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:53:43 +0800
Subject: Let's Say "No!" to Single, World Versions of Software
In-Reply-To: <199608021800.LAA10722@toad.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.95.960802144216.790I-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, some provocateur impersonating Bill Stewart wrote:

> Tim wrote:
> > Actually approving of disapproving a piece of software for sale 
> > to U.S. citizens is not currently possible.
> 
> Sure.  The Commerce Klaus of the Constitution lets them do it
> if they want to, though that required Congressional cooperation.

That would certainly be less of a stretch than some other commerce clause
cases. Crypto can be used interstate, and there's a compelling state
interest in form of The Four Horsemen. Heck, we should all thank our lucky
stars that our freedom-loving congresscritters let us use computers at all.
I believe it was Wickard who was told he couldn't grow food to feed his own
pigs because the government has a compelling state interest in keeping
interstate food prices high. Surely terrorism and kiddie porn, which is all
people ever use the net (let alone crypto) for, are even more important than
high food prices. 

> 	TRUST NO ONE!

Indeed.

- -rich
 fucking statist

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQBVAwUBMgJ4j5NcNyVVy0jxAQE/yAH+O3HErmEi9TrEJaBbmb6u0K/1du34t4MQ
cByjhW5poJlrb5CLtPAt/5nOaWYlwvlEtvXSckbn1DJPN5ry4kXVvw==
=0sLc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From bdolan at use.usit.net  Fri Aug  2 18:54:40 1996
From: bdolan at use.usit.net (Brad Dolan)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 09:54:40 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
In-Reply-To: <ae27a13f03021004323f@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960802170604.7666C-100000@use.usit.net>


Didn't (left-radical) Abbie Hoffman's anarchy bible _Steal This Book_ have 
some bombmaking instructions also?  I don't recall civilization falling in 
1968 or thereabouts when STB was published.

bd

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> At 9:33 AM 8/2/96, Conrad Walton wrote:
> 
> >i'm not exactly sure what an acid bomb is, but according to my book, The
> >Anarchist Cookbook, that I bought in 1972 (was the internet around back
> >then?), there is a compound called "picric acid" that is "more powerful
> >than TNT, but has some disadvantages".
> 
> The ARPANET (or ARPANet, or Arpanet...) was around then. (I had an account
> on it, circa 1973...not very useful for me.)
> 
> I also got my copy of "The Anarchist Cookbook" back around then. It was in
> the news locally when the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's office attempted
> to have it removed from the local bookstores....this removed it all right,
> as the stacks of copies sold out as quickly as they could be received and
> unpacked.
> 
> (As others have noted over the years, much of the advice is probably bogus
> and even dangerous. Not being an explosives dabbler, I wouldn't know.)
> 
> If Feinswine gets her ban on bomb-making information passed, and this is
> upheld by the courts (doubtful), the sites will be swamped with information
> queries, and fooling around with bombs will become more popular amongst the
> teenage set that has not expressed much interest in such things the past
> couple of decades.
> 
> The more things change, the more they remain the same.
> 
> --Tim May, an I-bomb-throwing crypto anarchist
> 
> Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
> ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
> stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
> good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
> on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
> Do not pack
> the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it settle.  You want
> the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need dry, fine powder
> sitting loose in a very rigid container.
> 
> 
> 





From tcmay at got.net  Fri Aug  2 19:07:18 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:07:18 +0800
Subject: Pipe bombs
Message-ID: <ae27c15006021004bae3@[205.199.118.202]>


At 9:26 PM 8/2/96, Lucky Green wrote:
>At 21:02 8/1/96, Timothy C. May wrote:
>
>>Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
...

>I do believe you forgot the fuse... Electrical ignition elements, such as
>the ones used to launch model rockets should work just fine.


Actually, all I did was copy the first couple of paragraphs from the very
first set of instructions I found, found by using Alta Vista to search the
Web on the string "pipe bomb". That's what turned up.

(I guess I should've put quote marks around it and given a URL, but I was
in a rush to generate my felonious alternate .sig. I'll correct it now.)


--Tim

HOW TO MAKE A PIPE BOMB:
"Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
Do not pack the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it
settle.  You want the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need
dry, fine powder sitting loose in a very rigid container." (more
information at http://sdcc13.ucsd.edu/~m1lopez/pipe.html, or by using
search engines)







From steve at miranova.com  Fri Aug  2 19:18:12 1996
From: steve at miranova.com (Steven L Baur)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:18:12 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
In-Reply-To: <9608021922.AA06774@sherry.ny.ubs.com>
Message-ID: <m2lofxtlhl.fsf@deanna.miranova.com>


>>>>> "Paul" == Paul J Bell <pjb at ny.ubs.com> writes:

jonathon> When I purchased my computers, I had to pay $150 to not have
jonathon> Windows and Dos installed on them.  That $150 went to Microsoft.
jonathon> It seemed to me that I was being ripped off, by Microsoft.

Paul> as i said, i have no use for microsoft, whats more, i don't use
Paul> microsoft.  that said, if a person really must pay to not have
Paul> their products installed, i agree that that is intorelable, and
Paul> at the least calls for finding a new vendor for computers. if
Paul> you really don't plan to use dos or windows, there is no reason
Paul> why you should pay for them. frankly, this sounds like a real
Paul> stupid move on the part of your hardware vendor. maybe you need
Paul> to shop around.

This is exactly what a new lawsuit recently filed against Microsoft is
about.  See
	http://www.caldera.com/news/pr001.html
for details.

They've already had their hand slapped for the per-processor license
agreements they pushed in the early '90s.  The per-processor licenses
were where Microsoft forced hardware vendors to pay a certain fee
based on CPUs sold regardless of what system software was delivered on
them.
-- 
steve at miranova.com baur
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be proofread for $250/hour.
Andrea Seastrand: For your vote on the Telecom bill, I will vote for anyone
except you in November.





From ceridwyn at wolfenet.com  Fri Aug  2 19:27:57 1996
From: ceridwyn at wolfenet.com (Cerridwyn Llewyellyn)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:27:57 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960802234117.006acb90@gonzo.wolfenet.com>


At 11:58 AM 8/2/96 +0000, you wrote:
>>P.S.  Do police really need a search warrant to wiretap cellular phones?
>
>It is my understanding that police need a warrant to tap *cellular* 
>phones, but not *wireless* phones.
>
>One should understand that monitoring cellular traffic is *much* more 
>difficult than tapping a conventional phone, because as the user 
>moves around in the service area the phone switches to different 
>repeaters, often several times during a conversation.

I'd have to disagree on that point.  Monitoring cellular traffic requires
nothing more than a cellular phone, and some software which enables
you to follow calls through the cells, for a total cost of about $500. 
This is exceptionally trivial with an Oki 900 and a ctek cable (which 
interfaces the fone with the computer).  
With this software you can monitor individual cells, choosing to "lock
on" to a call made from a specific number, or to a specific number.  You
can follow calls, and record any dtmf digits.  Also the caller will never 
be made aware that he/she is being listened to.  
A sophisticated land line wiretap that will not be detectable by the 
average citizen will cost well over $500, plus you have to install it 
without the target knowing, etc.  
//cerridwyn//







From ichudov at algebra.com  Fri Aug  2 19:29:41 1996
From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:29:41 +0800
Subject: Corporate e-mail policy
In-Reply-To: <199608021611.JAA13044@dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199608022351.SAA14955@manifold.algebra.com>


George Kuzmowycz wrote:
>   In an ideal world, the rest of the group would agree with me and say
> "Yup, we have no business reading e-mail." Since that's not likely,
> I'm looking for examples of "privacy-friendly" corporate policies
> that I can put on the table in our meetings, and end up with a
> minority report.  
> 

Maybe it is only me, but I recommend "privacy-fascist" policy. This way
employees will at least know to keep their own business out of computers
that will be monitored by the company anyways.

This is ultimately to the betterment of employees themselves if they
fall prey to complaints of the likes of January KOTM The Right Reverend
Colin James III (puke). For the information of those who do not know
CJ3 made it a hobby to complain to the employers of people whom he did
not like -- with not much success though.

The employees would easily be able to say that the employer has nothing
to do with the alleged matters of complaints.

	- Igor.





From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 19:29:53 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:29:53 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030027.TAA11243@einstein>



Hi,

Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 1996 16:41:17 -0700
> From: Cerridwyn Llewyellyn <ceridwyn at wolfenet.com>
> Subject: Re: [off-topic] roving wiretaps

> A sophisticated land line wiretap that will not be detectable by the 
> average citizen will cost well over $500, plus you have to install it 
> without the target knowing, etc.  

It costs nothing, it is already built into the switch at part of the
standard diagnostics. I spent 5 years at the University of Texas at Austin
working in security and part of my job was support of the NT switch. You
go to the switch put a butt-set or recorder on the diag port and route
the call data over to that port.


                                                  Jim Choate








From jseiger at cdt.org  Fri Aug  2 19:30:08 1996
From: jseiger at cdt.org (Jonah Seiger)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:30:08 +0800
Subject: Latest info on the "counter-terrorism" bill
Message-ID: <v01520d01ae27fabe505a@[204.157.127.21]>



The House passed a revised counter-terrorism bill this afternoon by a
substantial majority.  The bill is expected to be considered by the Senate
on Saturday 8/3, and is likely to pass.

The House-passed bill DOES NOT contain ANY of the privacy threatening
provisions.  Provisions dealing with funding for the Communications
Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (Digital Telephony) were REMOVED from
the bill just before the vote after civil liberties groups AND the FBI
objected to the language. Provisions dealing with emergency wiretap
authority and "roving wiretaps" were also not included in the House-passed
bill.

In addition, the bill does not contain any encryption provisions. Earlier
in the week, the Administration had circulated an outline of their
anti-terrorism proposal which included new, unspecified restrictions on
encryption.  Senators Burns (R-MT), Leahy (D-VT), Pressler (R-SD), Lott
(R-MS), and others worked hard to prevent any encryption provisions from
being included in early versions of the bill, and deserve a lot of credit
for fighting for the Net. It's nice to finally have a number of powerful
allies joining the usual defenders of net.freedom on Capitol Hill.

The bill passed today contains provisions increasing airport security,
studies on ways to improve US anti terrorism policy and other terrorism
issues, and a controvertial provisions expanding federal racketeering laws
to cover terrorist activity.

The bill also contains a small but not insigificant privacy victory. The
bill doubles the punishment from 5 to 10 years for unlawful disclosure of
information obtained from a warrant and increases certain penalties for
violation of the Privacy Act.

This is not over yet -- many of these issues, particularly encryption and
Digital Telephony funding, are likely to be back before the Congress in
September, so stay tunned...

Thanks to everyone who called Congress today to object to the new sweeping
surveillance provisions that were dropped from the bill! It looks like we
mave had really made a difference in this debate.

More as it comes...

Jonah

--
Jonah Seiger, Policy Analyst               Center for Democracy and Technology
<jseiger at cdt.org>                          (v) +1.202.637.9800

http://www.cdt.org/







From declan at well.com  Fri Aug  2 19:32:00 1996
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:32:00 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <v01510107ae28511736d5@[204.62.128.229]>


Stop the presses -- the other shoe didn't drop. Despite a flurry of
last-minute hyperbole, the House passed an anti-terrorism bill this
afternoon without the ominous encryption or wiretap provisions. Now
the bill lies in the lap of the Senate, which probably will approve it
later today or tomorrow before they leave town for the August recess.

In the wake of the dual bombings, Congress wanted to be seen as taking
*some* action before they adjourned, and last weekend Clinton and the
Dems started lobbying hard for the heinous measures they wanted in an
anti-terrorism bill. Vastly expanded state-snooping capabilities:
multipoint wiretaps, warrantless short-term wiretaps, dialed-phone
number recorders, and black and smokeless powder taggants. Even
possible of anti-crypto language that Jamie Gorelick, deputy attorney
general, has been shopping around for months.

The Net owes its thanks to the House Republicans for stopping these
fool Dems in a fine backroom political maneuver late last night.

They did it through the House Rules Committee, which in the wee hours
of the morning reported a rule allowing the GOP leadership to introduce
the terrorism bill on the floor today -- without letting Democrats see
it, amend it, or even send it back to committee. It was a good plan --
coordinated by Rep. Chris Cox -- keeping the legislation away from the
hands of the Big Brother Dems.

The Democrats waxed pissy. Rep. David Bonior, the party's whip, called
the majority's maneuvering "extrordinary." John Conyers, the ranking
Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, blasted Gingrich and the
Republican leadership for "bringing a meaningless bill to the House
floor."

Conyers said to reporters at 1 pm: "It's a hoax on the American
people. It is all bark and no bite... This bill is missing the
important wiretapping provisions that would allow law enforcement to
find and stop terrorists before they kill. The House Republicans and
the NRA say we should not have emergency authority for surveillance
even if we know terrorists are about to blow a plane out of the sky.
They also say that we should not have wiretap authority for terrorists who
use more than one telephone to make their deadly plans."

Of course, this is political grandstanding at its finest -- or worst.
Conyers conveniently neglected to add that law enforcement officers
already have the right to use roving wiretaps with court approval.

Also, there was a mixup over Digital Telephony funding, compounded by
the text of the legislation's being kept secret until the last minute.
Summaries distributed to reporters early this afternoon said: "The bill
authorizes the FBI to use enhanced telephone technology to investigate
suspected terrorist activity. Funding for equipment purchase was
provided in the 1996 omnibus appropriations measure enacted earlier
this year." But the DT provisions weren't in the final draft of the bill.

Silly Congressperns. The House had *already* approved the DT slushfund
on July 24 as part of the 1997 Commerce, Justice, State departments
appropriations bill.

Now the 1997 CJS appropriations bill goes to the Senate, which will
decide how much cash to give Digital Telephony when they return in early
September.

What's going to happen? Well, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), a former
prosecutor and longtime proponent of Digital Telephony, said yesterday
at the Intelligence Committee hearing on terrorism: "I was proud to
have worked with the FBI director to ensure passage of the
Communications Assisatance for Law Enforcement Act, sometimes called
the digital telephony law."

With Republicans like the ones in the House, who needs so-called "civil
libertarian" Democrats?

-Declan







From koontz at netapp.com  Fri Aug  2 19:33:00 1996
From: koontz at netapp.com (Dave Koontz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:33:00 +0800
Subject: ITAR
Message-ID: <9608022350.AA01262@supernova.netapp.com>



How about exporting programs, that when executed generate source code for
encryption algorithms?

(xmas.c comes to mind, an obscurity winning c program that writes out the
 twelve days of Christmas.)





From jimbell at pacifier.com  Fri Aug  2 19:55:39 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 10:55:39 +0800
Subject: URGENT: Surveillance Bill Gets New Life - House Vote lLikely TODAY!
Message-ID: <199608030013.RAA03026@mail.pacifier.com>


At 02:21 PM 8/2/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:

>("I had no idea of what was in the Communications Decency Act...it just
>sounded like the "decent" thing to vote for."....."You mean the
>Anti-Terrorism Bill suspends habeus corpus? What's that? I'll ask my
>staffers to look into it.")
>
>Fuck 'em all. Fawkes had it wrong...they're not worth the powder to blow
>'em to hell.
>
>All we can do is work on technological workarounds. Making their $2 billion
>Wiretap Boondoggle a worthless exercise is a start.

I thought of what I consider to be an excellent "workaround."   The way I 
see it, a majority of us want to see a majority of them dead, or at least 
resigned.  If that's the case, why can't we get what we want?



Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From minow at apple.com  Fri Aug  2 20:00:46 1996
From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 11:00:46 +0800
Subject: AP story: Police look for Olympic bombing Internet link.
Message-ID: <v03007803ae2846cb0c98@[17.202.12.102]>


Search Campus Where Jewell Worked;
 Check Internet Link

By Associated Press, 08/02/96

ATLANTA (AP) - Widening their investigation of Richard Jewell,
federal and state agents descended on a small Georgia college campus
Friday to hunt for evidence linking him to the Olympic park bombing.

Among other things, investigators were trying to determine whether the
former campus guard had tapped into the Internet via Piedmont College
computers, a campus source reported. Bomb-making instructions
available through the global computer network have contributed to an
increase in bombings in the United States, authorities say.

[From http://www.boston.com/globe/cgi-bin/globe.cgi?ap/apnat.htm ]

Martin Minow
minow at apple.com







From jya at pipeline.com  Fri Aug  2 20:01:06 1996
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 11:01:06 +0800
Subject: BOO_mer
Message-ID: <199608030028.AAA04054@pipe1.t1.usa.pipeline.com>


   8-2-96. WaJo: 
 
   "More Bombs Are Exploding Across the U.S." 
 
      What also worries law-enforcement officials are the 
      comparatively unspectacular bombs exploding at a rising 
      rate in neighborhoods across the country. Indeed, with 
      homicides declining, bombings may have become the 
      fastest-growing category of violent crime. "In the old 
      days, kids would break windows," says John O'Brien, an 
      agent in Washington with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, 
      Tobacco and Firearms. "Now, they're making pipe bombs." 
      Police say one of the most popular bombs among 
      youths -- one combining acid and other ingredients in a 
      bottle -- is called the "McGyver" because many learned 
      about it from the television show. David Estenson, head 
      of a bomb-crisis management firm and former head of the 
      Minneapolis police bomb squad, observes that many of the 
      pipe bombs in Israel contain only match heads. 
 
   "U.S. Studies Use of Chemical Tracers To Track Explosives 
   in Terrorist Blasts." 
 
      The Treasury Department is studying a family of trace 
      chemicals -- first developed by U.S. weapons scientists 
      to track the fallout of nuclear weapons -- as a way to 
      give terrorist explosives an identifiable trail. The 
      trace chemicals are newer and much smaller than plastic 
      "taggants," which have provoked resistance from the 
      explosives industry and gun lobbies. Desmonde Cowdery, 
      vice president of Isotag L.L.C., a small Houston company 
      that has obtained commercial rights to the process, 
      claims the chemical tracers are so small they can be 
      blended with all types of explosives, including 
      fertilizers and gunpowders, without interfering with 
      chemical reactions. 
 
   "Can America Stomach a War on Terror?" 
 
      The lessons from the world's battlefields of terror are 
      sobering. Not only have few countries been able to make 
      much of a dent in a determined terrorist campaign, but 
      their efforts also often incur a heavy price. 
      Due-process rights have been suspended, freedoms of 
      speech curtailed, police powers beefed up. 
 
      Tommy Sands, a Belfast folk singer, praises America's 
      caution. He says that in Northern Ireland and other hot 
      spots, authorities have often overreacted to the initial 
      threat. "It's like driving a car and seeing a red light 
      come on that means you're short on oil. If you take a 
      hammer to it, the red light will go out, but you're 
      still short on oil," Mr. Sands says. "Sometimes there 
      are answers other than the big hammer." 
 
   ----- 
 
   http://jya.com/boomer.txt  (19 kb for 3) 
 
   Lynx: http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~jya/boomer.txt 
 
   BOO_mer 
 
 
 
 
 





From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 20:18:24 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 11:18:24 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030135.UAA11317@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 15:23:23 -0700
> From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
> Subject: Re: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
> 
> The Fourth Amendment has been abolished by the Supreme Court for all
> intends and purposes. It remains listed in the Constitution for historic
> reasons only.

			       ARTICLE IV. 
 
	The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, 
papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall 
not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, 
supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place 
to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. 
 

I must agree with the above sentiment by Lucky. When Steve Jackson got
busted (I was peripheraly involved through Mentor and Bloodaxe) and the
warrant was not only sealed (ie Mentor and Bloodaxe didn't get to see it)
but it was unsigned as well when it was executed.

                                                     Jim Choate






From andrew_loewenstern at il.us.swissbank.com  Fri Aug  2 20:33:00 1996
From: andrew_loewenstern at il.us.swissbank.com (Andrew Loewenstern)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 11:33:00 +0800
Subject: AP story: Police look for Olympic bombing Internet link.
In-Reply-To: <v03007803ae2846cb0c98@[17.202.12.102]>
Message-ID: <9608030114.AA03672@ch1d157nwk>


Search Campus Where Jewell Worked;
 Check Internet Link

By Associated Press, 08/02/96

ATLANTA (AP) - Widening their investigation of Richard Jewell,
federal and state agents descended on a small Georgia college campus
Friday to hunt for evidence linking him to the Olympic park bombing.

Among other things, investigators were trying to determine whether the
former campus guard had tapped into the Piedmont College library, a
campus source reported. Bomb-making instructions available through the
national inter-library borrowing network have contributed to an increase
in bombings in the United States, authorities say.

[Not From <http://www.boston.com/globe/cgi-bin/globe.cgi?ap/apnat.htm ]



andrew





From sandfort at crl.com  Fri Aug  2 21:30:03 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 12:30:03 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030142.UAA11326@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802185527.26652A-100000@crl5.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Jim Choate asked:

> A reasonable person recognizes that such a business has two ways
> of fulfilling its responsiblities. They can either submit to
> regulation and quality control from the local municipality or
> else they can hang signs about their place of business declaring
> "Caveat Emptor: Our food may be tainted, eat at your own risk".
> Which do you think is the more reasonable?

It would be nice if businesses were offered that choice.  I would
choose the second, myself.  Only my sign would say, "Our food is
guaranteed not tainted by the Acme insurance company, not some
corrupt government."  The problem is, governments do not allow 
businesses nor consumers to make that sort of choice.  With them 
it's, "my way or the highway" (or harassment and jail actually).

> People and businesses are not the same.

Until Jim shows me a business that isn't owned and operated by
people, I'll have to respectfully disagree.  Businesses are just
people acting alone or in concert.  Actions are what count, not
whether the action is of a pecuniary nature or not.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 21:49:52 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 12:49:52 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030251.VAA11455@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 11:48:45 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alan Horowitz <alanh at infi.net>
> Subject: Re: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
> 
> <<  9th & 10th AMendments to the Conmstitution >>
> 
> Cute, you left out the Third.


			       ARTICLE III. 
 
	No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any home 
without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to 
be prescribed by law. 
 
I didn't include it because it isn't germane to the discussion at hand.
 
> We are referring to the Sovereign power of the State of Washington to 
> allocate to the municipality of Seattle, a general Police Power to 
> maintain the Peace.  Every lawyer seems to think that Seattle has the 
> power to forbid people from using sidewalks as latrines and kitchen sinks.

I agree with the municipality, if you want to eat your own shit and piss go
right ahead. You have no right to expose me to the deliterious health effects
of such material randomly sprayed around my city. Hell, even animals are smart
enough to know not to shit in their own bed. Pitty all these smart people seem
to have forgotten such a basic rule of nature. Such actions are clearly a
threat to my person and property.

> I am in bed with the government, so I have better knowledge than most of 
> the people on this list, about how bad it is. Nonetheless, I recall the 
> aphorism from the Talmud: "Pray for the health of the government, lest 
> the people eat other alive".

If these sayings indicate such insight how come the Jews have such a
terrible time getting along with anyone for any length of time? Why does
their current regime have such a hard time? Why is it that I get such a
rising in the hackles on my neck when I am reminded that it is illegal in
Isreal to carry a Palestinian flag in public. How come they begin to look
more and more like the new age nazi's? The Isrealis love of government and
structure has certainly not brought them great amounts of security, wealth,
or friends.

> If you want to walk into the public library after a six-month moratorium 
> on bathing - well, the courts are divided on this, but _I_ stand for the 
> proposition that this is an assault on the other patrons and I will lobby 
> _my_ city councilman for there to be rules against it.

I will oppose it. While I would oppose those self same persons from touching
me or my property without my prior permission (which I would not give) I
would not prohibit them from entering any public facility. I oppose Austin's
recent ruling prohibiting sleeping in public parks and other area because
the local businesses said it effected their profits. I oppose their recent
ruling that ALL persons who ride a bike MUST wear a helmet, ostensibly to
protect children even though the law doesn't mention minors at any point.
The mayor when queeried on this point simply ignored it. I assure you none
of them will get my vote, and from what I have seen not a lot of others
either.

> But if you want to play your boombox loud near me, make damn sure you do
> it behind soundproof walls. Where I live, the cops will respond to that 
> kind of complaint and shut down the nuisance, with nightsticks if need be 
> (in my little rural area, it's seldom necessary). Maybe you California or 
> NYC folks don't have police forces that will mitigate nuisances. Enjoy 
> your progressive radical-chic neighborhood, folks.

Unless you can demonstrate that your person or property are harmed by the
action I oppose such laws. Simply smelling bad is not a physical act. Austin
has a law which basicaly does the same thing. In general the people of the
city don't like it, the police don't enforce it, and the people drive around
town jammin' to their hearts content. If my apartment neighbor is playing
their radio too loud I am not going to call the cops I am going to call the
manager if my attempts at becoming some sort of aquaintence fail at mediation.
It is private property and short of violence to a person or property they
have no business in here without a warrant. I own 5 acres near Lockhart, just
outside Austin, and I have made it clear to several of the county mounties
that parking in my driveway is verbotten if they don't have a warrant for
searching my property, they liked to park there to eat food and fill out
reports. They seem to understand and respect my wishes. They now park down
at the intersection of my dirt road and 71 on public land.

The right to freedom of speech means you have a right to be offended and to
offend. If you haven't been offended at least once a day you need to get out
of your apartment and quit watching the roaches crawl the walls. If what is
on television offends you then start your own television station and play
family (or porno) material till your hearts content. Passing laws that tell
privately owned stations what to air is wrong because it is equivalent to
limiting the freedom of speech and press. This can be extended to all such
prior restraint laws. To regulate content based on the public airwaves model
is equivalent to the state telling me what station to listen to on my car
radio because I am on a public road.

When I was a small child I learned an important lesson the hard way. I was
smaller than the other kids so they would call me names and pick on me to no
end. Did I fight with them? No, I recognized even at that young age that
violence would not stop the actions, only change their nature. Violence as a
means of coersion is a signal of a small mind. On the other hand, I only lost
a single fight in the 1st grade. This taught me that if one is attacked in a
physical sense respond with all the force and violence you can muster, show
no mercy until the beggar is on the ground and in a sorry state. Don't stop
if they say they surrender, they may be saying it to gain a tactical
advantage. Stop only when you are certain they no longer have the will or
means to carry the fight further. It would be a great thing if our
government and society in general would learn this lesson regarding violence.
We would live in a much less violent world.

                                                      Jim Choate






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Fri Aug  2 21:53:18 1996
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 12:53:18 +0800
Subject: Corporate e-mail policy
In-Reply-To: <199608022351.SAA14955@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <q4B3RD7w165w@bwalk.dm.com>


ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes:
> employees will at least know to keep their own business out of computers
> that will be monitored by the company anyways.

Igor learned it the hard way... He's no longer reachable @wiltel.com. :-)

> This is ultimately to the betterment of employees themselves if they
> fall prey to complaints of the likes of January KOTM The Right Reverend
> Colin James III (puke). For the information of those who do not know
> CJ3 made it a hobby to complain to the employers of people whom he did
> not like -- with not much success though.

Not true - Colin got several forgers in serious trouble for their net-abuse.
More power to him.  The Internet needs more people like TRRCJ3 (pbuh).

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 21:59:07 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 12:59:07 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030142.UAA11326@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 16:50:01 -0500 (CDT)
> From: snow <snow at smoke.suba.com>
> Subject: Re: A Libertine Question
> 
>      As long as you are enforcing it on everyone, I don't think you'd have a 
> problem, but to force some one from cooking food for homeless people, and 
> allow a family barbeque, is IMO wrong.

Not at all. Businesses have no rights, individuals do. Businesses have a
responsibility to protect their patrons (if you don't think so ask all the
folks in Japan or the people here in Austin sick from Strawberries and
Blueberries they bought at the local HEB). Individuals have a right to
privacy, that includes cooking themselves food without harrassment. Business
on the other hand are selling products of potentialy questionable quality. A
reasonable person recognizes that such a business has two ways of fulfilling
its responsiblities. They can either submit to regulation and quality control
from the local municipality or else they can hang signs about their place of
business declaring "Caveat Emptor: Our food may be tainted, eat at your own
risk". Which do you think is the more reasonable?

> If it is unsafe/unsanitary to cook 
> food in a certain way, it is unsafe/unsanitary. Selective enforcement is 
> wrong. 

Not at all. I have a right to kill myself with bad cooking if I choose. I do
not have the right to kill another, especialy a stranger, without their
prior consent. I guess it would be ok if a food vendor were to ask you if
you minded being killed by their product, but I doubt many of them would be
in business next week, let alone sell many hot dogs.

People and businesses are not the same.


                                                        Jim Choate






From JMKELSEY at delphi.com  Fri Aug  2 22:04:22 1996
From: JMKELSEY at delphi.com (JMKELSEY at delphi.com)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:04:22 +0800
Subject: Paranoid Musings
Message-ID: <01I7TCONUR6G8Y5AIP@delphi.com>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

[ To: cypherpunks ## Date: 08/02/96 12:29 pm ##
  Subject: Paranoid Musings ]

>Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 11:13:59 -0700
>From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
>Subject: Paranoid Musings

>Sometimes paranoia strikes.  Since these musings are crypto related,
>I thought I would share them.

>Now expensive specialized cracking equipment can certainly speed up
>the process, but there may be a better way.  If cryptanalysis of RC4
>yields techniques which make the process much easier, then it is the
>ideal cypher to certify for export.

Actually, this makes sense for another reason.  Academic
cryptanalysis is often about finding any attack on a cipher that's
easier than keysearch, even if the requirements for that attack are
still completely impractical.  (Differential and linear attacks on
DES are a good example of this.)  However, if you're interested in
actually recovering data in your attacks with high probability and
low cost, then it makes sense to focus on protocol and
implementation weaknesses, and then on attacks like keysearch which
can be done with either ciphertext-only or known-plaintext.

I would guess that some of NSA's best people work on optimizing
keysearches.  This especially makes sense because of the widespread
use, first of DES, and more recently of exportable 40-bit ciphers
like RC2 and RC4.

>The paranoid conclusion is that there is a significant weakness in
>RC4.

The paranoid conclusion is that there is a significant weakness in
any cipher you're counting on.

>Bill Frantz       | Cave ab homine unius lebri | Periwinkle -- Consulting
>(408)356-8506     |  [Beware the man of one    | 16345 Englewood Ave.
>frantz at netcom.com |   book]  - Anonymous Latin | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

   --John Kelsey, jmkelsey at delphi.com / kelsey at counterpane.com
 PGP 2.6 fingerprint = 4FE2 F421 100F BB0A 03D1 FE06 A435 7E36

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgI7X0Hx57Ag8goBAQEsNAQAm6SbOnCkTh2EByH8Oa1GoTItx+JUE2hA
mtEDp//VW1qH5Lzem14ARGbcgIHbPQqVHN355p5pSrH7tI+RnPc45RRjmF6Ot96r
CjnOz3DWPOXx30pm4NGchKs3MmfMyeDKvL3GofMZee8qNm8IZsnMuLMhQABUIdBM
kU/oaYwfZdE=
=C9ip
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From hallam at ai.mit.edu  Fri Aug  2 22:06:15 1996
From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:06:15 +0800
Subject: VISA Travel Money
In-Reply-To: <4tmr8j$lrg@life.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <3202AC0F.41C6@ai.mit.edu>


Timothy C. May wrote:

> I'm also skeptical of these "VISA Travel Money" cards. That is, they don't
> seem to be too useful for anything.

They are usefull for the one purpose for which they are designed. One
can go off to a foreign country and obtain cash as required without
having to pay often usurous fees from bureaux de change. Just because
you are supposed to be able to use travel cheques as cash does not mean
that you really can.

> After all, cash works well. (It's rarely stolen, in my experience, or at
> least this is not a major concern. Traveller's checks work well, and can be
> "cashed" into the local currency. ATM machines fill the same function these
> "VISA Travel Money" cards apparently do; at least when I was in Europe the
> last time this is what I used, and my French francs were as untraceable as
> could be.
>
> As I see it, yet another marketing solution looking for a problem.

Its not a major VISA product but it is reasonably usefull. Its more convenient
to carry a card than cash. If one gets mugged or looses the card there
is a way of recovering the cash (sometimes). I don't think that there would
be much use for such cards in the tourist belt but you might well want to
have one if you were going on a trip to the hinterlands of a country.

For most people VISA travel cheques or a cash advance is likely to be
more usefull. 
 
> A real step would be a true privacy card, a card issued in a jurisdiction
> unfriendly to U.S. investigators and offering various transaction-blinding
> options. I have to wonder what pressures have been put on the major credit
> card companies...

See the Stored Value Card work that VISA have been working on, or MONDEX.
MONDEX has almost every feature you would want from anonymous cash except 
you can't prove its anonymous. You can do purse to purse transfers 
however.

Its a different level of privacy to that of e-cash. e-cash provides
only purchaser unlinkability and its an online scheme. MONDEX makes
it possible to trace certain withdrawal and deposit patterns of a user
but little else. 


		Phill





From tcmay at got.net  Fri Aug  2 22:13:00 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:13:00 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <ae27f97600021004ec6c@[205.199.118.202]>


At 12:48 AM 8/3/96, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>Stop the presses -- the other shoe didn't drop. Despite a flurry of
>last-minute hyperbole, the House passed an anti-terrorism bill this
>afternoon without the ominous encryption or wiretap provisions. Now
>the bill lies in the lap of the Senate, which probably will approve it
>later today or tomorrow before they leave town for the August recess.

I agree. And I think we should thank CDT, EFF, the ACLU, and (gasp) the NRA
for ensuring that martial law provisions did not get slipped in during the
rush to get out of Washington for the recess. (And maybe other groups...I
don't follow all the politics.)

I'm watching Rep. Bob Barr (R) on "Larry King Live," on CNN. He makes a lot
of sense, and keeps coming back to civil liberties, the alliance between
the ACLU and the NRA on this one, etc. His adversary, Rep. John Conyers (D)
is calling for stronger measures, for the need to "do something."

(I thought the Democrats nominally stood for certain types of civil
liberties? Not that I ever was fooled by them, but this is the public
personna they present.)


>The Net owes its thanks to the House Republicans for stopping these
>fool Dems in a fine backroom political maneuver late last night.

By the way, my blasting of Sen. Dianne Feinstein as "Fineswine,"
"Swinestein," etc. (names not original with me, of course) is heartfelt. I
don't mine dealing with opponents, even articulate enemies of freedom. But
Feinstein is a halfwit and a hypocrite. A San Francisco society lady
masquerading as a senator. She's proof that transmigration of souls is
real, being the incarnation of Marie Antoinette. "Let them eat cake."

--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 at 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."









From tcmay at got.net  Fri Aug  2 22:17:39 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:17:39 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
Message-ID: <ae28119a020210049840@[205.199.118.202]>


At 2:10 AM 8/3/96, Jim Choate wrote:

>True enough, but not the whole story. If a dog or cat is kept well and fed
>good quality food they live 10+ years. The average life of an animal on the
>street is between 2-5 years. As to people, we now live around 75-80 years,
>prior to all these rules and regulations on food and such the average was
>20-25. If we go back to what you propose you would be dead a long time ago.

Hardly a proved correlation. A lot of other factors come into play. But
never mind. No point arguing.

...
>I personaly find it reassuring that some bunch of knuckle-heads are unable
>to start a chip making facility like you support. The thought of finding
>flourine compounds in the local river (where I get my tap water) or simply
>dumped in the air is a little unsettling. Just because some group of bozo's
>want to start a business is not sufficient justification for that to be
>allowed.

A straw man. There is is no evidence that these startup companies are
dumping stuff in rivers. Jeesh. The point is that large companies learn how
to keep large staffs employed filling out paperwork, and they actually have
come to see it is a good way to keep small companies from forming.


>It seems to me that many of the folks who recognize downsized workers pleas
>for their 'right to a job' as so much bunk are at the same time supporting a
>businesses right to start up. A pretty humorous double standard.

Not at all comparable.


>I have never heard of anyone being arrested for giving away food, only
>selling it without a license. I bet the Salvation Army soup kitchen would be
>worried if this claim were true (they aren't and it ain't).

Then you weren't reading the thread, which in several posts described this
very situation. "Food Not Bombs" was giving away soup, chile, and other
such stuff at a park in Santa Cruz (and maybe elsewhere, e.g., San
Francisco). They were busted.

Now do you understand the situation?


--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 at 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."









From hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu  Fri Aug  2 22:20:01 1996
From: hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu (hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:20:01 +0800
Subject: VISA Travel Money
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802191032.26652B-100000@crl5.crl.com>
Message-ID: <9608030331.AA07184@Etna.ai.mit.edu>



I don't think that VISA travel money will be a major product
for VISA. When I spoke with Azbo about it it was not a 
major strategic direction for them.  He described its use by 
First Bank of Internet (later first Branch of Internet).  I think that
VISA would LIKE to provide the Ability for travel money, to function 
as a debit card, but it would then be very close to their existing 
product of secured payment cards.There are good reasons why aproduct 
that allows you to draw a specific amount of cash out of ATM's is a good 
idea for VISA and useful for a small number of customers, but I think 
you're reading way to much into this.  Much more interesting are proposals
by the Federal reserve Board, to exempt from regulation E certain types of 
stored value card provided they store no more than $100.  While $500 would
seem to me to be a more serious and sensible level while still not having
particular money laundering advantage (5 $100 bills is smaller than 
one smart card) it is at least a start.

Phill

PS Be willing to bet donuts provided he can suggest a way of delivering them 
via internet.





From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 22:24:03 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:24:03 +0800
Subject: FAA to require transponders on all aircraft passengers
Message-ID: <v02120d0bae2873a00df4@[192.0.2.1]>


According to KCBS, a local radio station, the FAA has closed a long
anticipated deal with a manufacturer of transponder devices. The goal of
the system to be deployed nationwide is to match aircraft passengers to
their luggage and thereby identify unaccompanied luggage on board an
aircraft.

Transponders will be affixed to all items of luggage and all passengers. If
the system discovers a transponder on the luggage in the cargo hold without
the corresponding transponder on the passenger on board, an alarm will
sound. I am not making this up.

As many of you know, I have long predicted subcutaneous transponders to
become widely deployed in the near future. First for child identification
and monitoring of criminals, then, as the children grow up, as universal
ID, driver license, proof of eligibility for employment, PIN substitute,
etc.

Today, we moved a step closer to this future.

[Note that the transponders will have to be affixed to the passenger. An
example would be a hospital style bracelet that stops working when removed.
Why embedding the transponder in a hand carried item, such as a card, will
not work is left as an exercise to the reader. Even an affixed device does
not provide perfect security. You'd really have to embed the transponder in
the body at an early age to make removal nearly impossible.]



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 22:25:52 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:25:52 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030132.UAA11308@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 15:36:02 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort at crl.com>
> Subject: Re: SOUP KITCHENS
> 
> A most distastful example is the complicit silence of gun stores
> when the gun grabbers regulate "kitchen table" gun dealers out of
> economic existance.

Funny, one of my customers is involved in the Texas gun lobby and through
him I am aware of literaly hundreds of people who are within a few miles of
Austin who have FFL's and have no problem selling weapons off their kitchen
table completely legal. Their prices in general are much lower than local
stores such as McBrides (the best known in Austin).

                                                 Jim Choate






From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 22:27:33 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:27:33 +0800
Subject: More evidence that democracy is bunk
Message-ID: <v02120d09ae28692597a7@[192.0.2.1]>


At 3:11 8/2/96, Deranged Mutant wrote:

>If they were asked if they minded random searches of their bags and
>belongings or required to carry photo-ID wherever they went, to be
>presented on demand, would they still be willing?

You bet. I remember a war on drugs releated poll from a few years back in
which a majority supported warrantless searches of their homes.



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 22:28:38 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:28:38 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <v02120d08ae2866db0ddc@[192.0.2.1]>


At 8:50 8/2/96, Paul J. Bell wrote:
>i, for one, and perhaps others on the list as well, would be interested in
>hearing
>what you mean when you say, "At&t, Microsoft, etc) who are ripping people
>off on a
>daily basis".
>
>for example, in what way is AT&T ripping people off? and what about
>microsoft?

Its up to you what you call it, but here is an interesting example:

An international phone call costs about 2 cents/min to produce. The average
rate paid for by the consumer is 62 cents. That's means the carriers mark
up this particular product by an amazing 3000%.

Can you name another business that has comparable mark-ups?



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 22:53:12 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:53:12 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030358.WAA11568@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 07:59:05 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort at crl.com>
> Subject: Re: Tolerance (fwd)

> Here I have to respectfully disagree, totally, with Jim.  One
> does not have to "reserve" one's rights.  They are inherent and
> my be exercised pretty much at will (I say "pretty much" because
> there are situations where "implied contract" applies).

Exactly! Stating a list is 'public' is an inherent contract between the list
provider and the subscriber with certain expectations on both parties part.
The list provider expects no illegal activity to take place such that they
are placed in jeopardy and the subscriber expects to recieve access to a
public (ie not regulated by a third party other than themselves and the
members en toto) list. Claiming the right to throw somebody off for any
reason other than illegal activity nullifies the claim of 'public'.

> A restaurant or bookstore is a public place in that it is open
> to the public.

I know of no state in the union where a bookstore, restaurant, mall, etc. is
considered public. In Texas such places make it clear that they are private
places and that they reserve the right to refuse service and/or ask you to
leave the premises.

Legaly a public place is someplace which is operated using public monies.

> Nevertheless, without first "reserving the right"
> to do so, the owners may tell you to leave if they don't like 
> the way you sound, look or smell. 

Because they ain't any more public than my house is on Wednesday nites when
I have it open to folks. I assure you that if somebody were to show up
smelling or filthy they would be asked to leave and if they refused I would
call a police officer and press trespass charges.

> Criminal activity is not
> required legally nor ethically.  Your ejection may, in fact, be
> totally arbitrary.  I don't see a privately maintained, "public"
> list as being philosophically any different.

The only way a police officer can expell you from a public place other than
for criminal behaviour is if the municipality passes ordinances regarding
access (ie open from 7-10 for example in the case of city parks here in
Austin) which must apply to ALL citizens equaly not just the vagabonds (I
have been thrown out of parks on many occassions and I assure I don't look
like a street bum even when I was living on the street in the early 80's - 
for grins I might add).


                                                 Jim Choate






From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Fri Aug  2 23:03:48 1996
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:03:48 +0800
Subject: AP story: Police look for Olympic bombing Internet link.
In-Reply-To: <9608030114.AA03672@ch1d157nwk>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.95.960802205338.3360E-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>


On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Andrew Loewenstern wrote:

> [Not From <http://www.boston.com/globe/cgi-bin/globe.cgi?ap/apnat.htm ]

"By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent"

You know, someone ought to put dossiers on these morons in a library
somewhere. 

-rich






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 23:07:04 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:07:04 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030308.WAA11470@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 19:09:25 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort at crl.com>
> Subject: Re: A Libertine Question (fwd)
> 
> > A reasonable person recognizes that such a business has two ways
> > of fulfilling its responsiblities. They can either submit to
> > regulation and quality control from the local municipality or
> > else they can hang signs about their place of business declaring
> > "Caveat Emptor: Our food may be tainted, eat at your own risk".
> > Which do you think is the more reasonable?
> 
> It would be nice if businesses were offered that choice.  I would
> choose the second, myself.  Only my sign would say, "Our food is
> guaranteed not tainted by the Acme insurance company, not some
> corrupt government."  The problem is, governments do not allow 
> businesses nor consumers to make that sort of choice.  With them 
> it's, "my way or the highway" (or harassment and jail actually).

And any insurance company with a whit of sense would charge you rates so
high that your much touted small vendors and many of the medium sized
vendors currently in business would not exist. You think governments are
bad? Wait till you see a bunch of bean counters racing a profit margin. In
such a situation we wouldn't even have the opportunity for input into the
system via constitutions, charters, and votes. Just imagine how much support
a Japanese insurance company would provide its clients in regards to the
current epidemic in Japan, absolutely none because it is better the little
vendor go out of business than the insurance company.

> Until Jim shows me a business that isn't owned and operated by
> people, I'll have to respectfully disagree.  Businesses are just
> people acting alone or in concert.  Actions are what count, not
> whether the action is of a pecuniary nature or not.

I own 2 businesses (CyberTects & Linux System Development Labs) and work for
another (Tivoli - IBM), none are equivalent to my person. Businesses are a
system of rules and procedures that one offers another person in exchange for
some other commodity. Saying a business has the same rights as a person is
equivalent to saying the Empire State Bldg. has civil rights because persons 
built it and occupy it. My dog has a better argument for civil rights than
any business, it breaths and shits. Would you seriously give my dog a vote?
I shure won't, and I won't support any business with rights.

                                                 Jim Choate






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 23:07:47 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:07:47 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030210.VAA11373@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 14:10:55 -0700
> From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
> Subject: Re: SOUP KITCHENS
> 
> (Fortunately, people survive all kinds of dirt and germs. If dogs and cats
> can eat stuff off the floor, and our ancestors did before hot water, soap,
> and autoclaves, then so can we. Not to mention children. But I digress.)

True enough, but not the whole story. If a dog or cat is kept well and fed
good quality food they live 10+ years. The average life of an animal on the
street is between 2-5 years. As to people, we now live around 75-80 years,
prior to all these rules and regulations on food and such the average was
20-25. If we go back to what you propose you would be dead a long time ago.

> The use of zoning and health code ordnances to harass certain classes of
> people is nothing new. Like I said, the Boy Scout Cookout and similar
> "good" events are not bothered by City Inspectors descending on them to
> shut them down.

In my experience they don't get hassled because they get the requisite
permits and act in good faith. Many of these small businesses and street
vendors are 'hassled' because they are unwilling or unable to meet basic
commen sense standards of conduct and go out of there way to circumvent
regulations and in some cases commen sense. I have a friend who worked at a
local strip club on N. Lamar (Yellow something...) up until a few weeks ago.
Seems one of the workers there turned a freezer off and as a result some
meat was tainted. Did they throw it out? Hell no, they went ahead and served
it because to do othewise would effect their profit margin. My (and by
extension your) life is not worth a few measly bucks. My friend complained
bitterly and when they went ahead and did it he quit and filed a complaint
with the local health dept. (I am completely unaware of the result but the
club is still open). I once got food poisoning from a Vietnamese food vendor
on the West Mall at UT Austin and complained and called the Health Dept.
Last time I was down on The Drag (the popular name of the street) the same
vendor was still in business and this was over 10 years later. And for the
record I have bought food there, I have just become more careful about its
taste and quality.

> Further, in time past the operation of a "street food" service (hot dogs,
> ice cream, various knoshing items, etc.) was a way for otherwise poor
> persons to start a business. My own city, Santa Cruz, has no pushcart
> vendors, and only one officially-approved sidewalk hotdog vendor. A loss
> for us, a loss for would-be vendors, and with no gain in "food safety" that
> I can plausible see.

Why do they prohibit permits for these types of businesses?

> I actually think this shows another side of the harassment of food
> giveaways and low-cost vendors: it cuts down on competition with the
> established food entities. While I tend to dismiss "corporate conspiracy"
> theories about how Giant Corporations are repressing and suppressing the
> Little Guys, there is little doubt that licensing, zoning, and other
> governmental restrictions are often used by established entities to keep
> out competition. Licenses get used for what economists call "rent-seeking"
> behavior.

You should be more careful about who you pick to represent you then when you
vote. Here in Austin back in the 80's the big thing was to move the airport
out of town. So many of the public officials rushed out and bought land near
the little town outside Austin in the hopes that the airport would be moved
there. It was so bad we had many elections where the citizenry voted not to
move the airport and the city council went ahead with the actions anyway.
Finaly a few years ago the feds closed Bergston the local airbase and the
entire rationale for moving the airport fell through and now all those
people have retired from local political actions because they are all broke.

> (Examples abound in other areas, too, such as where large chip companies
> like Intel actually relish the vast amounts of paperwork they are required
> to fill out, becuase this overhead and legal burden can be handled by their
> buildings full of paper pushers, but helps to keep small companies from
> entering the market. Intel has actually insisted that small companies file
> the same environmental impact reports, labor reports, etc., that they have
> to fill out. Understandable at one level, but also an example of using "the
> system" to put pressure on upstarts. Or, the rent-seeking of professional
> guilds, well-known to all of us.)

I personaly find it reassuring that some bunch of knuckle-heads are unable
to start a chip making facility like you support. The thought of finding
flourine compounds in the local river (where I get my tap water) or simply
dumped in the air is a little unsettling. Just because some group of bozo's
want to start a business is not sufficient justification for that to be
allowed.

It seems to me that many of the folks who recognize downsized workers pleas
for their 'right to a job' as so much bunk are at the same time supporting a
businesses right to start up. A pretty humorous double standard.

Persons don't have a right to work and businesses do not have a right to
start up unless they can meet reasonable levels of responsibility for their
actions. People and by extension businesses do not have the right to harm
others without their prior consent. As an extension of this, people have a
right to limit the ways and means that a business may use in order to operate.

> As to Alan Horowitz's bizarre notion that "public streets" are not to be
> used for giving away food,

I have never heard of anyone being arrested for giving away food, only
selling it without a license. I bet the Salvation Army soup kitchen would be
worried if this claim were true (they aren't and it ain't).

> does he believe the same to be true of giving
> away speech, giving away ideas, passing books to other people, etc.? "There
> are bookstores for selling or buying books, and anyone who engages in this
> sort of action on a public street will have his attitude adjusted with my
> billy club."

I am unaware of any municipality which prohibits giving away books, they
regulate bookstores because they are a business and engaged in commerce.
If you are aware of a municipality (or any list reader for that matter) I
would appreciate being informed (ie mail me privately).

> "Public" areas cause problems for analysis of rights, I will grant. The
> "commons problem" is well known. But I think that the specific cases we've
> been discussing, of whacking bums with nightsticks for the crime of not
> maintaining "proper decorum," and of Food Not Bombs being shut down while
> the Boy Scouts are not, are clear cases where the law is being misapplied.

And your argument that a business should have the same rights and
considerations as a human being is bogus. If that were true then by extensio
governments would have rights, which they don't. Unless you breath and shit
you don't have rights, only duties and responsibilities assigned by the
persons who built the system. A structure is not equivalent by any stretch
of the imagination as the person(s) who built it.


                                                  Jim Choate






From mpd at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 23:07:56 1996
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:07:56 +0800
Subject: More evidence that democracy is bunk
In-Reply-To: <v02120d09ae28692597a7@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <199608030410.VAA16970@netcom9.netcom.com>


Lucky Green wrote:

> At 3:11 8/2/96, Deranged Mutant wrote:
> 
> >If they were asked if they minded random searches of their bags and
> >belongings or required to carry photo-ID wherever they went, to be
> >presented on demand, would they still be willing?

> You bet. I remember a war on drugs releated poll from a few years 
> back in which a majority supported warrantless searches of their homes.

RAW was fond of pointing out that in spite of the current love of
democratic government, free societies are actually infrequent and
short-lived blips on the historical landscape.  

Something about basic human nature and "all you have to do is rock 
the boat a little and the people will beg the government to take their
rights away."

Since the government is usually in the best position to do any 
necessary cage-rattling, perpetual freedom is an illusory concept. 

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     mpd at netcom.com     $    via Finger.                      $






From sandfort at crl.com  Fri Aug  2 23:10:34 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:10:34 +0800
Subject: VISA Travel Money
In-Reply-To: <3202AC0F.41C6@ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802191032.26652B-100000@crl5.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Hallam-Baker wrote:

> They [VISA Travel Money cards] are usefull for the one purpose
> for which they are designed. One can go off to a foreign
> country and obtain cash...

Agreed, but does anyone have any reason to believe that these
cards cannot now (or perhaps will) be used just like regular
VISA cards for purchases in stores, restaurants, etc.?

I have two VISA debit cards in my name which can be used anywhere
VISA credit cards are accepted.  The VISA Travel Money card 
appears to be nothing more than a debit card that is tied to a
special sub-account at the issuing bank rather that the account
of a named individual.  At least where the retail establishment
has an on-line credit card terminal, the risks and protections
should be equivalent to a regular debit card. 

I'd bet dollars to donuts that the VISA Travel Money cards will
be usable just like VISA credit and debit cards within the next
2-3 years.  My guess is that they are just going slow to see
what sort of reception the Money cards get.


 S a n d y

P.S.	Phil should realize that my offer to bet dollars
	against donuts was not a serious wager.  It will
	not be necessary, therefore, for him to come up
	with some elaborate rationale to weasle out of
	the bet.  :-)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








From alano at teleport.com  Fri Aug  2 23:12:23 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:12:23 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960803040230.00ef56f4@mail.teleport.com>


At 08:28 PM 8/2/96 -0700, you wrote:

>Its up to you what you call it, but here is an interesting example:
>
>An international phone call costs about 2 cents/min to produce. The average
>rate paid for by the consumer is 62 cents. That's means the carriers mark
>up this particular product by an amazing 3000%.
>
>Can you name another business that has comparable mark-ups?

Verisign? 

InterNic Domain name registration?

Licence plates in Washington state?
---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From alanh at infi.net  Fri Aug  2 23:17:10 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:17:10 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960802164703.1649B-100000@smoke.suba.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960803002218.1359A-100000@larry.infi.net>


> > illegal to operate a residential kitchen and a residential sewge-disposal 
> > operation in a city park or a city sidewalk?
>      As long as you are enforcing it on everyone, I don't think you'd have a 
> problem

    Let's clarify something here. I am not complaining about these
fruitcakes who want to help the homeless retain their drug & alcohol
stupors, by taking care of them the way one takes care of a child - buying
the food, cooking the food, putting the food on their plate, etc. 

I anm referring to the homeless people who stake out "their" peice of a 
publicly owned real estate, and set up a continuing residence - cardboard 
or better box, ersatz cooking facilities, etc, etc. And then start acting 
out their own particular psychoses. Which typically involves accosting 
passersby, or worse.

Ya know, if these homeless folks were even doing this stuff with decorum,
 and not making disturbances and assaulting people, I for one wouldn't
give a shit.  Some may recall, as I do, the report in the New York Times a
few years ago about a chap who set up household 30 feet up in a tree in
Central Park. He was living there for 2 years before the Park Rangers
noticed and then evicted him. The fellow had several rooms, and even
running water. Don't ask me how. 

I admire that dude.





From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 23:27:26 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:27:26 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <199608030426.VAA19121@toad.com>


At 09:20 AM 8/1/96 -0800, jim bell <jimbell at pacifier.com> reminded us:
>Also:  Clipper was fabbed by VLSI Technology.  A few pointed inquiries might 
>work wonders here.

It was made by Mykotronx, using tamperproof programmable gate 
array chips from VLSI, though I don't remember whether they were
entirely programmed at Mykotronx+NSA, or whether they were
mostly mask-programmed at VLSI first.

On the other hand, if you _want_ to make a DES-cracker,
at the time Clipper came out, VLSI was making a 192Mbps DES chip,
and they may have faster stuff now.
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Rescind Authority!






From jimbell at pacifier.com  Fri Aug  2 23:35:57 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:35:57 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <199608030328.UAA11944@mail.pacifier.com>


At 07:48 PM 8/2/96 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> and black and smokeless powder taggants.

Such materials will be easy to defeat.  Find an indoor shooting range, 
vacuum up the powder residue that falls  in front of the shooting stalls, 
and you'll have a concentrated mixture of literally hundreds of types of 
taggants.  Add to bomb.  Laughing, at this point, is optional.

Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From shamrock at netcom.com  Fri Aug  2 23:36:27 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:36:27 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
Message-ID: <v02120d0fae28834ebce8@[192.0.2.1]>


At 21:10 8/2/96, Jim Choate wrote:

>In my experience they don't get hassled because they get the requisite
>permits and act in good faith. Many of these small businesses and street
>vendors are 'hassled' because they are unwilling or unable to meet basic
>commen sense standards of conduct and go out of there way to circumvent
>regulations and in some cases commen sense.

Jim,
I was there when Food Not Bombs got busted in San Francisco. They tried to
get a permit from the Health Department, but the HD refused to even process
the application. FNB finally won the case. I guess next time the HD will be
smarter, process the application and deny it. At present, SF has a
hands-off policy in regards to Food Not Bombs.

The feeding was never the real issue. The heavy political indoctrination
that came with it was. Patrick McHenry handed out the food, screaming in a
mike, in front of the Federal Building (without interfering with
pedestrians in any way) as the Feds came out on their lunch hour, having to
listen to him complain about President Bush's CIA background, calling Bush
a drug dealer, and demanding to know why there was no money for food when
there was plenty of money for nukes.

Now can we please let this thread (at least on the list) die?



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From alanh at infi.net  Fri Aug  2 23:43:36 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:43:36 +0800
Subject: VISA Travel Money
In-Reply-To: <3202AC0F.41C6@ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960803004729.1359D-100000@larry.infi.net>


Where does one buy these Visa debit cards. Great idea for travel in the
Philippines, where ATM's are widespread but Travellors checks are not very
negotiable. 





From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 23:51:21 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:51:21 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030343.WAA11512@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 12:01:41 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alan Horowitz <alanh at infi.net>
> Subject: Re: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
> 
> > to yourself. The burden of proof rests on the individual to prove that such
> > actions by a third party are a public nuisance.
> 
>    Bzzt, wrong anser. Thanks for playing.  A state and it's political 
> subdivisions does have the power to enact an ordinance DEFINING what 
> constitutes a public nuisance. They need merely protect 
> constitutionally-protected rights.

States don't enact ordinances, they enact laws. An ordinance is a regulation
which applies in a local municipality regulated by a charter. Laws are
enacted by a state or federal government regulated by a constitution. A
trivial distinction I agree. I would be willing to accept the premise that
in practice such terms are equivalent.

They have the right to enact such ordinances if their charter permits. No
community, state, or federal government in the US is given carte blanche in
regards to the creation of laws, regulation, and ordinances.

If you live in a state which permits the state government to enact such laws
then you have my sympathy. At least here in Texas the state government is
not given that job. It is left to the individual municipalities to define
public nuisance. Here in Austin the homeless were allowed to sleep at the
capitol because it is public property. Sad to say, that day is dead.
I oppose those changes as well. I believe it would be a good thing if more of
our public representatives had to face the homeless and other unpleasantries
in modern life on a personal and daily basis. They might be motivated to get
off their asses and serve the people instead of their campaign contributors.

Which constitution? The Federal government is tasked with upholding the
Constitution, not the states. The states are tasked with upholding their
individual Constitution provided they don't conflict with federal laws.
Municipalities are tasked with upholding their charters unless at odds with
the state or federal constitutions. You make it sound like my local city
council person is responsible for the Constitution, they are not any more
than I am.


> The City of Seattle may not define the act of disseminating anonymous 
> pamphlets as a nuisance. They may define the act of dissemination by 
> throwing them out the window of a moving vehicle, as a nuisance.

I would call it littering. There is litte reason to expect people to pick up
pamphlets from the middle of the street. As to handing them out, that is
protected. If the person you hand it to throws it down on the ground then
they are littering. It is called personal responsibility and respect for
oneself. From this springs respect for others.

> YOu are disconnected from reality. I am not going to waste further 
> keystrokes on this topic. My side already controls the electoral college 
> on this one. It's not my problem.

I may be disconnected from your reality, but reality is observer dependant.

But it is your problem because 'your' side is aging and my generation is just
now coming into power (ie eligable to run for president and such). With a
little luck we might be able to make a difference. All those people out there
you look down upon living in the streets with mohawks and rings through
their clits listening to Pigface and Skinny Puppy get to make the decisions
now. My suggestion to those who support the status quo is to run, run very
fast. We are the ones your mother warned you about. Were pissed off enough
that we aren't going to use violence and such, we intend to use your own
system of rules against you.

                                               Ravage
                                                Black
                                                 Leather
                                                  Monster






From alanh at infi.net  Fri Aug  2 23:53:41 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:53:41 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030308.WAA11470@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960803005947.1359E-100000@larry.infi.net>


Corporations are state-created persons [legal definition of "person", not
colloquial vernacular]. They have some privileges which have surface 
resmblence to the rights of natural people. For example, they can "have 
standing" in a court to initiate a legal proceeding - in their own name, 
not that of an agent or employee or trustee.





From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Fri Aug  2 23:57:12 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:57:12 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030514.AAA11685@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 21:33:20 -0700
> From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
> Subject: Re: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
> 
> >In my experience they don't get hassled because they get the requisite
> >permits and act in good faith. Many of these small businesses and street
> >vendors are 'hassled' because they are unwilling or unable to meet basic
> >commen sense standards of conduct and go out of there way to circumvent
> >regulations and in some cases commen sense.
> 
> I was there when Food Not Bombs got busted in San Francisco. They tried to
> get a permit from the Health Department, but the HD refused to even process
> the application. FNB finally won the case. I guess next time the HD will be
> smarter, process the application and deny it. At present, SF has a
> hands-off policy in regards to Food Not Bombs.

What exactly was the reason for the refusal to process the form? At that
point the FNB folks should have started a suite against the city and not
gone to the park. If they did they should have been very careful about
advertising the HD's refusal and making it clear that their presence and
actions there were a form of political disobedience.

There are good ways to tweak a nose and there are bad ways. Sounds like
these folks chose a bad way to begin with. I am glad to hear that justice
won out in the end. I bet next time the HD just processes the form. Is the
person in charge of the HD elected or appointed? If appointed than start a
suite against them as well as the department.

> The feeding was never the real issue. The heavy political indoctrination
> that came with it was. Patrick McHenry handed out the food, screaming in a
> mike, in front of the Federal Building (without interfering with
> pedestrians in any way) as the Feds came out on their lunch hour, having to
> listen to him complain about President Bush's CIA background, calling Bush
> a drug dealer, and demanding to know why there was no money for food when
> there was plenty of money for nukes.

I would have gone back the next day w/ a larger amp.

> Now can we please let this thread (at least on the list) die?

Certainly.

                                                Jim Choate






From alanh at infi.net  Fri Aug  2 23:57:21 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:57:21 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <ae28119a020210049840@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960803010515.1359F-100000@larry.infi.net>


We must always look at the legal definition of words. If I _give_ a 
joint, I can be charged with sale of a controlled substance. That no 
money changed hands is irrelevant.





From alanh at infi.net  Fri Aug  2 23:57:24 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:57:24 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030343.WAA11512@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960803010945.1359H-100000@larry.infi.net>


On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Jim Choate wrote:

> But it is your problem because 'your' side is aging and my generation is just
> now coming into power (ie eligable to run for president and such). With a


Why am I having these flashbacks to the Clinton Campaign promises of 1992 
about there existing a young man who is a "New Democrat", a white house 
that will have the highest-ever level of ethics, etc, etc, etc.





From roger at coelacanth.com  Sat Aug  3 00:04:59 1996
From: roger at coelacanth.com (Roger Williams)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 15:04:59 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960802234117.006acb90@gonzo.wolfenet.com>
Message-ID: <rogervif183vx.fsf@sturgeon.coelacanth.com>


>>>>> Cerridwyn Llewyellyn <ceridwyn at wolfenet.com> writes:

  >> One should understand that monitoring cellular traffic is *much*
  >> more difficult than tapping a conventional phone...

  > I'd have to disagree on that point.  Monitoring cellular traffic
  > requires nothing more than a cellular phone, and some software
  > which enables you to follow calls through the cells, for a total
  > cost of about $500...

Agreed.  I know that this capability was available to organisations at
the level of the State Police over ten years ago, and has long been
available to anyone with a credit card and the ability to read the
adverts in the back of _Police Chief_ magazine...

-- 
Roger Williams                         finger me for my PGP public key
Coelacanth Engineering        consulting & turnkey product development
Middleborough, MA           wireless * DSP-based instrumentation * ATE
tel +1 508 947-8049 * fax +1 508 947-9118 * http://www.coelacanth.com/






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Sat Aug  3 00:07:55 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 15:07:55 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030545.AAA11749@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 01:13:14 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alan Horowitz <alanh at infi.net>
> Subject: Re: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
> 
> > But it is your problem because 'your' side is aging and my generation is just
> > now coming into power (ie eligable to run for president and such). With a
> 
> Why am I having these flashbacks to the Clinton Campaign promises of 1992 
> about there existing a young man who is a "New Democrat", a white house 
> that will have the highest-ever level of ethics, etc, etc, etc.

My first guess is that you were taking LSD back then but then I wasn't
there. The second guess would be because you didn't read very carefuly. I
said nothing about highest-ethics or any other such promises of behaviour or
action. I think you are reading more into my statement than is there. I
simply said that some of my generation plan on using the rules against the
establishment.

I consider that a subtle but important difference.

                                             Jim Choate







From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Sat Aug  3 00:09:23 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 15:09:23 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030542.AAA11740@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 01:03:43 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alan Horowitz <alanh at infi.net>
> Subject: Re: A Libertine Question (fwd)
> 
> Corporations are state-created persons [legal definition of "person", not
> colloquial vernacular]. They have some privileges which have surface 
> resmblence to the rights of natural people. For example, they can "have 
> standing" in a court to initiate a legal proceeding - in their own name, 
> not that of an agent or employee or trustee.

Exactly, 'surface resemblance'. The Constitution at no point mentions
businesses in respect to the rights of the individual which is where all
discussions must start from in this government.

For example, some folks have claimed that corporations have rights that
prevent warantless searches and such. I have to strongly disagree. I see no
rational way to extend this to a corporation. If the police must use a
warrant to search a business located other than in a persons home or on
their property it is because the people who are present on that premisis
have rights and those rights would be infringed by such searches. I am not
even shure I accept the legal premise of corporations.

The amendment say:
 
	The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, 
papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall 
not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, 
supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place 
to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. 
 

                                                Jim Choate






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Sat Aug  3 00:12:17 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 15:12:17 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030546.AAA11760@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Sat Aug  3 00:38:30 1996
> Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 01:06:55 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alan Horowitz <alanh at infi.net>
> To: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay at got.net>
> cc: cypherpunks at toad.com
> Subject: Re: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
> In-Reply-To: <ae28119a020210049840@[205.199.118.202]>
> Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960803010515.1359F-100000 at larry.infi.net>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com
> Precedence: bulk
> 
> We must always look at the legal definition of words. If I _give_ a 
> joint, I can be charged with sale of a controlled substance. That no 
> money changed hands is irrelevant.
> 

Wrong, you can be charged with distribution, not sales.

                                              Jim Choate






From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz  Sat Aug  3 00:24:51 1996
From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 15:24:51 +0800
Subject: crypto CD source
Message-ID: <199608030547.RAA30464@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz>


>Some time ago on the list there was some discussion of putting together a CD
>full of cryptographic software and reference material. Nothing came of it, but
>I think several people expressed an interest
 
I have about 100MB (compressed) of crypto archives, papers, source code, etc
etc, reasonably well organised with descriptions of each file.  I've got a
friend to put it on CD, but only for my own use.  If there's someone who can
get them done in bulk outside the US you could probably use this as a crypto CD
(I don't think there's anyone in NZ who could do it, and I don't really want
the hassle of organising the whole thing).
 
Peter.
 





From sandfort at crl.com  Sat Aug  3 00:31:54 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 15:31:54 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030358.WAA11568@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802221348.29048B-100000@crl5.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Jim Choate wrote:

> Stating a list is 'public' is an inherent contract between the list
> provider and the subscriber with certain expectations on both parties part.
> The list provider expects no illegal activity to take place such that they
> are placed in jeopardy and the subscriber expects to recieve access to a
> public (ie not regulated by a third party other than themselves and the
> members en toto) list. Claiming the right to throw somebody off for any
> reason other than illegal activity nullifies the claim of 'public'.

A.  Where does Jim get the terms of the contract he implies from
    the simple word "public"?  As far as I can see, he simply made
    it up from whole cloth.  Interesting, but totally without any
    legal basis.
B.  I'm unaware that the Cypherpunks list has ever been advertised
    as "public" by the list owner.
C.  Combining A & B, I know of know instance where the owners of
    the Cypherpunks list ever made any indication that they were
    adhearing to the Byzantine interpretation of contract law as
    suggested by Jim.  (It sure doesn't comport to what I learned
    in my Contracts classes.)

> > A restaurant or bookstore is a public place in that it is open
> > to the public.
> 
> I know of no state in the union where a bookstore, restaurant,
> mall, etc. is considered public.

Actually, it's the law in ALL states in the union since the Public 
Accomidations Act was enacted some time in the '60s (with the
possible exception of Texas, I guess).

> Legaly a public place is someplace which is operated using
> public monies.

Like the Cypherpunks list?  Citation, please.

The problem with Jim is not that he doesn't know anything, but
rather that he knows so many things that aren't true.  (But I
would not favor enforcing the state granted monopoly on the
practice of law if Jim wants to hang out his shingle.  If he can
get someone to pay him for legal advice, more power to him, but 
/caveat emptor/.)


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~







From ppw3 at everett.com  Sat Aug  3 00:35:10 1996
From: ppw3 at everett.com (Paul Wittry)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 15:35:10 +0800
Subject: Why Fingerprints and Key-ID's
Message-ID: <199608030439.VAA00131@post.everett.net>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Cypherpunks,

I understand PGP Open-Signed messages and why they are used. I've 
read all the FAQ's. I can't seem to figure out why some of us put our 
Fingerprints and/or Key-ID's at the end of messages.

The answer to my question is probably in a FAQ somewhere and I'm 
missing it, I learn best by watching (visually) or by doing 
(experientially) so I'm having a little trouble learning from 
documentation.

In any case, if someone would spend a little time to explain, or 
point me in the right direction, I would be grateful.

Thanks,
Paul

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgLPl8498OZoTL5VAQFcrwP+JNK8K0cQFdU8+//GQQvj2Z3hn7gTgTeH
SRHosvwj5xNmR5pB9h8FlQillZ+OQEeEF+/z75+fqyK9AD68i+F0c0bymj1vJ6zR
zQnjUsIh/VBKLAvrmnmf08E4uWo2wdJrsjBtRkvShmMWHOBxsp5dReDrsVNPRHtK
Pp1zqTLUBpk=
=1kJ1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
___________________________________________________________________________
Paul Wittry, Visual Artist, Philosopher, Poet|"A poet is a dethroned king
Internet:<ppw3 at everett.com> <bi065 at scn.org>  |sitting among the ashes of
Homepage:<http://www.everett.net/users/ppw3> |his palace trying to form an
PGP Public Key=Finger:<ppw3 at everett.com>     |image from out of the ashes."
Please, encrypt your messages!!!!            |_______________Kalil Gibran__

 


            
                                             






From sandfort at crl.com  Sat Aug  3 00:44:43 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 15:44:43 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030308.WAA11470@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802214751.29048A-100000@crl5.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Jim Choate wrote:

> And any insurance company with a whit of sense would charge you rates so
> high that your much touted small vendors and many of the medium sized
> vendors currently in business would not exist. You think governments are
> bad? Wait till you see a bunch of bean counters racing a profit margin. In
> such a situation we wouldn't even have the opportunity for input into the
> system via constitutions, charters, and votes. Just imagine how much support
> a Japanese insurance company would provide its clients in regards to the
> current epidemic in Japan, absolutely none because it is better the little
> vendor go out of business than the insurance company.

Apparently Jim does not understand that the "race for profit 
margin" is what LOWERS the prices of goods and services.  You 
might check out HUMAN ACTION by von Mises.  Anyway, as I said in 
my previous post.

> > It would be nice if businesses were offered that choice

I'm confident that the market solution would be far cheaper and
less violent they injecting the coercive state apparatus into a
volutary transactions between PEOPLE.

> I own 2 businesses...none are equivalent to my person. 

So?  They are owned and operated by people.

> Businesses are a system of rules and procedures...

Made and enforced by PEOPLE.  Jim is begging the question.

> Would you seriously give my dog a vote?

Gee, I don't know your dog.  His understanding of economics
couldn't be much more rudimentary.  (Okay, it was a cheap
shot, but it was a silly question.)


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~









From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Sat Aug  3 00:52:27 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 15:52:27 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030617.BAA11822@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 22:05:06 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort at crl.com>
> Subject: Re: A Libertine Question (fwd)
> 
> > And any insurance company with a whit of sense would charge you rates so
> > high that your much touted small vendors and many of the medium sized
> > vendors currently in business would not exist. You think governments are
> > bad? Wait till you see a bunch of bean counters racing a profit margin. In
> > such a situation we wouldn't even have the opportunity for input into the
> > system via constitutions, charters, and votes. Just imagine how much support
> > a Japanese insurance company would provide its clients in regards to the
> > current epidemic in Japan, absolutely none because it is better the little
> > vendor go out of business than the insurance company.
> 
> Apparently Jim does not understand that the "race for profit 
> margin" is what LOWERS the prices of goods and services.  You 
> might check out HUMAN ACTION by von Mises.  Anyway, as I said in 
> my previous post.

Really? Then would you mind explaining why costs rise over time instead of
going down? Compare the cost of almost anything over time and what happens?
The price goes up. Insurance has become involved in the medical industry,
what happened? The cost has gone through the roof. The airplane industry was
deregulated in the late 70's, what happened? The price of a ticket went up
and more and more airlines went out of business because of lagging sales. In
many states (such as Texas) insurance was made mandatory, what happened? The
cost of automobile insurance went up.  The telephone companies were broken
up and 'privatized' in the 80's and what happened? The cost of phone service
has gone up and the rate of new service introduction has gone down. In
almost any case you care to mention where a monopoly or near-monopoly market
exists and is deregulated the cost of operation has gone up.

> > > It would be nice if businesses were offered that choice
> 
> I'm confident that the market solution would be far cheaper and
> less violent they injecting the coercive state apparatus into a
> volutary transactions between PEOPLE.

If this is so then by your own argument, business are operated by people
therefor they are people, the government should conform to this model since
it is operated by people also (by your argument). Therefore governments have
rights (clearly incorrect). Governments have duties and responsibilities,
under our Constitution the government is given no right. As a matter of fact
if there is a disagreement or unclear point the 10th says specificaly that
the government does not get to resolve it but rather the states or the
people. Clearly the founding fathers were drawing a distinction between the
people operating a system and the system itself.

> > I own 2 businesses...none are equivalent to my person. 
> 
> So?  They are owned and operated by people.

Yes, but they are not people any more than my ownership and operation of my
motor vehicle makes it a person. Is your contention that because I own and
operate a computer it should be given rights?

This is sorta funny, I can see it now...

"Your honor we would like to call Mr. Choate's 1985 Mustang to the stand to
give testimony."

"Mr. Choate's 1986 Mustang, you have been found guilty of speeding and
reckless driving."

Hey, come to think of it, this would make a great defence for many things.

"But your honor, my automobile has rights and is considered a person,
therefore you can't hold me responsible for running over those six nuns and
two infants. I was simply along for the ride. The only reason that I was in
the vehicle was that I was afraid to open the door and jump at 120 MPH."

Yup, I definately like where this is going...

I can see a cop reading my computer it's Miranda and waiting till Hell
freezes over for a positive responce.

Just think, all those dead cars...er persons...in the auto...er
people-crusher... We should bring those monsters up on charges for killing
people. Talk about mass murder.

> > Businesses are a system of rules and procedures...
> 
> Made and enforced by PEOPLE.  Jim is begging the question.

Which question would that be? "Should businesses be considered people with
the same rights and priviliges?" If so then it is clearly a negative answer.
The Constitution does not accept that premise and the law does not accept
that premise. If a business is found guilty of wrong doing do they put it in
jail? No, they put the persons involved in jail. Clearly the courts are
drawing a distinction between a system and those who operate it. Does the
constitution ever mention business or commercial enterprise in equality with
persons? Does this equality mean that I need to go the courthouse and get a
DBA in order to legaly exist in Texas as a business must?

Consider my dog, Reef, she is owned and operated by a person (I feed her,
walk her, clean up her messes, teach her tricks, even kill her if I choose -
though I can't be cruel to her) does this mean she is a person?

Sounds like the original proposition, that businesses should be awarded the
same rights as people because they are owned and operated by people, is a
reduction to absurtity.

> > Would you seriously give my dog a vote?
> 
> Gee, I don't know your dog.  His understanding of economics
> couldn't be much more rudimentary.  (Okay, it was a cheap
> shot, but it was a silly question.)

If I may, I would like to use a quote from the Transformers movie,

"You obviously don't understand the situation then."

Tata.

                                                Jim Choate






From jimbell at pacifier.com  Sat Aug  3 00:55:39 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 15:55:39 +0800
Subject: Freeh slimes again: Digital Telephony costs $2 billion now ...
Message-ID: <199608030552.WAA18439@mail.pacifier.com>


At 01:11 PM 8/2/96 -0700, Lucky Green wrote:
>At 18:29 8/1/96, Timothy C. May wrote:
>
>>(With the Internet Phone deals--even Intel is entering the market--why are
>>there no widespread uses of PGP or S/MIME? Yes, I know about about PGPhone,
>>and also the Nautilus product, but none seem to be used by anyone I know.
>>Maybe we should spend some time talking about the practical realities of
>>these tools.)
>
>The sound quality really isn't there, unless you have a fast machine or a
>fat pipe. In addition, the vast majority of Intel based computers lack the
>crucial (for user acceptance) full-duplex soundcard. Add to that the
>physical impossibility of getting decent real time services over a
>non-isochronous network, such as the Internet, I'net phones just don't
>provide suffcient speech quality for business/serious personal use even
>without the added overhead of crypto.

Which reminds me...  If there is any function Cypherpunks (and/or 
cyberpunks) should perform, it's one of using a "bully pulpit" to influence 
technical developments.  Consider, for example,  your observation that "the 
vast majority of Intel based computers lack the crucual full-duplex 
soundcard."  When I first heard that this was true, I wondered what bunch 
of nincompoops were responsible for this outrage.

There are  many potential uses for soundcards which require full-duplex 
operation.  Only the most stupid and basic functions don't.  There was no 
good reason for this lack; Presumably if somebody had been at the 
right place at the right time, he could have reminded that shit-for-brains 
"engineer" of the obvious consequences of building a product with such an 
egregious bug designed into it.

Anyway, that's water under the bridge.  However, we're probably all in 
agreement that Internet telephone (non-encrypted as well as encrypted) is 
going to be a big product in just a few years. This will require (or desire) 
a few high-CPU-power functions:

1.  A modem, obviously.
2.  Good encryption, possibly.
3.  Audio A/D and D/A, and associated compression functions.

 I propose that the better way of implementing it, rather than going through 
a sound card, is for modem manufacturers to built an  new modem with an 
extra telephone connection (perhaps the same physical connector that's 
currently used for the telephone handset) which goes to an ordinary 
telephone and does the audio A/D and D/A conversion, as well as the data 
compression/data expansion function that will be necessary.  The latter 
function would be done by an extra DSP on this modem/Internet telephone card. 

 Briefly, you'd talk into an ordinary telephone on your desk, which would be 
connected to the modem/telephone card.  That card would digitize your speech 
to whatever level of resolution  is practical, and compress it into an 
appropriate data rate.  This data would either be encrypted by the same DSP, 
or possibly presented to the host CPU for encryption.  From there, it would 
be sent to the modem section and transmitted over the telephone line. 

I think this would be superior to the use of a sound card, for a number of 
reasons.  First, obviously, is the reduction in cards in simple and/or 
portable systems.  To require that you have both a modem and a sound card 
(as well as a cpu) to implement an Internet telephone is unreasonable.  
Secondly, using a sound card (which can't do any compression) requires that 
you implement both the compresssion and encryption function with the host 
processor, which might be impractical for a low-cost processor like a '486.  
Putting a substantial portion of this function into a dedicated DSP means 
that main-processor overhead becomes minimal.  

Third, implementing a "flow-through" telephone circuit allows you to 
interpose this encryptor into an existing telephone system, such as that of 
a house or office.  The existing handsets can be used with no modification, 
presumably.  This would also allow easy implementation of a 
computer-controlled answering machine-type, because the computer will be 
able to digitize/synthesize audio as well as record it.  It could also 
implement fax and modem/bbs functions.





Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From alanh at infi.net  Sat Aug  3 01:15:33 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 16:15:33 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <v02120d0fae28834ebce8@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960803011939.6572A-100000@larry.infi.net>


> The feeding was never the real issue. The heavy political indoctrination
> that came with it was. Patrick McHenry handed out the food, screaming in a
> mi[crophone of an amplified public address system]

If this isn't disturbing the peace, I don't know what is.

Patrick McHenry wasn't interested in the homeless, _for their sake_.  He 
was using them as a pawn to act out his own neurotic vision of "social 
activism".  If there hadn't been any homeless in the city, Patrick 
McHenry would have latched onto some other - any other - issue. It's the 
screaming into the microphone that he wants.

   





From alanh at infi.net  Sat Aug  3 01:31:37 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 16:31:37 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030542.AAA11740@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960803023257.9798D-100000@larry.infi.net>


> I am not even shure I accept the legal premise of corporations.
 - Jim Choate


    This is NOT a drill. This is an actual pop quiz, in which Jim Choate 
is directed to tell us about the legal premise of incorporation. Jim, do 
you know anything about what you are talking about. Looking it up is not 
allowed.

P.S.  could you humor me on one tiny little thing?  Can we agree that 
that the word shall be spelled "sure", not "shure", on this list?  I 
don't want to trample on your artistic vision or anything like that, but 
could we just agree on this one tiny little thing





From sandfort at crl.com  Sat Aug  3 01:32:05 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 16:32:05 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030617.BAA11822@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960802231226.25121A-100000@crl3.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Jim Choate's dog wrote:

> Really? Then would you mind explaining why costs rise over time
> instead of going down?

Gladly. Prices rise over time because of inflation of the money 
supply.  While it is possible for private actors to temporarily
inflate the money supply (e.g., extension of credit by banks),
only the government can increase the money supply indefinitely.  
Inflation is the most insidious form of "taxation."  It steals
silently and punishes the savings in favor of consumption.

> Insurance has become involved in the medical industry, what
> happened? The cost has gone through the roof. The airplane
> industry was deregulated in the late 70's, what happened? The
> price of a ticket went up...yada yada yada.

Technically, Jim's logical fallacy is called /post hoc, ergo 
propter hoc/, after this, therefore on account of this.

> If this is so then by your own argument, business are operated
> by people therefor they are people...

Nope, that's not what I said.  This fallacy is called a "straw
man."  It is a weak or mistated opposing argument set up by a 
politician or debator, etc., in order that he may attack it and
gain an easy, showy victory.

Since you have mistated my position, the balance of your argument
is irrelevant.  (But thanks for playing.)

> Is your contention that because I own and
> operate a computer it should be given rights?

Nope.  Whatever gave you that idea?

> > > Businesses are a system of rules and procedures...
> > 
> > Made and enforced by PEOPLE.  Jim is begging the question.
> 
> Which question would that be? "Should businesses be considered
> people with the same rights and priviliges?"

Nope.  You just don't get it, do you?

> Sounds like the original proposition, that businesses should be
> awarded the same rights as people because they are owned and
> operated by people, is a reduction to absurtity.

More straw men.  From what orfice was that proposition pulled?

> If I may, I would like to use a quote from the Transformers
> movie,

Could these be the source of Jim's legal and economic knowledge?
You be the judge.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sat Aug  3 01:32:54 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 16:32:54 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
Message-ID: <199608030650.XAA21091@toad.com>


At 01:52 AM 8/2/96 -0700, daw at cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner) wrote:
>> would dramatically change surveillance authority to include wiretaps of
>> INDIVIDUALS instead of LOCATIONS.
>I don't get it.  Help me out here-- how can this possibly be constitutional?
     [CENSORED MATERIAL DELETED]

You've been hanging out with those subversive Canadians again,
haven't you?  It's covered by the Terrorism Exception to the 4th Amendment.*

>P.S.  Do police really need a search warrant to wiretap cellular phones?

Do you mean legally?  :-)
Some combination of laws and court decisions has established that
cordless phones don't provide an expectation of privacy,
but cellular phones do, so eavesdropping on cellular phones
requires wiretapping authorization (whether a warrant, FISA permission,
or whatever other procedures constitute Due Process.)




-----------------------------------
* The Drug Exception to the 4th Amendment says ", except for drugs, of course."
  The Terrorism Exception says "Be afraid.  Be very afraid."
-----------------------------------
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From tcmay at got.net  Sat Aug  3 01:36:22 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 16:36:22 +0800
Subject: Liberating Clipper Stuff from Mykotronx Dumpsters
Message-ID: <ae28445005021004823e@[205.199.118.202]>


At 4:24 AM 8/3/96, Bill Stewart wrote:
>At 09:20 AM 8/1/96 -0800, jim bell <jimbell at pacifier.com> reminded us:
>>Also:  Clipper was fabbed by VLSI Technology.  A few pointed inquiries might
>>work wonders here.
>
>It was made by Mykotronx, using tamperproof programmable gate
>array chips from VLSI, though I don't remember whether they were
>entirely programmed at Mykotronx+NSA, or whether they were
>mostly mask-programmed at VLSI first.

By the way, newcomers to the list (I'm not referring to Bill, of course)
may not know some of the background on this Mykotronx story. An interesting
use of remailers, too.

One of the early list subscribers went "Dumpster-diving" outside the
Torrance, CA headquarters of Mykotronx, a previously little-known defense
subcontractor.

Amongst the stuff in the Dumpster, unshredded, he found:

- payroll information

- copies of contracts with VLSI Technology, the NSA, AT&T, etc., showing
the work to have started back in the early 90s

- yield information on the chips, and some limited test information

- copies of various memoranda between AT&T, the NSA, the FBI, Mykotronx,
Sandia, and VLSI Technology

- a bunch of other goodies

He scanned or typed this stuff he found into a text file and sent it to one
of the earliest members of the Cypherpunks list, asking for it to be passed
on to someone who could do something with it. A few hours later, via
anonymous remailer posting, it went out to the several hundred subscribers
to the Cypherpunks list at that time. (It's somewhere in the archives, such
as they are. This would be around late April, 1993, possibly May-June.)

I later heard that Mykotronx was mightily embarrassed to have this kind of
stuff found in Dumpsters out where anyone could find it, and that "the
authorities" ordered a tightening up of security.

--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 at 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."









From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sat Aug  3 01:44:23 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 16:44:23 +0800
Subject: Jim Bell, stay out of Georgia....
Message-ID: <199608030708.AAA21521@toad.com>


At 09:54 AM 8/2/96 -0400, Duncan Frissell <frissell at panix.com> wrote:
>>>   JONESBORO, Ga. -- An 18-year-old self-styled anarchist who allegedly
>>>   distributed a free, homemade pamphlet with anti-government rhetoric
>>>   has been charged with advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government.
.....
>Brian -- why do the cops do busts like this where they know they will be
>thrown out?

1) Because they can
2) Because they can get away with it
3) Because most of the public approves of this kind of <noun deleted>
4) Because they can put out press releases encouraging 2) and 3)
   and folks will believe them.
5) Because if the case gets dropped it _might_ make Page 43 of the 
   newspaper and will be covered in a way that makes it clear
   that they're the good guys.
6) Because the state/city/town will cover their legal costs
   and penalties if they somehow lose a lawsuit
7) Because the state/city/town _won't_ cover the costs of a real
   defense of the "self-styled anarchist", who'll have to put up
   with a lot of crap as well as the 47:59:59 hours they can
   keep him in jail for no good reason plus any more until he
   can make bail for the bogusly heavy charges they'll lay on him.
8) Because once you're a "self-styled" anything, you don't get no respect.
9) I've never met any cops who were bullies - have you?
10)It's covered by the Anarchists and Commies Exception to the First Amendment.
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From ceridwyn at wolfenet.com  Sat Aug  3 01:59:49 1996
From: ceridwyn at wolfenet.com (Cerridwyn Llewyellyn)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 16:59:49 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960803071838.006b0808@gonzo.wolfenet.com>


At 08:42 PM 8/2/96 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Forwarded message:
>
>> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 16:50:01 -0500 (CDT)
>> From: snow <snow at smoke.suba.com>
>> Subject: Re: A Libertine Question
>> 
>>      As long as you are enforcing it on everyone, I don't think you'd have a 
>> problem, but to force some one from cooking food for homeless people, and 
>> allow a family barbeque, is IMO wrong.
>
>Not at all. Businesses have no rights, individuals do. Businesses have a
<snip>
>Blueberries they bought at the local HEB). Individuals have a right to
>privacy, that includes cooking themselves food without harrassment. Business
>on the other hand are selling products of potentialy questionable quality. A

I disagree with your sentiments about Business and rights, however, in this
instance, even that wasn't the issue. Food Not Bombs is NOT a business, it's
a not-for-profit organization that gives out (not sells) food.  They are the
same as, I think Tim May pointed out, a Boy Scout picnic, except for the 
homless, not the boy scouts.

//cerridwyn//







From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Sat Aug  3 02:16:45 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 17:16:45 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030750.CAA11930@einstein>



Hi all,

Because none of these issues have ever been tested in a court of law any
comments I or any other person makes (even if a lawyer) is simply personal
opinion. To find out what is 'really' going on we will have to simply wait
for that first case.

Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 22:28:37 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort at crl.com>
> Subject: Re: Tolerance (fwd)
> 
> A.  Where does Jim get the terms of the contract he implies from
>     the simple word "public"?  As far as I can see, he simply made
>     it up from whole cloth.  Interesting, but totally without any
>     legal basis.

Public - 

of or pertaining to the people; not private or secret; open to general use;
accessible to all; serving the people. Community or its members; a section
of community. Making known to the public; proclamation; printing in a book,
etc. for sale or distribution. To make widely known; to advertise. The state
of being generaly known; notoriety; advertisement.

I first learned about the cpunks list in Mondo 2000 several years ago not
long after I got PGP 1.0 off Adelante BBS in Co. Wasn't Eric's girlfriend
involved in Mondo 2000? (Hi Jude, I think we will have a RoboFest this year
in Austin, as always you are invited) Which would indicate a certain level of
premeditation regarding letting people know of the list. I think that qualifies
as public, I also think a court would accept that argument. The bottem line is
that the list operator crossed that line whether they were aware of it or not.
If they feel uncomfortable with this then they should consider very strongly
dropping the list or enacting some form of registration more preferential
than majordomo's subscribe system. This registration should clearly define
what is and is not allowed on this list.

> B.  I'm unaware that the Cypherpunks list has ever been advertised
>     as "public" by the list owner.

It has appeared in many publications which are intended for general or
'public' distribution in every one of those publications it was made clear
that anyone was welcome and the subscription address was provided. The list
operators ignorance of the consequences of their actions in no way alleviates
them of the consequences of those actions.

> C.  Combining A & B, I know of know instance where the owners of
>     the Cypherpunks list ever made any indication that they were
>     adhearing to the Byzantine interpretation of contract law as
>     suggested by Jim.  (It sure doesn't comport to what I learned
>     in my Contracts classes.)

It isn't my interpretation. Perhaps you should have paid better attention in
class. These issues have never been tested in a court of law in the US in
regards to computer networks and their special nature.

> > > A restaurant or bookstore is a public place in that it is open
> > > to the public.
> > 
> > I know of no state in the union where a bookstore, restaurant,
> > mall, etc. is considered public.
> 
> Actually, it's the law in ALL states in the union since the Public 
> Accomidations Act was enacted some time in the '60s (with the
> possible exception of Texas, I guess).

Not in Texas. We recently passed a law (Jan. 8) which permits citizens legaly
registered to carry concealed weapons. Because the way the law was worded it
was made clear in many newspapers and such that the ONLY way that business
could prohibit patrons from entering their premises with those weapons was
because they were PRIVATE property and therefore excluded from the
constraints of the law. [When I worked at UT the rationale that was used to
throw the dumpster divers off campus was that even though it was a publicly
funded school by taxes it was private property (didn't make sense to  me
then or now). I can also state unequivacly that if the UTPD catch you on
campus after 10pm or before 6AM w/o proof of either being a current student
or staff consider it a graceful and considerate officer if they only escort
you off campus.] Even now there is a big discussion here over whether
this is realy a strong enough distinction. It is only a matter of time
before a case comes up here to test even this limitation of private
ownership (which I happen to support, a person with a gun on my private
property is definately subject to my desires and wants, they represent a
clear and present danger. If they don't then why do they need to register
the weapons and why are they classed 'deadly weapons'?). The really sad part
is that it will probably be another one of those shoot outs at Wendy's in
Waco or some such nonesense as some loony toon goes postal. I wonder if that
was what Jeffeson meant about watering the tree of liberty with blood? If my
business property is really public simply because I am open to the public
then I feel the police have a responsibility to provide an officer on my
premises for whatever hours I am open for business to protect me, my property, and my
patrons just like they do at the courthouse, tax accessors office, etc. They
also have a responsibility to help assist in the operation and funding of my
business (something I oppose strongly) since they have now found my business
to be public; as a matter of fact they can help pay my damn taxes.

For the record Florida and every other state with 'Right To Carry' laws
looks at it this way. It is the only way under the current statutes to
allow businesses to control access by gun toting folks.

Now there is one caveat that most of you will have caught. That is the
definitions of public above. In short, we have a circular argument as the law
is worded now. Logicaly the courts have two recourses. They can first
declare that no agency has the right to regulate gun ownership and
possession (what I want to see) or else regardless of the 2nd, nobody has
the right to carry a weapon on their person in public, since police are not
awarded special consideration from constitutional law this would mean they
could not carry a weapon on their side in public. So the courts eventualy
must either refuse to review the case or else they must make some major
change in the current law which goes against the government either way.
Either everyone gets to wear weapons or nobody including the police get to
carry them. Either way with the last two the police are in a situation where
they are less likely to employ force for enforcement since they are no longer
the strong side in the 'discussion'.

> > Legaly a public place is someplace which is operated using
> > public monies.
> 
> Like the Cypherpunks list?  Citation, please.

The Cpunks list isn't a place. It is a steam of characters. Does the list
reside on my computer? It does at least to some degree since I obviously
have access to discuss these issues with you. It also resides on your
computer as well as the thousand or so subscribers. It resides at least in
part on the screen of my crt, the RAM in my computer, the network cable, the 
ISDN line, my providers router, my brain, the EM emission of the computer,
etc. ad nauseum. So there is no single 'place' where the list resides, any
more than a single place that an idea resides. This whole issue is the reason
that I contend that eventualy it will be seen clearly that postings on usenet,
public accessible mailing lists, irc channels, etc. are actualy automaticaly
public domain in regards to their content. At some point I feel that it will
turn out that unless you encrypt your data or place copyright symbols on it
with special, and likely convoluted, riders allowing various distributions
and storing via computer networks the author of computer text such as this
will grant all rights and privileges to the work to the public automaticaly.
This belief is the reason that I am interested in crypto, outside the simple
curiosity I have about nature.

I don't believe the cpunks list has ever been involved in a legal case. As a
matter of fact this issue has never been tested in a court of law. Perhaps
we should look at forcing a case. The best strategy would be for Eric to
throw somebody off the list sureptitously (sp? I put the dictionaries back and
I ain't walking over there again...sorry) and then for that person to bring
a civil suit alleging infringement of civil liberties (ie equal access under
the law). Eric would claim the list is private while the expunged user would
claim it was public. We would of course have to resolve the cost issue first.
I have two lawyers on retainer for my businesses but I don't believe either
would touch a non-commerical case like this would be and I don't have
anywhere near the personal capital to finance it myself. As a added bonus we
could pick a handicapped person and they could sue under the various laws
relating to those issues as well. This would get the whole issue of
handicapped access to computer technology to be explored. Currently the
handicapped (eg blind) find GUI interfaces nearly unusable. It would be
pretty weird (to me) to see court rule that every os and software
manufacturer must provide a CLI interface to their products because of the
new equal access laws regarding handicapped individuals.

> The problem with Jim is not that he doesn't know anything, but
> rather that he knows so many things that aren't true.  (But I
> would not favor enforcing the state granted monopoly on the
> practice of law if Jim wants to hang out his shingle.  If he can
> get someone to pay him for legal advice, more power to him, but 
> /caveat emptor/.)

That is a two edged sword. Where did you get your law degree? My lawyers
both got theirs at UT Austin Law School. Both are federal lawyers and both
have argued before the Supreme and are currently allowed to argue before the
Supremes.

The bottem line is that this whole issue is so full of circular arguments
and contrary views it may take quite a few years to work out something that
makes any kind of sense at all, if ever. Course by then we will have a whole
new generatio of technology to argue over.

Take care all, and watch your sixes.

                                                     Jim Choate








From TrustBuckFella at nowhere.com  Sat Aug  3 02:43:45 1996
From: TrustBuckFella at nowhere.com (TrustBuckFella)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 17:43:45 +0800
Subject: TrustBucks
Message-ID: <64gf4trmj9@nowhere.com>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
 
An alternative model of electronic money.
 
Every model of electronic money I know of except one retains some degree
of centralization. There is always a central "mint", usually a bank. If
you can't find a bank that acts the way you want, you're SOL. And the
only thing that enforces non-abuse (inflation, etc) by the bank is the
equivalence of electronic money to some form of "real" money. The sole
exception is Digicash. Unfortunately, Digicash has no restraint on
infinite spending-into-debt.
 
I want to present an alternative model I call "TrustBucks". TrustBucks
is decentralized but zero-sum and needs no assistance from "real"
currency. Its central idea is a "web of trust": Local, trusted contacts
are linked in a web that at some remove can extend everywhere.
 
I'm not going to try to develop the cryptographic protocols for
TrustBucks. I haven't got the requisite paranoia and pickiness
(compliments both) for that. TrustBucks also has nothing in the way of
anonymity and restraint on double-spending right now. If you can see how
it could be anonymous or restrain double-spending and still work, please
feel free to add.
 
 
The basic rules of TrustBucks:
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Each individual using TrustBucks has their own individual variety of
currency, notated here as TrustBucks( <name> ).
 
Each individual is considered to have an infinite supply of their
own TrustBucks.
 
Each individual accepts payment only in their own variety of TrustBucks.
 
There are only two fundamental operations with TrustBucks:
 
A and B swap TrustBucks, of any two varieties.
 
A pays B in TrustBucks( B ) for something external to the system.
 
 
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
 
Examples: Say Alice wants to pay Bob in TrustBucks, and Bob agreed to
accept payment in this form. Alice has several options for paying him.
 
*       Alice already has some TrustBucks( Bob ).
 
                Alice pays Bob.
 
*       The amount is small enough that Bob trusts Alice directly.
 
                Alice and Bob swap TrustBucks( Alice ) for TrustBucks( Bob )
                Alice pays Bob.
 
        I know this looks like an extra piece of complexity, but it's
        really not. By insisting that only TrustBucks( Bob ) are payment
        to Bob, we insure that Bob can't manipulate what currency he
        will accept to his advantage, which would otherwise be a
        problem. For instance, Bob cannot refuse to make good on his
        debts while accepting other people's money.
 
*       Alice doesn't have enough TrustBucks( Bob ), but does have
        TrustBucks( Carol ), and Bob trusts Carol directly for that
        amount.
 
                Alice and Bob swap TrustBucks( Carol ) for TrustBucks( Bob )
                Alice pays Bob.
 
*       Alice doesn't have enough TrustBucks( Bob ), but does have
        TrustBucks( Carol ), and Carol has some TrustBucks( Bob ).
 
                Alice and Carol swap TrustBucks( Carol ) for TrustBucks( Bob )
                Alice pays Bob.
 
*       Alice doesn't have enough TrustBucks( Bob ), and Carol has some
        TrustBucks( Bob ), and Carol trusts Alice directly.
 
                Alice and Carol swap TrustBucks( Alice ) for TrustBucks( Carol )
                Alice and Carol swap TrustBucks( Carol ) for TrustBucks( Bob )
                Alice pays Bob.
 
 
Using some combination of the above methods, Alice can pay Bob as long
as there are accessible parties in the system who, in total sum, trust
Alice for the amount of the payment, and there are accessible parties in
the system whom, in total sum, Bob is willing to trust for the amount of
his credit. Which gives the scheme its name: TrustBucks.
 
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Disadvantages:
 
        Lots of overhead.
 
        Third-party traders must be perpetually available.
 
        Not anonymous.
 
        Not clear how double-spending can be avoided.
 
Not a true disadvantage:
        It could "stall"; that is, there could be catch-22 situations
        where if only some people trusted to begin with, the system
        could continue, but not enough people trust each other to get it
        started. I say this is not a true disadvantage because the same
        thing happens in other currency-schemes, to an equal or larger
        degree. If it's merely more visible with TrustBucks, that should
        not be called a disadvantage. In practice, I think the
        threshhold of trust neccessary to start the system would be
        considerably with TrustBucks than with other systems.
 
Advantages:
        Decentralizable. It is not neccessarily decentraliz_ed_, but can
        become so as needed.
 
        Nobody controls the "mint".
 
        Few conceptual parts. When counting the parts in other schemes,
        don't forget to count the parts neccessary to fix or ameliorate
        problems that don't occur in TrustBucks, like deciding who
        "prints money", keeping them from abusing the role, stopping
        others (IE counterfeiters) from assuming the role, and so forth.
 
I don't claim that the above neccessarily adds up to a positive rating,
but it's worth hashing out, especially if it inspires more secure
protocols along the same decentralized lines.
 
 
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
I'm not the first person to notice that decentralized ideas tend to take
off more abruptly and firmly. For instance, PGP vs. Kerberos, or the
internet vs. AOL, Prodigy, Compuserve. Especially Usenet and the WWW.
That's why I thought a long time about bringing this idea out. Once it's
out, it and its successors are beyond my control or anyone else's.
 
 
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.1
 
iQCVAwUBMgLz8pi7GCxryNrZAQEfAAQApDzHN9PSpARe/MUZgDDk8F+eFLlKNAHZ
5H6KaX3SlWxL9itM8aFMoudpnBU2gAO7Kn9YHV+dFS1l/tE+NJDhSpTRL1EMKVw9
rGrL8lypX9bLsuw0+thMl1djJjQhc3To6qaLhJvZVji7TRXlKYuVMFW5D6Sm988a
Zg8nRsCQrIo=
=EOKl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Sat Aug  3 04:00:27 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 19:00:27 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030921.EAA12012@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Sat, 03 Aug 1996 00:18:38 -0700
> From: Cerridwyn Llewyellyn <ceridwyn at wolfenet.com>
> Subject: Re: A Libertine Question (fwd)
> 
> I disagree with your sentiments about Business and rights, however, in this
> instance, even that wasn't the issue. Food Not Bombs is NOT a business, it's
> a not-for-profit organization that gives out (not sells) food.  They are the
> same as, I think Tim May pointed out, a Boy Scout picnic, except for the 
> homless, not the boy scouts.

Then we have a clear case of abuse of power and if the folks at FNB don't
pursue this then they deserve the ignominy they receive. What is the current
status? Have counter suites been filed? What was the ACLU and NAACP (I am
assuming that everyone at FNB is not anglo-saxon and named 'Fletcher')
responce to requests for aid? Have they begun a petition or whatever the
city charter allows demanding the ouster of those in charge? What is the
Libertarian Party there doing? Has anyone contacted the Justice Dept. and
begun the proceeding for a civil rights suit? If these folks seriously went
out there not prepared to fight then the issues must not be very important to
them, perhaps a simple publicity stunt to get their 15 minutes and not realy
to help the homeless/foodless? Has anyone made reference to the judges
comments in the CDA trial regarding speech and chaos?

While the city acted illegaly, nobody has stated if the city categoricaly
prohibits such activities which was the point I was originaly trying to
express. Was this a isolated incident originating with the poor decision of
a single individual in the HD or was it organized? Have similar responces
occured before?

Every year on Halloween a bunch of folks here in Texas go down to the State
Capital at about 10pm and sit around and smoke pot for about an hour. The
city police have no jurisdiction on the capital grounds and the DPS officers
pretty much stand around and make shure things don't get out of hand. I have
never known of anyone being arrested but then again the place is crawling
with video and lawyers ready to pounce. I would contend that one of the
reasons that no actions are taken is that the event is organized and the
folks come prepared to go to jail and fight if need be.


                                               Jim Choate






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sat Aug  3 04:13:57 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 19:13:57 +0800
Subject: "And who shall guard the guardians?"
Message-ID: <199608030923.CAA22990@toad.com>


At 06:11 PM 8/2/96 -0400, David Lesher wrote:
>> The English-Only bill just passed in the House bans the use of
>> non-English languages by government officials.  Does Tim's sudden 
>> avoidance of the Latin mean that _he_'s the Fed??  
>
>What about Navajo?

Foreign diplomacy was one of the exceptions.

Algol wasn't, since it's designed to describe algorithms to humans,
even though it's additionally useful for diplomatic relations with
our Mechanical Companions.  (Actually, they are allowed to use it
for teaching purposes, or if really necessary for National Security,
and the Bureau of the Census can use it to help count people.)

Section (I), however, is disappointing - means we can't sue them for
putting "E Pluribus Unum" on the coinage....

============================
`(2) OFFICIAL BUSINESS- The term `official business' means governmental actions,
          documents, or policies which are enforceable with the full weight
and authority of the Federal
          Government, and includes publications, income tax forms, and
informational materials, but
          does not include--
               `(A) teaching of languages;
               `(B) requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act;
               `(C) actions, documents, or policies necessary for--
                    `(i) national security issues; or
                    `(ii) international relations, trade, or commerce;
               `(D) actions or documents that protect the public health and
safety;
               `(E) actions or documents that facilitate the activities of
the Bureau of the Census in
               compiling any census of population;
               `(F) actions, documents, or policies that are not enforceable
in the United States;
                (G) actions that protect the rights of victims of crimes or
criminal defendants;
               `(H) actions in which the United States has initiated a civil
lawsuit; or
               `(I) using terms of art or phrases from languages other than
English.
===================================================
"These aren't the droids you're looking for."
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From ravage at einstein.ssz.com  Sat Aug  3 04:16:44 1996
From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 19:16:44 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608030957.EAA12053@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 02:38:09 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alan Horowitz <alanh at infi.net>
> Subject: Re: A Libertine Question (fwd)
> 
> > I am not even shure I accept the legal premise of corporations.
>  - Jim Choate
> 
>     This is NOT a drill.

Right, petty harrasment would better describe it.

> This is an actual pop quiz, in which Jim Choate 
> is directed to tell us about the legal premise of incorporation. Jim, do 
> you know anything about what you are talking about. Looking it up is not 
> allowed.

Why should I be prohibited from looking it up? You had to in order to grasp
the concept originaly? Doesn't really matter since I already have done it
with LSD Labs. The concept behind incorporation is to create a commercial
entity whereby the  persons & possessions of the principles can be
protected from most legal actions against the corporation. The fictional
rights given the corporation is intended to create a framework whereby the
existing legal structure can be applied fairly to the business that the
corporation carries out. In the case of a single proprietorship such as
CyberTects it is possible for me to loose everything I own if the right
conditions arise (eg I got sued and lose) in order to pay the judgement.
It is much harder for me to loose monies and physical property being
involved in a incorporated venture.

The reason that I oppose this is the same reason that I oppose the laws that
prevent suing the government without their permission. It creates an
atmosphere of isolation that gives petty non-elected government prols the
feeling of invincibility and isolation. It's just their job, never mind they
are fucking peoples lives over. It is the reason that big companies screw up
time and time again and still manage to survive and do it to us again.

So what do I win other than a hard time?

> P.S.  could you humor me on one tiny little thing?  Can we agree that 
> that the word shall be spelled "sure", not "shure", on this list?  I 
> don't want to trample on your artistic vision or anything like that, but 
> could we just agree on this one tiny little thing

So fucking sue me for learning to read/write phoneticaly. Geesh what a petty
attitude. Do you feel better now? Is your sense of superiority restored?
If the only criticism you have is my spelling then shut the fuck up. If it
makes you feel any better I am very hyper-active and dyslexic as well. But
that is ok, there are people that love me anyway.


                                                Jim Choate






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sat Aug  3 04:35:35 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 19:35:35 +0800
Subject: Why Fingerprints and Key-ID's
Message-ID: <199608030959.CAA23261@toad.com>


At 09:42 PM 8/2/96 -0700, Paul Wittry <ppw3 at everett.com> wrote:
>I understand PGP Open-Signed messages and why they are used. I've 
>read all the FAQ's. I can't seem to figure out why some of us put our 
>Fingerprints and/or Key-ID's at the end of messages.

Even with the PGP Web Of Trust, one of the difficult problems
in cryptography is how to do key distribution - if you want to
talk to Bob, how do you know you've really got _Bob's_ key
instead of a key some imposter Eve _said_ was Bob's key?
Similarly, if you receive a message saying "Bank X will pay
you $Y, signed Bank X Small-Transactions-Teller", 
how do you know it really came from them and wasn't signed
by some fake key that Carol genned up?  
One way is to get some well-known person to sign your key,
or a chain of people which get you to a sig for the key you want.

Another way is to give out your key, often.  That way someone
who gets email from "you", signed by "your" key, can compare
the key with previous keys you've stuck on your email and
business cards, and scream if there's a mismatch.
For this, remember to use the full key fingerprint, not just
the short KeyID which can be duplicated arbitrarily.
This is especially useful for pseudonymous people like
Black Unicorn.

Another reason is just to remind people you've got a PGP key
and make it easier to look up 0x12345678 correctly than
"Joe Anonymous" or "smith".
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sat Aug  3 05:02:53 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 20:02:53 +0800
Subject: strength of 128-bit encryption?
Message-ID: <199608031017.DAA23426@toad.com>


At 11:38 AM 8/2/96 -0400, KDBriggs1 at aol.com wrote:
><< Current export standards allow export of 512-bit RSA for encrypting
> (including key exchange), 1024 bit for signing. >>
>1024-bit for signing?  Do you have a reference for this?  I was under the
>impression that digital signatures were not covered by export restrictions.

I've heard this also, but remember that the export standards are
"whatever specific products we decide you can export" rather than a
formal law you can design to and be sure they'll obey.

The ITAR doesn't cover pure authentication software, only software
capable of preserving privacy through encryption.  Some public-key
signature algorithms only do signature, some only do privacy,
RSA does both.  Thus, especially for software like Netscape which
_does_ have encryption capabilities, they can get away with limiting
the strength of the RSA signature portion because it's part of the
encryption package, and because RSA signing is just encrypting with
your private key instead of your public key.  Someone _could_ use
an RSA signature program to encrypt short data (like keys)
if they wanted to work at it, and while bugs in software are of course
entirely unheard of that would make this easier, there's still the
risk that those Crafty Furriners might disassemble the crypto code
from Netscape and reassemble it with the limits removed.
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From ravage at einstein.ssz.com  Sat Aug  3 05:42:40 1996
From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 20:42:40 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608031110.GAA12116@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 20:12:04 -0700
> From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
> Subject: Re: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
> 
> >True enough, but not the whole story. If a dog or cat is kept well and fed
> >good quality food they live 10+ years. The average life of an animal on the
> >street is between 2-5 years. As to people, we now live around 75-80 years,
> >prior to all these rules and regulations on food and such the average was
> >20-25. If we go back to what you propose you would be dead a long time ago.
> 
> Hardly a proved correlation. A lot of other factors come into play. But
> never mind. No point arguing.

But it is. I suggest you take a look at any social health text and look at
the comparisons between diets of our ancestors, ourselves, and various
cultures around the planet now. In places like Africa the mean age in many
places is still in the early 20's. It is pretty remarkable that places that
at one time had poor or subsistance diets and now have more modern diets
have the average life span growing (even in places like Samoa and the Pima
Indians in Mexico and the S. US where the high-fat diets are causinga marked
increase in coronary problems, interesting article in this months Sci-Am) by
leaps and bounds. Look at the studies which have tracked the English
population over the centuries (they kept good records) and compaired
physical body characteristics with food intake. It has been clearly shown
that as the food got better and more plentiful the lifespan got longer and
the average height got larger. Pretty strong evidence of some correlation
there. I certainly feel strongly enough about it that I would not willingly
eat food except in emergency conditions that I was not shure of the quality
or purity.

Other factors such as what? Disease? If you have a good diet then diseases
like colds and Influenza (for example) are survivable. Without good diets
high in Vitamen C and such you get Rickets and can die from a simple cold in
as little as 3 days. Certainly if you kill off the local fauna you will
increse your lifespan simply because there isn't as much to eat you when you
aren't looking. But this particular threat was most present for the older
and more damaged individuals. During some recent studies (5-6 years) of
Cromagnon Man it was discovered that these folks were covered in broken
bones, arthritic joints, spongy bones, spinabifida, etc. because of the hard
life they lived having to manualy chase down the dinner and kill up close
with rocks and sticks. If you get a chance try to get a peek at some of the
pictures. I remember one of a girl around 16 whose knees and back looked
like they belonged to somebody 80 years old.

If you feel there is no point in arguing (which I don't feel we are doing
since it seems pretty civil, we have widely seperate views) why resond?
That is like asking somebody a person question and then when getting the
answer saying you don't care. Just for the record, I am enjoying the
discourse. But since you are not I won't continue this thread any longer.

> >I personaly find it reassuring that some bunch of knuckle-heads are unable
> >to start a chip making facility like you support. The thought of finding
> >flourine compounds in the local river (where I get my tap water) or simply
> >dumped in the air is a little unsettling. Just because some group of bozo's
> >want to start a business is not sufficient justification for that to be
> >allowed.
> 
> A straw man. There is is no evidence that these startup companies are
> dumping stuff in rivers. Jeesh. The point is that large companies learn how
> to keep large staffs employed filling out paperwork, and they actually have
> come to see it is a good way to keep small companies from forming.

A straw man is where one claims one situation is analgous to another
different situation. This is not a straw man because we are talking about
the same issue but discussing the effect of size on behaviour.

Motorola, AMD, Sematech, etc. have all been fined over the last years for
doing just this to the waters around Austin. When I was working at Austin
Community College over the last 2 1/2 years (prior to going to work for
Tivoli - IBM 4 months ago) my primary responsibility was building a wafer
fab training facility at the Riverside campus from donations from these
folks and many others localy (Applied Material, Varian, etc.) I got to spend
a lot of time in site in areas that normaly are not open to outsiders. If
these big plants have problems regulating their emissions with their budget
and reams of paper just image what a startup hard for cash would do if they
thought they could get away with it "just this one time". I think the way
Crystal Semiconductor (ie fabless) does their design is the way to go for
small startups, simply rent production facilities from these other
companies. I know that, for example, each of the companies here in Austin
are in the process of shutting down older fabs and don't have plans to
upgrade them for at least a couple of years. For somebody like Crystal that
is a god send. It means they can bring products to market for costs way
below what it would have originaly cost, and the larger company gets to
bring in income on equipment it had originaly written off. Sounds like a
win-win to me.

Sorry, but a simple reading of the Austin American Statesman (admittedly a
shitty paper very highly biased) will provide numerous instances of such
dumps over the last few years.

> >It seems to me that many of the folks who recognize downsized workers pleas
> >for their 'right to a job' as so much bunk are at the same time supporting a
> >businesses right to start up. A pretty humorous double standard.
> 
> Not at all comparable.

But they are for the simple reason that we are talking about two entities
which each claim a right to some behaviour. And in this case directly
comparable because a person working is comparable to a business working.
Each provides services and expects a return.

Now the argument goes with persons that a person does not have a inherent
right to income. In other words if a company shuts down and they are laid
off w/o any other work forthcoming it is their fault for not seeking the
appropriate training and such (ie resources) to get another job with a
better future.

Now with business the claim is that they should have some rights comparable
to persons, however they should also be given the right to open their doors
for business even if they can't demonstrate some level of competency and
ability to survive in the market. This is carried to the point that they
should be allowed to operate without regulation or other forms of checks and
balances on their actions.

Now if a real person does not have a right to income if they don't posses
the requisite skills why should a business be allowed to do it without
showing the same sort requisite skills? Why should the local community be
forced to take on the burden of such a venture simply because the business
is a 'virtual' person? It is becoming pretty clear with the change in
welfare (which I support) that our society does not feel an obligation to
support folks for more than 2-3 years on the social dole without some return
on investment. Why should the city be required to provide utilities and
other services without some assurance they will get the public funds (ie
your money and mine) back? We as citizens in Austin certainly don't recieve
stock or other benefit from this other than the jobs it creates for persons
with the requisite skill.

> >I have never heard of anyone being arrested for giving away food, only
> >selling it without a license. I bet the Salvation Army soup kitchen would be
> >worried if this claim were true (they aren't and it ain't).
> 
> Then you weren't reading the thread, which in several posts described this
> very situation. "Food Not Bombs" was giving away soup, chile, and other
> such stuff at a park in Santa Cruz (and maybe elsewhere, e.g., San
> Francisco). They were busted.
> Now do you understand the situation?

I understand that they were arrested for the noise and such and not for the
food. The reason that the permit was refused (wrongly I agree) was that the
HD did not want the people out on the street causing a disturbance.

What they did should be protected if it is in the right place and at the
right time. The right of the poeple to assemble has an important caveat.
If I may,

 
				ARTICLE I. 
 
	Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, 
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of 
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, 
and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 
 
 
If you will notice it says 'peaceably', I do not believe this should include
standing on the corner with a bullhorn screaming at people. A more
appropriate strategy would have been to walk over and give the government
folks food also with little political pamphlets wrapped around their
weenies. They would have most likely eaten their food, looked at the
pamphlet, got a good chuckle and gone back to being good little prols.

As the situation was at fist described is not quite how it was. This bozo
apparently was on the corner with the direct intention of harrassing folks.
This is uncalled for behaviour in such a situation. I agree with the
conclusion that there was an alterior motive other than feeding the
homeless. It sounds more like a podium for a personal tirade.


                                                Jim Choate






From fallenangel at multipro.com  Sat Aug  3 06:01:49 1996
From: fallenangel at multipro.com (Fallen Angel)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 21:01:49 +0800
Subject: problem
Message-ID: <3203D296.2E30@multipro.com>


I unsubscribed from your mailing list so why am I still receiving 
email from it. I No longer wish to receive any more mail, so please stop 
it.

Fallen Angel
fallenangel at multipro.com





From wb8foz at nrk.com  Sat Aug  3 07:02:31 1996
From: wb8foz at nrk.com (David Lesher)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 22:02:31 +0800
Subject: FAA to require transponders on all aircraft passengers
In-Reply-To: <v02120d0bae2873a00df4@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <199608031156.HAA07017@nrk.com>


> 
> According to KCBS, a local radio station, the FAA has closed a long
> anticipated deal with a manufacturer of transponder devices. The goal of
> the system to be deployed nationwide is to match aircraft passengers to
> their luggage and thereby identify unaccompanied luggage on board an
> aircraft.

I thinks they have mixed their marbles....

The FAA is trialing (at the Olympics & Oshkosh) a GPS
rx/transponder; piped into a moving map.

The reason is their existing long-range radar (called ARSR --
Air Route surveillance Radar) is very long in the tooth, & they
have no hope of getting money to replace it. (Their recent 50
mile system procument, the ASR-9, looked like the worst of the
Sgt. York & the V-22...)

Note they spend $3-400E6 annually on radar maint. alone. [I
suspect they have to buy their vacuum tubes from St. Petersburgh,
the last source of them...]

The GPS scheme could replace:
	Primary Radar
	VOR [en route nav. -- lots of ground transmitters {?200?}
	scattered around country]
	ILS [instrument landing system]

It's the only rational thing I've seen the FAA pursue, vice be
forced into, in 20 years....

-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433





From ravage at einstein.ssz.com  Sat Aug  3 07:22:09 1996
From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 22:22:09 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608031145.GAA12155@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 23:36:37 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort at crl.com>
> Subject: Re: A Libertine Question (fwd)
> On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Jim Choate's dog wrote:
> 
> > Really? Then would you mind explaining why costs rise over time
> > instead of going down?
> 
> Gladly. Prices rise over time because of inflation of the money 
> supply.  While it is possible for private actors to temporarily
> inflate the money supply (e.g., extension of credit by banks),
> only the government can increase the money supply indefinitely.  
> Inflation is the most insidious form of "taxation."  It steals
> silently and punishes the savings in favor of consumption.

Then why didn't the costs rise at the same rate as the general inflation
rate instead of tens of times faster? If the cost of airline tickets matched
the rise in milk then my gallon of milk would cost over $10 instead of the
$2 (this x5 factor I got from a news show the other nite, I have not
verified it) it costs now (and it has remained pretty constant over the last
10 years or so arguing that something has been balancing that inflation rate).
Since the inflation rate on a dollar is flat across the board in our economy
simple inflation does not account for this rise in prices in a niche market.
I guess it could be in the case of airlines because they have had to increase
the fairs to pay for the increase in aircraft loss due to crashes and fatigue
(airlines are not replacing their aircraft as fast now as they did in the
regulation days, one of the reasons Beoing and other commercial companies
are having such a hard time.) over the last few years as well as the rise in
the price of their insurance premiums since deregulation to compensate for
the increased payouts both due to increased frequency of crashes since
deregulation and the increase in the payouts to the victims and their families.
I would guess that insurance companies don't like paying for a multi-million
dollar plane unless they have to. They are in the business of not paying off
after all.

> > Insurance has become involved in the medical industry, what
> > happened? The cost has gone through the roof. The airplane
> > industry was deregulated in the late 70's, what happened? The
> > price of a ticket went up...yada yada yada.
> 
> Technically, Jim's logical fallacy is called /post hoc, ergo 
> propter hoc/, after this, therefore on account of this.

If it was a single case I would agree, the reason that I put several
unconnected fields which share one thing, the loss of government regulation.
What we are looking at is a inflation rate for unregulated commodities
like milk (for example) and compare them to the difference in operating
costs between a regulated versus a unregulated role. It is clear that with
a increase of x5 in this area and something like < x2 in the commodities
area that something is at play here other than pure inflation.

> > If this is so then by your own argument, business are operated
> > by people therefor they are people...
> 
> Nope, that's not what I said.  This fallacy is called a "straw
> man."  It is a weak or mistated opposing argument set up by a 
> politician or debator, etc., in order that he may attack it and
> gain an easy, showy victory.

A straw man is where I take one situation and compare it to another. I am
taking your supposition and applying it to a economic model that fits both
cases. Both businesses and individuals survive by trading their outgoing
products for incoming products. The issue is whether the rules that apply to
one should apply to another. If you look at the gross cash flow between a
business and a individual they are identical. Since we are talking about
gross cash flow in both cases it does not qualify for straw man status.

> > Is your contention that because I own and
> > operate a computer it should be given rights?
> 
> Nope.  Whatever gave you that idea?

Your contention was that a business should enjoy some of the same rights
that a person does because it was owned and operated by a person or persons.
Since I own and operate my computer and it is an inanimate object like the
system of rules and procedures used by a business they are comparable in
this case, as is comparison to any other inanimate object. The key points
here are that people have rights and your contention that because businesses
are owned and operated by people they should have rights as well. My goal is
to determine your litmus test (if you will) as to how you determine that a
business is eligible for such right but a automobile is not. Simply saying
they are different is not sufficient in this case.

> > > > Businesses are a system of rules and procedures...
> > > 
> > > Made and enforced by PEOPLE.  Jim is begging the question.
> > 
> > Which question would that be? "Should businesses be considered
> > people with the same rights and priviliges?"
> 
> Nope.  You just don't get it, do you?

I get it, it just doesn't make sense when looked at the way you are looking
at because you have still failed to elucidate your litmus test. Obviously it
is more complicated than simple ownership or else anything owned would
qualify. I am simply requesting clarification of the remainder of the test.
It is hard to evaluate a theory if you don't have access to the whole thing.
Sorta similar to analyzing a crypto algorithm via public peer revue.
Generaly considered a bad thing.


                                             Jim Choate








From matts at cyberpass.net  Sat Aug  3 07:34:58 1996
From: matts at cyberpass.net (Matts Kallioniemi)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 22:34:58 +0800
Subject: List for crypto minus political rubbish
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960803123859.0034a45c@cyberpass.net>


At 15:25 1996-08-02 -0500, W.K. Woelbeling wrote:
>I am looking for a source of info on crypto.  While this list is of interest
>to (many) people, I find that the amount of political ranting outweighs any
>nuggets of information concerning cryptography.  Pointers?
>
>Bill

Just about everything on cryptography has already been said far too many
times. Just read Applied Cryptography and be done with it. What remains to
discuss is politics, psychology and marketing. How do you get people to use
the cryptography that already exists and how will the authorities react when
people do use it.

Matts






From jya at pipeline.com  Sat Aug  3 08:20:46 1996
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 23:20:46 +0800
Subject: List for crypto minus political rubbish
Message-ID: <199608031334.NAA10748@pipe3.t1.usa.pipeline.com>


On Aug 03, 1996 14:38:59, 'Matts Kallioniemi <matts at cyberpass.net>' wrote: 
 
>Just about everything on cryptography has already been said far too many
times.  
>Just read Applied Cryptography and be done with it. What remains to
discuss is  
>politics, psychology and marketing. How do you get people to use the  
>cryptography that already exists and how will the authorities react when
people  
>do use it. 
 
 
An exemplary air-clearing for a smoke-filled agenda; and two challenging
questions which may pose a High Noon amongst munitions-slingers. Bravo,
Matts, for cryptic concision. 
 
 
 





From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sat Aug  3 08:36:14 1996
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 23:36:14 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960803005947.1359E-100000@larry.infi.net>
Message-ID: <qq43RD13w165w@bwalk.dm.com>


Alan Horowitz <alanh at infi.net> writes:
> Corporations are state-created persons [legal definition of "person", not
> colloquial vernacular]. They have some privileges which have surface
> resmblence to the rights of natural people. For example, they can "have
> standing" in a court to initiate a legal proceeding - in their own name,
> not that of an agent or employee or trustee.

Corporations could also own property at the time when many "real" persons
could not. Corporations could also be granted monopoly rights by the state,
like an exclusive right to trade with a certain region.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





From declan at eff.org  Sat Aug  3 08:36:48 1996
From: declan at eff.org (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 23:36:48 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030750.CAA11930@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960803063907.28773A-100000@eff.org>


On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Jim Choate wrote:

> 
> It isn't my interpretation. Perhaps you should have paid better attention in
> class. These issues have never been tested in a court of law in the US in
> regards to computer networks and their special nature.

[...]

> That is a two edged sword. Where did you get your law degree? My lawyers
> both got theirs at UT Austin Law School. Both are federal lawyers and both
> have argued before the Supreme and are currently allowed to argue before the
> Supremes.


I've deleted most of Jim's meanderings above, mostly because I'm 
fascinated by the credentialism in the graf above.

He implies, without directly saying so, that "his lawyers" have weighed 
in on this dispute and agree with him. Of course this is hardly likely; 
he advances no coherent legal theory. (Except the "public forum" 
argument, which might apply to Usenet, but not cypherpunks.)

This is attempted proof by credentalism. I call him on it. 

Okay, Jim, what _do_ your lawyers say on this? Have you asked them? I,
too, have an attorney, a civil liberties specialist and a graduate from
Princeton law. So what? 

-Declan



// declan at eff.org // I do not represent the EFF // declan at well.com //






From corbet at stout.atd.ucar.edu  Sat Aug  3 09:12:44 1996
From: corbet at stout.atd.ucar.edu (Jonathan Corbet)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 00:12:44 +0800
Subject: AP story: Police look for Olympic bombing Internet link.
In-Reply-To: <v03007803ae2846cb0c98@[17.202.12.102]>
Message-ID: <199608031426.IAA25403@atd.atd.ucar.EDU>


> Bomb-making instructions
> available through the global computer network have contributed to an
> increase in bombings in the United States, authorities say.

My local paper (a Knight-Ridder rag) printed this story -- unquestioned --
as well.  Needless to say, I think a statement like this needs to be
responded to.  Letters to the editor, folks!  Wouldn't it be nice to have a
press that did a little more than print what the "authorities" have to say?

(This, of course, is the same paper that printed the recipe for a pipe bomb
on the front page after the explosion in Atlanta.  They included the
Elmer's glue and the all-important nails for best lethal effect -- you
might want to amend your sig again, Tim...:-)

Meanwhile, I have a question: as far as I know, no bombing has actually
been tied to the Internet in any way.  Does anybody know otherwise?  Even
though it's not really relevant to the principles of the debate here, it
seems worth pointing out.

jon





From declan at eff.org  Sat Aug  3 09:39:57 1996
From: declan at eff.org (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 00:39:57 +0800
Subject: problem
In-Reply-To: <3203D296.2E30@multipro.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960803064650.28773B-100000@eff.org>


I received a similar message in private email from the same person.

Obviously, he/she didn't know how to 'unsubscrive' properly. Hint: try 
email to majordomo at toad.com.

-Declan


On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Fallen Angel wrote:

> I unsubscribed from your mailing list so why am I still receiving 
> email from it. I No longer wish to receive any more mail, so please stop 
> it.
> 
> Fallen Angel
> fallenangel at multipro.com
> 


// declan at eff.org // I do not represent the EFF // declan at well.com //







From joelm at eskimo.com  Sat Aug  3 09:53:50 1996
From: joelm at eskimo.com (Joel McNamara)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 00:53:50 +0800
Subject: FAA to require transponders on all aircraft passengers
Message-ID: <199608031349.GAA18917@mail.eskimo.com>


This does seem to be real.  CNet has a few more details:

http://www.cnet.com/Content/News/Files/0,16,2031,00.html

At 08:28 PM 8/2/96 -0700, you wrote:
>According to KCBS, a local radio station, the FAA has closed a long
>anticipated deal with a manufacturer of transponder devices. The goal of
>the system to be deployed nationwide is to match aircraft passengers to
>their luggage and thereby identify unaccompanied luggage on board an
>aircraft.
>
>Transponders will be affixed to all items of luggage and all passengers. If
>the system discovers a transponder on the luggage in the cargo hold without
>the corresponding transponder on the passenger on board, an alarm will
>sound. I am not making this up.
>
>As many of you know, I have long predicted subcutaneous transponders to
>become widely deployed in the near future. First for child identification
>and monitoring of criminals, then, as the children grow up, as universal
>ID, driver license, proof of eligibility for employment, PIN substitute,
>etc.
>
>Today, we moved a step closer to this future.
>
>[Note that the transponders will have to be affixed to the passenger. An
>example would be a hospital style bracelet that stops working when removed.
>Why embedding the transponder in a hand carried item, such as a card, will
>not work is left as an exercise to the reader. Even an affixed device does
>not provide perfect security. You'd really have to embed the transponder in
>the body at an early age to make removal nearly impossible.]
>
>
>
>-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
>   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
>   Vote Harry Browne for President.
>
>
>
>






From wb8foz at nrk.com  Sat Aug  3 10:13:04 1996
From: wb8foz at nrk.com (David Lesher)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 01:13:04 +0800
Subject: FAA to require transponders on all aircraft passengers
In-Reply-To: <v02120d1cae291f445d20@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <199608031521.LAA07776@nrk.com>


> >I thinks they have mixed their marbles....

I get enlightened:
> 
>      Micron
>      Communications intends to utilize remote intelligent
>      communications (RIC) technology developed for its MicroStamp
{}
>      small-outline integrated circuit (SOIC) plastic package. Micron
>      Communications believes that the MicroStamp integrated circuit is
>      the first wireless communications technology to integrate a
>      single-chip CMOS solution, which includes a direct sequence spread
>      spectrum (DSSS) microwave-frequency radio operating at 2.45GHz, a
>      microcontroller, and low-power static random access memory (SRAM).
>      It also contains a synchronous serial port allowing additional
>      memory expansion.


They are going to hang one of these on EVERY bag?

At what per-unit cost? 

It's all the airlines can do to get barcode labels on each piece
that geos by, much less even a credit-card-sized gadget. And how
many will they lose???

THEN think of the RFI problems.....


-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433





From shamrock at netcom.com  Sat Aug  3 10:16:37 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 01:16:37 +0800
Subject: FAA to require transponders on all aircraft passengers
Message-ID: <v02120d1cae291f445d20@[192.0.2.1]>


At 7:56 8/3/96, David Lesher wrote:
[Quoting Lucky]
>> According to KCBS, a local radio station, the FAA has closed a long
>> anticipated deal with a manufacturer of transponder devices. The goal of
>> the system to be deployed nationwide is to match aircraft passengers to
>> their luggage and thereby identify unaccompanied luggage on board an
>> aircraft.
>
>I thinks they have mixed their marbles....

Nope. This from Micron's website:

Editorial Contact:

     Julie Nash, Micron Technology, (208) 368-4400
     Web Site URL http://www.micron.com
     Fax-on-demand: 800-239-0337

     FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

     MICRON COMMUNICATIONS, INC., ANNOUNCES AGREEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL
     AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

     Boise, Idaho, August 2, 1996 - Micron Communications, Inc., today
     announced a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRDA)
     with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to develop a model
     Positive Passenger Baggage Matching (PPBM) system. The objective
     of this PPBM system is to automatically recognize when baggage has
     been placed on an aircraft without an associated passenger. Micron
     Communications intends to utilize remote intelligent
     communications (RIC) technology developed for its MicroStamp�
     family of products to design a security system which will enhance
     current systems and provide efficient tracking of passengers and
     baggage.

     "Micron Communications is proud to be associated with products
     that are designed to help increase the safety of airline travel,
     while providing operational benefits to the industry and
     increasing the convenience to the traveler," said John R. Tuttle,
     Chairman and President of Micron Communications, Inc. "Our
     experience in microelectronics and systems design should enable us
     to develop systems that use tomorrow's technology in finding
     solutions to these important problems."

     "Once again, an Idaho company is breaking new ground," Senator
     Larry Craig said. "As chairman of the Congressional-White House
     Task Force on Terrorism, its exciting to see this kind of
     high-tech advancement in security being developed here at home by
     Micron Communications, Inc. The Positive Passenger Baggage
     Matching system is exactly the kind of common-sense answer we are
     looking for to improve airline safety and give us all greater
     comfort when we fly in the future, " Craig continued.

     Current MicroStamp-based products include the MicroStamp credit
     card-sized device and the MicroStamp Engine� in a 20-pin,
     small-outline integrated circuit (SOIC) plastic package. Micron
     Communications believes that the MicroStamp integrated circuit is
     the first wireless communications technology to integrate a
     single-chip CMOS solution, which includes a direct sequence spread
     spectrum (DSSS) microwave-frequency radio operating at 2.45GHz, a
     microcontroller, and low-power static random access memory (SRAM).
     It also contains a synchronous serial port allowing additional
     memory expansion.

     RIC units are different from RFID tags because they have a central
     processing unit (CPU), memory and microwave on board. This
     combination allows RIC units to perform more applications than
     low-performance RFID tags that use older technology at lower
     frequencies. MicroStamp RIC units are more powerful and more
     flexible than RFID units. They are also smaller and cost less than
     other RIC units of comparable performance.

     Systems integrators, original equipment manufacturers or end users
     interested in the MicroStamp family of products should contact
     Micron Communications Customer Service department, 1-888-MSTAMP1,
     (888-678-2671).

     Micron Communications, Inc., is a subsidiary of Micron Technology,
     Inc., whose common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange,
     Inc. (NYSE) under the symbol MU.

     MicroStamp and MicroStamp Engine are trademarks of Micron
     Communications, Inc.


-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From deviant at pooh-corner.com  Sat Aug  3 10:57:04 1996
From: deviant at pooh-corner.com (The Deviant)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 01:57:04 +0800
Subject: algorithms for verifying U.S. IP address ...
In-Reply-To: <199608011606.JAA23574@ohio.chromatic.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.94.960803160517.150A-100000@switch.sp.org>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Ernest Hua wrote:

> Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 09:06:40 -0700
> From: Ernest Hua <hua at chromatic.com>
> To: cypherpunks at toad.com
> Cc: hua at chromatic.com
> Subject: algorithms for verifying U.S. IP address ...
> 
> How does one verify that an IP address is coming from a U.S. site?
> How do most FTP site (e.g. those which carry crypto) determine the
> origins of a connection?
> 
> It seems to me that if the NSA/DoS is serious about keeping crypto
> strong for U.S. internal use, then they would help establish a
> method for U.S.-only interchange of this sort of software.  It is
> clear, however, that they do NOT have an interest in helping with
> this identification effort as it will thwart their own efforts at
> tapping U.S. (er ... oh gee ... they're NOT suppose to do that,
> right?  okay, they must not be doing it then ...)
> 
> Ern
> 

You might want to look around on www.internic.net/ftp.internic.net...
they have a set of rules that define this.

 --Deviant
Try `stty 0' -- it works much better.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBMgN48DAJap8fyDMVAQEZ0gf/S0waHw/HaXSM2J5l0gQ8DWkcueTTtfHz
yZb8827kUh9eX6eNOq4ZITc9H563WLW0+KBjM7Uxy6Bijz3Hyq/mS3APLaBMysHo
zzRjFhSfCoBO1Jx7e6XrOHUb3wZQWw6TbvyyCypB14WA08NcvDlXFGanGhBM0fZM
Y+HwGpWY+uaCtR16RaDh/oyY0YNu7I0gOOrh4KuyNRE6Y+if82ABzTfNmZcp93Ob
s8mPrZFPKhsc+Mzu3nbmCmnSYTWCOLlWy58DNRzRHt7RlqAPlSDBAscncyJ/VDYz
nfAGBYiAUXVFm1owaEO0zRFKeQXsWQgJJwlVqfqXtN+cQSlDVH4MWQ==
=9cEF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com  Sat Aug  3 10:57:07 1996
From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 01:57:07 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608031527.KAA12332@einstein>



Forwarded message:

> Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 06:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Declan McCullagh <declan at eff.org>
> Subject: Re: Tolerance (fwd)

> > 
> > It isn't my interpretation. Perhaps you should have paid better attention in
> > class. These issues have never been tested in a court of law in the US in
> > regards to computer networks and their special nature.

> 
> [...]
> 
> > That is a two edged sword. Where did you get your law degree? My lawyers
> > both got theirs at UT Austin Law School. Both are federal lawyers and both
> > have argued before the Supreme and are currently allowed to argue before the
> > Supremes.
> 
> 
> I've deleted most of Jim's meanderings above, mostly because I'm 
> fascinated by the credentialism in the graf above.

What credentials mine or the lawyers?

> He implies, without directly saying so, that "his lawyers" have weighed 
> in on this dispute and agree with him.

Hmmm, I looked back over this and I fail to see where this interpretation
can be taken. Perhaps you as well read more than is on the page. If you
would like to address specific issues then perhaps there would be some basis
for dialog.

> Of course this is hardly likely; 
> he advances no coherent legal theory. (Except the "public forum" 
> argument, which might apply to Usenet, but not cypherpunks.)

I have advanced several coherent theories. My primary one being that if the
9th and 10th are included in Constitutional interpretation many of the
issues, such as crypto and gun ownership, become trivial issues to resolve.
As to if it applies to cpunks and other similar 'private' resources, we will
just see how the court cases fall down the road.

> This is attempted proof by credentalism. I call him on it. 

Not any more than the original comments I was responding to. Anyway, what is
yoru credentials to 'call' me on it? While it may be true that you don't
agree with my views that hardly carries the weight to dismiss those views
out of hand. You sir, are not the legal benchmark in this country. I am
simply trying to change something I see as unjust.

> Okay, Jim, what _do_ your lawyers say on this? Have you asked them? I,
> too, have an attorney, a civil liberties specialist and a graduate from
> Princeton law. So what? 

Yes, I have asked them, both. They both agree that the issues that I raise
have NOT been tested in a court of law in this country (or any other) and
that it is possible that the inclusion of the 9th and 10th in a civil liberties case
could prove quite unsettling.  They have also warned me that quite a bit of
current legal precedence is in fact against my views. I accept this, just as
the folks who fought for womens suffrage or the end to slavery fought
against societies which enacted laws and policies that while accepted by the
vast majority as the status quo were never the less wrong. If my views were
the commen standard we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first
place.









From snow at smoke.suba.com  Sat Aug  3 10:58:26 1996
From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 01:58:26 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
In-Reply-To: <v02120d08ae2866db0ddc@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960803102345.928E-100000@smoke.suba.com>


On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Lucky Green wrote:
> At 8:50 8/2/96, Paul J. Bell wrote:
> >i, for one, and perhaps others on the list as well, would be interested in
> >hearing
> >what you mean when you say, "At&t, Microsoft, etc) who are ripping people
> >off on a
> >daily basis".
> >for example, in what way is AT&T ripping people off? and what about
> >microsoft?
> Its up to you what you call it, but here is an interesting example:
> An international phone call costs about 2 cents/min to produce. The average
> rate paid for by the consumer is 62 cents. That's means the carriers mark
> up this particular product by an amazing 3000%.
> Can you name another business that has comparable mark-ups?

     Drug (LSD) dealers.

Petro, Christopher C.
petro at suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow at smoke.suba.com






From sparks at bah.com  Sat Aug  3 11:02:22 1996
From: sparks at bah.com (Charley Sparks)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 02:02:22 +0800
Subject: List for crypto minus political rubbish
Message-ID: <v02140b04ad1058e92338@[156.80.2.159]>


<rant>
Personally, I enjoy some of the rantings, although I would like a forum for
new users to get some help and guidance.. perhaps they can scan my ISP to
see if I have accessed some bomb making info ...
</rant>


>Status: U
>Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 13:34:10 GMT
>To: Matts Kallioniemi <matts at cyberpass.net>
>Subject: Re: List for crypto minus political rubbish
>From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
>Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com
>X-PipeUser: jya
>X-PipeHub: pipeline.com
>X-PipeGCOS: (John Young)
>Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com
>Precedence: bulk
>
>On Aug 03, 1996 14:38:59, 'Matts Kallioniemi <matts at cyberpass.net>' wrote:
>
>>Just about everything on cryptography has already been said far too many
>times.
>>Just read Applied Cryptography and be done with it. What remains to
>discuss is
>>politics, psychology and marketing. How do you get people to use the
>>cryptography that already exists and how will the authorities react when
>people
>>do use it.
>
>
>An exemplary air-clearing for a smoke-filled agenda; and two challenging
>questions which may pose a High Noon amongst munitions-slingers. Bravo,
>Matts, for cryptic concision.
>
>
>
>







From snow at smoke.suba.com  Sat Aug  3 11:13:38 1996
From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 02:13:38 +0800
Subject: "adjust your attitude with their billy club" (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030343.WAA11512@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960803103512.928G-100000@smoke.suba.com>


On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Jim Choate wrote:
> fast. We are the ones your mother warned you about. Were pissed off enough
> that we aren't going to use violence and such, we intend to use your own
> system of rules against you.

     As a member of the same genereation I would like to add that the use 
of violence is not completely ruled out either.  


Petro, Christopher C.
petro at suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow at smoke.suba.com






From snow at smoke.suba.com  Sat Aug  3 11:13:42 1996
From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 02:13:42 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030308.WAA11470@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960803102059.928D-100000@smoke.suba.com>


On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Jim Choate wrote:
> built it and occupy it. My dog has a better argument for civil rights than
> any business, it breaths and shits. Would you seriously give my dog a vote?
> I shure won't, and I won't support any business with rights.

     I bet your dog would vote better than a lot of people I know. 

Petro, Christopher C.
petro at suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow at smoke.suba.com






From clopez at nayar.uan.mx  Sat Aug  3 11:30:20 1996
From: clopez at nayar.uan.mx (Carlos L. Mariscal)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 02:30:20 +0800
Subject: [off-topic] roving wiretaps
In-Reply-To: <rogervif183vx.fsf@sturgeon.coelacanth.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960803093240.20572A-100000@nayar.uan.mx>



> >>>>> Cerridwyn Llewyellyn <ceridwyn at wolfenet.com> writes:
> 
>   >> One should understand that monitoring cellular traffic is *much*
>   >> more difficult than tapping a conventional phone...
> 
>   > I'd have to disagree on that point.  Monitoring cellular traffic
>   > requires nothing more than a cellular phone, and some software
>   > which enables you to follow calls through the cells, for a total
>   > cost of about $500...
> 

	So, it is MUCH more difficult, or at least more expensive; anyone 
can get a beige box for less than US $10, right? And clipping it onto 
MaBell boxes takes less of a brain than programming or modifying a 
scanner or a cellular phone.   :)

    __       
    ||     
   ====         'If you can dream of it
   |  |__       then you can manage it'
   |  |-.\     
   |__|  \\         clopez at nayar.uan.mx
    ||   ||         
  ======__|     
 ________||__   
/____________\   Carlos L. Mariscal
	





From tcmay at got.net  Sat Aug  3 11:31:15 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 02:31:15 +0800
Subject: AP story: Police look for Olympic bombing Internet link.
Message-ID: <ae28cf25000210049ea4@[205.199.118.202]>


At 2:26 PM 8/3/96, Jonathan Corbet wrote:

>My local paper (a Knight-Ridder rag) printed this story -- unquestioned --
>as well.  Needless to say, I think a statement like this needs to be
>responded to.  Letters to the editor, folks!  Wouldn't it be nice to have a
>press that did a little more than print what the "authorities" have to say?
...
>Meanwhile, I have a question: as far as I know, no bombing has actually
>been tied to the Internet in any way.  Does anybody know otherwise?  Even
>though it's not really relevant to the principles of the debate here, it
>seems worth pointing out.

But, as I keep saying, this is not a very useful argument. Given that
bomb-makers get their information somewhere (encyclopedia articles, books,
Loompanics catalogs, etc.) and given that the Web is beginning to seriously
compete with these traditional sources, I have no doubts that the Net will
sooner rather than later be implicated in a bombing.

If one makes the arguments the the Net should not be regulated because it
has not been used to supply information for a crime, then what happens when
the Net *is* implicated? That particular argument then crumbles.

I prefer to argue it this way: "Sure, the Net could be used for information
on bombs. So could encyclopedias, books, "Time" and "Newsweek," and CNN. So
what? We don't throw out the First Amendment and our belief that people can
read and write what they want just because a few bombers may gain
knowledge. We don't shut down chemistry departments because bombers learn
about chemistry. And so on."

This is, I think, a more lasting and persuasive argument.

--Tim May

HOW TO MAKE A PIPE BOMB:
"Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
Do not pack the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it
settle.  You want the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need
dry, fine powder sitting loose in a very rigid container." (more
information at http://sdcc13.ucsd.edu/~m1lopez/pipe.html, or by using
search engines)







From master at internexus.net  Sat Aug  3 11:46:33 1996
From: master at internexus.net (Laszlo Vecsey)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 02:46:33 +0800
Subject: Anonymous Message Broadcast
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.92.960803125401.4269B-100000@micro.internexus.net>


Has anyone implemented a simple anonymous chat system (an anonymous irc)
using the technique described in Applied Cryptography 2nd edition? I'm
speaking of the Anonymous Message Broadcast documented in section 6.3, it
begins on page 137.

Can the same system be implemented using base256 (unsigned char, 8bit ASCII)
instead of the simple on/off binary method that is described in the
explanation? How would it differ.

Thanks.

(define(RSA m e n)(list->string(u(r(s(string->list m))e n))))(define(u a)(if(>
a 0)(cons(integer->char(modulo a 256))(u(quotient a 256)))'()))(define(s a)(if
(null? a)0(+(char->integer(car a))(* 256(s(cdr a))))))(define(r a x n)(cond((=
0 x)1)((even? x)(modulo(expt(r a(/ x 2)n)2)n))(#t(modulo(* a(r a(1- x)n))n))))






From tcmay at got.net  Sat Aug  3 11:52:24 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 02:52:24 +0800
Subject: FAA to require transponders on all aircraft passengers
Message-ID: <ae28d1fd0102100449d6@[205.199.118.202]>


At 3:21 PM 8/3/96, David Lesher wrote:

>They are going to hang one of these on EVERY bag?
>
>At what per-unit cost?
>
>It's all the airlines can do to get barcode labels on each piece
>that geos by, much less even a credit-card-sized gadget. And how
>many will they lose???
>
>THEN think of the RFI problems.....

It turns out that I'm one of the early investors in a start-up company
developing a very similar product, albeit (we hope) with some technological
advantages. Lucky Green, for one, has met the principals in this company
and can confirm what I'm saying.

(I began working with them, and investing, several years ago. It was partly
the long-term implications of their ideas which triggered my proposal a few
years back: the "position escrow system." Under position escrow,
citizen-units would voluntarily escrow their positions for access by
authorized law enforcement officers, dietary compliance agents, social
workers, and other interested officials. The system is voluntary, as key
escrow is voluntary, in that it only applies when people leave their houses
and use the public streets; they are of course free not to leave their
houses, and hence not to voluntarily escrow their movements.)

I heard about the Micron-FAA deal on CNN, and went to the Micron Web site
for details. It's a spread-spectrum system, so it may well work in a
luggage environment (though perhaps not as well as the units planned by the
company I'm an investor in).

The "every bag" point is feasible, though I would assume conventional
luggage tags would work adequately. "Per-unit" costs could be low
enough....these units will be reused many times, after all.

The RFI problems are actually the least of the concerns, given the "code
space" technology which is possible. (That is, tens of thousands of
transponders can share the same RF spectrum in a local environment by
allocation of frequencies or, even better, by using code space
allocation...there are some close parallels with cryptography, of course,
as there are in communications technology and spread-spectrum technology in
general.)

Personally, I'm not convinced that the Micron-FAA deal with accomplish
much, but the authorities are rushing to "do something," so struggling
Micron may get some of the largesse.

(Besides, "bag escrow" will allow other agencies--such as DEA--to sniff
bags for traces of cocaine residue and then automatically issue arrest
orders for the citizen-unit associated with the bag. The surveillance state
needs technology like this.)

--Tim May

HOW TO MAKE A PIPE BOMB:
"Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
Do not pack the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it
settle.  You want the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need
dry, fine powder sitting loose in a very rigid container." (more
information at http://sdcc13.ucsd.edu/~m1lopez/pipe.html, or by using
search engines)







From drosoff at ARC.unm.EDU  Sat Aug  3 12:05:41 1996
From: drosoff at ARC.unm.EDU (David Rosoff)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 03:05:41 +0800
Subject: Information gathering by news servers
Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19960803171637.3b574292@arc.unm.edu>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 12.33 PM 8/2/96 -0400, Scott McGuire wrote:
>How much information about what someone reads can be gathered
>by a news server?  Is there an anonymous way to read a public
>news server, or would a server have to be set up intentionally
>to allow anonymous reading?

You could use the Anonymizer (http://www.anonymizer.com/) in
combination with a Web Usenet archive: Dejanews, for example.
(http://www.dejanews.com/).

===============================================================================
David Rosoff (nihongo ga sukoshi dekiru)  --------------->  drosoff at arc.unm.edu
PGP public key 0xD37692F9 -----> finger drosoff at acoma.arc.unm.edu or keyservers
0xD37692F9  Key fingerprint =  25 7D AA 01 85 41 43 89  50 5A 33 76 F1 F1 99 67
Do you know who's reading your email? ---> http://www.arc.unm.edu/~drosoff/pgp/
Is it a forgery? --- I have PGP signed all email and news posts since May 1996.
===============================================================================
"Relax. It's not a real alarm. They can't crack _Pentagon_ codes. Can they?" :p

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgOHcBguzHDTdpL5AQE2QAQArHuoLVA0dOJ+LddI2TumYvD/vaFrWBmI
LQ3pDNlDRHdyY7u1RouVKkJbYVTvxNZCKQyaWYMgcA38eZl52V65DFq+N11Jhwm4
egCBlOlezDjPOeTk/nK25Ojavdb8ABtqGXGRFf4GwfFBQPq2kApzi8MewYEYeCJG
HaofCy5FDWU=
=bG1v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From minow at apple.com  Sat Aug  3 12:09:27 1996
From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 03:09:27 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
In-Reply-To: <v02120d08ae2866db0ddc@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <v03007801ae2933d82e72@[17.219.102.152]>


Lucky Green opines:
>
>An international phone call costs about 2 cents/min to produce. The average
>rate paid for by the consumer is 62 cents. That's means the carriers mark
>up this particular product by an amazing 3000%.
>
>Can you name another business that has comparable mark-ups?
>

Well, software comes to mind.

In the international telephone case, you are paying 2 cents for the
call, and 60 cents for being able to place the call when you want to.

It's time for a story:

Once upon a time, Westinghouse's chief turbine engineer was called
to a power plant to diagnose a problem. He walked around the turbine
for a while, listened to it, thought for a bit, then took out a piece
of chalk and drew an X on the housing. "There is a bad bearing here;
replace it."

Westinghouse sent a bill for $10,000 for the diagnosis.

The power plant objected to the sum and asked for an itemized invoice.

Westinghouse sent: $0.05 for the chalk, $9999.95 for knowing where
to put the chalk.

Martin.







From mclow at owl.csusm.edu  Sat Aug  3 12:20:05 1996
From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 03:20:05 +0800
Subject: FYI: CTST Conference Proceedings
Message-ID: <v03007800ae2446adf096@[207.67.246.99]>


I received thei week an advertisment for the 1996 CardTech/SecureTech conference proceedings.
These people have a web site at <http://www.ctst.com>, but it's really lame. 
(It doesn't contain this table of contents, for example)


Since I am not building/using/designing smart card technology right now, I won't be buying it.
However, the some of the titles caught my eye:

Does anyone have access to this kind of stuff, and would they be willing to post a summary?

Here's a (partial) TOC:

Volume 1 - Technology

Changing the face of Money
    The Legislature's Perspective on the Future of Money
    Legal and Regulatory Challenges on the Development of Digital Money
    Privacy and American Business

Introduction to Card and Identification Technology
...

Advanced Identification Technology Workshop
    ...
    Advances in Signature Verification
    A Proposed Standard for Biometric Decidability
    New Imaging Technology Enables Non-intrusive Credit Card Fraud Prevention
    Secure Private Key Generation using a Finderprint
    Photo-ID Encryption and Pattern Recognition for Counterfeit Resistance
   The Voice Password(tm) Chip Low-Cost Biometric Security
   A Direct Fingerprint Reader

Smart Card Technology Seminar
...

Magnetic Stripe Card Technology Seminar
...

Biometric Technology Seminar
...

Optical Memory Card Technology Seminar
...

RFID Technology Seminar
...

PC Card Technology Seminar
...

2-D Bar Code Technology Seminar
...


Volume 2 -- Applications

Stored Value Card Applications Seminar
...

Telecommunications Applications Seminar
...

Government Applications Seminar
    Go Beyond Security -- Build in Privacy: One Does Not Equal The Other
    ...
    A Citizen Card for Europe
    The Spanish Social Security Card Project (TASS)
    Government Cards and the Information Age

Information Security Applications Seminar
...

Physical Security Applications Seminar
...

Financial Applications Seminar
...

Retail & Loyalty Applications Seminar
...

Large Scale Identifications Seminar
    What's New in Licensing and Department Motor Vehicles Applications
    Welfare ID at the Point of Transactions Using Fingerprints & 2D Bar Codes
    INS Card Production Strategies and Initiaitives
    Counterfeiting of Cards
    Korean IC Card Market and Trends of Development and Investment
    Campus-Wide CardIssuance at the State University of New York
    National ID Programs Around the World
    Trends in National ID Programs
    The Future of Large Scale Identification Applications


Health Care Applications Seminar
...

Transportation Applications Seminar
...

University Applications Seminar
...

-- Marshall

Marshall Clow     Aladdin Systems   <mailto:mclow at mailhost2.csusm.edu>

"We're not gonna take it/Never did and never will
We're not gonna take it/Gonna break it, gonna shake it,
let's forget it better still" -- The Who, "Tommy"







From tcmay at got.net  Sat Aug  3 12:20:16 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 03:20:16 +0800
Subject: TrustBucks
Message-ID: <ae28d609020210043d2d@[205.199.118.202]>


At 6:11 AM 8/2/96, TrustBuckFella wrote:
>An alternative model of electronic money.
>
>Every model of electronic money I know of except one retains some degree
>of centralization. There is always a central "mint", usually a bank. If
>you can't find a bank that acts the way you want, you're SOL. And the
>only thing that enforces non-abuse (inflation, etc) by the bank is the
>equivalence of electronic money to some form of "real" money. The sole
>exception is Digicash. Unfortunately, Digicash has no restraint on
                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>infinite spending-into-debt.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You want to elaborate on this contention?

If Alice transfers Digicash-type money to Bob, this is because Alice either
bought the DC-money someplace, or already had it, or otherwise arranged
with a bank to make the transaction. Maybe the bank "loaned" her money she
didn't already have, but this is a completely separable issue from the form
of DC-money.

So what is this "restraint on infinite spending-into-debt"? Gullible
lenders can always lend her vast amounts of money which she may never
repay, but this is fully separable from what transfer protocol she uses to
"spend" this loaned money.

If, on the other hand, your point is something about inflation, this is
also separable. Digicash and other forms of electronic money are generally
not currencies per se, but are a kind of transfer order, more like a check.
As such, not directly implicated in the issue of inflation.

>I'm not going to try to develop the cryptographic protocols for
>TrustBucks. I haven't got the requisite paranoia and pickiness
>(compliments both) for that. TrustBucks also has nothing in the way of
>anonymity and restraint on double-spending right now. If you can see how
>it could be anonymous or restrain double-spending and still work, please
>feel free to add.

No protocols. No anonymity. No protection against double-spending.

Looks promising. Keep us informed.

--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 at 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."









From minow at apple.com  Sat Aug  3 12:27:19 1996
From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 03:27:19 +0800
Subject: More evidence that democracy is bunk
In-Reply-To: <v02120d09ae28692597a7@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <v03007802ae2935f4ad55@[17.219.102.152]>


Lucky Green writes:

>At 3:11 8/2/96, Deranged Mutant wrote:
>
>>If they were asked if they minded random searches of their bags and
>>belongings or required to carry photo-ID wherever they went, to be
>>presented on demand, would they still be willing?
>
>You bet. I remember a war on drugs releated poll from a few years back in
>which a majority supported warrantless searches of their homes.
>

At last month's SAFE (crypto policy) conference, one of the
legislators mentioned that someone snuck the text of the
Fourth Amendment into the crime bill, and it was voted down
in committee.

(It would be nice to dig this out of a transcript, so it doesn't
become an urban legand.)

Martin Minow
minow at apple.com







From minow at apple.com  Sat Aug  3 12:28:19 1996
From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 03:28:19 +0800
Subject: "And who shall guard the guardians?"
In-Reply-To: <199608030923.CAA22990@toad.com>
Message-ID: <v03007803ae2939e89b1f@[17.219.102.152]>


Does the English Only bill conflict with the UN Declaration of
Human Rights (Article 2):

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this
Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex,
language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,
property, birth or other status.

Note: "freedom of language"

For that matter, does the escrowed crypto legislation conflict with
Article 12:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy,
family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and
reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against
such interference or attacks.

My understanding is that the United States is (finally) a signatory
to the Declaration.

Martin Minow
minow at apple.com







From sandfort at crl.com  Sat Aug  3 12:36:53 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 03:36:53 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030750.CAA11930@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960803092648.29021A-100000@crl10.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Jim Choate's dog wrote:

> Because none of these issues have ever been tested in a court
> of law...

Wrong.  Most, if not all of them have.

> ...any comments I or any other person makes (even if a lawyer)
> is simply personal opinion.

In other words, Jim thinks his legal opinion is just as good as
anyone else's.  A nice eqalitarian sentiment, but obviously
unfounded.  There is such a thing as an educated opinion, as
there are also pig ignorant opinions.

> > A.  Where does Jim get the terms of the contract he implies from
> >     the simple word "public"?...

> Public - 
> 
> of or pertaining to the people; not private...yada yada yada.

Jim thinks a dictionary definition of "private" are terms of a
contract.  Interesting.

> I first learned about the cpunks list in Mondo 2000 several
> years ago not long after I got PGP 1.0...

But, Jude was not and is not an owner of the Cypherpunks list.
Whatever she wrote (and I don't have that issue before me) in
no way binds the owner even if there were some validity to Jim's
fanciful claims about the legal requirements on "public" lists.

> I also think a court would accept that argument.

That and US$1.25 will get you coffee at the Top of the Mark.

> > B.  I'm unaware that the Cypherpunks list has ever been advertised
> >     as "public" by the list owner.  (emphasis added)
>                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
> It has appeared in many publications which are intended for
> general or 'public' distribution in every one of those
> publications it was made clear that anyone was welcome and the
> subscription address was provided.

Jim apparently thinks a person can be bound by the opinions 
expressed in a "public" forum by a third party.  Okay, in this
public forum I publically state that people (such as Jim) who 
post really dumb, psuedo-legalistic posts have to pay each list
member a buck for spamming.

> The list operators ignorance of the consequences of their
> actions...

What actions?

> in no way alleviates them of the consequences of those actions.

Mock legalese in no way alleviates Jim from the consequences
of making uneducated legal pronouncements in front of God and
everybody.

> It isn't my interpretation.

Whose interpretation is it then.  Is Jim disavowing his own
pronouncement?

> ... These issues have never been tested in a court of law in
> the US in regards to computer networks and their special
> nature.

Maybe because the issues of "public" (which Jim tells us, below,
is" a public place is someplace which is operated using public 
monies") lists do not require resorting to any "special nature" 
of computer networks and can simply be addressed by pre-existing 
legal princples covering run-of-the-mill membership organizations.

> > > > A restaurant or bookstore is a public place in that it is open
> > > > to the public.
> > > 
> > > I know of no state in the union where a bookstore, restaurant,
> > > mall, etc. is considered public.
> > 
> > Actually, it's the law in ALL states in the union since the Public 
> > Accomidations Act was enacted...

> Not in Texas. We recently passed a law (Jan. 8) which permits citizens legaly
> registered to carry concealed weapons. Because the way the law was worded it
> was made clear in many newspapers and such that the ONLY way that business
> could prohibit patrons from entering their premises with those weapons was
> because they were PRIVATE property and therefore excluded from the
> constraints of the law.

Jim does not seem to understand that the Public Accomidation Act 
is applied PRIMARILY to private property.  It is his loony-toon
sea-lawyer concepts of "public," as in public list, that are the
cause of his total misunderstanding of the legal issues here.

> [Interesting but irrelevant gun law lore elided]
> 
> Now there is one caveat that most of you will have caught. That
> is the definitions of public above. In short, we have a circular
> argument as the law is worded now. 

Duh.

> > > Legaly a public place is someplace which is operated using
> > > public monies.
> > 
> > Like the Cypherpunks list?  Citation, please.
> 
> The Cpunks list isn't a place. It is a steam of characters.

First, where is Jim's citation with regard to the definition of
a public place?  I'd like to see him support just one of his
outrages legal claims with at least a scintilla of evidence.

Second, what legal evidence does Jim have that the sender of a
stream of characters (i.e., the provider of a service--free in
this case) is under any obligation to continue to provide a forum
for people he no longer wishes to provide said forum?  

This is the crux of the issue.  Jim can get into all the side
issues he wants about gun laws and whether his dog should vote.
The question before us is, may those who run the Cypherpunks list
have the right arbitrarily throw someone off the list, even though
it be advertised as "public"?  Clearly people have been thrown off
such public lists (including, I believe, Cypherpunks).  Nothing
happened.  If Jim believes the outcome should have been otherwise,
he has the burden of proof of explaining why.  He may, of course,
again offer his odd legal opinions, uncontaminated by actual
legal knowledge, but actual recourse to the law would be a lot
more convincing.

Of course, if Jim actually comes up with something better than
his opinions, I'll be ready to address such arguments.

> ...My lawyers both got theirs at UT Austin Law School. Both are
> federal lawyers and both have argued before the Supreme and are
> currently allowed to argue before the Supremes.

Cool.  Please have them post something on this thread.  I'd love
to see their analysis of "public" list liability.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~







From sandfort at crl.com  Sat Aug  3 13:07:06 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 04:07:06 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608031145.GAA12155@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960803104000.29021C-100000@crl10.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Jim Choate's dog wrote:

> > ...Prices rise over time because of inflation of the money 
> > supply...

> Then why didn't the costs rise at the same rate as the general
> inflation rate instead of tens of times faster?

Simple.  In a market economy, with or without inflation, relative
prices are constantly changing in response to changes in supply 
and demand, and as capital is moved among investments to maximize
return.  In an inflationary environment the result is that while
all (or at least most) prices are rising, some will rise faster
than others in the short term.  Q.E.D.

> If the cost of airline tickets matched the rise in milk then my
> gallon of milk would cost over $10 instead of the $2...
> [Jim supported his /post hoc/ argument by saying it applied to
> a lot of things, i.e., he did not address the issue, but in
> essence said /post hoc/ does not apply when there's a whole
> bunch of it.]
>
> ...It is clear that with a increase of x5 in this area and
> something like < x2 in the commodities area that something is
> at play here other than pure inflation.

Only to someone who does not understand economics.  A counter
example is the unregulated computer industry.  Prices rise very
little, if at all, and even undergo price deflation at times. 

> A straw man is where I take one situation and compare it to
> another.

Sorry, this is incorrect.  (We call that an analogy.)  The 
definition of "straw man" I used came directly from the 
dictionary.  Now you may have a "personal" definition, but I
doubt it's widely shared.  (Ref., my Lewis Carrol quote in my
exchange with the pomey.)

If there are no other questions, class is dismissed.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~







From drosoff at ARC.unm.EDU  Sat Aug  3 13:22:29 1996
From: drosoff at ARC.unm.EDU (David Rosoff)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 04:22:29 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19960803183603.3b57cd10@arc.unm.edu>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 09.02 PM 8/2/96 -0700, Alan Olsen wrote:

>>Can you name another business that has comparable mark-ups?
>
>Verisign? 
>
>InterNic Domain name registration?
>
>Licence plates in Washington state?

All the money they could possibly make is peanuts compared
to the colossal rip-off of compact discs. :)

===============================================================================
David Rosoff (nihongo ga sukoshi dekiru)  --------------->  drosoff at arc.unm.edu
PGP public key 0xD37692F9 -----> finger drosoff at acoma.arc.unm.edu or keyservers
0xD37692F9  Key fingerprint =  25 7D AA 01 85 41 43 89  50 5A 33 76 F1 F1 99 67
Do you know who's reading your email? ---> http://www.arc.unm.edu/~drosoff/pgp/
Is it a forgery? --- I have PGP signed all email and news posts since May 1996.
===============================================================================
"Relax. It's not a real alarm. They can't crack _Pentagon_ codes. Can they?" :p

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgOXvxguzHDTdpL5AQGzyQP/cDvyqIPmlU1Gg6BE+4u4GQb/RNe6LPa8
AR8fqae+dnEMsqRBF5ChEXNwNDxXCMzxVF0xXhVytlLUonlPpKCTL5E3YZ7nrj5/
SkO0/QpnyqTH1wzb6dV9RBcSxF0+V6EWX1rbHEqfXna52qWOCjDsaH3Wno5FZGJF
O60tNSmcVcE=
=8vn1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Sat Aug  3 13:24:57 1996
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 04:24:57 +0800
Subject: Let's Say "No!" to Single, World Versions of Software
In-Reply-To: <199607302110.OAA05638@netcom8.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199608030749.IAA00194@server.test.net>



Bill Frantz <frantz at netcom.com> writes:
> [...]  many of them are taking public positions on the ProCODE
> bill. Another of the things they are doing is deploying strong
> crypto domestically.
>
> Here is a start at a list of such companies:
> 
> Community ConneXion - Too much to mention, Thanks Sameer
> IBM - The Anarchistic Key Authorization system (from U of Texas), 
>    see 6th Usenix Security Symposium proceedings
> Netscape - SSL
> PGP Inc - 'nuff said
> Sun Microsystems - SKIP implementation, PGP v3 implementation

Sun PGP v3?  Whats the story behind this item?  Are sun sponsoring PGP
v3 development?

Adam
--
#!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj
$/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1
lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)





From shamrock at netcom.com  Sat Aug  3 13:25:53 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 04:25:53 +0800
Subject: More evidence that democracy is bunk
Message-ID: <v02120d1fae294b043d69@[192.0.2.1]>


At 10:02 8/3/96, Martin Minow wrote:

>At last month's SAFE (crypto policy) conference, one of the
>legislators mentioned that someone snuck the text of the
>Fourth Amendment into the crime bill, and it was voted down
>in committee.
>
>(It would be nice to dig this out of a transcript, so it doesn't
>become an urban legand.)

I remember when this originally happened. It was on the news. But I thought
it happened in the full House. Should be in the Congressional Record.



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From shamrock at netcom.com  Sat Aug  3 13:28:49 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 04:28:49 +0800
Subject: "And who shall guard the guardians?"
Message-ID: <v02120d20ae294d6dce36@[192.0.2.1]>


At 10:20 8/3/96, Martin Minow wrote:

>My understanding is that the United States is (finally) a signatory
>to the Declaration.

That doesn't matter. Violations would have to be tried by the World Court
in Den Haag. The US does not recognize decisions made there (unless it
suits their purpose).



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From markm at voicenet.com  Sat Aug  3 13:33:47 1996
From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 04:33:47 +0800
Subject: Liberating Clipper Stuff from Mykotronx Dumpsters
In-Reply-To: <ae28445005021004823e@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.960803142858.207D-100000@gak>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> He scanned or typed this stuff he found into a text file and sent it to one
> of the earliest members of the Cypherpunks list, asking for it to be passed
> on to someone who could do something with it. A few hours later, via
> anonymous remailer posting, it went out to the several hundred subscribers
> to the Cypherpunks list at that time. (It's somewhere in the archives, such
> as they are. This would be around late April, 1993, possibly May-June.)

These files can also be found at ftp.funet.fi/mirrors/dsi/cypherpunks/clipper/
mykotronx*, as the archives are still down.

- -- Mark

PGP encrypted mail prefered
Key fingerprint = d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348
http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/  


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBMgObhbZc+sv5siulAQEAiAQAoFJQ0vREu1gORRFIoTGvD7paTNppiIg5
OW5yL88NBUBAhR9Y6kpD53EPU1pCkkv1nVqYXIrvS5PdfIC7lCfsXRs/GG7NkZUf
BgBKzNFEHVRo4nIQA5HtSDfPL5AcH6cA5XIZiReo8VMPOmV/xQR7b2IPRxohlJCH
8ALe1MsysSs=
=LBhD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From alano at teleport.com  Sat Aug  3 13:37:10 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 04:37:10 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960803184244.00e284e4@mail.teleport.com>


At 12:18 AM 8/3/96 -0700, Cerridwyn Llewyellyn wrote:

>>>      As long as you are enforcing it on everyone, I don't think you'd
have a 
>>> problem, but to force some one from cooking food for homeless people, and 
>>> allow a family barbeque, is IMO wrong.
>>
>>Not at all. Businesses have no rights, individuals do. Businesses have a
><snip>
>>Blueberries they bought at the local HEB). Individuals have a right to
>>privacy, that includes cooking themselves food without harrassment. Business
>>on the other hand are selling products of potentialy questionable quality. A
>
>I disagree with your sentiments about Business and rights, however, in this
>instance, even that wasn't the issue. Food Not Bombs is NOT a business, it's
>a not-for-profit organization that gives out (not sells) food.  They are the
>same as, I think Tim May pointed out, a Boy Scout picnic, except for the 
>homless, not the boy scouts.

They are also Anarchists.  (They are referenced on various Anarchist web
pages, among other places.)

My personal belief is that they are being prosecuted because they bill
themselves as Anarchists and not for what they are doing.  If this has been
"Society Wives Against Hunger", there would have been no problems at all.
(And probibly commendations from the local paper and civic leaders.)

Locally, people who have billed themselves as Anarchists have been monitored
by the police, harased, and arrested.  (Remember: you only deserve the
protection of the state if you do not oppose the state.)

It seems that this country is quite willing to harrass fringe political
groups when the "powers that be" feel they can get away with it.  (Which is
quite often.)
---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com  Sat Aug  3 14:38:06 1996
From: anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com (anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 05:38:06 +0800
Subject: The Hazards of Reading Naughty Newsgroups at Work
Message-ID: <199608031945.MAA22460@jobe.shell.portal.com>


The following interesting article appeared on page 6 of the
August 3, 1996 Seattle Times.

  County Accuses Four of Using the Internet to Access Child Porn
  --------------------------------------------------------------

By Ronald K. Fitten
Seattle Times Staff Reporter

Four men, including two former Microsoft employees, have been charged
with allegedly using computers to access child pornography on the
Internet, said King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng.

"Traditional law-enforcement efforts against child pornography have
focused on magazines, movies, and tangible materials," Maleng said
yesterday.  "But law enforcement faces new challenges with the
emergence of new technology.  The Internet, with its millions of
international web sites, has become the new underground highway for
illegal child pornography."

The two former Microsoft engineers, Michael Seaman, 37, of Kirkland,
and Ronald Rosul Jr., 31, of Seattle, allegedly used Microsoft
computers to access and copy child pornography from the Internet,
according to prosecutors.

Microsoft said both were fired after Microsoft discovered the alleged
crimes in October 1995.

Seaman is charged with possession of child pornography.  He allegedly
used his Microsoft computer to collect more than 2,500 files of
photographs of young children in sexual poses or being sexually
abused.

Rosul is also charged with possession of child pornography.  He
allegedly used Microsoft equipment to manufacture a CD-ROM disk
containing child pornography.

Both Seaman and Rosul will be arraigned next week in King County
Superior Court.  If convicted, both could receive up to one year in
jail.

Maleng, who said police and prosecutors worked cooperatively with
Microsoft throughout the investigation, said law-enforcement officers
had confiscated computer hard drives, CD-ROMs, and printed materials
as evidence.

Microsoft spokesman Mark Murray said the company found out about the
activities of its two former employees last year and alerted police.

"We provided the police with the computers to pull up the evidence,"
Murray said.

In an unrelated case, William D. Powell, 52, or Renton, and Dwight
Hunter, 48, of Bellevue, are charged with possession of and dealing in
child pornography.

Powell, an unemployed engineer, is accused of using his home computer
to exchange child pornography with Hunter.

If convicted of both offenses, Powell, who has a warrant out for his
arrest after failing to appear at his arraignment three weeks ago,
could be sentenced to between 21 and 27 months in prison.

Hunter, an unemployed salesman, is accused of using his home computer
to exchange child pornography with Powell and of having photographs in
his computer disks of children engaged in several types of sexual
activities with adults, other children, and a dog.

Hunter will be arraigned next week.  If convicted, he could receive
almost three years in prison.








From tcmay at got.net  Sat Aug  3 14:38:09 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 05:38:09 +0800
Subject: Let's Say "No!" to Single, World Versions of Software
Message-ID: <ae28fe2d00021004abfc@[205.199.118.202]>


At 7:49 AM 8/3/96, Adam Back wrote:
>Bill Frantz <frantz at netcom.com> writes:

>> Sun Microsystems - SKIP implementation, PGP v3 implementation
>
>Sun PGP v3?  Whats the story behind this item?  Are sun sponsoring PGP
>v3 development?

Derek Atkins is being paid by Sun for his work on v3, last I heard.

--Tim

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 at 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."









From pjn at nworks.com  Sat Aug  3 15:39:06 1996
From: pjn at nworks.com (pjn at nworks.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 06:39:06 +0800
Subject: Who the hell is ....
Message-ID: <TCPSMTP.16.8.3.-16.30.12.2645935021.659124@.nworks.com>


 In> OK, I'v been on the list a bit now. I see a lot of the same
 In> people posting to it, 
 In> My question is " Who the Hell is Sternlight" At first I thought
 In> it was a pen name ( the light on the end of a boat ?? )

 Close... If you shone a light throught one ear, it would come out
 the other...


 P.J.
 pjn at nworks.com



... We are Hippies of Borg.  Make love.  War is irrelevant.

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR]







From hallam at ai.mit.edu  Sat Aug  3 16:57:53 1996
From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 07:57:53 +0800
Subject: Jewell is the Militia Bomber!!!!
In-Reply-To: <4tqcv0$2b1@life.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <3203CC50.167E@ai.mit.edu>


Hey folks, relax eh?

Its generally best when the police don't release every bit of
information on their investigations as they progress. Far from
criticising the police for having investigated Jewell on no or little
evidence you should criticise them for telling us about the evidence
they do have.

Although prosecuting a security guard in order to rob the terrorists of
publicity is a cute trick I don't think the US authorities are that
smart. In the past USGov has been less than sparkling in its ability to
keep a lid on secrets like that.


		Phill





From rah at shipwright.com  Sat Aug  3 17:47:25 1996
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 08:47:25 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS
In-Reply-To: <ae27b98904021004e701@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <v0300780cae297f34aa6d@[206.119.69.46]>


At 5:10 PM -0400 8/2/96, Timothy C. May wrote:
> (Examples abound in other areas, too, such as where large chip companies
> like Intel actually relish the vast amounts of paperwork they are required
> to fill out, becuase this overhead and legal burden can be handled by their
> buildings full of paper pushers, but helps to keep small companies from
> entering the market.

Milton Freedman observed this in "Free to Choose". He said something to the
effect that regulation only *helps* the existing players in any given
market by increasing barriers to entry, especially for smaller firms.

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/







From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Sat Aug  3 17:57:19 1996
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 08:57:19 +0800
Subject: Corporate e-mail policy
In-Reply-To: <199608022351.SAA14955@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960803230601.6988E-100000@mcfeely.bsfs.org>



On Fri, 2 Aug 1996 ichudov at algebra.com wrote:

> George Kuzmowycz wrote:
> >   In an ideal world, the rest of the group would agree with me and say
> > "Yup, we have no business reading e-mail." Since that's not likely,
> > I'm looking for examples of "privacy-friendly" corporate policies
> > that I can put on the table in our meetings, and end up with a
> > minority report.  
> > 
> 
> Maybe it is only me, but I recommend "privacy-fascist" policy. This way
> employees will at least know to keep their own business out of computers
> that will be monitored by the company anyways.
> 

I think you need to take the "fascist" approach, at least officially. I 
would hope that, unofficially, you don't monitor, eavesdrop, etc., unless 
a problem requires you to. (such as receiving email from another site 
that attacks have been detected, originating from your systems, etc.)

If you don't take the "fascist" approach, you are granting employees a
"reasonable expectation of privacy", which you cannot, in truth, provide 
(without spending a lot of additional money). Once you've put your 
company in this position, you've now set them up for an employee to have 
their "privacy" violated, so you've increased the company's risk. The 
benefits of running a "privacy friendly" corporate system just don't 
outweigh the costs and risks.

If somebody wants to read alt.sex.whatever-floats-their-boat, I really
don't care, but I don't want to be in the position of ensuring their
privacy while doing so on corporate equipment; they can get their own 'net
account and play at home. 

I prefer to put out an official "fascist sysadmin's system use policy", 
and then leave users to themselves, as long as I don't get any complaints 
of illegal activity that could land my company in hot water. What you 
publish as a use policy, and what you actively enforce do not have to be 
the same.

Just my $.02.





From TrustBuckFella at nowhere.com  Sat Aug  3 18:51:45 1996
From: TrustBuckFella at nowhere.com (TrustBuckFella)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 09:51:45 +0800
Subject: TrustBucks
Message-ID: <htrb56rmj9@nowhere.com>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
 
tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May):
> You want to elaborate on this contention?
>
> If Alice transfers Digicash-type money to Bob, this is because Alice either
> bought the DC-money someplace, or already had it, or otherwise arranged
> with a bank to make the transaction. Maybe the bank "loaned" her money she
 
Mistaken terminology, mea culpa. The scheme I was thinking of is
actually called Private Currency. Someone mistakenly labelled the
writeup Digicash and I cut and pasted without thinking. I do know the
difference when my brain is on.
 
s/Digicash/Private Currency. Apologies to Digicash.
 
I'll explain Private Currency and why it's good and bad. In Private
Currency you don't "buy the [money] someplace". You mint it when paying.
Alice and Bob check each other's public debt and if neither is scared
off by the other's high debt, they mint a debt for Alice and money for
Bob. They publish a record of the transaction, which is how they knew
each other's public debt in the first step. So in theory the amount of
currency in existance is exactly 0. In practice I wouldn't trust anyone
for a debt that I didn't trust directly for that amount. I believe the
scheme would stall.
 
I conceived TrustBucks as an alternative that would retain the
decentralization but work.
 
> No protocols. No anonymity. No protection against double-spending.
>
> Looks promising. Keep us informed.
 
Fine. I doubt my mechanisms will be optimal but here you go.
 
Restraint on double-spending: Each participant publishes a list of the
    ID and value all outstanding TrustBucks of their own variety. Value
    of the notes can be obscured so it can only be verified by someone
    who has seen the note itself.
 
    What if some participant doesn't publish a complete list? Well, who
    are they robbing? People who directly trusted them for that amount
    and now won't ever again.
 
Anonymity: Each participant identifies their currency by a randomly
    chosen ID-number instead of name and publishes their ID/value under
    that number.
 
    However, it's pretty pointless, since the chain of trust has a hard
    time extending beyond people who directly know each other anyways.
 
 
A better objection would have been that it's hard to identify a chain of
mutually trusting links between two strangers who want to make a
transaction.
 
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.1
 
iQCVAwUBMgPoDJi7GCxryNrZAQHeEgQAmHsJithWMhmRv4y3IjnCBFKAgmZLCQ+i
NVYGDBVJ19iwAOTTwqHgcYMGEYdKBLUaBMRAczJDfGRbsB6WbFLKyiESHT8gpV7R
6CVesb7XpRaVDBylgTvoE/NNXfNrLrTfWOeVWtivMSVkDRKJC6BbONR1J5juhQjv
A9s1wa/uwSw=
=hsSY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From jimbell at pacifier.com  Sat Aug  3 18:51:50 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 09:51:50 +0800
Subject: Digital Telephony costs $2
Message-ID: <199608040010.RAA21627@mail.pacifier.com>


At 02:52 AM 8/3/96 -0800, Chris Adams wrote:
>On 3 Aug 96 01:16:48 -0800, jimbell at pacifier.com wrote:
>
>> I propose that the better way of implementing it, rather than going through 
>>a sound card, is for modem manufacturers to built an  new modem with an 
>>extra telephone connection (perhaps the same physical connector that's 
>>currently used for the telephone handset) which goes to an ordinary 
>>telephone and does the audio A/D and D/A conversion, as well as the data 
>>compression/data expansion function that will be necessary.  The latter 
>>function would be done by an extra DSP on this modem/Internet telephone 
card. 
>
>If you were so inclined, you could implement the whole thing for MWave
>modems.  They are fast enough to handle 28.8k and sound card functions at
>the same time off of a single DSP. 

That seems a bit difficult to believe.  I get the impression that 
implementing a 28.8Kbps+ modem pretty much uses up the capability of a 
near-state-of-the-art DSP chip.  Further, recently an item appeared on CP 
concerning a new voice-compression standard that was claimed to put 
good-quality voice into a 2400 bps stream.   Each function, coding and 
decoding, was claimed to occupy about (don't recall the exact figures) a 
little over half the capability of a TI 32025 DSP chip, which admittedly is 
an older unit.  Assuming full-duplex is desired (and that's the purpose of 
this exercise) you'd need the full resources of something with greater 
'ooomph' than a 32025 just for the coding/decoding.

Sure,  it may not be necessary to compress voice audio all the way down to 
2400 bps, since the current modem standards allow 28.8kbps and beyond, but I 
suggest that decreasing net traffic by a factor of 12 (28.8k to 2.4k) is a 
desirable goal.  Remember, in the long term "everybody" will be using 
Internet telephone. (And no doubt you've noticed that high-volume hardware 
gets cheap, really fast.  Putting in a second DSP for compression/encryption 
won't increase the costs all that much.)  Leaving the encryption in hardware 
would improve exportability, at least from a legal/ITAR standpoint. 


 While eventually full-fiber-capacity Internet will be able to increase the 
capacity to "unlimited" levels, in the meantime the capacity is limited (by 
switches if nothing else) and going the extra mile to limit Internet 
telephone's impact on the national net would be better.


>With the right drivers you could use
>the telephone/speaker/mic jacks that are on most of the integrated cards.
>  Also, they have a standard realtime OS with most of the functions being
>portable across cards as well, so you'd have to do very little work to
>support other Mwave cards.

The reason I think a system I've described has a future is that modem 
manufacturers have a PROBLEM.  Their problem is that they've pretty much run 
out of room to improve the bit-pushing through a 3 KHz bandwidth.  Sure, 
they can focus their attention on cable modems or ISDN units or other toys, 
but the market for such beasts won't develop for a few years.  They'll 
pretty much be stuck doing an occasional upgrade, or selling into new 
computers, but that will slow down.  What they'd like to have is a new 
function that "everybody" wants to have, and allowing people to bypass LD 
telephone charges is a powerful motivating factor to get people to upgrade 
their modems.



Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From alano at teleport.com  Sat Aug  3 19:04:17 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 10:04:17 +0800
Subject: Liberating Clipper Stuff from Mykotronx Dumpsters
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960804002934.00f11750@mail.teleport.com>


At 02:33 PM 8/3/96 -0400, Mark M. wrote:

>
>These files can also be found at ftp.funet.fi/mirrors/dsi/cypherpunks/clipper/
>mykotronx*, as the archives are still down.

Actually the path is:

ftp://ftp.funet.fi/mirrors/ftp.dsi.unimi.it/cypherpunks/clipper/

---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From edgar at garg.campbell.ca.us  Sat Aug  3 19:34:22 1996
From: edgar at garg.campbell.ca.us (Edgar Swank)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 10:34:22 +0800
Subject: SecureDrive News
Message-ID: <3203ee7d.1399699@news.earthlink.net>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

SecureDrive Users:

It's been brought to my attention that the detached signatures
for two executable files in SECDR14B.ZIP don't verify.

   COPYSECT.EXE
   FPART.EXE

These were supposed to be identical to the 1.4/1.4a files, so the
same signatures were used. It seems the files were inadvertantly
re-compiled with a different version compiler, hence the mismatch.
Anyone concerned, can use the files from SECDR14A.ZIP, which are
still available, and should match the signatures.

It's also been said by a couple of correspondents that the listing
of CRC values from PKZIP could be easily counterfeited. Accordingly,
here is a list of MD5 digest values for SECDR14B.ZIP and all contained
files.

  CHK-SAFE.EXE Ver 2.51 by Bill Lambdin Don Peters and Robert Bullock.
  MD5 Message Digest Algorithm by RSA Data Security, Inc.

    File name     Size     Date    Time        MD5 Hash
  ________________________________________________________________________
  SECDR14B.ZIP   132389  07-21-96  05:23  8de408deac3499a458764a50f691eca0
  SECDRV.DOC      54081  07-20-96  19:45  9807d8301ec46f4d3903fbd5fe5ac438
  LOGIN.EXE       43718  07-20-96  20:12  b0ab456fb143c37855000bd0a9650482
  CRYPTDSK.EXE    42564  07-20-96  20:12  025f07b300e398792c5ce2d309881cd0
  SECTSR.ASM      32595  08-06-95  00:00  4d0ee685a96ef26e574809dcf4b0b96e
  CRYPTDSK.C      20623  07-20-96  19:34  0a8d238492fd0b37090a7b7f527903e8
  CRYPT2.ASM      19664  11-19-93  21:42  d774eca62b4ba6552e1cda74f2b4f05d
  LOGIN.C         18598  07-20-96  19:41  c2850e1427e2eb7126df83b720b57ce5
  COPYING         18321  06-14-93  22:27  ad4652e2dcfd4a0ecf91a2c01a7defd5
  FPART.EXE       15466  07-20-96  20:12  bac8c6e72f99983e132fec7cf6ca9b48
  SDCOMMON.C      14998  06-12-96  18:06  18ec797c194c4c34b81c5185c861065a
  SETENV.ASM      13011  07-20-96  19:48  9b52beb40986d9df4bcce09bbf5d80e5
  COPYSECT.EXE    12606  07-20-96  20:12  dbe7ae98b6d187d9904ddff72515c72a
  MD5.C           11557  05-09-93  19:38  951169a660ad48449ab6c0cbe20f3d3b
  KEY.ASC          5278  11-14-95  20:52  3a9040d3863aaffd030b570173e38b5d
  FPART.C          4353  08-06-95  00:00  963aaaf429a6de80133aa0856ac8c424
  SECDRV.H         3656  08-06-95  00:00  2e29ce5abbd5085503aee10a2adda26b
  MD5.H            3407  05-11-93  12:49  3b254fd2c035f3081ca2ec96ea120f9a
  COPYSECT.C       2022  08-06-95  00:00  91f9b9da8addd893cf71e3fc6f8e7bf7
  SECTSR.COM       2000  07-20-96  20:12  7ab3ea1e58673bb81158ac20e663836d
  MAKEFILE         1554  08-06-95  00:00  6e58f4269326251b342d5d7971ddac54
  RLDBIOS.ASM      1355  01-21-94  08:44  dbfe21f1440f2021ce04738b95a5e3ec
  USUALS.H         1254  05-09-93  19:39  270fa89c0ff884ee10d1a02a1ff9040d
  FILE_ID.DIZ       278  12-06-95  20:33  343cf830a0975aaaef88327625c97396
  COPYSECT.SIG      152  08-06-95  00:00  7a208bb9c283ca3574578edb4215457d
  CRYPTDSK.SIG      152  06-01-96  01:10  d4eba61786e984d2b3e7576c5629abb8
  FPART.SIG         152  08-06-95  00:00  82462ce35887ebdc57fb603521e34263
  LOGIN.SIG         152  06-01-96  01:09  7fc1f6d8a3292c50b6b790603cf3fa2c
  SECTSR.SIG        152  08-06-95  00:00  a4cebfb7b0e69a0b678ed3382aeff9a2

The CHK-SAFE program can be obtained at

  ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/fileutil/cs-251.zip

Regards,

Edgar W. Swank   <edgar at Garg.Campbell.CA.US>
Edgar W. Swank   <Edgar_W._Swank at ilanet.org>
Home Page: http://members.tripod.com/~EdgarS/index.html
Author of SecureDrive Version 1.4b

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgPttN4nNf3ah8DHAQGCUAP/QMI92acYiyV4v739rvIDM/MVe08+6D+D
ZGGZ0dKgSxHLBV9iO+u754R+A3aUGXUM8PFHjGLRFjytFs+dLWo8w5XMqnOYZasJ
26hTSWzgzubNzV2jrnOlcHi4mw5+v5kOjnFycORXaJ/1pNjB2LIB+98DwujPdYDt
M+tD0ojh8vc=
=KkGX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Edgar W. Swank   <edgar at Garg.Campbell.CA.US>
Edgar W. Swank   <Edgar_W._Swank at ilanet.org>
Home Page: http://members.tripod.com/~EdgarS/index.html





From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com  Sat Aug  3 22:31:54 1996
From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Deranged Mutant)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 13:31:54 +0800
Subject: Crypto added to anti-terror bill in US at last minute?!?!!
Message-ID: <199608040346.XAA24376@unix.asb.com>


>From ACLU's site: http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/terror.html 

     The latest understanding from ACLU's legislative representatives is
     that the
     "Anti Terrorism" bill that is expected to be acted on today and
     tomorrow will include government controls on encryption -- a
     scheme for key escrow of private keys for encryption. It is also
     likely to include expanded use of wiretapping without a Court
     order. 
---
No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help"
Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (root at magneto)
Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.





From jamesd at echeque.com  Sat Aug  3 22:33:10 1996
From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A. Donald)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 13:33:10 +0800
Subject: Pipe bombs vs high explosives.
Message-ID: <199608040337.UAA17682@dns1.noc.best.net>


Does anyone have any experimental information comparing an 
untamped high explosive with a pipe bomb?

A pipe bomb is a device for getting a decent explosion
out of a low explosive, such as gunpowder.

A low explosive combusts relatively slowly.  The purpose
of the pipe is to hold it together for long enough to get
decent pressure.

Homemade low explosives tend to be even more feeble 
than manufactured low explosives, because it is inadvisable
for amateurs to recorn their powder, with the result that
home made powders burn slow, whereas homemade high
explosives are just as effective as manufactured high 
explosives.

My theoretical expectation is that pipe bombs would be 
very ineffectual when compared to high explosives, 
especially using home made powders.

Note that very large pipe bombs can be made by using 
propane cylinders or compressed gas cylinders in 
place of pipes.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 at echeque.com






From jamesd at echeque.com  Sat Aug  3 22:34:07 1996
From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A. Donald)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 13:34:07 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <199608040337.UAA17692@dns1.noc.best.net>


At 07:48 PM 8/2/96 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> John Conyers, the ranking
> Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, blasted Gingrich and the
> Republican leadership for "bringing a meaningless bill to the House
> floor."
>
> Conyers said to reporters at 1 pm: "It's a hoax on the American
> people. It is all bark and no bite... This bill is missing the
> important wiretapping provisions that would allow law enforcement to
> find and stop terrorists before they kill.


I remember the old days when the conservatives were the Law'n Order
guys.

(pulling my long white beard and vigorously shaking my rocking
chair)

These days when somebody dies in police custody, you automatically
know that the caring progressive lovers of the poor and oppressed
are running the city where it happened.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 at echeque.com






From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com  Sat Aug  3 22:35:55 1996
From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Deranged Mutant)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 13:35:55 +0800
Subject: ITAR
Message-ID: <199608040339.XAA24208@unix.asb.com>


On  2 Aug 96 at 16:50, Dave Koontz wrote:

> How about exporting programs, that when executed generate source code for
> encryption algorithms?

Nope.

There already are such things.  Make a .zip archive and convert it 
into a self-extracting program.

Rob
 
---
No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help"
Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (root at magneto)
Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.





From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com  Sat Aug  3 22:44:35 1996
From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Deranged Mutant)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 13:44:35 +0800
Subject: Disregard that last bit of FUD...
Message-ID: <199608040350.XAA24481@unix.asb.com>


Nevermind. I realized the ACLU excerpt I sent out wasn't so up to 
date (or was it...?)

Rob
---
No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help"
Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (root at magneto)
Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.





From JonWienk at ix.netcom.com  Sat Aug  3 22:56:23 1996
From: JonWienk at ix.netcom.com (JonWienk at ix.netcom.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 13:56:23 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <199608040412.VAA06740@dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com>


On Fri, 02 Aug 1996, jim bell <jimbell at pacifier.com> wrote:
>At 07:48 PM 8/2/96 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>> and black and smokeless powder taggants.
>
>Such materials will be easy to defeat.  Find an indoor shooting range, 
>vacuum up the powder residue that falls  in front of the shooting stalls, 
>and you'll have a concentrated mixture of literally hundreds of types of 
>taggants.  Add to bomb.  Laughing, at this point, is optional.
>
>Jim Bell
>jimbell at pacifier.com

In addition to powder residue, collect all the spent shell casings you can, 
especially ones that are of the same caliber as weapons you own. In addition to 
the possibility of reloading them (and saving a bundle on ammo costs) you can 
sprinkle them around liberally in the aftermath of an encounter (assuming you 
survive) and give the crime scene people a bunch of red herrings to deal with. 
Of course, you should never touch them, (the FBI got DNA samples from stamps the 
Unabomber licked on his mailbombs, so even tiny droplets of sweat can bust you) 
and you should collect the actual brass fired and sandblast it.

Incidentally, one of the interesting traits of a shotgun is that buckshot is not 
subject to the ballistics matching techniques used on rifle and pistol bullets. 
The plastic wads (which prevent the shot from touching the barrel) do not take 
the microscopically detailed impressions from the barrel that copper or lead 
bullets do. The heat from firing always melts the plastic slightly--enough to 
defeat this.  Of course, if you leave the fired shells lying around, the primer 
and ejector marks can bite you...

>     FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>
>     MICRON COMMUNICATIONS, INC., ANNOUNCES AGREEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL
>     AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
>
>     Boise, Idaho, August 2, 1996 - Micron Communications, Inc., today
>     announced a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRDA)
>     with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to develop a model
>     Positive Passenger Baggage Matching (PPBM) system. The objective
>     of this PPBM system is to automatically recognize when baggage has
>     been placed on an aircraft without an associated passenger.

Of course, this means that every time they lose your luggage, you will be 
detained for "suspected terrorist activity", and the plane your luggage was 
wrongly sent to will be evacuated while the bomb squad takes it to a remote area 
and blows it up... (the luggage, not the plane)

Jonathan Wienke

"1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full 
gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the 
world will follow our lead in the future!"
--Adolf Hitler

"46.  The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, 
transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. ...Consider the 
following statement:  I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist 
confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government."
--The 29 Palms Combat Arms Survey  
http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/Palms.htm

1935 Germany = 1996 U.S.?

Key fingerprint =  30 F9 85 7F D2 75 4B C6  BC 79 87 3D 99 21 50 CB






From grafolog at netcom.com  Sat Aug  3 23:12:54 1996
From: grafolog at netcom.com (jonathon)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 14:12:54 +0800
Subject: Future US Postal History -- Indicium to Replace Stamps (fwd)
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95.960804042839.469B-100000@netcom>



	Anybody else think this makes mail snooping a whole
	lot simpler?

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 11:28:54 -0500
From: "Philatelic.Com Email Service" <post at philatelic.com>
Subject: Future US Postal History -- Indicium to Replace Stamps

To: post at philatelic.com
Subject: Future US Postal History -- Indicium to Replace Stamps
from: dreggen at accessnv.com

Reference:  Federal Computing Week
		Volume 10, No.l 29; July 29, 1996

		Federal Computing Week (FCW) is a publication of
		FCW Government Technology Group
		3110 Fairview Park Drive  --  Suite 1040
		Falls Church, VA   22042-4599
		USA

		Tel:     703 - 876 - 5100
		Fax:    703 - 876 - 5126

		Page 19


USPS
Proposed specifications would improve mail security
	by Colleen O'Hara

The following is quote of one topic paragraph from the article:

"Defining a Postmark

	One specification defines what a postmark, or evidence of postage,
must look like.  USPS has proposed that the new postmark contain
a unique digital signature carried in a 2-D bar code.  A new indicium
substitutes for a postage stamp or postage meter impreint as evidence that
postage was paid.

	Because of the information the indicium will contain, the agency
will be better able to deter amil fraud as well as provide additional services,
such as mail tracking and tracing, according to Roy Gordon, program
manager for the agency's Information Based Indicia Program.

	'USPS' inidtial strategy is to sample [letters] in the mail stream
and scan on a random basis,' Gordon said.  'In the long term, it will
scan 100 percent of the mail to deter fraud.  The key is that it provides
the USPS [with] the ability to provide additional services to carry that
data with mail pieces.' "


	This whole article is probably a must read for anyone who is
following or who is interested in what the postal history of the
future will be like.

		Dale Eggen
		dreggen at accessnv.com

*****************************************************************
People who do not give specific references are cowards
who are trying to have an influence on peoples opinion
by the manipulation of information to suit their own will.
						William Shakespear
*****************************************************************



		
_____________________  PHILATELIC.COM-E-MAIL-SERVICE  ____________________

* To reply in PRIVATE to the sender, you MUST use their email address.
* Selecting REPLY will distribute a PUBLIC message.
* Currently reaching over 300 Dealers and Collectors with your email post!
__________________________________________________________________________

                 _/_/_/                           _/_/_/
                  _/_/_/ http://www.philatelic.com _/_/_/
                   _/_/_/                           _/_/_/






From schryver at radiks.net  Sat Aug  3 23:21:32 1996
From: schryver at radiks.net (Scott Schryvers)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 14:21:32 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <199608040258.VAA06801@sr.radiks.net>


>At 8:50 8/2/96, Paul J. Bell wrote:
>An international phone call costs about 2 cents/min to produce. The average
>rate paid for by the consumer is 62 cents. That's means the carriers mark
>up this particular product by an amazing 3000%.
>
>Can you name another business that has comparable mark-ups?
The Medical Industry.
PGP encrypted mail preferred.  
E-Mail me for my key.
Scott J. Schryvers <schryver at radiks.net>






From alanh at infi.net  Sat Aug  3 23:33:32 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 14:33:32 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608031110.GAA12116@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960804005129.3390I-100000@larry.infi.net>


Famine and inadequate nourishment does weaken the stamina and 
survivability of individuals in the Third World, but the main problem is 
non-access to (what we consider to be) simple, basic medical modalities. 
Untold numbers of African babies die of not-very-virulent diseases, 
because they becomes fatally dehydrated. In the West, these babies 
revieve IV fluids which carries them over the critical period. In a 
village that is three days walk to a bus which takes 16 hours to get to a 
clinic that has IV needles and sterile fluids, the baby WILL die.





From alanh at infi.net  Sat Aug  3 23:35:34 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 14:35:34 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960803071838.006b0808@gonzo.wolfenet.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960804003919.3390F-100000@larry.infi.net>


I wouldn't lift a finger to _shut down_ "Food Not Bombs" , but they are 
not the same as a Boyscout Picnic.

A boyscout picnic is a private party. Some people got invited to eat the 
food, any others who do are stealing.

FoodNotBombs just gave away stuff to all comers.





From alanh at infi.net  Sat Aug  3 23:40:47 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 14:40:47 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608031145.GAA12155@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960804005911.3390J-100000@larry.infi.net>


> Since the inflation rate on a dollar is flat across the board in our economy
> simple inflation does not account for this rise in prices in a niche market.


   No. The COnsumer Price Index (the Bureau of Labor Statistics also puts
out the Producer Price Index, but that is not as widely reported in the
cartoon-news mass media), _is_ a single number, but only because it is
_defined as_ a measure of central tendency of all the price rises. It is
an artificial number. Each individual price rise, does swing freely. 






From alano at teleport.com  Sat Aug  3 23:49:26 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 14:49:26 +0800
Subject: More to be paranoid about...
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960804051419.00b3eaec@mail.teleport.com>


Take a look at:

     http://www.spiritone.com/cgi-bin/plates

Feed it an Oregon licence plate number and it will feed you back all sorts
of info about the person/victim.

The uses for such things are only limited by an evil imagination...


---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From alanh at infi.net  Sun Aug  4 00:26:20 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 15:26:20 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608030921.EAA12012@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960804004443.3390G-100000@larry.infi.net>


> perhaps a simple publicity stunt to get their 15 minutes and not realy
> to help the homeless/foodless?

    How could such a thing be. O mon dieu. I am shocked, I tell you - 
shocked!





From anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com  Sun Aug  4 00:47:58 1996
From: anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com (anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 15:47:58 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
In-Reply-To: <199608040258.VAA06801@sr.radiks.net>
Message-ID: <199608040606.XAA20028@jobe.shell.portal.com>


> >At 8:50 8/2/96, Paul J. Bell wrote:
> >An international phone call costs about 2 cents/min to produce. The average
> >rate paid for by the consumer is 62 cents. That's means the carriers mark
> >up this particular product by an amazing 3000%.
> >
> >Can you name another business that has comparable mark-ups?
> The Medical Industry.
> PGP encrypted mail preferred.  
> E-Mail me for my key.
> Scott J. Schryvers <schryver at radiks.net>

You guys are confused.  The actual telephone call may cost only 2
cents/min, but the accounting and billing procedures are way more
expensive.  As long as they are doing any kind of usage-based
charging, that actual act of charging will continue to cost
considerably more than the data transmission.

Why do you think sending long-distance IP packets is basically free?

- Tom





From gcg at pb.net  Sun Aug  4 01:37:48 1996
From: gcg at pb.net (Geoffrey C. Grabow)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 16:37:48 +0800
Subject: WARNING: SecureDrive & PartitionMagic
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960804064926.006b59d0@mail.pb.net>


It seems rather obvious now, but since I learned the hard way, I figured
that I'd save the rest of you from a painful experience.

I have one HD of 1.2gb.  I created a 50mb partition at the end of the drive
using PM and encrypted it with SD14b.  I ran out of room on the secured
partition and wanted to enlarge it.  I used PM to shrink the primary
partition a little, and to enlarge the secured partition.  When I shrank the
primary, the free space on the drive appeared between the two partitions.
To enlarge the secondary, I moved it to the free space, then enlarged it on
the right.  This was BAD!  PM did its thing, but no matter what I did after
that, I couldn't get the secured partition to a usable state.  I ended up
formatting the secured partition to recover.  

After some playing, it seems that PM tries to "re-align" the data on the 2nd
partition when you move left.  That's where things get screwed up.  I tested
a few combinations, and found that everything works fine if you decrypt the
partition before moving/resizing, then re-encrypt after.

Just some friendly info.  

 
                                                     G.C.G.

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | Geoffrey C. Grabow       |      Great people talk about ideas.       |
 | Oyster Bay, New York     |     Average people talk about things.     |
 | gcg at pb.net               |      Small people talk about people.      |
 |----------------------------------------------------------------------|
 |     PGP 2.6.2 public key available at http://www.pb.net/~wizard      | 
 |          and on a plethora of key servers around the world.          |
 |   Fingerprint =  A6 7B 67 D7 E9 96 37 7D  E7 16 BD 5E F4 5A B2 E4    |
 |----------------------------------------------------------------------|
 | That which does not kill us, makes us stranger.   - Trevor Goodchild |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Sun Aug  4 02:57:55 1996
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 17:57:55 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <199608040412.VAA06740@dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <FsF5RD17w165w@bwalk.dm.com>


JonWienk at ix.netcom.com writes:
> Incidentally, one of the interesting traits of a shotgun is that buckshot is
> subject to the ballistics matching techniques used on rifle and pistol bullet
> The plastic wads (which prevent the shot from touching the barrel) do not tak
> the microscopically detailed impressions from the barrel that copper or lead
> bullets do. The heat from firing always melts the plastic slightly--enough to
> defeat this.  Of course, if you leave the fired shells lying around, the prim
> and ejector marks can bite you...

Is there truth to the rumor that poking a file inside the barrel will
alter the marks on future test firings?

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





From amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in  Sun Aug  4 05:11:50 1996
From: amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in (Arun Mehta)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 20:11:50 +0800
Subject: "And who shall guard the guardians?"
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960804094852.00304850@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>


At 10:20 03/08/96 -0700, Martin Minow wrote:

>Does the English Only bill conflict with the UN Declaration of
>Human Rights (Article 2):
..
>For that matter, does the escrowed crypto legislation conflict with
>Article 12:
..
>My understanding is that the United States is (finally) a signatory
>to the Declaration.

A couple of points need clarification:

A Declaration isn't, in international law, binding. A covenant
is, provided you haven't just signed it but also ratified it
(i.e. made it a part of national law). So the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights is basically just a statement of good
intentions. Much more important, legally, is the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR),
http://www.pluggedin.org/amnesty/rights4.htm
 which the US *ratified* not so long ago.

Says the ICCPR 

Article 17 

1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful
interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence,
nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law
against such interference or attacks. 

Article 19 

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without
interference.
2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression;
this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers,
either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or
through any other media of his choice.
3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2
of this article carries with it special duties and
responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain
restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law
and are necessary:
(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;
(b) For the protection of national security or of public
order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. 
________

Key, in Article 17, is the term "unlawful." With this escape
clause, the US gov has no problems, long as they make appropriate laws.

Article 19 is more interesting, because restrictions must be
shown to be necessary...

Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta at cpsr.org
http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/  finger amehta at cerfnet.com for public key






From declan at eff.org  Sun Aug  4 07:49:59 1996
From: declan at eff.org (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 22:49:59 +0800
Subject: Crypto added to anti-terror bill in US at last minute?!?!!
In-Reply-To: <199608040346.XAA24376@unix.asb.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960804055506.11179A-100000@eff.org>


Congress isn't in session. It would be a genuine trick for them to pass 
any legislation before September.

-Declan


On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Deranged Mutant wrote:

> >From ACLU's site: http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/terror.html 
> 
>      The latest understanding from ACLU's legislative representatives is
>      that the
>      "Anti Terrorism" bill that is expected to be acted on today and
>      tomorrow will include government controls on encryption -- a
>      scheme for key escrow of private keys for encryption. It is also
>      likely to include expanded use of wiretapping without a Court
>      order. 
> ---
> No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help"
> Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (root at magneto)
> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.
> 


// declan at eff.org // I do not represent the EFF // declan at well.com //







From roger at coelacanth.com  Sun Aug  4 09:27:13 1996
From: roger at coelacanth.com (Roger Williams)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 00:27:13 +0800
Subject: [Noise] Future US Postal History...
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.95.960804042839.469B-100000@netcom>
Message-ID: <rogeru3uj41ly.fsf@sturgeon.coelacanth.com>


>>>>> jonathon  <grafolog at netcom.com> writes:

  > 	'USPS' inidtial strategy is to sample [letters] in the mail stream
  > and scan on a random basis,' Gordon said.  'In the long term, it will
  > scan 100 percent of the mail to deter fraud...

Of course, there's little point in doing this as long as anonymous
post boxes still exist, so...

-- 
Roger Williams                         finger me for my PGP public key
Coelacanth Engineering        consulting & turnkey product development
Middleborough, MA           wireless * DSP-based instrumentation * ATE
tel +1 508 947-8049 * fax +1 508 947-9118 * http://www.coelacanth.com/






From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Aug  4 09:28:44 1996
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 00:28:44 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608031110.GAA12116@einstein>
Message-ID: <v03007802ae2a59dc5ea5@[206.119.69.46]>


At 12:55 AM -0400 8/4/96, Alan Horowitz wrote:
> Famine and inadequate nourishment does weaken the stamina and
> survivability of individuals in the Third World, but the main problem is
> non-access to (what we consider to be) simple, basic medical modalities.
> Untold numbers of African babies die of not-very-virulent diseases,
> because they becomes fatally dehydrated. In the West, these babies
> revieve IV fluids which carries them over the critical period. In a
> village that is three days walk to a bus which takes 16 hours to get to a
> clinic that has IV needles and sterile fluids, the baby WILL die.

Actually, it's really a question more of information than transportation.
The, heh, solution to diaherrea-induced dehydration -- like the kind you
get from Cholera -- is a very simple mixture of sugar, salt, and water.
This (and, of course, the proper construction of the sanatation facilities
which caused the Cholera to begin with) is just the kind of information
which the internet can carry.

All we need is a few more cycles of Moore's law and a bunch of
microsattelite-based internet routers...

And, of course, the microcurrency system to pay for it all. :-).

It would certainly be cheaper than "Peace" Corps ecotourism...

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/







From rah at shipwright.com  Sun Aug  4 09:56:50 1996
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 00:56:50 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
In-Reply-To: <199608040258.VAA06801@sr.radiks.net>
Message-ID: <v03007805ae2a5c9f04e9@[206.119.69.46]>


At 2:06 AM -0400 8/4/96, anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com wrote:
> You guys are confused.  The actual telephone call may cost only 2
> cents/min, but the accounting and billing procedures are way more
> expensive.  As long as they are doing any kind of usage-based
> charging, that actual act of charging will continue to cost
> considerably more than the data transmission.

Ah. So, why settle the transactions for digital cash and skip all that
overhead? Yet another application for micromoney.

It seems to me that I've been arguing -- for two years now -- that digital
bearer certificate settlement will prove to be *much* cheaper than
book-entry settlement, and here the answer's been looking at us, straight
in the face, all this time.

Anybody have any ideas how to go about measuring the savings between
accumulating, storing, and processing call-billing data and simply paying
for them  before/during/after the call with digital cash?

I hear this strange rumbling underground. Hey, isn't that "Dad" Joiner?

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/







From jya at pipeline.com  Sun Aug  4 10:56:37 1996
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 01:56:37 +0800
Subject: SAC_ard
Message-ID: <199608041611.QAA03240@pipe1.t1.usa.pipeline.com>


   August ScaAm has longish article on smart-cards by Carol 
   Fancher, a Motorola engineer and developer of the smart- 
   card market. 
 
   ----- 
 
   http://jya.com/sacard.txt  (26 kb) 
 
   Lynx: http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~jya/sacard.txt 
 
   Via www.anonymizer.com 
 
   SAC_ard 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 





From sandfort at crl.com  Sun Aug  4 11:28:14 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 02:28:14 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <FsF5RD17w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960804082928.19776B-100000@crl3.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Sun, 4 Aug 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM asked:

> Is there truth to the rumor that poking a file inside the barrel
> will alter the marks on future test firings?

I don't know the answer to this one, but my best guess is,
A) yes, but not enough to alter the test firing, and
B) whether or not it did, it would be strong evidence of an
attempt to screw up such a test.  There are few (no?) legitimate
reasons to harm one's gun thusly.

I have heard, but have not evidence for, is that with use, these
characteristic markings change.  As a result, putting 200-300
rounds through a gun at the range is enough to alter its
identifiable barrel markings sufficiently to defeat forensic
matching.  Don't know, just heard, but it sounds reasonable.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








From moroni at scranton.com  Sun Aug  4 12:02:39 1996
From: moroni at scranton.com (Moroni)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 03:02:39 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <FsF5RD17w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.960804121342.4158A-100000@user1.scranton.com>


    Nitric Acid wii change barrelling.


On Sun, 4 Aug 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:

> JonWienk at ix.netcom.com writes:
> > Incidentally, one of the interesting traits of a shotgun is that buckshot is
> > subject to the ballistics matching techniques used on rifle and pistol bullet
> > The plastic wads (which prevent the shot from touching the barrel) do not tak
> > the microscopically detailed impressions from the barrel that copper or lead
> > bullets do. The heat from firing always melts the plastic slightly--enough to
> > defeat this.  Of course, if you leave the fired shells lying around, the prim
> > and ejector marks can bite you...
> 
> Is there truth to the rumor that poking a file inside the barrel will
> alter the marks on future test firings?
> 
> ---
> 
> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
> Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps
> 






From jimbell at pacifier.com  Sun Aug  4 12:12:20 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 03:12:20 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <199608041735.KAA21449@mail.pacifier.com>


At 08:37 AM 8/4/96 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

>
>On Sun, 4 Aug 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM asked:
>
>> Is there truth to the rumor that poking a file inside the barrel
>> will alter the marks on future test firings?

>I have heard, but have not evidence for, is that with use, these
>characteristic markings change.  As a result, putting 200-300
>rounds through a gun at the range is enough to alter its
>identifiable barrel markings sufficiently to defeat forensic
>matching.  Don't know, just heard, but it sounds reasonable.

Heard same thing here; it's almost certainly true.  It would help if the gun 
got a thorough cleaning as well:  You can "de-copper" a barrel by plugging 
one end, and filling the barrel with an ammonia solution. (this is available 
as a commercial product for guns, at wildly-inflated prices.  Ordinary 
ammonia solution works just as well, cheap.)   This dissolves the copper 
left from the passage of copper/brass-jacketed bullets.  You can tell it's 
working:  The copper forms the distinctive blue cupramine ion in solution.


BTW, all this changes is the microstructure of the markings:  The number of 
riflings and the twist of the riflings are, obviously, unchanged.



Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From David.K.Merriman.-.webmaster at toad.com  Sun Aug  4 12:52:21 1996
From: David.K.Merriman.-.webmaster at toad.com (David.K.Merriman.-.webmaster at toad.com)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 03:52:21 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <199608041807.LAA11271@toad.com>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

To: cypherpunks at toad.com, sandfort at crl.com
Date: Sun Aug 04 13:07:42 1996
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>                           SANDY SANDFORT
>  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> 
> C'punks,
> 
> On Sun, 4 Aug 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM asked:
> 
> > Is there truth to the rumor that poking a file inside the barrel
> > will alter the marks on future test firings?
> 
> I don't know the answer to this one, but my best guess is,
> A) yes, but not enough to alter the test firing, and
> B) whether or not it did, it would be strong evidence of an
> attempt to screw up such a test.  There are few (no?) legitimate
> reasons to harm one's gun thusly.
> 
> I have heard, but have not evidence for, is that with use, these
> characteristic markings change.  As a result, putting 200-300
> rounds through a gun at the range is enough to alter its
> identifiable barrel markings sufficiently to defeat forensic
> matching.  Don't know, just heard, but it sounds reasonable.
> 
> 

Considering the relative strengths/hardnesses of the metals involved 
(high-grade steel for barrel, lead and/or copper for projectile), I'd 
suspect that it would take more than 200-300 rounds to have any significant 
impact on the barrel rifling. This, of course, is for 'normal' weapons and 
ammo; using diamond projectiles in a saturday night special voids all 
warranties, express or implied :-)

my ha'penny's worth.

Dave Merriman

PS - Been using Pronto Secure beta software the last couple of days for 
email. It's not Eudora, but *very* convenient for signing/encrypting. A 
couple of bugs/gotchas, but nothing I'd expect to see in for-sale version.
I'm actually mildly impressed with how smoothly and transparently it works 
with PGP on a DOS/Win95 system.
PGP Email welcome and encouraged. Visit my web site at
http://www.shellback.com/p/merriman
for my PGP key and fingerprint
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgQwKsVrTvyYOzAZAQGacAP+L8CfV6aFmuAsJYTM5ttHqWu6B49vL2cx
Ejnxwp2bRcM7winGALg+LQwwqjx1eNd1gKLsjrIRdh4oQgCBobfdEMU2poJvceTD
shfPhvZqDWQQgZf0B1OkqzporGprdKM6V/rEbguzDMGt1SaUX585dZaYq5/CtyOO
b+NFH+WSemc=
=VWgA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in  Sun Aug  4 12:58:44 1996
From: amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in (Arun Mehta)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 03:58:44 +0800
Subject: Internet telephony (was Freeh slimes again)
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960804173946.003173d8@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>


At 13:11 02/08/96 -0700, Lucky Green wrote:
>The sound quality really isn't there, unless you have a fast machine or a
>fat pipe. In addition, the vast majority of Intel based computers lack the
>crucial (for user acceptance) full-duplex soundcard. Add to that the
>physical impossibility of getting decent real time services over a
>non-isochronous network, such as the Internet, I'net phones just don't
>provide suffcient speech quality for business/serious personal use even
>without the added overhead of crypto.

What I'd like to see -- for which technology is all in place, and
none of the shortcomings you mention apply -- is voice mail that
functions seamlessly between people who only have a phone, and
those with Internet connections on computers with a sound card.
Many companies practically use voice mail as an alternative to
long phone conversations. This might also help the Internet
spread, because with a connection you would be able to save  on
long-distance charges -- and strong crypto could be used.

I'm sure the software for this exists too -- the ISPs only have
to run it on their servers. It would be nice, though, if the ISPs
had a facility that when there is a voice message for you, it
either phones or pages you...
Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta at cpsr.org
http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/  finger amehta at cerfnet.com for public key






From sebago at earthlink.net  Sun Aug  4 13:42:54 1996
From: sebago at earthlink.net (Allen Robinson)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 04:42:54 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <199608041900.MAA04859@serbia.it.earthlink.net>


Rather than resorting to such extreme measures as attacking the interior 
of the existing barrel with a file or nitric acid, simply replace the 
barrel with a new one (normally not prohibitively expensive), then put a 
few hundred rounds through the new barrel at the range so that it appears
used when/if examined.

Naturally this does not address the possibility of unique marks made on 
the primer by the firing pin, on the cartridge by the ejector, etc.

AR

#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%
"In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted
security.  When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to
society but for society to give to them, when the freedom
they wished for was freedom from responsibility, then Athens
ceased to be free."  - Edward Gibbon
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Allen Robinson.........................sebago at earthlink.net
PGP public key FE4A0A75
fingerprint 170FBC1F7609B76F 967F1CC8FCA7A41F





From hfinney at shell.portal.com  Sun Aug  4 14:29:56 1996
From: hfinney at shell.portal.com (Hal)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 05:29:56 +0800
Subject: TrustBucks
In-Reply-To: <htrb56rmj9@nowhere.com>
Message-ID: <199608041939.MAA03317@jobe.shell.portal.com>


An interesting idea.  It reminds me of a barter system, with the similar
problem of trying to put together a complex trade which is mutually
acceptable.  I wonder whether it could be automated if people posted
their holdings and what they would accept.  Then software could go into
this database and try to put together a set of trades that will let
someone make a purchase.  However it would seem to be very harmful to
privacy to have to post all this information.

There are some "lightweight payment" schemes out there which have the
property that people only accept cash that is "for them".  Sometimes
there is a broker involved who actually issues the cash on behalf of the
merchant (the merchant trusts the broker to do this) so that customers
need only go to a smaller number of brokers.  Then these systems can be
based on heavier payment systems like digicash or credit cards which
people use to open accounts with the brokers.

I do like the decentralization idea, but these lightweight schemes have
some of the same advantages.

Hal





From rsaeuro at sourcery.demon.co.uk  Sun Aug  4 14:31:16 1996
From: rsaeuro at sourcery.demon.co.uk (RSAEURO General)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 05:31:16 +0800
Subject: ANNOUNCE:- RSAEURO Version 1.03
Message-ID: <3204fbd0.27628667@post.demon.co.uk>


ANNOUNCE:- RSAEURO Version 1.03
===============================

What is RSAEURO?
----------------

RSAEURO is a cryptographic toolkit providing various functions
for the use of digital signatures, data encryption and supporting
areas (PEM encoding, random number generation etc).  To aid
compatibility with existing software, RSAEURO is call-compatible
with RSADSI's "RSAREF(tm)" toolkit. RSAEURO allows non-US
residents to make use of much of the cryptographic software
previously only (legally) available in the US.

RSAEURO contains support for the following:

*    RSA encryption, decryption and key generation.  Compatible
     with 'RSA Laboratories' Public-Key Cryptography Standard
     (PKCS) #1.

*    Generation and verification of message digests using MD2,
     MD4, MD5 and SHS (SHS currently not implemented in
     higher-level functions to maintain compatibility with
     PKCS).

*    DES encryption and decryption using CBC (1, 2 or 3 keys
     using Encrypt-Decrypt-Encrypt) and DESX(tm), RSADSI's
     secure DES enhancement.

*    Diffie-Hellman key agreement as defined in PKCS #3.

*    PEM support support for RFC 1421 encoded ASCII data with
     all main functions.

*    Key routines implemented in assembler for speed (80386 and
     680x0 currently supported).

International Use
-----------------

IMPORTANT NOTICE:  Please do not distribute or use this software
in the US it is 'illegal' to use this toolkit in the US, as RSADSI and
Cylink hold patents relating to public-key cryptography.  If you are a
US resident, please use the RSAREF toolkit instead.


On The Web
----------

RSAEURO can now be found at

http://www.sourcery.demon.co.uk/rsaann.html

Ftp Sites
---------

RSAEURO can be found at

ftp://ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/misc

Author Details
--------------

With comments and suggestions, please address them to Stephen
Kapp, at 'rsaeuro at sourcery.demon.co.uk'

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RSAEURO:      rsaeuro at sourcery.demon.co.uk
RSAEURO Bugs: rsaeuro-bugs at sourcery.demon.co.uk
Tel:          +44 (0) 468 286034
Http:         http://www.sourcery.demon.co.uk/rsaann.html

RSAEURO - Copyright (c) J.S.A.Kapp 1994-1996.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------





From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Aug  4 15:32:18 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:32:18 +0800
Subject: FAA to require transponders on all aircraft passengers
Message-ID: <199608042050.NAA12512@toad.com>


>At 3:21 PM 8/3/96, David Lesher wrote:
>>They are going to hang one of these on EVERY bag?
>>At what per-unit cost?
Probably low enough, at least if they can reuse the tags
(should be easy to find them, since they're transponder-equipped.)

My guess about how they'll be used is to replace the bar-code
stickers used by many baggage-handling systems - they'll stick
one on at checkin, corresponding to the number on your ticket,
track them when they load them on the plane (so they know
that all the bags correspond to people expected to get on the plane,
as well as knowing the bags are getting on the correct plane),
and track the tickets to make sure that all the people expected 
to get on the plane actually do get on (I think they use bar-code
readers or OCR today, and that'll probably continue.)

Tim> "bag escrow" will allow other agencies--such as DEA--to sniff

Also useful for the baggage checkers at the baggage claim, 
who'll be able to check that your baggage tag belongs to your
ticket, and that nobody sneaks baggage out unchecked,
either stealing it or trying to pick up the contraband.
Of course they'll _have_ to check all the bags to collect
the transponders.

David>>THEN think of the RFI problems.....

Tim> The RFI problems are actually the least of the concerns, 
Tim> given the "code space" technology which is possible.

The RFI issue isn't just telling one transponder from another,
it's interference with the airplane's electronics.  The devices
will be a bit quieter than your laptop, since they presumably
only broadcast in response to polls - probably quieter than
pagers but noisier than digital watches.


                                Bill


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Aug  4 15:34:49 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:34:49 +0800
Subject: Digital Telephony costs $2
Message-ID: <199608042050.NAA12518@toad.com>


At 05:09 PM 8/3/96 -0800, Jim Bell talked about mixing telephony,
voice compression, and modem functions on future modems,
and how doing a 28.8 modem uses up most of a DSP chip,
while 2400bps voice coding and decoding also each use up about half,
making full duplex tough.

One advantage of higher-speed modems is that you can get away with
16kbps ADPCM coding, which is dirt-simple computationally;
your 386 probably has enough horsepower to do it, though a PC's
interrupt structure may make it tough to shove all the data in and
out in real time.  You still need a sound card that'll do the
A/D and D/A conversion simultaneously if you want full-duplex;
that wasn't part of the original market vision of Soundblaster,
so vanilla sound cards don't all do it.  It also has the advantage
that the data is being moved through your CPU, so encryption is
an easy add-on, rather than having one combined modem/voiceblaster
card which doesn't have any hooks for crypto or other processing.

>Sure,  it may not be necessary to compress voice audio all the way down to 
>2400 bps, since the current modem standards allow 28.8kbps and beyond, but I 
>suggest that decreasing net traffic by a factor of 12 (28.8k to 2.4k) is a 
>desirable goal.  

One problem is that tighter compression methods are far more sensitive
to network latency than crude ones, and need to process more milliseconds
of speech before putting out a packet on the net (e.g. a 64-byte tinygram
is 200ms of speech at 2400bps, vs. 32ms at 16kbps.)  For modem-to-modem
communications, this is no problem; for Internet random delays it is.

Also, another big difficulty with full-duplex transmission is that you
need echo-cancelling, especially with high-latency circuits.
Half-duplex is annoying, but it doesn't echo, and it's more tolerant
of delay because you're not expecting it to have natural timing...

>The reason I think a system I've described has a future is that modem 
>manufacturers have a PROBLEM.  Their problem is that they've pretty much run 
>out of room to improve the bit-pushing through a 3 KHz bandwidth.  

Given that the "3KHz" is almost universally transmitted over 64kbps
digital channels, there's really no point in pushing past 33.6 with
analog-based coding; better to just do ISDN.  (You can still do analog-only
calls if you're on an analog central office talking to someone else
at the same exchange, but it'd be a flat-rate local call anyway.
If there's anybody still using analog trunks between offices, 
it's some mom&pop rural telco, and you can't get 28.8 on barbed-wire...)

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Aug  4 15:36:29 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:36:29 +0800
Subject: More to be paranoid about...
Message-ID: <199608042050.NAA12505@toad.com>


At 10:14 PM 8/3/96 -0700, you wrote:
>Take a look at:
>     http://www.spiritone.com/cgi-bin/plates
>Feed it an Oregon licence plate number and it will feed you back all sorts
>of info about the person/victim.

It's interesting to know that Senator Hatfield's wife's birthday
is 1/17/29, and that the title to the car is held with a 
security interest by the US SENATE EMPLOYEES FEDERAL CREDIT,
and that (at least) Social Security Numbers weren't listed
for the plates I checked.  Also that, unlike many states,
the Governor doesn't have License Plate #1.

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From alanh at widomaker.com  Sun Aug  4 15:36:53 1996
From: alanh at widomaker.com (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:36:53 +0800
Subject: New Agers feeding at the porkbarrel trough
Message-ID: <Pine.UW2.3.93.960804161931.11658A-100000@wilma>


Looking at page 98 of the August-September _Home Power_ magazine, I see the
publisher, Richard Perez, saying about vendors of non-solar-generated
electricity: "None of this money is billed via your electric meter, but
instead concealed in taxes or paid out everywhere from supermarkets to
hospitals." 

On page 76 of the same edition, in an article titled "The New Utility", we see
the following statement: "If all goes well in November, voters in Davis,
California will vote on implementing the first US rate based incentive (RBI)
program. As discussed in previous issues of _Home Power_, RBI programs are are
locally adopted programs in which communities assess utility bills a 1%
surcharge. The surcharge is used to purchase PV [viz., photovoltaic
solar-generated] power from participating homeowners at a premium rate. The
incentive plus the benefits of net metering [a plan in which electric
utilities are required to pay home-based electricity vendors, the full cost of
a kilowatt-hour of power, notwithstanding that the homeowner didn't pay for
the distribution losses, plant costs of the transmission grid,
untimed-to-load-demand supply, etc] should allow recovery of 90% of system
investment in 10 years."

Now, call me politically incorrect, but I say that utility bills don't get
assessed surcharges - *people* get assessed *taxes*.  I say that if it's
good for the non-solar vendors to be denounced for wanting to offload some
of their costs onto taxpayers, then the sauce is good for the solarpower
gander, too. 

I say that Richard Perez makes his living by encouraging the distribution of
solarpower hardware and services. I say that Richard Perez has a circle of
friends and business associates who are in that industry.

I say that Richard Perez has a conflict of interest. I say that Richard Perez
is a hypocrite.

I will renew my subscription to the magazine.... the non-political
articles are high quality and unmatched elsewhere. I will continue to
purchase selected items from _Home Power_'s advertisers - they fill my
needs.

I will agitate strongly against the "establishment" of solarpower (and
its lesser analogues, such as microhydro, windturbine, biomass) in the
pantheon of pork barrel empires.






From llurch at networking.stanford.edu  Sun Aug  4 15:41:36 1996
From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:41:36 +0800
Subject: The Hazards of Reading Naughty Newsgroups at Work
In-Reply-To: <199608031945.MAA22460@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.95.960804135637.9417B-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>


On Sat, 3 Aug 1996 anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com wrote:

> The following interesting article appeared on page 6 of the
> August 3, 1996 Seattle Times.
[...]
> Rosul is also charged with possession of child pornography.  He
> allegedly used Microsoft equipment to manufacture a CD-ROM disk
> containing child pornography.
> 
> Both Seaman and Rosul will be arraigned next week in King County
> Superior Court.  If convicted, both could receive up to one year in
> jail.

"Where do you want to go today?"

> Microsoft spokesman Mark Murray said the company found out about the
> activities of its two former employees last year and alerted police.
> 
> "We provided the police with the computers to pull up the evidence,"
> Murray said.

I couldn't help thinking of the poor technical schmucks whose job it was
to spy on their co-workers.

-rich






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Aug  4 15:48:46 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:48:46 +0800
Subject: "And who shall guard the guardians?" [NOISE]
Message-ID: <199608042050.NAA12499@toad.com>


Arun and Marin have been quoting from UN docs and the
>International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR),
>http://www.pluggedin.org/amnesty/rights4.htm
> which the US *ratified* not so long ago.

>2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression;
>this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart
>information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers,
>either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or
>through any other media of his choice.
>3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2
>of this article carries with it special duties and
>responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain
>restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law
>and are necessary:
>(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;
>(b) For the protection of national security or of 
>public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. 
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^        ^^^^^^           ^^^^^^^

Lots of UN declarations of rights have this sort of exception;
"protection of public morals" is something so blatantly vague
and broad that if a government contends that such a concept exists, 
as the covenant does, it could probably force the World Court
to conclude that it permits them to declare as "necessary"
just about anything short of burning witches and heretics,
and humanely beheading heretics, drug dealers, and anonymous remailer
operators is probably ok by this standard.

The UN Declaration (or was it Convention) on the Rights of the Child
is even worse - it strongly states the right to believe in and
practice religion, except when the government needs to interfere
to protect public morals or public order...  On the other hand,
it provides no such exception for the right to mandatory public
education or identity registration.
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Aug  4 16:28:17 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 07:28:17 +0800
Subject: Anonymous Message Broadcast
Message-ID: <199608042120.OAA12926@toad.com>


At 12:58 PM 8/3/96 -0400, Laszlo Vecsey <master at internexus.net> wrote:
>Has anyone implemented a simple anonymous chat system (an anonymous irc)
>using the technique described in Applied Cryptography 2nd edition? I'm
>speaking of the Anonymous Message Broadcast documented in section 6.3, it
>begins on page 137.

A lot of people talk about Dining Cryptographers networks, but I'm not
aware of more than an occasional test implementation - the concept is
simple, but getting all the details right is a lot of work,
including things like collision detection, and there aren't a lot of
good uses for the things to motivate development, even though they
are basically cool.  

One design approach is to use IRC; another is email.
IRC probably requires that all the participants be on simultaneously,
or requires a coordination system to handle whoever's on right now.


>Can the same system be implemented using base256 (unsigned char, 8bit ASCII)
>instead of the simple on/off binary method that is described in the
>explanation? How would it differ.

Rather than doing Base256, just XOR the bytes; you get the speed of
doing things a byte or word at a time, while still getting bitwise changes.
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From gcg at pb.net  Sun Aug  4 17:05:56 1996
From: gcg at pb.net (Geoffrey C. Grabow)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:05:56 +0800
Subject: WARNING: SecureDrive & PartitionMagic
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960804220146.0068d1b8@mail.pb.net>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 15:47 08/04/96 -0400, Charley Sparks wrote:
>
>
>where can I get a copy of SD and does it work with NT ??
>
Check out: http://www.serve.com/ruccia/securedr.html for the SD.  As 
for working on NT... I haven't the foggiest.  I've got a kludgey way 
of using it under win95, but it mostly works.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgUdrsr4ljoOgY7BAQGTpQP+IZXlrMJh3snU27ydLDcdzCOeDC813GYW
ujHcDpHiItY7Uq4hgBW6qoHIhmrb8DRHgVJDWyfa/OAmwJzs6sAOEzQCP1ktPM7b
LLn1oPphtoPCXN1RXB+s38jHZmzzY32sLidmAqgpMDRboUwDvKfczHs9Tik1PzgQ
X3k3S43k0pc=
=+lgv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
                                                     G.C.G.

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 | Geoffrey C. Grabow       |      Great people talk about ideas.       |
 | Oyster Bay, New York     |     Average people talk about things.     |
 | gcg at pb.net               |      Small people talk about people.      |
 |----------------------------------------------------------------------|
 |     PGP 2.6.2 public key available at http://www.pb.net/~wizard      | 
 |          and on a plethora of key servers around the world.          |
 |   Fingerprint =  A6 7B 67 D7 E9 96 37 7D  E7 16 BD 5E F4 5A B2 E4    |
 |----------------------------------------------------------------------|
 | That which does not kill us, makes us stranger.   - Trevor Goodchild |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Aug  4 17:52:41 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:52:41 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <199608042250.PAA13719@toad.com>


At 10:02 AM 8/1/96 -0700, tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) wrote:

>Question (a la "Wired"): "When will the United States introduce an internal
>passport?"
>May: "2005, but they won't call it that."

Stewart: "Last week, but they didn't call it that."

According to Alaska Airlines, the FAA's policy as of last week
has switched to a mandatory policy that if you don't produce
government-issued photo-id, you can't get on the plane;
the previous policy had been more flexible.  

The folks stamped my ticket "Documents Verified" - looks
suspiciously similar to "Papers In Order".

       (Which they actually weren't, on my return trip;
        I handed her my work ID in the same plastic carrier
        as my train pass, and handed her the credit card
        I'd bought the tickets with explaining that I wasn't
        on government business and asking when had
        the policy changed and commenting.  And the nice
        Rent-A-Xray-Technician who asked if I minded if
        he searched my computer bag was totally confused
        when I said "Yes, of course I mind.")

You can still travel in a car if someone else is driving,
and you can still get on a train without identification,
but without papers you can't fly or drive, and you can't
ride a horse on the freeway except in the back of a horse trailer.
Driver's licenses were the beginning of a long downhill trend.

I wonder if they'll still accept an American passport; the country
has obviously been taken over by Pod People while we weren't looking....
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From hallam at ai.mit.edu  Sun Aug  4 19:13:18 1996
From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:13:18 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <4u3255$si2@life.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <32053E44.2781@ai.mit.edu>


Oh dear oh dear....

First off people on cypherpunks seem to have the idea that the type
of people who go blasting peoples heads off have brains. Without
wanting to inflate people's egos too much the average reader of
cypherpunks is an awful lot smarter than your average criminal. 

Fancy plans to disolve gun barrels etc are way too complex for 
your average criminal and in any case it is substantially easier
to drop a gun in a lake or the sea and less likely to result in
incrimination than to try disolving it, run 200 rounds through
it or whatever.


Vacuming up powder left over from a rifle range would not help
very much. One of the problems of building a bomb is to make 
sure that all the explosive goes off. A gas chromatograph is 
able to differentiate spent and unspent explosive. It would be 
easier to go off and buy the stuff from multiple sources or
to make ones own explosive from nitrates with oxidants.

I would expect that anyone vacuming up the residue from a gun
club is likely to have difficulty explaining what he is doing.
After all one does not usually go off to play Rambo, then stick
an apron on and start doing the housework.


I personally think that tagants is an insuffieicent approach to
the problem. Given the number of gun related homicides in the
US it is not unreasonable to require each individual cartridge
to be stamped with a serial number and for gun dealers to be 
required to record each individual purchase. That at least 
was my advice to the UK govt after Dunblane. 

If people go arround claiming that ownership of guns is necessary
so that people can commit acts of treason against the US govt
then it is inevitable that there will be pressure for greater
regulation. The NRA has been playing a bad hand stupidly. By
raising the militia argument they have played into the hands
of abolitionists. It would be entirely foolish for the crypto
lobby to allow themselves to be tied to the NRA. The NRA has
no choice but to support civil liberties, there is no reason
why the wider civil liberties movement needs to support the
NRA.


More significant for crypto  policy is the recent revelations 
about US spying on the European Union by spoofing CISCO routers
via SNMP. That act should be exploited to drive a wedge between
US attempts to bar use of cryptographic security systems and
the members of the EU.


		Phill





From rvincent at cnmnet.com  Sun Aug  4 19:36:11 1996
From: rvincent at cnmnet.com (RICHARD VINCENT)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:36:11 +0800
Subject: CDT Policy Post 2.25 - Senate Encrypti
Message-ID: <199608050021.TAA14904@future.cnmnet.com>


-- [ From: RICHARD VINCENT * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --


-------- REPLY, Original message follows --------

Date: Monday, 24-Jun-96 01:57 AM

From: Shabbir J. Safdar        \ Internet:    (shabbir at vtw.org)
To:   cypherpunks at toad.com     \ Internet:    (cypherpunks at toad.com)

Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 2.25 - Senate Encrypti 

Damn, we've been found out.

I don't suppose anyone will notice the fact that although I've helped with
the preparation for the SAFE day, I won't actually be attending the event.

Clearly, I don't want to get caught.

-Shabbir J. Safdar * Online Representative * Voters Telecomm. Watch (VTW)
 http://www.vtw.org/ * Defending Your Rights In Cyberspace

PS On a more serious note, I can't get testimony into the record for this
hearing if you don't send it to me.  Sooo...please either fill out the form
at http://www.crypto.com/submit/ or if you find that format too constraining
, just send it to me in email.  I'll see what I can do to make sure PGP
signatures are reproduced intact in the Congressional Record.

Most everyone I know cannot simply jaunt off to D.C. for a day.  Why not at
least make your voice heard?

anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com writes:
>WHY IS NO ONE TALKING ABOUT THIS VIOLATION OF OUR RIGHTS? EVER HERE THAT
>IN THE US VOTES ARE supposed to be *****SECRET*****??? NO MORE!
>
>Why does the vtw cdt etc want to hand over your name to the us gov? Notice
>how there's two events one on the east cost and the other on the west coast





From drose at AZStarNet.com  Sun Aug  4 19:46:37 1996
From: drose at AZStarNet.com (David M. Rose)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:46:37 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <199608050034.RAA15919@web.azstarnet.com>


Bill Stewart wrote:

>I wonder if they'll still accept an American passport; the country
>has obviously been taken over by Pod People while we weren't looking....

I don't know if this was an isolated incident, but I recently attempted to
pick up a package at the Post Office using my passport as I.D.  NO, I was
told, this is not acceptable identification, and as a union worker, you
can't tell me what to do.  Appeals to chicken-hearted management were
brushed off; I finally identified the highest ranking union official (shop
steward?), who reluctantly ordered the recalcitrant worker to fetch my parcel.

Your guess is as good as mine...

Dave Rose






From unicorn at schloss.li  Sun Aug  4 20:06:47 1996
From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 11:06:47 +0800
Subject: Pipe bombs vs high explosives.
In-Reply-To: <199608040337.UAA17682@dns1.noc.best.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.94.960804210041.9632F-100000@polaris>


On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, James A. Donald wrote:

> Does anyone have any experimental information comparing an 
> untamped high explosive with a pipe bomb?

> Homemade low explosives tend to be even more feeble 
> than manufactured low explosives, because it is inadvisable
> for amateurs to recorn their powder, with the result that
> home made powders burn slow, whereas homemade high
> explosives are just as effective as manufactured high 
> explosives.
> 
> My theoretical expectation is that pipe bombs would be 
> very ineffectual when compared to high explosives, 
> especially using home made powders.

Flash powders are quite easy to make and deflagrate quickly enough to
cause quite a nice bang without any containment what so ever when set off
in amounts over about two tablespoons worth.

Start off with fine enough mesh Al powder and grind your oxidizer down
fine enough and all you need for proper mixing is a (static treated)
zip-lock bag.

Not that I would ever suggest that anyone try to manufacture such
mixtures, but they are plenty potent enough to match and exceed most
manufactured deflagrating powders.

--
I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist
unicorn at schloss.li






From drose at AZStarNet.com  Sun Aug  4 20:40:22 1996
From: drose at AZStarNet.com (David M. Rose)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 11:40:22 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <199608050134.SAA05951@web.azstarnet.com>


Phil  H-B writes:

>Oh dear oh dear....

(Mucho B.S. elided)

Dear Doc:

Trollmeister supreme Sternlight has left the building.  Hint...hint...






From shamrock at netcom.com  Sun Aug  4 20:50:33 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 11:50:33 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <v02120d27ae2b05587a10@[192.0.2.1]>


At 15:48 8/4/96, Bill Stewart wrote:

>I wonder if they'll still accept an American passport; the country
>has obviously been taken over by Pod People while we weren't looking....

A US passport is not considered valid ID by the State of Oregon. If
somebody here doesn't belive this, send someone who looks like he might be
under 21 into any liquor store in Oregon with just an US passport.


-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From liberty at gate.net  Sun Aug  4 21:01:30 1996
From: liberty at gate.net (Jim Ray)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 12:01:30 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill...[Noise]
Message-ID: <199608050151.VAA72932@osceola.gate.net>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Phill Hallam-Baker <hallam at ai.mit.edu> wrote:

>Oh dear oh dear....
...

>I personally think that tagants is an insuffieicent approach to
>the problem. Given the number of gun related homicides in the
>US it is not unreasonable to require each individual cartridge
>to be stamped with a serial number and for gun dealers to be 
>required to record each individual purchase. That at least 
>was my advice to the UK govt after Dunblane. 

So _THAT'S_ how they could have prevented the atrocity.  ;>

Weakening caused by the stress of stamping, the immensity of the
number of cartidges fired every day in the U.S., and the fact that
revolvers *exist* aside, we have these strange people called
"reloaders" in this country, Phill, and right now they have LOTS of
unstamped brass on hand. Criminals who wanted it would have an
unlimited supply into the foreseeable future. I agree with you that
criminals are, on the whole, dumber than cypherpunks, but it is easy
for them to pick up ideas like shooting a few hundred rounds or filing
a barrel etc. whether or not they are as likely as we are to have them
first. They already use all-fabric bleach to get any blood/DNA out of
clothing used in crimes, and even if they ARE stupid, they sit around
jail cells an awful lot talking about how to get away with their
crimes next time. JMR

Regards, Jim Ray -- DNRC Minister of Encryption Advocacy

"Big business never pays a nickel in taxes, according to Ralph
Nader, who represents a big consumer organization that never
pays a nickel in taxes." -- Dave Barry 

 Defeat the Duopoly! Vote "NOTA," not Slick/Dull in November.
 Harry Browne for President. Jo Jorgensen for Vice-president.
 http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/
___________________________________________________________________
PGP id.E9BD6D35 51 5D A2 C3 92 2C 56 BE  53 2D 9C A1 B3 50 C9 C8
<mailto:liberty at gate.net> http://www.shopmiami.com/prs/jimray Coming
soon, the "Pennies For Perot" page. Keep billionaires off welfare!
___________________________________________________________________


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Freedom isn't Freeh.

iQCVAwUBMgVRim1lp8bpvW01AQFwxAP7B4AugPSgmbnhFE3J7d8un1CMzYTznJkq
4Pf8zjH9iOo3pn+LoY7QgOFjUZo5tcuGRfyiEWJozfoeykhQ7Ds3tpiAUtfx2smN
1O9LGHuzv6WDOKuqK4bKAS20S0W2lWRgcDDBc8PEcXdSgekCDCgBFKRPr+IKY/jP
j2TIIVt0aLE=
=dOud
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From shamrock at netcom.com  Sun Aug  4 21:10:11 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 12:10:11 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <v02120d28ae2b079d02b4@[192.0.2.1]>


At 20:20 8/4/96, Hallam-Baker wrote:

>If people go arround claiming that ownership of guns is necessary
>so that people can commit acts of treason against the US govt
>then it is inevitable that there will be pressure for greater
>regulation. The NRA has been playing a bad hand stupidly. By
>raising the militia argument they have played into the hands
>of abolitionists.

Appeasement never works. See the following two quotes.

"1935 will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has
full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient,
and the world will follow our lead into the future." - Adolf Hitler

* > What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not  <*
* > warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit <*
* > of resistance?  Let them take arms!" - Thomas Jefferson, 1787  <*

NRA Life Member and proud of it,


-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From alano at teleport.com  Sun Aug  4 21:23:14 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 12:23:14 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960805022246.00d7c568@mail.teleport.com>


At 07:01 PM 8/4/96 -0700, Lucky Green wrote:
>At 15:48 8/4/96, Bill Stewart wrote:
>
>>I wonder if they'll still accept an American passport; the country
>>has obviously been taken over by Pod People while we weren't looking....
>
>A US passport is not considered valid ID by the State of Oregon. If
>somebody here doesn't belive this, send someone who looks like he might be
>under 21 into any liquor store in Oregon with just an US passport.

This is because Oregon has been taken over by The Pod People.  (Or at least,
the Oregon Liqueur Control Commission has.) 

Getting such foolishness reversed is difficult when you have as many control
freaks in the State Legislature (and elsewhere).
---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Sun Aug  4 23:15:07 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 14:15:07 +0800
Subject: A Libertine Question
Message-ID: <199608050420.VAA16738@toad.com>


At 08:18 PM 7/31/96 -0400, DCF wrote:
>Since there are no "public places" in a free society, 

If it _were_ a free society, there would be places that
nobody had conquered yet, common and usable by anyone
(as opposed to today's "public" spaces that had been conquered
by a government which claims the right to exclude others,
and places owned by individuals or groups which the government
has said are none-the-less public.)

There would probably also be places that were owned by
people who had somehow acquired the right to kick other people out;
you can argue about whether a free society should treat land
this way.  (Most land ownership in the US derives from
land grants given by kings who were put in place by
watery tarts handing out swords or equally authoritative processes,
or from land that the Yankees stole from the Mexicans
and then re-stole from the Indians and granted to the railroads.)

In a human-created environment like cyberspace the existence
of ownable spaces is obviously true, unlike found spaces like land.  
There are also found spaces in cyberspace where there's no particular
rightness to assigning ownership, and places that even if
you decide ownership through first use is a good thing,
people can decide to leave unowned or shared.
IP address space and domain name space are good examples -
property ownership is a useful analogy, preventing conflicts
by multiple people who want the name foo.com, but once you've
suggested naming things *.com, it's fair game.
On the other hand, since the Internet is a cooperative shared fiction,
if you want people to be able to find and connect to you,
getting the popular nameservers and routers to point the name
joesgarage.microsoft.com and IP address 127.0.0.2 in your direction
may not be highly productive.
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From harmon at tenet.edu  Sun Aug  4 23:20:46 1996
From: harmon at tenet.edu (Dan Harmon)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 14:20:46 +0800
Subject: problem
In-Reply-To: <3203D296.2E30@multipro.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960804231307.8066A-100000@alpha.tenet.edu>


First go read the original documents that were sent to you. A novel idea.


On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Fallen Angel wrote:

> I unsubscribed from your mailing list so why am I still receiving 
> email from it. I No longer wish to receive any more mail, so please stop 
> it.
> 
> Fallen Angel
> fallenangel at multipro.com
> 





From take at barrier-free.co.jp  Sun Aug  4 23:27:09 1996
From: take at barrier-free.co.jp (Hayashi_Tsuyoshi)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 14:27:09 +0800
Subject: key escrow article on the Asahi Shinbun
Message-ID: <199608050420.NAA28069@ns.barrier-free.co.jp>


I found key escrow article on the Asahi Shinbun.  Asahi
Shinbun is one of the most famous Japanese newspaper.  I
can't write more info because I am busy now.

BTW, Asahi Shinbun has their own server:

  URL: http://www.asahi.com/.

# English version is also available.

- Tsuyoshi Hayashi <take at barrier-free.co.jp>
- PGP public key: http://www.barrier-free.co.jp/take/pgpkey
- (CF 27 34 5B 46 FA 2A 12  D2 4C E3 F7 2A 45 E0 22)
- Barrier Free, Inc. (established on 25 Jan 1996)





From alanh at infi.net  Sun Aug  4 23:39:26 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 14:39:26 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <32053E44.2781@ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960805002648.13067C-100000@larry.infi.net>


On Sun, 4 Aug 1996, Hallam-Baker wrote:

> in any case it is substantially easier
> to drop a gun in a lake or the sea and less likely to result in
> incrimination than to try disolving it, run 200 rounds through
> it or whatever.
 
   Police divers pull murder weapons out of the water all the time. It's
very, very common.

Phil, is there ANY freedom that you would fight for?





From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Mon Aug  5 00:28:04 1996
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 15:28:04 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <v02120d27ae2b05587a10@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <NBa7RD31w165w@bwalk.dm.com>


shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) writes:

> At 15:48 8/4/96, Bill Stewart wrote:
>
> >I wonder if they'll still accept an American passport; the country
> >has obviously been taken over by Pod People while we weren't looking....
>
> A US passport is not considered valid ID by the State of Oregon. If
> somebody here doesn't belive this, send someone who looks like he might be
> under 21 into any liquor store in Oregon with just an US passport.

This reminds me how many years ago (I think this was under Reagan, or maybe
even Carter) I went to U.S.V.I without any papers at all, not realizing that
it's "abroad". When the time came for me to get back, I was shocked to see
some security people checking the papers of the people getting on the plane
to N.Y. I explained the situation and they let me in with no papers.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





From lharrison at csbh.mhv.net  Mon Aug  5 01:19:32 1996
From: lharrison at csbh.mhv.net (Lynne L. Harrison)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 16:19:32 +0800
Subject: More to be paranoid about...
Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19960805061137.2aef92e0@pop.mhv.net>


At 10:14 PM 8/3/96 -0700, Alan Olsen wrote:
>Take a look at:
>
>     http://www.spiritone.com/cgi-bin/plates
>
>Feed it an Oregon licence plate number and it will feed you back all sorts
>of info about the person/victim.



  Not surprising at all.  Unbeknownst to most of the general populace, DMV
records (for the most part) are public records and are subject to Freedom of
Information requests.  AAMOF, I have an account with NYS/DMV which I use to
pull my clients' records when they are charged with DWI and/or other traffic
offenses.  I simply dial into DMV's [outdated] computer and pull the record.
It also came in handy on a personal level when I did not get my registration
card after buying my car and discovered that the dealer had not registered
my car.







************************************************************
Lynne L. Harrison, Esq.       |    "The key to life:
Poughkeepsie, New York        |     - Get up;
lharrison at mhv.net             |     - Survive;
http://www.dueprocess.com     |     - Go to bed."
************************************************************

DISCLAIMER:  I am not your attorney; you are not my client.
             Accordingly, the above is *NOT* legal advice.






From cts at deltanet.com  Mon Aug  5 01:46:04 1996
From: cts at deltanet.com (Kevin Stephenson)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 16:46:04 +0800
Subject: 119_816
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960718235050.006c0f38@gonzo.wolfenet.com>
Message-ID: <320595D0.7D52@deltanet.com>


Cerridwyn Llewyellyn wrote:
> 
> At 11:29 AM 7/17/96 GMT, you wrote:
> >   6-17-96. NYP:
> >
> >   "11 Officers Are Accused of Failure to pay Taxes. Claims of
> >   Sovereignty and 98 Dependents."
> >
> >      At least 11 New York City police officers have been
> >      accused of failing to pay any Federal taxes for several
> >      years by declaring they each had 98 dependents and by
> >      insisting that the Government had no right to tax them.
> >      The officers relied on a package of instructions that
> >      described how to avoid paying taxes by declaring that
> >      they were sovereign citizens who did not have to pay
> >      taxes.
> 
> Anyone know which "package of instructions" they were using,
> and where they can be obtained online?
> //cerridwyn//

I've heard of this before. Check altavista for soveriegn(sp?) citizens
of the united states. A lot of complicated rambling about birth 
certificates, duress and the federal government.





From rp at rpini.com  Mon Aug  5 02:13:59 1996
From: rp at rpini.com (Remo Pini)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 17:13:59 +0800
Subject: crypto CD source
Message-ID: <9608050710.AA29333@srzts100.alcatel.ch>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

To: cypherpunks at toad.com
Date: Mon Aug 05 09:07:49 1996
Addendum: If I have more than 1000 buyers, the price drops to around 9 USD 
per CDROM.

>Estimated prices (USD) - If I have at least 300 "certain" buyers:

>CDROM with 2-color label and jewel-case: USD 13.-
>Shipment US:                             USD  3.- (swiss mail sucks!)   
>Shipment Europe:                         USD  2.-
>Since the origin of those CD's is Switzerland, no ITAR would apply.
- --------< fate favors the prepared mind >--------
Remo Pini                            rp at rpini.com
PGP:  http://www.rpini.com/remopini/rpcrypto.html
- ------< words are what reality is made of >------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBMgWdxhFhy5sz+bTpAQEsmQf9GwGi2Mz3e6/HlTA0Ry5FpI14uPxk7qzS
id7GJ50dL88q8M0JcLEOEWu3SZuhvgInV7aG3YzhjyaOs8tmCW1WKilUzgDXyIMQ
mnvlqfWilquKRQN2LW+5DjBaECeuDTHSYH/EJofsU7v6ivLBCe39yM51h+5SFG0c
mZRQebJFBge6udvhFfdtoDWMP7D1pZE+6ZtOCFeeZUmntNQtGH7KLD/rijfiuFWN
uwl1d2779QDhu4FtEOm363f9HO4r2fU7K5B7g0dSeBF2uhZCgcJd7TzhwkmSupxO
rT0VyJtYy6YcTs9YFbvxNABQ6RtRvKVbSxzLGAdPkAKXFDFodjTw6w==
=2Z4p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




From problem at webchat.wbs.net  Mon Aug  5 02:14:49 1996
From: problem at webchat.wbs.net (WebChat Broadcasting System)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 17:14:49 +0800
Subject: Validation Code for WBS Access
Message-ID: <9608050701.AA02391@webchat.wbs.net>


Thank you for joining the WebChat Broadcast System!  We eagerly await 
seeing you online.  

Your handle is:   e3f0f5eeeb
Your password is: toad

Your validation# is: 90582293  (you only need to use this once)

To get full access to the system, go to 
http://wbs.net and enter any room.  When prompted, enter your handle,
password. and validation#.

Then you're done!  You'll have full privileges on WBS.

By validating you acknowledge having read the WBS system rules
(at http://wbs.net/wbs/rules.html) and promise to abide by them.  
Thank you.


If you have any difficulties please write us at problem at wbs.net.  Thanks, 
and enjoy!

Sincerely,

The staff at WebChat Broadcasting System





From Ben.Samman at EdelWeb.fr  Mon Aug  5 02:44:11 1996
From: Ben.Samman at EdelWeb.fr (Ben)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 17:44:11 +0800
Subject: Who the hell is ....
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960802100835.0069d380@pop1.jmb.bah.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95.960805093641.279F-100000@mercier.gctech.edelweb.fr>


> OK, I'v been on the list a bit now. I see a lot of the same
> people posting to it, 
> My question is " Who the Hell is Sternlight" At first I thought
> it was a pen name ( the light on the end of a boat ?? )

He claims he was some ranking official during the Carter administration.

To get more information do an AltaVista search for him--I seem to remember
some FAQ on this exact question.


Ben.
____
Ben Samman.................................................ben at edelweb.fr
Paris, France                 		Weather has improved. Stay tuned.






From rp at rpini.com  Mon Aug  5 02:49:27 1996
From: rp at rpini.com (Remo Pini)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 17:49:27 +0800
Subject: crypto CD source
Message-ID: <9608050705.AA29297@srzts100.alcatel.ch>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

To: cypherpunks at toad.com
Date: Mon Aug 05 09:03:30 1996
Well,

I could.

Estimated prices (USD) - If I have at least 300 "certain" buyers:

CDROM with 2-color label and jewel-case: USD 13.-
Shipment US:                             USD  3.- (swiss mail sucks!)   
Shipment Europe:                         USD  2.-

Since the origin of those CD's is Switzerland, no ITAR would apply.

If you're interested (at least 300 of you), mail me. 
Subject line: CryptoCD
Anonymous guys ignored (but data handled confidentially and encrypted on my 
machine).
If you want more than one, send more than one mail (but with a different 
body, so I can kill duplicated mails).
Once I get more than 300 requests, I'll start putting it together and have 
it mastered. At that point I will request a written order (fax or so). If 
anyone has a better idea on how to handle the stuff, mail me...

> I have about 100MB (compressed) of crypto archives, papers, source code,
> etc etc, reasonably well organised with descriptions of each file.  I've
> got a friend to put it on CD, but only for my own use.  If there's
> someone who can get them done in bulk outside the US you could probably
> use this as a crypto CD (I don't think there's anyone in NZ who could do
> it, and I don't really want the hassle of organising the whole thing).
- --------< fate favors the prepared mind >--------
Remo Pini                            rp at rpini.com
PGP:  http://www.rpini.com/remopini/rpcrypto.html
- ------< words are what reality is made of >------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBMgWcxBFhy5sz+bTpAQE1/gf/eJI+dt1guw0joLKoBpm0ShpvK3/fHFwb
SUlMJSaLgEODR9DRCC+uYc3+mRTNLrup8w1XIcQO1OAZO/GQumL97y8TtLp8fBpY
FcNTYxtXY/UflHE5OySLWIz4jfNArIpZBxXb/zuUqrAqCj5NsWWHUsb45CM/j8cy
1dYT5wcoGELbJiZy1jVZV6eEmqliZIZAtD+fU+bq4oJIgDRCEDWt6RTJPhoHfx5F
wxEuOkpeBQi8uJD9gL85lk5S7Exa1n/0u8+UgE1sm9UMIRA8IOzRK3lIlRvT+0VI
0r2lK4wnKdhmILkPcxGq+82bUZ7HUepS4oZGAduzhW73ANtMEzVPxw==
=5+88
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




From strix at rust.net  Mon Aug  5 03:25:30 1996
From: strix at rust.net (Jennifer Mansfield-Jones)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 18:25:30 +0800
Subject: SOUP KITCHENS -- lifespans
In-Reply-To: <199608031110.GAA12116@einstein>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960804180050.3830E-100000@neophron.rust.net>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Sat, 3 Aug 1996, Jim Choate wrote:

> > Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 20:12:04 -0700
> > From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
> > Subject: Re: SOUP KITCHENS (fwd)
> > 
> > Hardly a proved correlation. A lot of other factors come into play. But
> > never mind. No point arguing.
> 
> But it is. I suggest you take a look at any social health text and look at
> the comparisons between diets of our ancestors, ourselves, and various
> 

In case Alan's post didn't make it clear, _average_ lifespan values are
averages from birth.  Maximum lifespans haven't changed.  However, between
the effects of vaccination and municipal sewage treatment, any infant born
in a developed country has a good chance of living a long time.  A society
with very high birth rates and high infant mortality will have a low
average lifespan even if every child who makes it to the age of ten lives
to be a hundred. 

regards,
`=-`=-`=-`=-                                          -='-='-='-='
 Jennifer Mansfield-Jones   http://www.rust.net/~strix/strix.html
 strix at rust.net                            PGP key ------^
          Never try to outstubborn a cat.  (R.A.H.)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgUoOUxVmNNM34OxAQG59AQAropfEClWviL0TZaLqlos5p/gP5cnQGYL
uMVAgtBb5smfD3GF5xs4LBtvW5987H4oFI5AOXCUcOuKePWXhtXwMbA5g9JfbKpa
v8sm9v1uG9ci9TwiArD5ePu1xBE4974IBo+23dEfq0LD/QhioO4J2QFMaKkiqoBe
tu9z5eccjqY=
=Ya3s
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From rp at rpini.com  Mon Aug  5 03:28:19 1996
From: rp at rpini.com (Remo Pini)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 18:28:19 +0800
Subject: crypto CD source
Message-ID: <9608050810.AA04146@srzts100.alcatel.ch>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

To: cypherpunks at toad.com
Date: Mon Aug 05 10:08:19 1996
I'm looking for contents for the crypto CD.

Since this CD will (might) be mastered in Switzerland, no ITAR applies to 
the CD, but if anyone wants to include some restricted stuff, send it to me 
(dat, disk or encrypted email)

Address: Pini Computer Trading
         "Crypto CD"
         Hofwiesenstr. 234
         8057 Zuerich
         Switzerland

My wish list:

- - PGP
- - A lot of algorithms in C, Pascal, ASM (for diverse processors)
- - Private Idaho
- - Pronto Secure
- - a suite of html pages describing all files (I'll probably have to do that
  myself)
- - Netscape (the secure versions, if its legally feasable -> Netscape?)
- - Crypto papers
- - Crypto analysis papers
- - Lawtexts concerning crypto (ITAR, France, ...)

Anything else?


- --------< fate favors the prepared mind >--------
Remo Pini                            rp at rpini.com
PGP:  http://www.rpini.com/remopini/rpcrypto.html
- ------< words are what reality is made of >------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBMgWr9BFhy5sz+bTpAQEOuQf+PAfJrxDLo4mEDsC8QelbBE5WHqNecmcq
soPN0ZDSDzSEdbofALHBEiAW8SHVT4h1XWPNG1QjNvuCsluLN4HX1IQSfCjjCNzO
/T9jqNqKbwDL5ssluD9nc/tbjaTN2zdXIVRE2/1QZmyrysT5MK5tiHzbbkrFjSy2
tVwUmEk9W+gTAzNBxLE5ni2Q6oLLuf+jnzw0jBn15nA3S7USN+G+dMsNG2ROR7ZI
Lp1a9XvqtjZ41Ju1C0QVR6u53a7mB8unrxxALewF2TjJUXxJOA0W1QbxM8/aI6cb
jjePr0NoohyCORLNh+pGaBQ+DXYY28JL5keCyGCr8k/INXHIksbEIQ==
=aTqo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




From rp at rpini.com  Mon Aug  5 04:14:10 1996
From: rp at rpini.com (Remo Pini)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 19:14:10 +0800
Subject: Getting serious: Crypto CD
Message-ID: <9608050845.AA06404@srzts100.alcatel.ch>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

To: secure at commtouch.com, cypherpunks at toad.com
Date: Mon Aug 05 10:43:16 1996
Dear Sirs

I want to put together a CDROM containing "everything" a cryptographically 
interested person needs. I would like to include your cryptographically 
relevant products.

The CD will be organized the following way:

- - the user interface consists of HTML-pages
- - one of these pages will include a directory of files
- - one directory entry will be your product (whatever you prefer as a name)
  and leads to a page/pages of your design.
- - you can use a directory named after your company (but in compliance with
  CDROM restrictions -> 8 letters, no special chars, i.e. "mycompny" or so)
  and any subdirectories you want.
- - binary program space is restricted to 25 MB
- - html space is restricted to 1 MB

Dos and Donts:

- - program limitations (stuff you only get when you register/buy the full
  product) must be declared.
- - export/usage restrictions must be declared (US/nonUS)

Further info:

The CD will be sold at around USD 15 (including shipment)

Advertisement:

Seperate advertisment (html pages and graphics) can be made for USD 50.- 
per page (<200K). A link on the index page will be included.

Legalese:

- - This CD will be mastered and shipped outside US, so whatever you send us
  (if you send it from outside US) will not be affected by ITAR.
- - The copyright will remain in your hands, you only grant Pini Computer
  Trading (PCT) the permission to duplicate and distribute the content on
  a CDROM and, should we choose to do so, on the internet.
- - The legality of your content is your responsiblity. 


If you are interested, mail me...

Sincerely yours,

Remo Pini
Pini Computer Trading

PS: This message may have been forwarded by anyone. If you receive it 
several times, ignore the redundant mails.

PSS: This message may be forwarded to anyone offering a cryptographically 
relevant product. (-> forward ahead, cypherpunks)

- --------< fate favors the prepared mind >--------
Remo Pini                            rp at rpini.com
PGP:  http://www.rpini.com/remopini/rpcrypto.html
- ------< words are what reality is made of >------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBMgW0JRFhy5sz+bTpAQFdsQgAsxz04ridQ+urdvMVQzpBVkjonuc0ek4Q
GihsyATZi2U0Fi73UleJsOz9rsnmodvcJYvkQ2Omtp7mQOFHYWBi7nihELMb06OQ
YXduCr/0BQWRX+ORrJtQtehMdctzHnQcTV1AEcCR400YQlBu2YLiB7MLWsEtvqoK
15q0q3Hu7TMOVvplgSMjAT2yAevI5iKEn1AJ5q+kqjQ81fT3KTtuJh2U06TLtSQp
2PecOIk8rPq6fy+wyQN6/PssLrbKkPIKDzMwpupDUb4rEMGNJYP/wykF4BN+vBBE
8pvpD+qd5iODCZplsQ1lY95t48xqBsZ4AQHl8W5WKha5LMBuIFVmIQ==
=RdAm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




From master at internexus.net  Mon Aug  5 05:48:44 1996
From: master at internexus.net (Laszlo Vecsey)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 20:48:44 +0800
Subject: The Dining Cryptographers in the Disco
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.92.960805062336.6658B-100000@micro.internexus.net>


There is a protocol for anonymous message broadcast which supposedly
detects disruption, can someone tell me how it works? Applied Cryptography
lists a reference to "Advances in Cryptology, Crypto '89 Preceedings"
(page 690) but I dont have a copy of it, I'd appreciate it if someone
could fill me in on what it says.

Thanks!

- Lester






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Mon Aug  5 06:46:28 1996
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 21:46:28 +0800
Subject: Who the hell is ....
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.95.960805093641.279F-100000@mercier.gctech.edelweb.fr>
Message-ID: <F7P7RD34w165w@bwalk.dm.com>


Ben <Ben.Samman at EdelWeb.fr> writes:
> > OK, I'v been on the list a bit now. I see a lot of the same
> > people posting to it,
> > My question is " Who the Hell is Sternlight" At first I thought
> > it was a pen name ( the light on the end of a boat ?? )
>
> He claims he was some ranking official during the Carter administration.

No, no, it's euphemism for a flashlight stuck up someone's rectum,
where "flashlight" is in turn euphemism for "gerbil". :-)

Anyway, whoever had bet that he'd keave this list by now, has won.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





From declan at eff.org  Mon Aug  5 07:03:36 1996
From: declan at eff.org (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 22:03:36 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <v02120d27ae2b05587a10@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960805040046.21970A-100000@eff.org>


I had the same problems when I was working at Xerox in Webster, NY. 
Supermarkets just plain didn't want to accept my passport as valid ID.

More recently, I attended an IEEE conference at MITRE in Virginia. To 
enter the building, they required you to fill out a form listing your 
SSN. The forms were taped to the guard's desk, in full view of anyone who 
was curious.

I was horrified and gave a random number.

A friend who was with me (who in fact is on cypherpunks) dutifully gave
her correct SSN. Oh, and they wanted photo ID. I offered press
credentials. Unfortunately for the lackey, it didn't have any sort of
serial or ID number on it he could record.

-Declan



On Sun, 4 Aug 1996, Lucky Green wrote:

> At 15:48 8/4/96, Bill Stewart wrote:
> 
> >I wonder if they'll still accept an American passport; the country
> >has obviously been taken over by Pod People while we weren't looking....
> 
> A US passport is not considered valid ID by the State of Oregon. If
> somebody here doesn't belive this, send someone who looks like he might be
> under 21 into any liquor store in Oregon with just an US passport.
> 
> 
> -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
>    Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
>    Vote Harry Browne for President.
> 
> 


// declan at eff.org // I do not represent the EFF // declan at well.com //







From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu  Mon Aug  5 07:19:01 1996
From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 22:19:01 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
Message-ID: <199608051211.GAA26432@zifi.genetics.utah.edu>


FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
DAVID STERNLIGHT






From rah at shipwright.com  Mon Aug  5 07:35:04 1996
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 22:35:04 +0800
Subject: International Conference on Electronic Markets !
Message-ID: <v03007806ae2b8facd6a0@[206.119.69.46]>



--- begin forwarded text


From: Ram Chellappa <ram at yama.bus.utexas.edu>
Subject: International Conference on Electronic Markets !
To: www-buyinfo at allegra.att.com
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 96 2:54:04 CDT
Reply-To: ram at cism.bus.utexas.edu

X-Hpvue$Revision: 1.8 $
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Message/rfc822
X-Vue-Mime-Level: 4
Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85]

                            Seventh Conference on
          Organizational Computing, Coordination and Collaboration

               International Conference on Electronic Markets

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  FOR MORE INFORMATION: http://ecworld.utexas.edu/others/flyer.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Theme : Electronic Markets
 Date : November 6-8, 1996
 Location : IC2 Institute, 2815 San Gabriel, Austin, Texas 78705
 Questions

 About program: contact Dr. Andrew Whinston at 512-471-8879
 About registration/logistics: contact the RGK Foundation at
 512-474-9298 or jhampton at zilker.net

Sponsors :

    * IC2 Institute
    * Center for Information Systems Management
    * College and Graduate School of Business Administration at The
      University of Texas at Austin;
    * RGK Foundation
    * National Science Foundation
 Who should attend

   * Software developers and managers in the electronic commerce area
   * Executives concerned with developments in banking and finance
   * Executives concerned with developing on-line customer service and
     logistics support
   * Executives who make investments in next generation technology
   * Executives who develop internal operations support
   * Academics in information systems, marketing, finance,
     organizational behavior, and service management concerned with the
     emerging research topics in the electronic commerce domain.




--
RAMNATH K CHELLAPPA                       Ph: 512-467-7813 (home)
Doctoral Candidate			      512-471-7962 (office)
Center for Information Systems Management
Department of MSIS
University of Texas, Austin.       Web: http://cism.bus.utexas.edu/ram
			  	 email: ram at cism.bus.utexas.edu
--Some people have 10 years of experience,
while some have one year of experience,
10 times over !!!

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Mon Aug  5 08:56:06 1996
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 23:56:06 +0800
Subject: More to be paranoid about...
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19960805061137.2aef92e0@pop.mhv.net>
Message-ID: <BwP7RD33w165w@bwalk.dm.com>


"Lynne L. Harrison" <lharrison at csbh.mhv.net> writes:
>
>   Not surprising at all.  Unbeknownst to most of the general populace, DMV
> records (for the most part) are public records and are subject to Freedom of
> Information requests.  AAMOF, I have an account with NYS/DMV which I use to
> pull my clients' records when they are charged with DWI and/or other traffic
> offenses.  I simply dial into DMV's [outdated] computer and pull the record.
> It also came in handy on a personal level when I did not get my registration
> card after buying my car and discovered that the dealer had not registered
> my car.

If I remember correctly, it costs $4 for one search (via modem), and one has
to pre-pay $200 to open the account. One can do a free sarch if one's friendly
with the LEO's. :-)

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





From amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in  Mon Aug  5 09:39:17 1996
From: amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in (Arun Mehta)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 00:39:17 +0800
Subject: "And who shall guard the guardians?" [NOISE]
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960805124248.002f27d4@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>


At 13:50 04/08/96 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
>>restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law
>>and are necessary:
>>(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;
>>(b) For the protection of national security or of 
>>public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. 
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^        ^^^^^^           ^^^^^^^
>
>Lots of UN declarations of rights have this sort of exception;
>"protection of public morals" is something so blatantly vague
>and broad that if a government contends that such a concept exists, 
>as the covenant does, it could probably force the World Court
>to conclude that it permits them to declare as "necessary"
>just about anything short of burning witches and heretics,
>and humanely beheading heretics, drug dealers, and anonymous remailer
>operators is probably ok by this standard.

Heretics it depends, drug dealers no problem, but anonymous
remailer operators haven't been beheaded yet. Their persecution
will probably take much more subtle forms -- denial of government
jobs or contracts (lawbreakers and anarchists, after all),
whatever hurts most. There are many ways of manipulation in an
advanced, information based society that are no less cruel than
the torture of more overtly authoritarian ones.

International covenants aren't entirely useless: governments have
to report to the UN how much success they are having in
implementation, and are questioned closely. If indeed the fears
of many of you come true, cypherpunks will have far greater
awareness of human rights instruments and their usefulness (or
lack thereof) before the century is done.

Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta at cpsr.org
http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/  finger amehta at cerfnet.com for public key






From m5 at vail.tivoli.com  Mon Aug  5 09:40:32 1996
From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 00:40:32 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
In-Reply-To: <199608051211.GAA26432@zifi.genetics.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <3205FA65.7716@vail.tivoli.com>


Anonymous wrote:
> 
> FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
> DAVID STERNLIGHT

Why can't we get trolls of this caliber more often?





[ E-mail me today to sign up for your official "I'm a Shitopunk" shirt! ]

______c_____________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX    * For the time being,
       m5 at tivoli.com * m101 at io.com          *    
      <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101>         *    three heads and eight arms.





From master at internexus.net  Mon Aug  5 10:19:28 1996
From: master at internexus.net (Laszlo Vecsey)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 01:19:28 +0800
Subject: Destroying client/server model, anonymous broadcasting.
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.92.960805083049.9867A-100000@micro.internexus.net>


Getting back to the Dining Crypto Problem, is it possible to complete a
round by passing information around the circle of participants (each
individual communicates and maintains a connection with the person on the
left and right) rather than sending the round results to everyone via a
central server that everyone is connected to? In effect no one would be a
server, or everyone would be a server depending on the way you look at it.
A circular linked list would be maintained and kept in sync by every
client so that error recovery could come into play if someone mysteriously
disconnects. Could it work? How would the protocol differ.

Also I need info on the Disco problem, detecting if someone is tampering.

Thanks.

- Lester






From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU  Mon Aug  5 10:25:28 1996
From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 01:25:28 +0800
Subject: List of reliable remailers
Message-ID: <199608051350.GAA16087@kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu>


   I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed
information about remailer features and reliability.

   To use it, just finger remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu

   There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of
interesting links to remailer-related resources, at:
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html

   This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP
encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see:
http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html

   For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger
pgpkeys at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu

This is the current info:

                                 REMAILER LIST

   This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first
   part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration
   options and special features for each of the remailers. The second
   part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each
   remailer. You can also get this list by fingering
   remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu.

$remailer{"extropia"} = "<remail at miron.vip.best.com> cpunk pgp special";
$remailer{"portal"} = "<hfinney at shell.portal.com> cpunk pgp hash";
$remailer{"alumni"} = "<hal at alumni.caltech.edu> cpunk pgp hash";
$remailer{"c2"} = "<remail at c2.org> eric pgp hash reord";
$remailer{"penet"} = "<anon at anon.penet.fi> penet post";
$remailer{"flame"} = "<remailer at flame.alias.net> cpunk mix pgp. hash latent cut post reord";
$remailer{"mix"} = "<mixmaster at remail.obscura.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?";
$remailer{"replay"} = "<remailer at replay.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek";
$remailer{"ecafe"} = "<cpunk at remail.ecafe.org> cpunk mix";
$remailer{"amnesia"} = "<amnesia at chardos.connix.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ksub";
$remailer{'alpha'} = '<alias at alpha.c2.org> alpha pgp';
$remailer{'nymrod'} = '<nymrod at nym.jpunix.com> alpha pgp';
$remailer{"lead"} = "<mix at zifi.genetics.utah.edu> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"treehole"} = "<remailer at mockingbird.alias.net> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"nemesis"} = "<remailer at meaning.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut";
$remailer{"exon"} = "<remailer at remailer.nl.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"vegas"} = "<remailer at vegas.gateway.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut";
$remailer{"haystack"} = "<haystack at holy.cow.net> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"ncognito"} = "<ncognito at rigel.cyberpass.net> mix cpunk pgp hash latent";
$remailer{"lucifer"} = "<lucifer at dhp.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"jam"} = "<remailer at cypherpunks.ca> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek";
$remailer{"winsock"} = "<winsock at c2.org> cpunk pgp hash cut ksub reord";
$remailer{'nym'} = '<config at nym.alias.net> newnym pgp';
catalyst at netcom.com is _not_ a remailer.
lmccarth at ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer.
usura at replay.com is _not_ a remailer.

Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator:
(c2 alpha)
(flame replay)
(alumni portal)

Use "premail -getkeys pgpkeys at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu" to get PGP keys
for the remailers. Fingering this address works too.

Note: The remailer list now includes information for the alpha
nymserver.

Last update: Mon 5 Aug 96 6:48:42 PDT
remailer  email address                        history  latency  uptime
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
alumni   hal at alumni.caltech.edu           *##+-*+++###     3:25  99.99%
alpha    alias at alpha.c2.org               *+++++++-+*+  1:18:11  99.98%
mix      mixmaster at remail.obscura.com     -+--+++-++-   1:28:16  99.96%
treehole remailer at mockingbird.alias.net   -+---++++-++  1:35:49  99.93%
lead     mix at zifi.genetics.utah.edu       +++ ++++++++    38:48  99.87%
haystack haystack at holy.cow.net            ###++***+*##     3:13  99.85%
winsock  winsock at c2.org                   -..--------   4:26:36  99.85%
penet    anon at anon.penet.fi               -----------   8:31:00  99.83%
replay   remailer at replay.com              ********** *     5:01  99.67%
nymrod   nymrod at nym.jpunix.com            -**-+###+**      7:24  99.56%
lucifer  lucifer at dhp.com                  ++++-+++--+   1:12:03  99.53%
c2       remail at c2.org                    +++++++--+-   1:36:27  99.34%
portal   hfinney at shell.portal.com         ###+*+-*## #     2:55  99.28%
ncognito ncognito at rigel.cyberpass.net     --.._-_-.. * 17:16:16  98.94%
nemesis  remailer at meaning.com             +********+      29:19  98.24%
extropia remail at miron.vip.best.com        ---.---__    26:57:48  97.25%
amnesia  amnesia at chardos.connix.com       -- --- ---    2:58:14  96.19%
jam      remailer at cypherpunks.ca            **********    16:40  95.51%
vegas    remailer at vegas.gateway.com       -*#-**#*        13:17  57.14%

   History key
     * # response in less than 5 minutes.
     * * response in less than 1 hour.
     * + response in less than 4 hours.
     * - response in less than 24 hours.
     * . response in more than 1 day.
     * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days).

   cpunk
          A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To:
          field.
          
   eric
          A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead.
          
   penet
          The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses
          X-Anon-To: in the header.
          
   pgp
          Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the
          keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email
          address, should be used as the encryption key ID.
          
   hash
          Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of
          outgoing messages.
          
   ksub
          Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode.
          
   nsub
          Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode.
          
   latent
          Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option.
          
   cut
          Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option.
          
   post
          Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header.
          
   ek
          Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header.
          
   special
          Accepts only pgp encrypted messages.
          
   mix
          Can accept messages in Mixmaster format.
          
   reord
          Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note:
          I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and
          haven't verified the reord info myself.

   mon
          Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email.
          
   filter
          Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If
          not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined
          for public forums are subject to filtering.
          

Raph Levien





From pjb at ny.ubs.com  Mon Aug  5 10:29:20 1996
From: pjb at ny.ubs.com (Paul J. Bell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 01:29:20 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
Message-ID: <9608051411.AA07503@sherry.ny.ubs.com>


"picric acid is indeed more powerful than TNT.  it was the primary explosive
used in WW-I. it was also the primary cargo on a ship, i think it was the
"Montblac", that exploded in Halifax harbor and nearly wiped-out the city. this
was in the 1917 - 1919 timeframe.

	-paul


> From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Fri Aug  2 19:04:53 1996
> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 13:12:30 -0500 (CDT)
> From: Sean Walberg <umwalber at cc.UManitoba.CA>
> To: Conrad Walton <conrad at walton.com>
> Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com
> Subject: Re: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type> : > TEXT/PLAIN> ; > charset=US-ASCII> 
> Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com
> Content-Length: 1357
> 
> I remember seeing an item on TV that had mentioned an acid bomb (it was a
> news report about a public access TV show that was showing people how to 
> make bombs).  In this example, some common chemicals were mixed together, 
> tightly closed, and moments later an explosion occured.  They never said 
> the chemicals, for all I know it could have been lemon juice and baking 
> soda in a sealed container, a la Dry Ice bomb...  It didn't look like a 
> bomb of mass destruction, more of a loud bang and a smallish explosion...
> 
> Sean
> 
> 
> On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Conrad Walton wrote:
> 
> > >and everyplace else all the news.answers FAQs are stored. What, precisely, is
> > >an acid bomb? Also note the standard blame-the-Internet (not, say, increased
> > >irritation with government after the Republicans failed to reduce it) 
> > >rhetoric.
> > 
> > i'm not exactly sure what an acid bomb is, but according to my book, The 
> > Anarchist Cookbook, that I bought in 1972 (was the internet around back 
> > then?), there is a compound called "picric acid" that is "more powerful 
> > than TNT, but has some disadvantages". 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sean Walberg                              umwalber at cc.umanitoba.ca
> The Web Guy                  http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~umwalber 
> UNIX Group, U. of Manitoba          PGP Key Available from Servers
> 
> 





From amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in  Mon Aug  5 11:17:09 1996
From: amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in (Arun Mehta)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 02:17:09 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960805124321.003064b0@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>


At 10:10 04/08/96 -0400, Robert Hettinga wrote:
>At 2:06 AM -0400 8/4/96, anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com wrote:
>> As long as they are doing any kind of usage-based
>> charging, that actual act of charging will continue to cost
>> considerably more than the data transmission.
>
>Ah. So, why settle the transactions for digital cash and skip all that
>overhead? Yet another application for micromoney.

True, though even better would be simply to charge you a flat
rate. If billing is that expensive, why bother? 

What happened to the proposals asking for flat-rate pricing before the FCC?

Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta at cpsr.org
http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/  finger amehta at cerfnet.com for public key






From netsurf at pixi.com  Mon Aug  5 11:59:10 1996
From: netsurf at pixi.com (NetSurfer)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 02:59:10 +0800
Subject: ****Tacoma, Washington Starts Taxing Internet Access 07/30/96
In-Reply-To: <199607311533.LAA05116@mccannerick-bh.mccann.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960805054010.6678B-100000@netsurfer>



On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. wrote:

>   	  				 
> >WASHINGTON, DC, U.S.A., 1996 JUL 30 (NB) -- By Bill Pietrucha.  
> >Tacoma, Washington, has just gained the distinction of being the 
> >only municipality in the United States to tax Internet Access 
> >providers (IAPs) like telephone service providers. 
> >

Hawaii has been taxing this (and everything else incl. collected 
taxes, food & medical) for years :-( calling it a "general excise tax"

#include <standard.disclaimer>
                    _   __     __  _____            ____
                   / | / /__  / /_/ ___/__  _______/ __/__  _____
                  /  |/ / _ \/ __/\__ \/ / / / ___/ /_/ _ \/ ___/
                 / /|  /  __/ /_ ___/ / /_/ / /  / __/  __/ /
================/_/=|_/\___/\__//____/\__,_/_/==/_/==\___/_/===============







From honey at citi.umich.edu  Mon Aug  5 11:59:34 1996
From: honey at citi.umich.edu (peter honeyman)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 02:59:34 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
Message-ID: <199608051349.GAA22092@toad.com>


Declan McCullagh writes:

> This is attempted proof by credentalism. I call him on it. 
> 
> Okay, Jim, what _do_ your lawyers say on this? Have you asked them? I,
> too, have an attorney, a civil liberties specialist and a graduate from
> Princeton law. So what? 

declan, you are a fucking liar, and i am calling you on it.  princeton does
not have a law school.

	peter





From janke at unixg.ubc.ca  Mon Aug  5 12:02:31 1996
From: janke at unixg.ubc.ca (janke at unixg.ubc.ca)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 03:02:31 +0800
Subject: The Dining Cryptographers in the Disco
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.92.960805062336.6658B-100000@micro.internexus.net>
Message-ID: <m2ivaxlu0t.fsf@clouds.heaven.org>



The paper you want is at 

http://www.zurich.ibm.ch/Technology/Security/sirene/publ/WaPf1_89DiscoEngl.ps.gz





From jimbell at pacifier.com  Mon Aug  5 12:08:25 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 03:08:25 +0800
Subject: Freeh slimes again: Digital Telephony costs $2 billion now ...
Message-ID: <199608051546.IAA09508@mail.pacifier.com>


At 08:52 AM 8/2/96 -0700, Brock N. Meeks wrote:
>
>On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Ernest Hua wrote:
>
>> Louis Freeh is now asking the Congress for $2 billion to fund
>> Digital Telephony.  Yes, that is FOUR TIMES what he said it
>> would cost the taxpayers to give up their own privacy.  Score
>> one for the cynics who said $500 million was not enough.
>
>I broke the story about how much Digital Telephony would *really* cost in 
>CyberWire Dispatch more than two years ago.  The price tag in my piece:  
>"... at least $2 billion..."  In that Dispatch I wrote that the Clinton 
>White House had made the decision to support the bill based on a flawed 
>cost/benefit analysis study the FBI had done.

Which should remind us...  While the costs are going up, so far undetermined 
is the "benefits" that are supposed to accrue from this bugging ability.   
How many crimes, approximately, are going to be solved or prevented by the 
expenditure of this $2 billion dollars?  One hundred?  A thousand?  Even if 
it were 10,000, that would still be $200,000 per crime.  Is there no cheaper 
way to prevent those crimes?

And, moreover, do we REALLY want to prevent those "crimes"?   If they are 
attacks on an illegitimate government that is violating our rights, as far 
as I can see we want to see those "crimes" succeed, not fail.

Let's put their feet to the fire:  They should be required to show a 
reasonable estimate of the benefits as well as an apparently phony initial 
estimate of the costs.  If they respond that they can't estimate the 
benefits, then why do they want us to incur the costs.

However, the real answer is even simpler.


Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From camcc at abraxis.com  Mon Aug  5 12:15:49 1996
From: camcc at abraxis.com (camcc at abraxis.com)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 03:15:49 +0800
Subject: Again, disappointed in Gingrich
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960805154557.0073b034@smtp1.abraxis.com>


At 03:17 PM 8/1/96 EDT, you wrote:
:	Again, I'm disappointed in Gingrich. This amplifies the earlier
:comments.
:	-Allen

I have never been disappointed in Gingrich; he has always been what he
seems--just another politician, albeit a front for the "religious" right.
Why expect anything different?

Alec (from Ga.)






From camcc at abraxis.com  Mon Aug  5 12:16:50 1996
From: camcc at abraxis.com (camcc at abraxis.com)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 03:16:50 +0800
Subject: Tolerance
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960805154837.006b4d98@smtp1.abraxis.com>


At 02:46 PM 8/1/96 -0800, you wrote:
:Just a comment to all of the 'true libertarians' out there, especially
:the "defend to the death" types:  How many of you defended Mr.
:Sternlight's recent membership?
:
Beautiful.

Alec






From minow at apple.com  Mon Aug  5 13:02:05 1996
From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 04:02:05 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19960805124321.003064b0@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>
Message-ID: <v03007804ae2bd3eda69b@[17.202.12.102]>


Arun Mehta <amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in> writes:

>
>True, though even better would be simply to charge you a flat
>rate. If billing is that expensive, why bother?
>

Tragedy of the Commons.

Flat rate works only if no single user can use more than
a tiny fraction of the total bandwidth.

Martin Minow
minow at apple.com









From frissell at panix.com  Mon Aug  5 13:08:34 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 04:08:34 +0800
Subject: The Halifax Explosion
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960805165110.006766dc@panix.com>


At 10:11 AM 8/5/96 EDT, Paul J. Bell wrote:
>"picric acid is indeed more powerful than TNT.  it was the primary explosive
>used in WW-I. it was also the primary cargo on a ship, i think it was the
>"Montblac", that exploded in Halifax harbor and nearly wiped-out the city. this
>was in the 1917 - 1919 timeframe.
>
>	-paul
>

The Mont Blanc carried quite a lot of fun stuff.  "Stored in the holds, or
simply stacked on deck, were 35 tons of benzol, 300 rounds of ammunition, 10
tons of gun cotton, 2,300 tons of picric acid (used in explosives), and
400,000 pounds of TNT."  Thursday December 6, 1917.  The greatest
conventional explosion produced by mankind.

See:

http://ttg.sba.dal.ca/nstour/halifax/explode.htm

Governments shouldn't be trusted with high explosives.  They can't be
counted upon to handle them properly.

>From 1889-1989 the governments of the world murdered 160 million people.
>From 1889-1989 the private individuals of the world murdered fewer than 20
million people.

See Death by Government by R. J. Rummel
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=1560001453/1372-7724803-532789

DCF






From unicorn at schloss.li  Mon Aug  5 13:12:03 1996
From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 04:12:03 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960805040046.21970A-100000@eff.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.94.960805130022.25646B-100000@polaris>


On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> I had the same problems when I was working at Xerox in Webster, NY. 
> Supermarkets just plain didn't want to accept my passport as valid ID.
> 
> More recently, I attended an IEEE conference at MITRE in Virginia. To 
> enter the building, they required you to fill out a form listing your 
> SSN. The forms were taped to the guard's desk, in full view of anyone who 
> was curious.
> 
> I was horrified and gave a random number.

You should always be horrified, and always give a random number.

--
I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist
unicorn at schloss.li






From m5 at vail.tivoli.com  Mon Aug  5 13:24:01 1996
From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 04:24:01 +0800
Subject: gathering bandwidth through spam
Message-ID: <320629E6.247A@vail.tivoli.com>


Maybe I'm dense, but it didn't really "click" until the other day that
the Netscape mail reader, which renders html pages mailed as attachments
right there in the mail reader window, would also run any Java applets
(and, I guess, Javascript code) referenced by the page.

If you're using Netscape as a mail reader, and this isn't old news to
you, you can try it: point the browser at a page with an applet, and
then use the "File->Mail Document" menu command to mail it to yourself.

Thus:  if you want to gather some free compute cycles, just spam a
document out to a few thousand hapless victims.  Those using Netscape
for mail (and you can find them pretty easily by looking at the
"X-Mailer" field when creating your mailing list) will click on your
message, pull your applet, and give you some cycles without realizing
it.  Of course, your applet will be free to connect back to home base
and relay any results it gets.

Cool, huh?

______c_____________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX    * For the time being,
       m5 at tivoli.com * m101 at io.com          *    
      <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101>         *    three heads and eight
arms.





From jimbell at pacifier.com  Mon Aug  5 13:27:36 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 04:27:36 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
Message-ID: <199608051717.KAA14678@mail.pacifier.com>


At 10:11 AM 8/5/96 EDT, Paul J. Bell wrote:
>"picric acid is indeed more powerful than TNT.  it was the primary explosive
>used in WW-I. it was also the primary cargo on a ship, i think it was the
>"Montblac", that exploded in Halifax harbor and nearly wiped-out the city. this
>was in the 1917 - 1919 timeframe.
>
>	-paul


The molecular difference between TNT and picric acid is a methyl group, 
weight 15 (on TNT) substituted for a hydroxyl, weight 17 (on 
picric acid.)   If there is a difference, it is a very small one.

Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From unicorn at schloss.li  Mon Aug  5 13:29:25 1996
From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 04:29:25 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <199608042250.PAA13719@toad.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.94.960805124757.25001A-100000@polaris>


On Sun, 4 Aug 1996, Bill Stewart wrote:

[...]

> You can still travel in a car if someone else is driving,
> and you can still get on a train without identification,
> but without papers you can't fly or drive, and you can't
> ride a horse on the freeway except in the back of a horse trailer.
> Driver's licenses were the beginning of a long downhill trend.
> 
> I wonder if they'll still accept an American passport; the country
> has obviously been taken over by Pod People while we weren't looking....

I often have trouble with foreign passports and one of my associates often
has extensive problems trying to use an american passport for anything in
the United States.

Comments uttered in my presence on the subject have included:

"We don't accept THOSE."

"Sorry, we need to see OFFICIAL identification."

"Don't you have something state issued?"

"Uh, we need a driver's license number."


> #			Thanks;  Bill
> # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
> # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!
> 
> 

--
I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist
unicorn at schloss.li






From rah at shipwright.com  Mon Aug  5 13:48:02 1996
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 04:48:02 +0800
Subject: Email Confidentiality and Malpractice?
Message-ID: <v0300780aae2bd8ca6cc2@[206.119.69.46]>



--- begin forwarded text


X-Sender: oldbear at pop.tiac.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 12:48:12 -0300
To: Bob Hettinga <rah at shipwright.com>
From: The Old Bear <oldbear at arctos.com>
Subject: Email Confidentiality and Malpractice?

Bob:

I always feel funny passing along items like this from usenet.

This was posted to nine of the alt.business newsgroups dealing with
law and insurance investigation.  It seemed reasonably interesting,
contains some useful information, and is not overly offensive for a
self-promotional spam.  (And, at least it was posted in appropriate
places.)

If you see any merit in all or part of this being reposted to dcsb
or elsewhere, feel free to do so.

Cheers,
Will

--- Forwarded message follows ---
Newsgroups:alt.business.insurance
From: syr at netroplis.net (Bill Fason)
Subject: Email and confidentiality: Are you committing malpractice?
Organization: Serves You Right Civil Process & Investigations
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 96 17:57:54 GMT
Lines: 74

If you're discussing cases through email and you're not encrypting your
correspondence, then you could be committing malpractice.  See:

        http://www.gsu.edu/%7Elawppw/lawand.papers/bjones.html

                        Client Confidentiality:
            A Lawyer's Duties with Regard to Internet E-Mail
                                  by
                            Robert L. Jones

                            August 16, 1995

    Contents:
       1. E-Mail v. Snail Mail
       2. Hacker, Cracker, Phracker - Sniffer, Spoofer, Spy
       3. Encryption to the Rescue?
       4. Bad Things That Happen to Good Lawyers
       5. Ethical Considerations
       6. The Attorney-Client Privilege
       7. Negligence Anyone?
       8. Conclusion
       9. Endnotes

Bob's homepage is  http://www.mindspring.com/~bobjones/my1sthom.html


And here is the website for Georgia State Univ. Law School.  It has one
of the best collections of cyberlaw resources I've seen.  GSULaw is at
the cutting edge of the field.

            http://www.gsu.edu/~lawadmn/gsulaw.html

While Bob's brilliant article specifically addresses attorney-client
confidentiality, his insights apply to any professional using email.
In fact, anyone who uses email for internet or intranet communications
faces the same fact of life: unencrypted email carries no expectation
of privacy.  It's like dropping a postcard through the mail.  In fact,
it's even worse.  Important discussions of cases, clients, patients,
bids, negotiations, strategies or anything requiring confidentiality
needs to be securely encrypted.  Sending unencrypted sensitive email
invites nightmare scenarios.

        Viacrypt is the answer. It combines the essentially unbreakable
strength of Phil Zimmerman's PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) with the
user-friendly interface of Windows.  Easy to install and use, Viacrypt
allows the user to quickly encrypt and decrypt email.  It also allows
the user to sign messages, and to check the signature of other electronic
messages.
        Viacrypt also allows the user to encrypt files on one's own hard
drive.  A user of PGP can leave the office knowing that sensitive files
will remain confidential regardless of who is on the evening cleanup
crew.
        Regular PGP for DOS is free. If you want to find out more about
where and how to get your free copy, then visit the Encryption Policy
Resource Page:

                     http://www.crypto.com/

        And if you need help getting it up and running, feel free to
contact me.

        Viacrypt, on the other hand, costs money.  I offer it
        for $125 plus shipping.

        I suggest that you get your copy fast while it is still legally
available.  Both FBI Director Louis Freeh and Vice President Al Gore
have both spoken out against allowing US citizens to use encryption this
strong.  They want everyone to register their private encryption software
keys with the federal government, thus allowing the feds to read anyone's
email.  It is reminiscent of the old communist governments' laws
requiring citizens to register their typewriters with the police.
Widespread use of PGP will hamper government efforts to ban it.  PGP is
so strong that the federal government has declared it a weapon and
banned its export.

Bill Fason
Serves You Right
Civil Process & Investigations          * Skiptraces
1436 W. Gray #272                       * Background Checks
Houston TX 77019                        * Asset Searches
713/524-4767                            * PGP Encryption Consulting
713/942-8165 fax                        * Financial Fraud Detection
SLN A-8111

--- end forwarded text



-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/







From tcmay at got.net  Mon Aug  5 13:51:05 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 04:51:05 +0800
Subject: The Myth of Flat Rates and Infinite Bandwidth
Message-ID: <ae2b842502021004a399@[205.199.118.202]>


At 4:40 PM 8/5/96, Martin Minow wrote:
>Arun Mehta <amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in> writes:
>
>>
>>True, though even better would be simply to charge you a flat
>>rate. If billing is that expensive, why bother?
>>
>
>Tragedy of the Commons.
>
>Flat rate works only if no single user can use more than
>a tiny fraction of the total bandwidth.
>

This was also the fallacy of the "dark fiber" vision of George Gilder, who,
as an economist of sorts, should've known better.

--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 at 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."









From jims at MPGN.COM  Mon Aug  5 14:26:39 1996
From: jims at MPGN.COM (James C. Sewell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 05:26:39 +0800
Subject: Corporate e-mail policy
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960805173421.0075df00@tansoft.com>


At 11:22 PM 8/3/96 -0400, Rabid Wombat wrote:

> What you 
>publish as a use policy, and what you actively enforce do not have to be 
>the same.
>

  Unfortunately this is a problem in many companies.  There are policies
which are enforced to the letter, guidelines which are just suggestions,
and fake-rules which are not even attempted to be enforced.

  The problem comes when the employee and employer can't distinguish
them from each other.  

  Personally I think I would approach it as the privacy we have with the
eontents of our car's trunk.  If an officer has probable cause to search
the trunk then he can, otherwise he can't.  It's not a perfect system but
it does work better than other alternatives I can think of.

  Write into your policy:
    "Electronic mail may be monitored if there is sufficient reason to
     believe that it is being improperly used which includes, but is not
     limited to: mail to competitors, more than 20 recipients (spam), and
     incoming mail from questionable sources.  If such monitored mail is
     encrypted the employee must provide a clear text version of the mail
     which is to be unencrypted under supervision to avoid substitutions.
     Any employee refusing to make available such mail will be ...."

  Just remember, as was said, once you make a policy it becomes precedence
and will stick with you forever... longer if it's a bad one.

Best Wishes
   Jim
Jim Sewell - jims at tansoft.com    Tantalus Incorporated - Key West, FL






From hua at chromatic.com  Mon Aug  5 14:32:50 1996
From: hua at chromatic.com (Ernest Hua)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 05:32:50 +0800
Subject: Confirmation Needed: American(s) hack into Euro systems ...
Message-ID: <199608051717.KAA21733@server1.chromatic.com>



Anyone knows the details behind this?

Ern

------- Forwarded Message

			    CDA96-L Digest 48

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Who's infringing whose privacy?
	by MichaelP <papadop at peak.org>

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Topic No. 1

Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 01:31:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: MichaelP <papadop at peak.org>
Subject: Who's infringing whose privacy?
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960804010241.24125B-100000 at kira>

London Sunday Times August 4 1996 

American spies hack into Euro computers to steal trade secrets

AMERICAN intelligence agents have hacked into the computers of the
European parliament and European commission as part of an
international espionage campaign aimed at stealing economic and
political secrets, according to investigators.

The European parliament has called in British communications experts
to improve its security and to block further attempts by American
govern ment agents to spy on its workings.

Security officials at the parliament's Luxembourg offices say they
have discovered several recent instances in which its communications
system was compromised by American hacking. They have also found
evidence that the Americans used information obtained from hacking to
help them in negotiations last year on the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade (GATT).

Lord Plumb, leader of the British Tory MEPs in the European
parliament, said he was shocked by the disclosure. "I will be taking
this up directly with the American ambassador [to the European
Union]," he said.

The CIA has already been accused by the Japanese and French
governments of hacking into their communications networks in an
attempt to obtain confidential trade secrets.

The European parliament's computer network links more than 5,000 MEPs,
officials, researchers and other staff to each other, and to the
European commission headquarters in Brussels and the council of
ministers.

Traffic across the network by telephone and computers includes details
of the private medical and financial records of many MEPs and
officials, and discussion documents on confidential issues, including
trade, tariff and quota agreements. The records of closed committees
of inquiry into BSE and fraud are also stored on the system.

European parliament sources say the Americans accessed the network by
compromising the information exchanges that link the parliament's
internal networks with the Internet and external users.

The devices, called "routers", filter entry to the European
parliament's network. It is understood the Americans were able to
obtain access to what is called the simple network management protocol
(SNMP), the language that enables the networks to talk to each other.
They were able to exploit the fact that parts of the system were
manufactured by two American firms.

The breach came to light when officials believed that American
negotiators had been given advance warning of confidential European
Union positions in last year's trade negotiations. "It was established
that the system had been penetrated just days before the talks," an EU
source said. "Our principal concern is not to establish what has
already been copied but to ensure that it does not happen again. This
is an on-going problem."

A spokeswoman for Antonio Cavaco, director of data processing at the
commission, confirmed that allegations of hacking had been
investigated. However, she said she was unable to provide any details.

- ------------------------------

End of CDA96-L Digest 48
************************







From ichudov at galaxy.galstar.com  Mon Aug  5 14:46:10 1996
From: ichudov at galaxy.galstar.com (Igor Chudov)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 05:46:10 +0800
Subject: Integrating PGP 3.0 Library with INN
Message-ID: <199608051829.NAA19030@galaxy.galstar.com>


Hi,

Has anyone thought of integrating PGP 3.0 library with INN? 

I was thinking along the lines of having PGPMoose support built
right into INN: if an arriving article is posted to a moderated
newsgroup for which a PGP key is available in the INN's keyring,
INN verifies existence and correctness of a PGP signature.

An article that fails this verification will be dropped. 

Same thing can be used for authenticating newgroup and rmgroup
messages, in the spirit of true freedom on usenet -- anyone would
be sent _their own_ newgroups and rmgroups but no one will
be impersonated.

For those not familar with PGP Moose, it is a program that was written
by Greg Rose. It is used for signing approvals on usenet articles. It
takes message body, several important header fields, signs them with
PGP and places the signatures in the headers, in order not to clobber the
text.

If moderators choose short enough keys (512 bits for example), this
verification will not take any significant amount of CPU time.


igor





From rvincent at cnmnet.com  Mon Aug  5 14:58:31 1996
From: rvincent at cnmnet.com (Zero Cool)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 05:58:31 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
In-Reply-To: <199608051211.GAA26432@zifi.genetics.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <3205B283.183B@cnmnet.com>


Anonymous wrote:
> 
> FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
> DAVID STERNLIGHTSuch language,
???????????????





From remailer at cypherpunks.ca  Mon Aug  5 14:59:02 1996
From: remailer at cypherpunks.ca (John Anonymous MacDonald)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 05:59:02 +0800
Subject: Implementing DSS Fortezza KEA
Message-ID: <199608051812.LAA32671@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu>



Adam Shostack wrote:
> 	There ws a paper presented at the rump session of Crypto '95
> entitled the k1 Key Exchange Algorithim.  The origin of the algorithim
> is not clear, however, if you're getting bitstreams from a Fortezza,
> you might want to find a copy of the paper.

The web says the paper was presented by one Carl Ellison.  How about it
Carl, is it online somewhere??






From rvincent at cnmnet.com  Mon Aug  5 15:05:35 1996
From: rvincent at cnmnet.com (Zero Cool)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 06:05:35 +0800
Subject: viruss'
Message-ID: <3205B2F7.7E74@cnmnet.com>


Does anyone know where thre is  good virus page????
I know that there is one out there, but dont have the add.
Zero Cool





From hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu  Mon Aug  5 15:24:53 1996
From: hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu (hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 06:24:53 +0800
Subject: Public report of the EU crack.
Message-ID: <9608051858.AA08707@Etna.ai.mit.edu>



>From the Sunday times:- 

http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/Sunday-Times/stifgnnws01015.html?youra-c


AMERICAN intelligence agents have hacked into
the computers of the European parliament and
European commission as part of an international
espionage campaign aimed at stealing economic and
political secrets, according to investigators, write
Tim Kelsey and David Leppard. 

The European parliament has called in British
communications experts to improve its security and
to block further attempts by American govern ment
agents to spy on its workings. 

Security officials at the parliament's Luxembourg
offices say they have discovered several recent
instances in which its communications system was
compromised by American hacking. They have also
found evidence that the Americans used information
obtained from hacking to help them in negotiations
last year on the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade (Gatt). 

Lord Plumb, leader of the British Tory MEPs in the
European parliament, said he was shocked by the
disclosure. "I will be taking this up directly with the
American ambassador [to the European Union]," he
said. 

The CIA has already been accused by the Japanese
and French governments of hacking into their
communications networks in an attempt to obtain
confidential trade secrets. 

The European parliament's computer network links
more than 5,000 MEPs, officials, researchers and
other staff to each other, and to the European
commission headquarters in Brussels and the council
of ministers. 

Traffic across the network by telephone and
computers includes details of the private medical
and financial records of many MEPs and officials,
and discussion documents on confidential issues,
including trade, tariff and quota agreements. The
records of closed committees of inquiry into BSE
and fraud are also stored on the system. 

European parliament sources say the Americans
accessed the network by compromising the
information exchanges that link the parliament's
internal networks with the Internet and external
users. 

The devices, called "routers", filter entry to the
European parliament's network. It is understood the
Americans were able to obtain access to what is
called the simple network management protocol
(SNMP), the language that enables the networks to
talk to each other. They were able to exploit the fact
that parts of the system were manufactured by two
American firms. 

The breach came to light when officials believed
that American negotiators had been given advance
warning of confidential European Union positions
in last year's trade negotiations. "It was established
that the system had been penetrated just days before
the talks," an EU source said. "Our principal
concern is not to establish what has already been
copied but to ensure that it does not happen again.
This is an on-going problem." 

A spokeswoman for Antonio Cavaco, director of
data processing at the commission, confirmed that
allegations of hacking had been investigated.
However, she said she was unable to provide any
details. 
[end]

I consider the political dimension of this affair to 
be more significant that the technical. This brings the
US and the French into the same category of anti-crypto
government with a habit of poking its nose into other
people business and getting caught.

		Phill












From sandfort at crl.com  Mon Aug  5 16:19:59 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:19:59 +0800
Subject: A SPANIARD IN THE WORKS? (non-crypto)
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960805122848.22701A-100000@crl2.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

Is there anyone on the list who lives in Spain?  If so, please
reply by private e-mail.

Thanks,


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








From adam at homeport.org  Mon Aug  5 16:22:42 1996
From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:22:42 +0800
Subject: Integrating PGP 3.0 Library with INN
In-Reply-To: <199608051829.NAA19030@galaxy.galstar.com>
Message-ID: <199608052017.PAA09340@homeport.org>


Igor Chudov wrote:

| Has anyone thought of integrating PGP 3.0 library with INN? 
| 
| I was thinking along the lines of having PGPMoose support built
| right into INN: if an arriving article is posted to a moderated
| newsgroup for which a PGP key is available in the INN's keyring,
| INN verifies existence and correctness of a PGP signature.


| If moderators choose short enough keys (512 bits for example), this
| verification will not take any significant amount of CPU time.

Its my experience that at full feed sites, there isn't enough cpu to
do this.  A p-90 can get ovewhelmed pretty easily trying to keep up
with the load.  Trying to look into the body of an article means at
least a few hundred more ops per article.  You could do this on a leaf
node.  However, you cut the reliability of the system by adding things
to go wrong.  Better to have a scanner that checks specific moderated
groups after INN has deposited the articles.

Adam





-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume





From aeisenb at duke.poly.edu  Mon Aug  5 16:25:06 1996
From: aeisenb at duke.poly.edu (Anne Eisenberg)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:25:06 +0800
Subject: Cookies on Microsoft Explorer?
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960805154442.12332B-100000@duke.poly.edu>



Does anyone know what the equivalent technology is on Microsoft to
Netscape's cookie technology?  Does Microsoft have support for cookies or 
not?  

All of the discussion on the list to do with
cookies is related to Netscape.  Does this mean that if one switches to
Microsoft Explorer one can avoid the problem?  Many thanks.

Anne Eisenberg
aeisenb at duke.poly.edu






From Frank_Schroth at zd.com  Mon Aug  5 16:39:58 1996
From: Frank_Schroth at zd.com (Frank Schroth)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:39:58 +0800
Subject: Personal View @2.0 Released
Message-ID: <9608052256.AA4175@mail.zd.com>



Dear ZD Net Member:

We're pleased to announce that the all-new ZD Net Personal View, 
the Web's premier source for personalized computing news, is now 
available at no charge, exclusively to registered members of ZD 
Net. 

With computing news and information -- now from over 650 respected 
sources -- ZD Net's Personal View allows you to create your own 
computing information service on the Web, tailored to track only 
the information that matters most to you.  

Save time searching and surfing.  Use Personal View to get a wide 
spectrum of coverage on the computing information you need to stay 
ahead.  And remember, it's all available in one place, it's updated 
24 hours day and it's FREE for our registered users!

We'd like to invite all of our ZD Net members to put the new 
Personal View to work for you. Click on the Personal View link on 
ZD Net's home page or go direct to www.pview.com to check out our 
brand-new look and, more importantly, all of our new features:

     -- More news from a wider range of sources (over 650!), 
     -- Expanded search capabilities (including 2 months of archived 
        information)
     -- More flexibility in creating your personal Profile
     -- Plus links to the very latest ZD Net news and features 
        related to your unique interests.

If you've already come to rely on Personal View, we know you'll be 
impressed with the improvements we've made. And if you haven't had 
the chance to visit Personal View, now is the perfect time. Just 
point your browser to www.pview.com, take a minute to set up your 
Custom profile and you'll have you're own personal information 
service on the WWW.

Thank you for your continued use of ZD Net!    We look forward to 
serving your computing information needs for a long time to come.

Sincerely,
ZD Net Personal View Team 





From m5 at vail.tivoli.com  Mon Aug  5 16:49:18 1996
From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:49:18 +0800
Subject: Stealth cookies
Message-ID: <32065A8C.39FA@vail.tivoli.com>


There's been a thread here about some outfit that, by being referenced
from web documents here and there, would insert its cookie in your
browser even though you've never directly visited that site.  I've
nuked any & all messages about that; if anybody recalls any details,
I'd be thankful for the information.

______c_____________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX    * For the time being,
       m5 at tivoli.com * m101 at io.com          *    
      <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101>         *    three heads and eight
arms.





From dfloyd at IO.COM  Mon Aug  5 16:58:49 1996
From: dfloyd at IO.COM (Douglas R. Floyd)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:58:49 +0800
Subject: Corporate e-mail policy
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960805173421.0075df00@tansoft.com>
Message-ID: <199608052008.PAA19323@pentagon.io.com>


> 
> At 11:22 PM 8/3/96 -0400, Rabid Wombat wrote:
> 
> > What you 
> >publish as a use policy, and what you actively enforce do not have to be 
> >the same.
> >
> 
>   Unfortunately this is a problem in many companies.  There are policies
> which are enforced to the letter, guidelines which are just suggestions,
> and fake-rules which are not even attempted to be enforced.
> 
>   The problem comes when the employee and employer can't distinguish
> them from each other.  
> 
>   Personally I think I would approach it as the privacy we have with the
> eontents of our car's trunk.  If an officer has probable cause to search
> the trunk then he can, otherwise he can't.  It's not a perfect system but
> it does work better than other alternatives I can think of.
> 
>   Write into your policy:
>     "Electronic mail may be monitored if there is sufficient reason to
>      believe that it is being improperly used which includes, but is not
>      limited to: mail to competitors, more than 20 recipients (spam), and
>      incoming mail from questionable sources.  If such monitored mail is
>      encrypted the employee must provide a clear text version of the mail
>      which is to be unencrypted under supervision to avoid substitutions.
>      Any employee refusing to make available such mail will be ...."

Personally, a policy may save or cause lots of money in losses.  My
recommendation:  Have an attorney look your policy over, or have him/her
write it for you.

It may cost some money, but may possibly save your company.






From alano at teleport.com  Mon Aug  5 16:59:00 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:59:00 +0800
Subject: ****Tacoma, Washington Starts Taxing Internet Access 07/30/96
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960805181729.00e8c4a0@mail.teleport.com>


At 05:42 AM 8/5/96 -1000, NetSurfer wrote:
>
>On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. wrote:
>
>>   	  				 
>> >WASHINGTON, DC, U.S.A., 1996 JUL 30 (NB) -- By Bill Pietrucha.  
>> >Tacoma, Washington, has just gained the distinction of being the 
>> >only municipality in the United States to tax Internet Access 
>> >providers (IAPs) like telephone service providers. 
>> >
>
>Hawaii has been taxing this (and everything else incl. collected 
>taxes, food & medical) for years :-( calling it a "general excise tax"

I believe the reason the Tacoma ordinance is getting so much flack is that
they are wanting to charge sales tax on all transactions that take place
from ISPs in Tacoma.

This type of taxation is not new.  Various jurisdictions have tried to use
the same thing on mail order houses.  Having worked for a service bureau
that dealt with mail order, I know what a hassle it is to try to keep track
of such taxation.  There is a company that will sell you the data of all of
the sales tax rates throughout the country.  This includes every little
podunk city, county, and fire district tax.  They are divided by zip code,
but that is no guarantees that you have the right place. The reality is that
trying to "be legal" under such regulations is next to impossible, even with
the proper data.  I know of few mail order firms that are willing to go to
that extreme.  (Unless, of course, they have gotten the proper threats from
some miffed tax baron.)

And they wonder why there is so much disrespect for the law...
---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From jwz at netscape.com  Mon Aug  5 16:59:08 1996
From: jwz at netscape.com (Jamie Zawinski)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 07:59:08 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960805040046.21970A-100000@eff.org>
Message-ID: <320652BC.31DF@netscape.com>


Black Unicorn wrote:
> 
[ ...random losers asking for your SSN... ]
> > I was horrified and gave a random number.
> 
> You should always be horrified, and always give a random number.

Well, it would be nice if it was that easy.  You (legally) need to give
the correct one to anyone who has to make a report about you to the IRS,
right?  Such as your employer.  But it's not always clear who else needs
it.  Is it needed to allow someone to do a credit check on you?  Is it
needed to get a driver's license?  (The fine print on the DMV forms says
"yes".)  Is it necessary to make use of employer-sponsored medical
insurance?  (I suspect that the answer to this one is "no", except for
the fact that when my employer set up my medical insurance they let the
insurance company use my SSN as my insurance-related-ID-number.  But in
any event, my dentist told me, "if you don't give it to us, they won't
pay.")

I don't like the idea of having a universal ID number, but neither do I
like the idea of having to go to extreme lengths to make the "right
thing" happen for something where my effort will have only moral impact,
not material.

If you already have a SSN, can you get a *new* one in any legal way?
(Sort of the same idea as changing your phone number to avoid
telemarketing scum...)

-- 
Jamie Zawinski    jwz at netscape.com   http://www.netscape.com/people/jwz/
``A signature isn't a return address, it is the ASCII equivalent of a
  black velvet clown painting; it's a rectangle of carets surrounding
  a quote from a literary giant of weeniedom like Heinlein or Dr. Who.''
                                                         -- Chris Maeda





From frissell at panix.com  Mon Aug  5 17:01:03 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:01:03 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960805194823.0087b730@panix.com>


On Sun, 4 Aug 1996, Bill Stewart wrote:

>> You can still travel in a car if someone else is driving,
>> and you can still get on a train without identification,
>> but without papers you can't fly or drive, and you can't
>> ride a horse on the freeway except in the back of a horse trailer.
>> Driver's licenses were the beginning of a long downhill trend.

Don't forget the bus.  Of course you can still drive a car without a DL.
Just don't get stopped.  Additionally, driving without a license is a pretty
minor offense.  Stick with cheap cars so confiscation isn't a problem.  Most
also forget that the Driver's License can be issued by any nation on earth.
Some countries have easier standards for license issuance.

Strange facts about cars and drivers in the US:

1)  It is legal for an unlicensed driver to own or drive an unregistered car
as long as he stays off the public streets and roads (what for expansion of
the definition of public streets and roads).

2)  It is legal for a licensed driver to drive a car owned by some other
person or legal entity.  Ownership and control can be two different things.

3)  A car can be registered in other states or in other countries and still
be driven anywhere in the US.

4)  A licensed driver is one with a license from any jurisdiction on earth
(try to stick to ones most cops have heard of).

5)  A US court cannot suspend a foreign license (but they can bust you for
other stuff if you get caught in the same local jurisdiction twice.)

>> I wonder if they'll still accept an American passport; the country
>> has obviously been taken over by Pod People while we weren't looking....
>

At 12:52 PM 8/5/96 -0400, Black Unicorn wrote:

>I often have trouble with foreign passports and one of my associates often
>has extensive problems trying to use an american passport for anything in
>the United States.
>
>Comments uttered in my presence on the subject have included:
>
>"We don't accept THOSE."
>
>"Sorry, we need to see OFFICIAL identification."
>
>"Don't you have something state issued?"
>
>"Uh, we need a driver's license number."

At least the Passport doesn't have your address or much useful information
on it.  And if you've done things properly, it's not connected to your SS
number.  Should work for flight ID at the airport these days, however.

DCF






From maverick at ns.interconnect.net  Mon Aug  5 17:03:18 1996
From: maverick at ns.interconnect.net (Sean Sutherland)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:03:18 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <19960805204130906.AAB148@maverick>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hallam-Baker Wrote -- 
> Date:          Sun, 04 Aug 1996 20:20:20 -0400

> I personally think that tagants is an insuffieicent approach to
> the problem. Given the number of gun related homicides in the
> US it is not unreasonable to require each individual cartridge
> to be stamped with a serial number and for gun dealers to be 
> required to record each individual purchase. That at least 
> was my advice to the UK govt after Dunblane. 

There's four major problems with this.  First off, a large number of 
guns used in homicides are revolvers or derringers (anyone got the 
numbers?).  These guns don't spit out the shells.  So, it would be 
utterly useless to do so.  The second problem is the number of shells 
expelled in the US every day.  I doubt there's enough room on the 
butt end of a shell to print that number (it couldn't be printed on 
the sides, as this would screw up the fit of the shell, and possibly 
weaken it).  And, it'd be almost impossible getting gun manufacturers to
pay for the equiptment that it would take to emprint serial numbers.  
The third number is that cartridges 
are recycled.  Aside from reloading your own, there's a large number 
of people that sweep up brass from gun ranges to reload themselves.  
The idea that someone swept up the brass could get almost anyone off. 
The final problem is the paperwork.  Cops today can barly keep up 
with the paperwork involved with the Brady Bill.  Could you imagine 
if they had to keep track of AMMO purchases?

> If people go arround claiming that ownership of guns is necessary
> so that people can commit acts of treason against the US govt
> then it is inevitable that there will be pressure for greater

The provision to give people the means to commit treason against the 
government are in the Constitution.  That's why the second amendment 
is there -- to empower the people to protect themselves against the 
government.  Then there's the first amendment, which is there 
partially so that the people can keep the government in check with 
speech and the press.

> regulation. The NRA has been playing a bad hand stupidly. By
> raising the militia argument they have played into the hands
> of abolitionists. It would be entirely foolish for the crypto

The NRA, I'm sorry to say, has screwed up royally.  It's about time 
that they regroup, or else they fall.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBMgUWzVZoKRrkPmSJAQGNPQf/TMJdVIPG+znJdWK3DlxmANXyLpz7qs8Z
ESHxWo5unmVuDMSGhLGNT15GabdlMozgmatM11iFXmtpzXSBDMwUQOGS29ScgF6l
PW3PBJ0AMscr16GFJu7EcaJStXXAKPCb3mIQmd/JEs51uwpPVgz65fMyRhq3LALF
2fSnNybWGpX60QefZfvtxd6ePx5FyO05v5BJD916N9rh5sRcyspO9Bn5gdvqZaEF
MjcYiDuV1qMl1oO7FAF41HDpw1x8hVp1BsUyN812aBl2YbYYxTaQwjE+BaEmExM7
wLgwUBLZ809fqBWeXpGw8CBmy4FmM7KwiI4fxGxdbcgnFBvRavTrdQ==
=SY5x
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
   Sean Sutherland    | mailto:maverick at interconnect.net
PGP Key ID - e43e6489 | http://www2.interconnect.net/maverick
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
GCS/C d- s+:+ a--- C+++ V--- P L E- W++ N++ K w o O-(++) M-- 
V PS+ PE++ Y PGP++ t--- 5+++ X++ R b++ DI+ D+ G e- h! !r y
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----





From ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu  Mon Aug  5 17:03:34 1996
From: ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu (Simon Spero)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:03:34 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.94.960805124757.25001A-100000@polaris>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960805162736.4762C-100000@tipper.oit.unc.edu>


I've been using by british passport as photo-id for years, and I haven't 
had any major problems- you can get your checks printed with your 
passport number on them instead of a drivers licence, which will makes 
things much easier.

Simon

---
Cause maybe  (maybe)		      | In my mind I'm going to Carolina
you're gonna be the one that saves me | - back in Chapel Hill May 16th.
And after all			      | Email address remains unchanged
You're my firewall -    	      | ........First in Usenet.........





From drose at AZStarNet.com  Mon Aug  5 17:07:58 1996
From: drose at AZStarNet.com (David M. Rose)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:07:58 +0800
Subject: Public report of the EU crack.
Message-ID: <199608052120.OAA06066@web.azstarnet.com>


Hallam-Baker wrote:

>I consider the political dimension of this affair to 
>be more significant that the technical. This brings the
>US and the French into the same category of anti-crypto
>government with a habit of poking its nose into other
>people business and getting caught.
>
>		Phill

Say what?  John Young I can understand; this blather?

Att: "Doc" Baker/Mr. Hyde, err, Hallam: any rudimentary text on
diction/grammer/syntax might be helpful to you.

Sheesh!  At least Sternlight seemed to be acquainted with the English language.






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Mon Aug  5 17:08:25 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:08:25 +0800
Subject: Destroying client/server model, anonymous broadcasting.
Message-ID: <199608052126.OAA28317@toad.com>


At 08:42 AM 8/5/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Getting back to the Dining Crypto Problem, is it possible to complete a
>round by passing information around the circle of participants (each
>individual communicates and maintains a connection with the person on the
>left and right) rather than sending the round results to everyone via a
>central server that everyone is connected to? In effect no one would be a
>server, or everyone would be a server depending on the way you look at it.
>A circular linked list would be maintained and kept in sync by every
>client so that error recovery could come into play if someone mysteriously
>disconnects. Could it work? How would the protocol differ.

There's an obvious simple way to do this which appears to be slightly wrong.
Somebody (assume it's Alice) announces a round "This is round N, size S 
bytes, value vvvv....", everybody who receives it does their calculations, 
XORs them in with the data, and passes it on.  Once it gets all the way
around (and Alice xors in her real number xor the nonce she started with),
it goes around again so everybody can see the message.

The catch is that two players can collude to monitor the player between them.
Since Eve knows what data she passed (Dr.) Fred, and their random numbers,
and Gorby knows what Fred passed him, and their random numbers,
they can tell whether Fred added any data of his own.  With a server-based
system, on the other hand, collusion that Eve and Gorby also find out
Fred's output, either by eavesdropping or colluding with the server.
(Hmmm - I suppose this also happens with Chaum's NSA dinner?  The example
essentially used broadcast to exchange all the users' contributions.)

Also, to set up a DCnet, you almost need a server of some sort to coordinate
who talks to whom.
#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu  Mon Aug  5 17:18:25 1996
From: hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu (hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:18:25 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <19960805204130906.AAA148@maverick>
Message-ID: <9608052116.AA09050@Etna.ai.mit.edu>



> First off, a large number of 
>guns used in homicides are revolvers or derringers (anyone got the 
>numbers?).  These guns don't spit out the shells.  So, it would be 
>utterly useless to do so.  

The shells are removed sometime or other. Nothing is a 100% solution
but anything that gives the criminal an extra thing to worry about 
improves the chances that a mistake is made.

Many people go to jail because of fingerprints on shell cases.

>The second problem is the number of shells 
>expelled in the US every day.  I doubt there's enough room on the 
>butt end of a shell to print that number (it couldn't be printed on 
>the sides, as this would screw up the fit of the shell, and possibly 
>weaken it).  

I doubt that more than 32 bits of info will be required. Thats not 
that difficult to imprint.

>And, it'd be almost impossible getting gun manufacturers to
>pay for the equiptment that it would take to emprint serial numbers.  

Not a problem, that type of machinery is a standard type of 
industrial machine. Might be expensive to adapt the lines but 
I doubt it.


>The third number is that cartridges 
>are recycled.  Aside from reloading your own, there's a large number 
>of people that sweep up brass from gun ranges to reload themselves.  
>The idea that someone swept up the brass could get almost anyone off. 

Not an issue. A person may have an excuse that explains why
the blood is in his car or his fingerprints are on the knife but
a conviction depends on more than one piece of evidence. If 
there is information that gives the police a lead it is 
usefull.

At present the police are investigating the purchase of white 
powder - checking each purchaser out who fits the Olympic
bomber profile. That is a lot of work for a much weaker lead.

If a person says that they fired at a range then you have 
narrowed the search scope to the guys at the range.

>The final problem is the paperwork.  Cops today can barly keep up 
>with the paperwork involved with the Brady Bill.  Could you imagine 
>if they had to keep track of AMMO purchases?

Not a problem, thats an opportunity. I build very large, very
high reliability computer systems. I can build machines that
deal with several million transactions a day for less than a 
million and run them for less than a quarter million a year. That
is cheap when one considers the cost of investigation saved.

>The provision to give people the means to commit treason against the 
>government are in the Constitution.  That's why the second amendment 
>is there -- to empower the people to protect themselves against the 
>government. 

Making that argument defeats your case. Irespective of the framers
of the constitution nobody in Congress or the Administration believes
that you have a right to take up arms against the government. In
fact they are scared of the militia movement and the NRA. Every time
you make that argument you make it harder for people to accept your
case. 

Its like hearing a Marxist spout stuff from Capital to support a
civil liberties. Regardless of wether the content makes sense the
form of the argument is a complete turn off. 

I used to side with HCI before I started talking to the 
talk.politics.guns people. That convinced me that they were a threat
to the security of the country - even before McVeigh sent me a
mail defending his 2nd ammendment rights that looked very 
much like yours. Regardless of whether he is guilty or not I
still regard him and those that hold his views to be as 
serious a threat to the USA as the Red Army Faction were in
Germany, or the Red Brigades in Italy or the IRA in the UK.

If people carelessly justify terrorism they are fueling that
fire. Up until now the US has not had a serious terrorist 
problem. If terrorism becomes widespread then don't imagine
the constitution will be a protection. Thomas and Reinquist 
are not going to stop measures to "protect the nation" even
if like the WWII internement of Japaneese nationals they are in
gross violation of the constitution. 

If you think the wiretap bill is bad think on this, all guns
of all types banned except where held by special license.
Checkpoints at major road intersections. Stop and search
patrols in city centers and the army on the street. Its not
at all far fetched, the UKgovt took less than a year to 
introduce such measures in Northern Ireland. Constitution or
not, don't expect that the US Congress won't make a similar 
response.


	Phill









From tcmay at got.net  Mon Aug  5 17:21:12 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:21:12 +0800
Subject: Corporate e-mail policy
Message-ID: <ae2ba0d5030210046128@[205.199.118.202]>


At 5:34 PM 8/5/96, James C. Sewell wrote:

>  Personally I think I would approach it as the privacy we have with the
>eontents of our car's trunk.  If an officer has probable cause to search
>the trunk then he can, otherwise he can't.  It's not a perfect system but
>it does work better than other alternatives I can think of.

This comparison breaks down completely. The police are not involved, so the
language of "probable cause" is inappropriate. We may differ in our
opinions on whether employers can search mail and car trunks, but the
language of "probable cause" suggests a legal/constitutional issue that is
probably not there.

Imagine Alice operates a courier service and owns and operates several
delievery vehicles . Bob, her employee, drives one of her cars. Is he to
imagine that the trunk may not be opened by Alice unless she has "probable
cause"? Nonsense. It it _her_ car, bought and paid for. To imagine
otherwise is to wander into a fever swamp in which owners of property may
not even use their own propery.

(If anyone suggests that landlords cannot barge into tenant's apartments,
this is a different situation. For one thing, there are usually terms and
conditions spelled out in a contract about when and under what
circumstances a landlord may enter the premises.)

Is corporate e-mail more like the courier service example or more like the
landlord-tenant example? I suggest the former, as the e-mail is used in the
everyday furtherance of business, and illegality/abuse may harm the owner,
as with drugs in the trunk of a courier car. (The owner of a property who
leases it out is generally not held liable for the misdeeds and crimes of
his tenants, except in some special circumstances. Hotel owners are not
guilty of the crimes of the residents, which are of course common.)

The original question asker, who asked how to help write his corporate
e-mail policy, is free to lobby for a different interpretation; this is,
after all, a matter of agreed-upon policy, not a matter for the state to
stick its nose into.

--Tim May


P.S.

>  Just remember, as was said, once you make a policy it becomes precedence
>and will stick with you forever... longer if it's a bad one.
>

Alice the Courier Service is of course perfectly free to announce new
policies, so your point is incorrect.

--Tim

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 at 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."









From deviant at pooh-corner.com  Mon Aug  5 17:28:16 1996
From: deviant at pooh-corner.com (The Deviant)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:28:16 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
In-Reply-To: <199608051211.GAA26432@zifi.genetics.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.94.960805185051.142A-100000@switch.sp.org>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, Anonymous wrote:

> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 06:11:56 -0600
> From: Anonymous <nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu>
> To: cypherpunks at toad.com
> Subject: FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
> 
> FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
> DAVID STERNLIGHT
> 

Whoever did this obviously lacks imagination, creativity, and brains.  Not
only would David not use such undescriptive phrases, but he would (and has
said so) not use a remailer.  Whoever did this, you are a true idiot.

 --Deviant
        "Uncle Cosmo ... why do they call this a word processor?"
        "It's simple, Skyler ... you've seen what food processors do to food,
	right?"
                -- MacNelley, "Shoe"


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBMgZDIzAJap8fyDMVAQFpZQf/Vh9A5bI6EABRkOn+izlflDSQO97FSc5T
PSddf/oH/a6biQeFsS+YLIZ/U9ZSxPUB3T0mquZe0YEtowa5FWNmfgKT40ERBHBf
n3fQrI1auBKuZ6W5TJz69qJLHUJj2ngbKqwQ49Ey3urnl4cAJqGCsvSI3qJyadmM
P6A44jHyc0YI83tOGgjTRzxbjXMGk5nmSkFfTQnDGnhpZNI7t0C5+cJ/iJ002YfS
zcTw2UbOx3jq5WLIqjFN2DZBgZy275xP0hZWQFanY4H4E90pmVKqPkW3ZQVdXysO
1fvB0hfreezH6Uc/jvDq4Zszv/m+bsAXPXDdj9EOclW0b7Pf00vEUg==
=Dn7o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From dsmith at prairienet.org  Mon Aug  5 17:34:08 1996
From: dsmith at prairienet.org (David E. Smith)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:34:08 +0800
Subject: PGP public key servers are useful! [noise?]
Message-ID: <199608052141.QAA15347@bluestem.prairienet.org>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

To: cypherpunks at toad.com
Date: Mon Aug 05 16:43:42 1996
Over the last couple of weeks, I've noticed a lot
of subscribers who PGP clearsign their messages,
but who haven't uploaded their keys to any of
the public keyservers.

Those keys are most useful when they're
available to people who might want to use them,
so I'm asking those of you who haven't sent
them to a keyserver to do so.

(The quick version: paste your key in cleartext
into a letter, sent to pgp-public-keys at pgp.mit.edu
with the subject: ADD.  If you don't have it
in cleartext, do pgp -kxa and follow the prompts.)

TIA,
dave





- ---- David E. Smith  POB 324  Cape Girardeau MO USA 63702
dsmith at prairienet.org   http://www.prairienet.org/~dsmith
send mail of 'send pgp-key' subject for my PGP public key
  "Heard a lot of talk about this Jesus, a man of love,
   a man of strength; but what a man was two thousand
    years ago means nothing at all to me today ... "
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Automagically signed with Pronto Secure for Windows.

iQEVAwUBMgZrGzVTwUKWHSsJAQGRtwf/TPjleUXsqf2GcEsutZNnyYD82bYM2ZT/
NQm0BeUTcNdU+jA/2z5aiy+FRozcL6EeIDPULtCGeMvDYu95vBOjnimIxMjng9J6
mIpFIQzXUN4ZDdE7m1khbn8Vdk/V0kehQL318LzB484SQILWNYvTNrj/cDq6CdKW
RMyyOH3+5VH1xRZJjFYvTsKnCszmtZIIvrjOt9+nX/j02bWnZRV7IGbOFjSrCL6p
r1TZG/TnU60YGz/TaUhp5OCj0bFlkFQlg+NmcwR9j4rlIza9ujBSuGIcflMRWTG3
ighrCC9cpL1v/qJkHXKy67xdvIZWlq7UiyqTRUEBg7rwjSBca0YgZQ==
=rDtm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From jimbell at pacifier.com  Mon Aug  5 17:35:29 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:35:29 +0800
Subject: fbi, crypto, and defcon
Message-ID: <199608052125.OAA29181@mail.pacifier.com>


At 09:40 AM 8/5/96 -0700, Martin Minow wrote:
>Arun Mehta <amehta at giasdl01.vsnl.net.in> writes:
>>True, though even better would be simply to charge you a flat
>>rate. If billing is that expensive, why bother?

>Tragedy of the Commons.
>
>Flat rate works only if no single user can use more than
>a tiny fraction of the total bandwidth.

Using a "Tragedy of the Commons" analysis on telecommunications systems 
isn't very appropriate.  Modern telephone systems have a fairly well-defined 
instantaneous capacity, do not wear out based on usage, unused capacity 
doesn't 'store up' for later use, nor do sporadic attempts at excessive use 
have anything more than a very transitory effect.  (fast busy signals.)  And 
in addition, a person doesn't profit in an unlimited fashion by attempting 
to over-use the telephone:  Nobody I know would spend 24 hours per day on 
the phone if it were free, for example.  So there's little motivation to 
over-use the resource.

The Internet is even more "friendly" along these lines than telephone 
systems:  The Internet doesn't "fail hard," denying access when usage is 
high, it merely slows all access to match the need.  There are enough 
differences that I think Internet deserves an entirely new analysis.  Don't 
worry, it will be also be interesting, from a game-theory perspective, but 
it will be very distinct from a classic "tragedy of the commons" situation.  

The current question is how to motivate individuals and companies to invest 
in improvements to the Internet that will benefit everyone. However, I don't 
think that will be the limiting factor that it may currently appear to be.  
Due to the nature of the Internet, there is nothing to prevent a company 
(such as AOL, Compuserve, or other) from building a shadow version of the 
Internet, through which all of its customer's traffic will pass until it 
emerges local to its destination.  Customers who appreciate this kind of 
prompter service will be motivated to pay slightly more and will buy 
Internet access through that company.  So the "commons" won't be quite so 
"common," and product differentiation will allow choice.



Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From vinnie at webstuff.apple.com  Mon Aug  5 17:57:47 1996
From: vinnie at webstuff.apple.com (Vinnie Moscaritolo)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 08:57:47 +0800
Subject: Credit Cards over the internet
Message-ID: <v0300780aae2c29df08c4@[204.179.131.29]>


Just read a forwarded message from a merchant who indicated that:

<quote>
Mastercard in no way authorises the transmission of credit card details via
the internet/email due to the possibility of fraud. Supposedly if
Mastercard finds that any merchant receives such details via
internet/email, they will cancel the merchants agreement/rights
immediately. While a lot of work is being done regarding the transmission
of secure data it has not been perfected yet. Merchants must have special
permission to accept details by phone or fax.
</quote>

We have no first hand knowledge of this change in the merchant account rules.

As a merchant who accepts credit cards via the internet/email, I know that
our credit card fraud rate is around 1 in 1403 transactions. In all cases,
the card we were given was stolen by conventional means and the charge was
authorized before that knowledge filtered through the credit card system.
Seems to me that this is a small percentage.

I have heard of no one who has had their card stolen while passing it
across the internet. Local restaurants and shops and Unix file servers,
yes, but via packet sniffing, no.

If the above internet/email restriction is true and if we assume that the
people at the credit card companies do know what they are doing, then it
sounds like someone might be attempting to kill the SSL method of accepting
credit card information in favor of some other standard such as SET. I'd be
willing to bet that SET will be proclaimed as the perfected method that is
suitable for use where other methods such as SSL or PGP would not be
allowed. I'd also be willing to bet that even with SET, the fraud rate that
I experience will remain the same.

Does anyone have real facts on this?

<name withheld>


Vinnie Moscaritolo
"Law - Samoan Style"
http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/
Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A







From jimbell at pacifier.com  Mon Aug  5 18:27:53 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 09:27:53 +0800
Subject: Public report of the EU crack.
Message-ID: <199608052306.QAA04853@mail.pacifier.com>


At 02:20 PM 8/5/96 -0700, David M. Rose wrote:
>Hallam-Baker wrote:
>
>>I consider the political dimension of this affair to 
>>be more significant that the technical. This brings the
>>US and the French into the same category of anti-crypto
>>government with a habit of poking its nose into other
>>people business and getting caught.
>>
>>		Phill
>
>Say what?  John Young I can understand; this blather?
>
>Att: "Doc" Baker/Mr. Hyde, err, Hallam: any rudimentary text on
>diction/grammer/syntax might be helpful to you.


Have a little toleration.  I've heard he's a FOREIGNER!
Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From mpd at netcom.com  Mon Aug  5 19:04:48 1996
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:04:48 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
In-Reply-To: <320652BC.31DF@netscape.com>
Message-ID: <199608052313.QAA18497@netcom5.netcom.com>


Jamie Zawinski wrote:

> If you already have a SSN, can you get a *new* one in any legal way?
> (Sort of the same idea as changing your phone number to avoid
> telemarketing scum...)

The original SSN was never intended to be used as a form of 
identification, or so the government claimed.  You may request
from the government a taxpayer ID number, which you may then use
in lieu of your SSN for identification purposes, if you desire
to hold the government to its original promise. 

Of course, using a Taxpayer ID everywhere provides you with no more
anonymity than using an SSN everywhere.  Such is life. 

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     mpd at netcom.com     $    via Finger.                      $









From vagab0nd at sd.cybernex.net  Mon Aug  5 19:10:08 1996
From: vagab0nd at sd.cybernex.net (Erle Greer)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:10:08 +0800
Subject: Off topic: Re: viruss'
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960805231721.006d4cb8@mail.sd.cybernex.net>


At 01:38 AM 8/5/96 -0700, you wrote:
>Does anyone know where thre is  good virus page????
>I know that there is one out there, but dont have the add.
>Zero Cool

Let your mouse do the walking.
http://www.yahoo.com
Type "virus", without the quotes.
viola!

Good luck!
Vagab0nd<br>
<a href="http://ww2.sd.cybernex.net/~vagab0nd/index.html">Visit web page for
public key.</a>






From omega at bigeasy.com  Mon Aug  5 19:38:02 1996
From: omega at bigeasy.com (Omegaman)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:38:02 +0800
Subject: NYtimes OPed pro-wiretapping 8/2
Message-ID: <199608052354.SAA06636@betty.bigeasy.com>


found this today as well.  One negative reply letter was also posted.

reference:
<http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/early/02heym.html>


"August 2, 1996


          Listening in on Terrorism

          By PHILIP HEYMANN

          CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- President Clinton's major proposals
          for new powers to fight terrorism are useful and pose
          no threat to Americans' civil liberties. "

( oooookkaaay...)

"         Many of these measures are intended only to give government
          as much power to thwart terrorism as it already has to
          combat other criminal acts."

(do go on...I'm fascinated now)


"         The part of the plan that has drawn the most criticism from
          across the political spectrum involves proposals to increase
          the Government's investigative powers, particularly through
          wiretapping and other methods of monitoring phone calls. "

[..snip..]
(assertion follows that current laws are inadequate for electronic 
surveillance against terrorism.)


"        In criminal cases the courts have never considered the use
          of devices that record the numbers of incoming or outgoing
          calls on a telephone to be significant invasions of privacy."

(Never mind what the "people" might say)

"         But there is no similar provision for investigations of
          suspected foreign terrorists. Under the President's
          proposal, agents would be allowed to use the devices if they
          can show that it is relevant to a terrorism investigation."

(not exactly sure how a terrorist investigation differs from a 
criminal investigation...but this is the distinction Heyman is 
drawing.  In his view, current law is not sufficient against domestic 
terrorist investigation.) 

"        Under current law, officials must get a separate warrant for
          each phone the suspect uses unless they can prove the
          suspect is changing phones purposely to thwart
          investigation. This is a stricter standard than is applied
          even to requests to plant a microphone to overhear a 
          suspect."

[..snip..]


"        Government agents would still be required to
          show probable cause that the suspect is committing one of
          the offenses on the Federal list and that the calls being
          monitored will concern that crime. "

(Gosh!  Who knew the government and the FBI were so powerless?)


"        Philip Heymann, a former Deputy Attorney General in the
          Clinton Administration, is a professor at Harvard Law School
          and the Kennedy School of Government. 

                      Copyright 1996 The New York Times Company "

(big shock, eh?)
...
To say that Mr. Heymann is being misleading is an understatement.  He 
ignores that the government wishes to be able to wiretap for 48 hours 
without prior court approval.  He attempts to imply that the roving 
wiretap is focused on an individual rather than a location or 
locations.  And he seems to believe that all of these enormous powers 
will not be abused.

I wonder if he would feel differently if his personal FBI file was 
among those gathered by the Clinton administration.

me
--------------------------------------------------------------
 Omegaman <omega at 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.
--------------------------------------------------------------





From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Mon Aug  5 19:38:03 1996
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:38:03 +0800
Subject: Public report of the EU crack.
In-Reply-To: <199608052120.OAA06066@web.azstarnet.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960805235759.10764B-100000@mcfeely.bsfs.org>



No, no, Dave, you've missed the point. Phill-grams are really stego. Send 
him an email to get the secret decoder ring. Purple ones work best.



On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, David M. Rose wrote:

> Hallam-Baker wrote:
> 
> >I consider the political dimension of this affair to 
> >be more significant that the technical. This brings the
> >US and the French into the same category of anti-crypto
> >government with a habit of poking its nose into other
> >people business and getting caught.
> >
> >		Phill
> 
> Say what?  John Young I can understand; this blather?
> 
> Att: "Doc" Baker/Mr. Hyde, err, Hallam: any rudimentary text on
> diction/grammer/syntax might be helpful to you.
> 
> Sheesh!  At least Sternlight seemed to be acquainted with the English language.
> 
> 





From tcmay at got.net  Mon Aug  5 20:27:48 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 11:27:48 +0800
Subject: The futility of trying to "tag" ammunition
Message-ID: <ae2bdb75040210042746@[205.199.118.202]>


At 3:38 AM 8/5/96, Sean Sutherland wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>Hallam-Baker Wrote --
>> Date:          Sun, 04 Aug 1996 20:20:20 -0400
>
>> I personally think that tagants is an insuffieicent approach to
>> the problem. Given the number of gun related homicides in the
>> US it is not unreasonable to require each individual cartridge
>> to be stamped with a serial number and for gun dealers to be
>> required to record each individual purchase. That at least
>> was my advice to the UK govt after Dunblane.
>
>There's four major problems with this.  First off, a large number of

Actually, there are so many problems with this that I dismissed Phill's
"plan" out of hand. But since others are weighing in on it, I might as
well, too.

It has little CP relevance, except that it parallels other seemingly well
though-out proposals which crumble when some common sense analysis is used.


The key point is this:

A billion rounds of ammunition already out in the U.S. +

Perps typically fire fewer than 5 rounds in committing their crimes  +

Incredible logistical problems in tagging and tracking shells  =

An idea shot down.

>guns used in homicides are revolvers or derringers (anyone got the
>numbers?).  These guns don't spit out the shells.  So, it would be

Most older guns in the hands of street punks are revolvers, though this is
not necessarily where handgun homicides mostly come from. Those are "home
shootings"--a man kills his wife, a woman kills her husband, a brother
shoots a brother, etc. Most of these are done with guns that are handy and
that have been in the family/house for a long time....most are, thus,
revolvers.

(The 1911 .45 is moderately common, but not nearly so much so as old .38s
and even .22s.)

In any case, Phill's proposal would collapse for this situation. First, the
guns are very old and the ammo would not be the new "tagged cases." (In
most cases, a old "box of shells." Most home owners of guns never fire
practice rounds and tend to have a few boxes at most of shells, which they
keep for many, many years.)

And in most home killings, it becomes clear real fast who did the shooting.
And, as Sean notes, these revolvers will not eject the shells.

It is marginally possible that spent shells could be identified when fired
from semi-automatics, of course. Other factors to consider, though:

1. The vast amount of ammo already out there. Given that perps typically
fire only a handful in their criminal career, not hard to just use older
ammo.

(The Sternlight-favored argument might be invoked here: "Ah, but criminals
are too stupid to do this, and so it will help." I disagree. Most street
punks would understand the principal. Just as they seek out "clean" guns,
they surely would not load their carry guns with 9mm ammo bought and
"registered" under their own names.

2. Target shooters consume the vast majority of rounds. (This is why
foolish proposals by Moynihan to "force" ammo to be sold for, say, $5 a
round, is ineffectual for the intended purpose: the perp loading his .357
or 9mm will hardly be deterred by a $30 price, even assuming he would buy
in a store at these prices.) (Think of the black market supply: my several
thousand rounds of 9mm, .45, .223, etc., would be worth $15,000 or more at
"Moynihan prices. The Feds could try to outlaw all ammo transfers between
individuals...left as an exercise as to how effective this could ever be,
and whether juries would send people off to the pen for the crime of
selling some .45 shells.)

3. Reloaders. As others have noted, there is an essentially inexhaustible
supply of reloaded shells.

4. The vast amound of ammo already out there. Crates and crates and crates
of surplus ammo in all sorts of calibers, entire container ships of ammo
coming to the U.S. (e.g, I just got my UPS delivery of 850 rounds of a
Czech brand, Sellior and Bellot, and my 1000 rounds of Italian Fiocchi are
due any day...multiply this by 100,000.

5. Stockpiling. Don't forget the "law of unintended consequences." The
biggest gun boom in history came when the Feds cracked down on gun
purchases. California gun stores were crowded for months. (Ditto for
high-capacity magazines: in the months of "warning" that people had,
factories cranked up production, customers stockpiled, and there was a
sudden surge of interest in getting that previously-obscure 3-round mag for
one's Glocks! :-})

>utterly useless to do so.  The second problem is the number of shells
>expelled in the US every day.  I doubt there's enough room on the
>butt end of a shell to print that number (it couldn't be printed on
>the sides, as this would screw up the fit of the shell, and possibly
>weaken it).  And, it'd be almost impossible getting gun manufacturers to

6. There isn't enough room. The shell I have in my hand barely has enough
room to print "FEDERAL 45 AUTO". A unique numbering of the total ammo
sales, even by boxes and not individual cases, would need a 9-12 characters
(and would likely run out in a few year--12-14 characters would be needed).
Actually, this is the "most solvable" of the problems...the others are the
real killers.

>pay for the equiptment that it would take to emprint serial numbers.
>The third number is that cartridges


>are recycled.  Aside from reloading your own, there's a large number
>of people that sweep up brass from gun ranges to reload themselves.

>The idea that someone swept up the brass could get almost anyone off.

7. There's this...and there's the possibility that one could implicate
_others_. For example, pick up a few empty shells at the range. I imagine
there might be some souvenir value in buying a "This shell was fired by
Dianne Feinstein." (For the uniniated, at the same time DiFi was railing
against the public's ownership of guns, she was carrying one in her purse.)

This gets back to the "chain of evidence" point we so often mention.

>The final problem is the paperwork.  Cops today can barly keep up
>with the paperwork involved with the Brady Bill.  Could you imagine
>if they had to keep track of AMMO purchases?

8. Indeed, it would inflate ammo prices too much.

(Given that people like me have thousands of rounds, the ability to reload,
and would be happy to undercut the local K-Mart's price.)

>The NRA, I'm sorry to say, has screwed up royally.  It's about time
>that they regroup, or else they fall.
>

Indeed, I refused to renew my membership because of their wishy-washyness
on basic issues. In my opinion, spending the "Life Member" fees on a Dillon
reloading press is a better investment.


--Tim May

HOW TO MAKE A PIPE BOMB:
"Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
Do not pack the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it
settle.  You want the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need
dry, fine powder sitting loose in a very rigid container." (more
information at http://sdcc13.ucsd.edu/~m1lopez/pipe.html, or by using
search engines)







From jfricker at vertexgroup.com  Mon Aug  5 20:31:15 1996
From: jfricker at vertexgroup.com (John F. Fricker)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 11:31:15 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806003317.00a56cac@vertexgroup.com>


At 12:59 PM 8/5/96 -0700, you wrote:
>Black Unicorn wrote:
>> 
>[ ...random losers asking for your SSN... ]
>> > I was horrified and gave a random number.
>> 
>> You should always be horrified, and always give a random number.
>
>Well, it would be nice if it was that easy.  You (legally) need to give
>the correct one to anyone who has to make a report about you to the IRS,
>right?  Such as your employer.  But it's not always clear who else needs
>it. 

Originally the 1939 ('37?) Social Security Act explicitly stated that the
SSN could not be used for anything except SSA matters. Times apparently have
changed or perhaps it's just de facto legislation by complicity.






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Aug  5 20:36:30 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 11:36:30 +0800
Subject: United States as Northern Ireland
Message-ID: <ae2be7b705021004087b@[205.199.118.202]>


At 9:16 PM 8/5/96, hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:

>If you think the wiretap bill is bad think on this, all guns
>of all types banned except where held by special license.
>Checkpoints at major road intersections. Stop and search
>patrols in city centers and the army on the street. Its not
>at all far fetched, the UKgovt took less than a year to
>introduce such measures in Northern Ireland. Constitution or
>not, don't expect that the US Congress won't make a similar
>response.

Yes, I agree.

Welcome to our side, Phill!

--Tim May

HOW TO MAKE A PIPE BOMB:
"Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
Do not pack the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it
settle.  You want the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need
dry, fine powder sitting loose in a very rigid container." (more
information at http://sdcc13.ucsd.edu/~m1lopez/pipe.html, or by using
search engines)







From iang at cs.berkeley.edu  Mon Aug  5 20:45:31 1996
From: iang at cs.berkeley.edu (Ian Goldberg)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 11:45:31 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <199608042250.PAA13719@toad.com>
Message-ID: <4u6733$30p@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <199608042250.PAA13719 at toad.com>,
Bill Stewart  <stewarts at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>According to Alaska Airlines, the FAA's policy as of last week
>has switched to a mandatory policy that if you don't produce
>government-issued photo-id, you can't get on the plane;
>the previous policy had been more flexible.  

So does anyone have any sort of "official" list as to what constitutes
"government-issued photo-id"?  I'll be flying within California soon
(see you at Crypto...), as as a "furriner", I have no US ID.  I do have
photo-id issued by _another_ government, though (a health card; I wonder
if they'll have heard of that...).

   - Ian "I'd try to be sure to get to the airport early, but the plane
            leaves at some ridiculous time like 7:30am"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgafi0ZRiTErSPb1AQFsOQQAmxihUufsUh5EYbJ1aHrnP0zFomUb/uo9
qAScGSlWAzzpXYuXnZaG29VeSJ60b/haXaIbSR8C1X4oEIUjiv69gzYa/YJS7RTr
Vb4JEKZdJyiDPxZ7rlyVBquWGLBItazw4mkPAzFi4r6f0nnlXifq1zWGtTR7qakZ
1nGEEYfBeQE=
=h/Zx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From steve at edmweb.com  Mon Aug  5 20:46:08 1996
From: steve at edmweb.com (Steve Reid)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 11:46:08 +0800
Subject: "lite" version of cpunks available?
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960805181131.186A-100000@bitbucket.edmweb.com>


Are there any filtered versions of the Cypherpunks mailing list available? 
I'm currently subscribed to cypherpunks-d at gateway.com, but that machine is
down and I haven't received anything in the past few days. 






From frissell at panix.com  Mon Aug  5 20:47:25 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 11:47:25 +0800
Subject: Internet Economics
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806011555.00913cdc@panix.com>


At 02:22 PM 8/5/96 -0800, jim bell wrote:
>The current question is how to motivate individuals and companies to invest 
>in improvements to the Internet that will benefit everyone. However, I don't 
>think that will be the limiting factor that it may currently appear to be.  
>Due to the nature of the Internet, there is nothing to prevent a company 
>(such as AOL, Compuserve, or other) from building a shadow version of the 
>Internet, through which all of its customer's traffic will pass until it 
>emerges local to its destination.  

Note that this is the business model for @HOME which will be handling the
heavy lifting for various Internet Over Cable systems around the country.

DCF






From frissell at panix.com  Mon Aug  5 20:49:34 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 11:49:34 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806010151.008f8f48@panix.com>


At 12:59 PM 8/5/96 -0700, Jamie Zawinski wrote:

>Well, it would be nice if it was that easy.  You (legally) need to give
>the correct one to anyone who has to make a report about you to the IRS,
>right?  Such as your employer.  

Virtually no one in the history of the world has done any time for giving a
false SS#.  Considering the fact that millions of Americans daily drive
drunk, exceed the lawful speed limit, drift through stop signs without
coming to a complete halt pick each other up in bars and do a host of other
things that are much more likely to get them in trouble than making up an
SS#, I am constantly *amazed* that people always advise you not to do so.

If it's good enough for the President of Israel, it's good enough for anyone.

>Is it
>needed to get a driver's license?  (The fine print on the DMV forms says
>"yes".)  

But most DMVs don't check and the SS is still resisting verification
services (at least until the Immigration Bill passes).

>Is it necessary to make use of employer-sponsored medical
>insurance?  (I suspect that the answer to this one is "no", except for
>the fact that when my employer set up my medical insurance they let the
>insurance company use my SSN as my insurance-related-ID-number.  But in
>any event, my dentist told me, "if you don't give it to us, they won't
>pay.")

Just make sure you give the insurance company and the doctor the same number.

>If you already have a SSN, can you get a *new* one in any legal way?
>(Sort of the same idea as changing your phone number to avoid
>telemarketing scum...)

The SS resists issuing new numbers in spite of widespread duplication and
theft.  Soon people will find themselves denied the right to work in this
country unless the SS reverses this reluctance.  If your SS# is stolen and
used "too many times"  in a future worker verification program, you're
screwed.  And there won't even be any welfare for you.

Use Alta Vista to find the SS Number FAQ.  There's more stuff.

DCF







From shamrock at netcom.com  Mon Aug  5 20:58:43 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 11:58:43 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
Message-ID: <v02120d40ae2c47b357a4@[192.0.2.1]>


At 16:13 8/5/96, Mike Duvos wrote:
>Jamie Zawinski wrote:
>
>> If you already have a SSN, can you get a *new* one in any legal way?
>> (Sort of the same idea as changing your phone number to avoid
>> telemarketing scum...)

To prevent the blacklisting of labor leaders by SSN, the Social Security
Act has a provision that allows you to request a new SSN. You have a right
to get a new SSN issued. Don't expect your SS office to know anything about
it.

[disclaimer: I am not an attorney]



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From tcmay at got.net  Mon Aug  5 21:12:53 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:12:53 +0800
Subject: Public report of the EU crack.
Message-ID: <ae2bef6106021004d576@[205.199.118.202]>


At 12:12 AM 8/6/96, John C. Randolph wrote:
>Well, well, well!
>
>So we gain a several allies in our battle against key-escrow, and
>lo and behold, it's all the *other* governments who don't want
>Uncle Sam to read their mail.
>
>I hope that any c'punks in foreign countries can make some politcal
>hay with this: "Don't let the yankee imperialists tell us a goddamn thing
>about crypto policy!  They'll only use it to pull weasel moves in the
>trade talks!"
>
>Actually, it might be a good thing for Her Majesty's government to
>issue an advisory, saying not to buy US routers and encryption software,
>because it can't be trusted, under present US ITAR rules.

Agreed. The report was only surpising to me in that it appeared in
print...anyone who read Bamford in '82 knew this sort of economic espionage
was a major mission of the NSA and various private contractors.

On the subject of routers and sniffers, excuse me if I'm misremembering
things, but wasn't a certain anti-Mitnick hacker writing in one of his
books about his role in developing certain "packet sniffers" that had
properties desirable to the U.S. intelligence community? Perhaps the Brits
are just being "monitored" by the Colonials?

(If I sound paranoid, I just came from a showing of "Chain Reaction." Some
flaws, but also some good reminders about the dangers of the "black
budget," large listening posts in Virgina (and England and elsewhere), and
a U.S. government that now sits astride the world.)

--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 at 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."









From jcr at idiom.com  Mon Aug  5 21:25:44 1996
From: jcr at idiom.com (John C. Randolph)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:25:44 +0800
Subject: Public report of the EU crack.
Message-ID: <199608060012.RAA06035@idiom.com>



Well, well, well!

So we gain a several allies in our battle against key-escrow, and
lo and behold, it's all the *other* governments who don't want
Uncle Sam to read their mail.

I hope that any c'punks in foreign countries can make some politcal
hay with this: "Don't let the yankee imperialists tell us a goddamn thing
about crypto policy!  They'll only use it to pull weasel moves in the
trade talks!"

Actually, it might be a good thing for Her Majesty's government to 
issue an advisory, saying not to buy US routers and encryption software,
because it can't be trusted, under present US ITAR rules.

-jcr







From omega at bigeasy.com  Mon Aug  5 21:34:21 1996
From: omega at bigeasy.com (Omegaman)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:34:21 +0800
Subject: NYtimes on " 'net telphony"
Message-ID: <199608052330.SAA06495@betty.bigeasy.com>


An article I found on Internet Telephony today in the New 
York Times.  

reference:
<http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/0805telephony.html>

article also contained a diagram of a traditional Point-to-point 
synchronous phone call and a packet-switched Internet call which 
shoed pieces of a sentence being transferred over multiple routes.

"         _ Free Long Distance
              Phone Calls! (Computer Extra)_

          By PETER H. LEWIS 

               Sometimes Internet technology moves faster than the
               speed of sound. 

          Nearly 400 Intel Corp. engineers were waiting for Brian
          Frank to stage a demonstration of Internet telephones last
          week at a business meeting in Oregon, when suddenly his
          laptop computer started ringing. 

          Frank, a summer intern, had just finished loading new
          software that would let him place a phone call from his
          laptop to an associate's PC backstage. But before he could
          make the call, someone in Norway had seen Frank's network
          connection pop up on an Internet phone directory on the
          World Wide Web and dialed him up. "

[..snip..]

        
"        For the Intel engineers, it was an industry wake-up call.
          Hitherto a hacker's hobby, the use of microphones and
          computers to place phone calls, send faxes and transmit
          pager signals over the Internet now seems ready to emerge as
          a serious business opportunity. "

[..snip..]

"        Technical drawbacks still keep Internet telephony from being
          a true substitute for the good old, reliable telephone
          network. And yet, the number of regular Internet telephone
          users is expected to rise from fewer than 400,000 last year
          to 16 million by 1999, according to a forecast from the
          research company International Data Corp. By that year, IDC
          predicts, Internet telephony could constitute a $500 million
          market. 

          Beyond cheap phone calls, the possible applications include:
          

          -- Catalogue shopping on the World Wide Web, where the
          customer could speak live with a sales agent. 

          -- Work-team software that would enable groups working
          collaboratively on documents via the Internet to converse
          about the project, too. 

          -- Adding voice capabilities to multiplayer computer games
          like "Doom" or "Quake," so that teammates could coach one
          another and jeer the opposition. "

[..snip..]
  
"         In fact, Intel and Microsoft late last month jointly
          announced a set of technical standards that are intended to
          promote compatibility among various makes of hardware and
          software used in Internet telephony. "

[..snip..]

"         "A lot of people look at Internet telephony as a replacement
          or alternative for long-distance service, and that's the
          most obvious use for it today," said Frederic H. Yeomans,
          marketing manager for Intel's Internet and communications
          group in Hillsboro, Ore. But Yeomans said the technology was
          advancing so quickly that new applications, possibly ones
          not yet imagined, would inevitably arise. "
(hype?  You make the call..)

[..snip..]

"        Telephone companies appear to be divided over how to respond
          to the technological challenges. 

          "Everyone would agree it's a compelling, alternative form of
          communication, and we're excited about it," said Mark
          Fisher, vice president for Pacific Bell Internet Services in
          San Francisco, a unit of the regional Bell holding company
          Pacific Telesis. "

[..snip..]

"         Other, smaller phone companies are not as optimistic, and
          are mounting a legal and lobbying challenge to try to halt
          competition from the computer industry. "

[..snip..]
          NYT-08-04-96 1932EDT 
         Copyright 1996 The New York Times Company 

...

What follows is more hype about a "killer app" that will bring this 
technology to the forefront. 

Little is said about current bandwitdth limitations or PC 
technology limitations.  Nothing is said of crypto technology either.

me
--------------------------------------------------------------
 Omegaman <omega at 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.
--------------------------------------------------------------





From jfricker at vertexgroup.com  Mon Aug  5 22:05:16 1996
From: jfricker at vertexgroup.com (John F. Fricker)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:05:16 +0800
Subject: Stealth cookies
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806003319.00a5a274@vertexgroup.com>


Doubleclick was the company.

They place banner ads on other pages that deliver a cookie header to your
browser. Their trick is a script that delivers a cookie along with the graphic.
Here's a sample from one of their own ads:

Set-Cookie: IAF=x; path=/; expires=Wed, 09-Nov-99 23:59:00 GMT


And right from the horses mouth:
"DoubleClick has created the largest and most complete user and
organization database on the Internet. DoubleClick is able to tell an
incredible amount of information about a user, such as operating system,
location, organization name, type, revenue, and size (click here for a
more detailed description of target selection criteria). Along with
sophisticated scheduling and our incredible DART software,
DoubleClick is able to automatically and dynamically assign the best ad
banner for a user."

and

"DoubleClick development ad banners are designed to capture more
data about an individual or to attract potential advertisers, both of which
ultimately benefit all DoubleClick Network member Web sites."

Pomp and Puffery. But it makes the marketeers drool.

As a user downloads more doubleclick banners, the cookie allows doubleclick
to  accumulate more crumbs in the form of url of the referring page. Just as
traditional marketing demographics were founded on what magazines one
subscribes, web advertising hopes to build demographics on what pages you view. 

Solution?

1) Don't put your name in the netscape configuration (d'oh)
2) make your cookie.txt file read only
3) use www.anonymizer.com when surfing

Turning of "auto-load images" will not prevent the doubleclick cookie from
being transmitted or recieved.

aside note:
there is a current cp archive at http://infinity.nus.sg/cypherpunks/ but it
could use a local search tool.

--j

At 03:33 PM 8/5/96 -0500, you wrote:
>There's been a thread here about some outfit that, by being referenced
>from web documents here and there, would insert its cookie in your
>browser even though you've never directly visited that site.  I've
>nuked any & all messages about that; if anybody recalls any details,
>I'd be thankful for the information.
>
>______c_____________________________________________________________________
>Mike M Nally * Tiv^H^H^H IBM * Austin TX    * For the time being,
>       m5 at tivoli.com * m101 at io.com          *    
>      <URL:http://www.io.com/~m101>         *    three heads and eight
>arms.
>






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Aug  5 22:11:12 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:11:12 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <ae2bffef0a021004b92e@[205.199.118.202]>


At 1:28 AM 8/6/96, Ian Goldberg wrote:
>So does anyone have any sort of "official" list as to what constitutes
>"government-issued photo-id"?  I'll be flying within California soon
>(see you at Crypto...), as as a "furriner", I have no US ID.  I do have
>photo-id issued by _another_ government, though (a health card; I wonder
>if they'll have heard of that...).
>
>   - Ian "I'd try to be sure to get to the airport early, but the plane
>            leaves at some ridiculous time like 7:30am"

As I recall, Ian, you are some kind of Damned Foreigner, a Canadian, and
possibly a Jew (from a name like "Goldberg"). As such, your Canuck
documents are worthless in these Beknighted States (at least until the
memory of the single person killed in Atlanta fades...Atlantans are worth
the lives of 100 lives of Third Worlders, which is why the single death in
Atlanta justifies this crackdown).

Perhaps if you coverted to either Southern Baptist or Mormon your stay here
would be easier.....


--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 at 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."









From tcmay at got.net  Mon Aug  5 22:12:06 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:12:06 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <ae2bfb9809021004b448@[205.199.118.202]>


At 1:01 AM 8/6/96, Duncan Frissell wrote:

>The SS resists issuing new numbers in spite of widespread duplication and
>theft.  Soon people will find themselves denied the right to work in this
>country unless the SS reverses this reluctance.  If your SS# is stolen and
>used "too many times"  in a future worker verification program, you're
>screwed.  And there won't even be any welfare for you.
>
>Use Alta Vista to find the SS Number FAQ.  There's more stuff.

BTW, I attempted to comply with the law in a recent request posted to
ba.jobs.offered and scruz.general: I solicited workers for some brush
clearing on my place, but advised them to only apply if--appearing to be
Hispanic, Latin, Mexican, or otherwise unOfficial--they provided proof of
their legal ability to work for me.

Personally, I don't care. In fact, when employing gardeners and yard works
I prefer Mexicans. But the law says, these days, that I must verify the
legality of workers *if* they appear to be dark-skinned, Mexican, Latin, or
the like. I say "if" because there are no requirements in general for
white-skinned, Anglo workers....no work permits, no proofs of citizenship
(such a document is currently lacking in the American pantheon...I, a mixed
descendant of Mayflower colonist and Scandinavian immigrants, lack such
"proof").

Predictably, I got e-mail threatening me with legal action (ha!) and
claiming me to be a racist.

I promise not to ask my potential employees for legal proof of their right
to work if the Feds and Sacramentans promise not to make it a law that I
check such things, and if the laws are not written such that I am a felon
for not asking for such documents from a dark, dusky Mexican but not from a
blonde- or red-haired ubermensch. (Jews I haven't figured out...some seem
to pass the "no documents required test" and some I want to demand Green
Cards for...ironically, it may be "discrimination" for me to request that
these "dusky" folks supply proof of their permission to work in these
Beknighted States. A strange world we live in.)

--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 at 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."









From JonWienk at ix.netcom.com  Mon Aug  5 22:41:54 1996
From: JonWienk at ix.netcom.com (JonWienk at ix.netcom.com)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:41:54 +0800
Subject: Ballistics
Message-ID: <199608060242.TAA06198@dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com>



On Sun, 04 Aug 96, dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) wrote:

>Is there truth to the rumor that poking a file inside the barrel will
>alter the marks on future test firings?

A much better idea is to clean the barrel with a stiff wire brush. If you blue 
the inside of the barrel, and then brush the bluing off, that is enough. 
Alternatively/additionally, fire several hundred rounds with the weapon.  Either 
will change the microscopic pattern of grooves sufficiently to cause a mismatch. 
Poking a file around in the barrel is a good way to ruin a gun.

Changing barrels is a good idea as well. I can change the barrel on my Desert 
Eagle in about 15 seconds. A better idea yet is to fabricate a removable 
silencer (that can be attached/detached without modifying the barrel) with a 
wire brush surrounding the muzzle opening (similar to a batery terminal cleaner, 
but sturdier, of course) so that the bristles put their own marks on the bullet 
as it leaves the barrel. Even if the silencer is found, you will never be able 
to put it on aligned exactly the same way, and the marks will not line up 
exactly. Alternatively, you could mount the bristles on a bearing so they can 
rotate freely, so the patterns of marks constantly change as the brush rotates. 
Of course, getting caught with a silencer is a good way to go directly to jail 
without passing GO.

Of course, if you are serious about avoiding this kind of hassle, you will mount 
a bag to the receiver of your gun to catch the fired shells, so that they aren't 
lying around for curious people to find.

Jonathan Wienke

"1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full 
gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the 
world will follow our lead in the future!"
--Adolf Hitler

"46.  The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, 
transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. ...Consider the 
following statement:  I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist 
confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government."
--The 29 Palms Combat Arms Survey  
http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/Palms.htm

1935 Germany = 1996 U.S.?

Key fingerprint =  30 F9 85 7F D2 75 4B C6  BC 79 87 3D 99 21 50 CB






From ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu  Mon Aug  5 22:56:36 1996
From: ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu (Simon Spero)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:56:36 +0800
Subject: Credit Cards over the internet
In-Reply-To: <v0300780aae2c29df08c4@[204.179.131.29]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960805234211.753E-100000@tipper.oit.unc.edu>


[set discussion is available on set-discuss at commerce.net . Majordomo stuff]

This would seem to be a new policy; previously I'd heard that mastercard 
and visa were going to be encouraging the use of SET quite strongly, but 
since SET isn't going to be available until at least Q1 97, it would be 
silly to stop all activity now.

SET is massively over-engineered and is one of most obnoxious crypto 
protocols you'll find, but it does have some cute features (merchant 
never learns card number, etc).

Simon

---
Cause maybe  (maybe)		      | In my mind I'm going to Carolina
you're gonna be the one that saves me | - back in Chapel Hill May 16th.
And after all			      | Email address remains unchanged
You're my firewall -    	      | ........First in Usenet.........





From dfloyd at IO.COM  Mon Aug  5 23:00:40 1996
From: dfloyd at IO.COM (Douglas R. Floyd)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:00:40 +0800
Subject: Cookies on Microsoft Explorer?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960805154442.12332B-100000@duke.poly.edu>
Message-ID: <199608060328.WAA07633@pentagon.io.com>


> 
> 
> Does anyone know what the equivalent technology is on Microsoft to
> Netscape's cookie technology?  Does Microsoft have support for cookies or 
> not?  
> 
> All of the discussion on the list to do with
> cookies is related to Netscape.  Does this mean that if one switches to
> Microsoft Explorer one can avoid the problem?  Many thanks.

MSIE supports cookies.

> 
> Anne Eisenberg
> aeisenb at duke.poly.edu
> 






From smart at mel.dit.csiro.au  Mon Aug  5 23:11:56 1996
From: smart at mel.dit.csiro.au (Bob Smart)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:11:56 +0800
Subject: view from Australia (Re: United States as Northern Ireland)
In-Reply-To: <ae2be7b705021004087b@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <199608060349.AA24880@shark.mel.dit.csiro.au>



In Australia the gun lobby are now deeply distrusted. During the
current crackdown on high powered and repeating weapons they have made
many statements, at all levels of their movement, that indicate that
they want the guns in order to kill people and to give themselves the
option of insurrection. Unlike the US this is not an activity that is
supported by the constitution and the people are strongly against it.

If we assume that the gun lobby will lose, [please I am not discussing
whether it *should* lose and I'm not interested in arguments on this
so send them to the list not to me], then supporters of privacy and
freedom through cryptography do the cause a great disservice by
associating themselves with the gun lobby.

In fact we are passing up a great chance to sell the cause of
communication freedom through cryptography by arguing:

  Communication privacy through cryptographic technology is a 
  necessary counter-balance to the inevitable increase in state 
  control of public spaces [in an age when weapons technology
  permits weapons that can kill large numbers of people to be
  easily concealed].

  Secure electronic communication is the freedom that carries no 
  direct risk to other people. It is the one that must be preserved 
  in a free society.

  The 1990s is the decade of the bloodless revolution built on
  the freedom of communication. Preserving free communication is
  the vital step in countering out-of-control governments and criminal
  organizations, and cryptography is the way to keep communication
  free.

I don't think this line of argument will appeal to cypherpunks but
if there are other organizations running this line I'd be keen to
support them.

Bob Smart






From gimonca at skypoint.com  Mon Aug  5 23:22:57 1996
From: gimonca at skypoint.com (Charles Gimon)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:22:57 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports) (fwd)
Message-ID: <m0unbyR-00002wC@skypoint.com>


Forwarded message:
> Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 17:33:17 -0700
> From: jfricker at vertexgroup.com (John F. Fricker)
> Subject: Re: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
> 

Before this gets too out of hand, I'm going to mention that Chris
Hibbert's Social Security Number FAQ (posted regularly to several
newsgroups, including news.answers) is superb. Great job of
separating legitimate paranoia from old wives' tales. Check for it
in Usenet or your favorite search engine.

Remember--privacy is your own responsibility.

> At 12:59 PM 8/5/96 -0700, you wrote:
> >Black Unicorn wrote:
> >> 
> >[ ...random losers asking for your SSN... ]
> >> > I was horrified and gave a random number.
> >> 
> >> You should always be horrified, and always give a random number.
> >
> >Well, it would be nice if it was that easy.  You (legally) need to give
> >the correct one to anyone who has to make a report about you to the IRS,
> >right?  Such as your employer.  But it's not always clear who else needs
> >it. 
> 
> Originally the 1939 ('37?) Social Security Act explicitly stated that the
> SSN could not be used for anything except SSA matters. Times apparently have
> changed or perhaps it's just de facto legislation by complicity.
> 
> 






From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Mon Aug  5 23:38:46 1996
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:38:46 +0800
Subject: Integrating PGP 3.0 Library with INN
In-Reply-To: <199608052017.PAA09340@homeport.org>
Message-ID: <X5Z8RD36w165w@bwalk.dm.com>


Adam Shostack <adam at homeport.org> writes:

> Igor Chudov wrote:
>
> | Has anyone thought of integrating PGP 3.0 library with INN?
> |
> | I was thinking along the lines of having PGPMoose support built
> | right into INN: if an arriving article is posted to a moderated
> | newsgroup for which a PGP key is available in the INN's keyring,
> | INN verifies existence and correctness of a PGP signature.
>
>
> | If moderators choose short enough keys (512 bits for example), this
> | verification will not take any significant amount of CPU time.
>
> Its my experience that at full feed sites, there isn't enough cpu to
> do this.  A p-90 can get ovewhelmed pretty easily trying to keep up
> with the load.  Trying to look into the body of an article means at
> least a few hundred more ops per article.  You could do this on a leaf
> node.  However, you cut the reliability of the system by adding things
> to go wrong.  Better to have a scanner that checks specific moderated
> groups after INN has deposited the articles.

It's wasteful to run this checking at every Usenet node.

It would be more efficient to run PHPMoose checking at a few trusted sites
and have them issue NoCeMs for articles that fail the check.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





From mpd at netcom.com  Mon Aug  5 23:55:56 1996
From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:55:56 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <ae2bfb9809021004b448@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <199608060439.VAA25581@netcom22.netcom.com>


tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) writes:

 > Predictably, I got e-mail threatening me with legal action
 > (ha!) and claiming me to be a racist.

 > I promise not to ask my potential employees for legal proof
 > of their right to work if the Feds and Sacramentans promise
 > not to make it a law that I check such things, and if the
 > laws are not written such that I am a felon for not asking
 > for such documents from a dark, dusky Mexican but not from a
 > blonde- or red-haired ubermensch.

Yet, when the laws are "improved" to apply to all equally, people
still bitch.

The producers of the geriatric porn film "Grandma Does Grandpa",
and the popular sequel, "Grandma Does Grandpa II", must show at
the beginning of the film the address where the legally required
affidavits proving that Grandma and Grandpa are over 18 years of
age are available for inspection.

If they fail to do this, of course, they are child pornographers,
and may fork over many decades of their lives and hundreds of
thousands of their dollars towards the official government
crusade to protect our nation's youth from exploitation.

The fact that Grandma and Grandpa are obviously within mere
months of buying the farm does nothing to mitigate their offense,
should they decide that the law is not worth bothering with.

"What are you in for?"

"Child Porn."

"How old were the kids?"

"In their mid 70s."

"Ewwwwwww.  That's sick man!  You're disgusting."

:)

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     mpd at netcom.com     $    via Finger.                      $






From tcmay at got.net  Mon Aug  5 23:57:17 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:57:17 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports) (fwd)
Message-ID: <ae2c1c850b0210047075@[205.199.118.202]>


At 2:34 AM 8/6/96, Charles Gimon wrote:
>Forwarded message:
>> Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 17:33:17 -0700
>> From: jfricker at vertexgroup.com (John F. Fricker)
>> Subject: Re: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
>>
>
>Before this gets too out of hand, I'm going to mention that Chris
>Hibbert's Social Security Number FAQ (posted regularly to several
>newsgroups, including news.answers) is superb. Great job of
>separating legitimate paranoia from old wives' tales. Check for it
>in Usenet or your favorite search engine.

I _know_, Chris Hibbert. Chris Hibbert is a _friend_ of mine. And this is
not just old wives' tales.

(w apologies to the Texas senator)

--Tim

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 at 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."









From jfricker at vertexgroup.com  Mon Aug  5 23:59:15 1996
From: jfricker at vertexgroup.com (John F. Fricker)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:59:15 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806044723.01073e4c@vertexgroup.com>


At 07:37 PM 8/5/96 -0700, you wrote:
>At 1:01 AM 8/6/96, Duncan Frissell wrote:
>
>>The SS resists issuing new numbers in spite of widespread duplication and
>>theft.  Soon people will find themselves denied the right to work in this
>>country unless the SS reverses this reluctance.  If your SS# is stolen and
>>used "too many times"  in a future worker verification program, you're
>>screwed.  And there won't even be any welfare for you.
>>
>>Use Alta Vista to find the SS Number FAQ.  There's more stuff.
>
>BTW, I attempted to comply with the law in a recent request posted to
>ba.jobs.offered and scruz.general: I solicited workers for some brush
>clearing on my place, but advised them to only apply if--appearing to be
>Hispanic, Latin, Mexican, or otherwise unOfficial--they provided proof of
>their legal ability to work for me.
>


Hmmm. Actually a long time ago I lost my job with Greenpeace out of refusal
to sign an I-9 which was in '86 the Department of Justice's form to exhibit
eligibility to work in the US. The form required that I present two pieces
of photo identification or a driver's license to be authenticated by my
employer. Maybe it's a CA state law that adds an additional skin tone
criterium to for the filing of an I-9.

--j






From declan at eff.org  Tue Aug  6 00:08:17 1996
From: declan at eff.org (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:08:17 +0800
Subject: Tolerance (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199608051349.GAA22092@toad.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960805200936.24298B-100000@eff.org>


Hmm... Perhaps my attorney went to Princeton as an undergrad. *shrug* I 
recall a Princeton diploma on his office wall.

Now, Peter, you're a moron, and I call you on it. 

-Declan


On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, peter honeyman wrote:

> Declan McCullagh writes:
> 
> > This is attempted proof by credentalism. I call him on it. 
> > 
> > Okay, Jim, what _do_ your lawyers say on this? Have you asked them? I,
> > too, have an attorney, a civil liberties specialist and a graduate from
> > Princeton law. So what? 
> 
> declan, you are a fucking liar, and i am calling you on it.  princeton does
> not have a law school.
> 
> 	peter
> 


// declan at eff.org // I do not represent the EFF // declan at well.com //







From rah at shipwright.com  Tue Aug  6 00:10:31 1996
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:10:31 +0800
Subject: e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce
Message-ID: <v03007800ae2c742ab98e@[206.119.69.46]>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce

Stiffing, Stealth Conferences,
Pieces of the True Cross, Stiffies,
Grenades and Magic Feathers

Robert Hettinga
8/5/96

The principal waste of my time and attention, for the last six weeks or so,
has been my negotiations (or lack thereof) with an (as yet ;-)) unnamed
cypherpunk (and company) about whether they're going to stiff (or not) Peter
Cassidy, me, and two (as yet) unnamed other people, on the final payment
(a moderately signigicant chunk of change) for some consulting work we
did for them earlier this year. We accuse them of shooting the messenger,
because their idea won't work. More to the point, they couldn't make it work
even if a market was there. Which it isn't. For them, anyway. They accuse us
of gross incompetence. Interesting, because we punchlisted the entire
contract (and voluminous addenda) before we shipped the report, have logs of
them downloading *all* the source material and appendices, which we put on
the server for them *long* before we started dunning them for a past due
invoice. Not to mention Peter's written more *published* articles on
topics like this (in places, like, say, the Economist) in the last *year*
than most people *write* about *anything* in their entire lifetimes. And, of
course, they *aren't* going with the business idea they hired us to check
out in the first place. Go figure.

May you live in interesting times, the chinese curse goes, and things have
gotten interesting enough for me lately, thank you very much. I finally
decided to unwrap myself emotionally this week from this particular
"interesting time", "modulo" (to quote the aforementioned unnamed
cypherpunk) real (or imagined :-)) "other" measures our legal help says we
can take, should the inevitable stiffing (or not) occur, and concentrate on
other stuff, "modulo" my time spent in further negotiations about being
stiffed (or not).

Clearly, I've been talking with legal types too much lately. Speaking of
which, someday, I want to write another non-repudiation rant. Code and
Reputation instead of Law and Force, and all that. But not now. We still
might work this out. I hope.


So, in the background of the aforementioned stiffing (or not), Vinnie
Moscaritolo and I have been working on a project, something we've been
talking about since January or so. We wanted to throw a small Macintosh
crypto conference. Tim Dierks, of Consensus (and ex- Apple DTS, where Vinnie
now works), buttonholed Vinnie in a coffee shop a while back, and proposed
that we "stealth" the crypto conference idea into one about digital
commerce. Seeing as how both Vinnie and I gibber about "Digital Commerce is
Financial Cryptography" and all, it was fine by us. Along about June (July?)
or so, Vinnie, ever the mil-spec, surreptitiously obtained the necessary
sack of grenades and started paddling in towards the beach in a rubber raft,
inviting us to mop-up festivities the next morning at dawn. Next thing we
all knew, he had scheduled an Apple conference facility in Cupertino for 2
days, the 5th and 6th of September, a Thursday and Friday, and he may have
even gotten Apple to spring for groceries, though Those with Proper
Budgetary Authority might have gotten hit by a grenade or two, and they (the
groceries) could be MIA. Fortunately, this activity has been entirely a
ground-up exercise on the developers' part, so going dutch for lunch
probably won't scare anyone off, one way or the other. We could probably
hold it in a Chuck-E-Cheese and fill the room, people are that interested in
internet commerce, and crypto, on the Mac. And those little gophers, of
course...

Meanwhile, also in my, heh, copious, free time, (did I tell you I'm also
pitching sponsors for FC97? :-)), I've been working on a Mac-e$ rant with
Vinnie. Collaberation is Hard.  But, it looks like we're just about through.
Real Soon Now. Kind of reminds me of the late-1960's button which said
"Freedom Soon". In the process, said rant has turned into some kind of
Magnum Opus, which makes me nervous, with contributions from a couple of
other people besides Vinnie and myself. And, no, the one you're reading
isn't it. :-). But it's coming. Soon. We hope.


All of which brings up the *real* point of this rant. I mean, who *cares* if
you can do crypto on the Mac or not? Why not stand back and watch the
MacRubble bounce?

My thinking about all of this started because I've been reading Vinnie's
mail over his shoulder. (Yes. I'm shameless. When we're working on stuff
together, we trade our mail about it. As they say in the Mac biz, "Sosumi".)
That is, Vinnie's been out there scaring up speakers for this shindig that
he "borrowed" the grenades for, and, well, in his tree-shaking (God help you
if Vinnie shakes a tree you're in), he invites (if you could call what
Vinnie sent an invitation :-)) Yet *Another* Nameless Cypherpunk (YANC) to
come and give us what we hope would be a Patented Colorful Cypherpunk
crypto-Peptalk, with Vinnie saying to him (YANC), in effect, we need him
(YANC) for a proper Laying-On of Hands, him being a Piece of the True Crypto
Cross, and all.

Of course, Vinnie didn't stand a chance.  If we *could* consider Vinnie for
it, (which we can't, because he's on the selection committee) he might have
earned the coveted 1996 Black Rhino "Mr. Kevlar" award (for courage in the
face of imaginary gunfire) for his efforts. Actually, considering the, heh,
caliber, of last year's winner, it's just as well. A, uh, bang-up job Mr.
Weinstein of Netscape did last year. A hard one to top. And so, the search
continues. Both for this year's "Mr. Kevlar", and, of course, for some other
Piece of the True Cross. Or so we think. I'll get to that in a moment.

What Vinnie got from Yet Another Nameless Cypherpunk, instead of "Yes, I'll
come talk about crypto, the universe, and everything.", was Yet Another
Rendition of the Apple Macintosh Massacree. In six-part ;-) harmony, of
course. And, no, I won't sing it here in its 21-minute (not even 17 for
radio) entirety. However, I should really note here that no matter how
reasoned and cogent YANC's arguments were (and cogent they were, too: upon
reading them, I was halfway to the dumpster with my trusty old PB180,
tears in my eyes, before I came to my senses), in general, one of the *big*
reasons that Vinnie got the $0$AD ($ame Old $ong And Dance) Re the Future of
the Mac as a Viable Platform was probably more because the aforementioned
YANC has eschewed speaking opportunities like this for years anyway, and
Vinnie probably didn't ask him with the Proper Deference Necessary for a
Cypherpunk of That Stature. In fact, I *know* Vinnie didn't, because I read
his mail ;-). However, that, of course, wasn't why YANC gave Vinnie the
aforementioned Massacree in particular.

YANC Massacreed Vinnie because there's a lot of *very* disappointed Mac
users out there, YANC being a prominent example thereof. Love the computer.
Hate the company. Hell hath no fury like a Mac user (not to mention
shareholder) scorned. Heck. I understand *that*. I did the *same* thing just
over a year ago this week. "Platforms are Meat", and all that. For what it's
worth, YANC, I *feel* your pain... :-).


So, I repeat, why *not* stand back and let the MacRubble bounce? No, this is
not a segue for me to stand up in my chair and start singing the Apple
Company Song at the top of my lungs, complete with a QuickDraw-VR DOOM
environment file of One Infinite Loop right up there on the screen for y'all
to marvel at and play with using your very own Newtons, all while I sing 100
Company Song verses with a six-part MIDI chorus of my own voice (Yechhh!).
Nope. Not me. Indeed, I really *do* say, "Why not?". That is, let's look at
what happens if people *don't* develop crypto for the Mac.

The truth is folks, not much.

First of all, we all think it'll be Real Bad News for Apple Real Soon
if real-live strong cryptography isn't shoved as far down as it's possible
to make it go into the Mac's operating system, and right now, dammit. But,
so *what*? The Mac's only, say, 5-7% of the computer market anyway, and the
only possibly new, cool, stuff Apple's involved in, say, OpenDoc/Cyberdog,
has 5%, maybe 10%, of *that*, so, who *cares*? Potential Mac crypto
developers aren't effecting that many people at *all*. They would better
spend their time doing CryptoJava++ or something, because there's *much*
more market penetration *there*. Or, even better, developers should go do
CAPI for Windows. I mean, that's where the *real* money is, right? So
fergadaboudit, go write CAPI-code, I mean, Microsoft Gets The Internet Now,
right? At least there'll be *active* developer support from the MotherShip,
which is better than whatcha get from Apple ferchrissakes <He said, ducking
a mysteriously appearing grenade fusilade from Vinnie's general direction.
Can someone tell me *how* he pulls the pins and throws them all at once
like that?>.

But, as bad as all this is, lack of strong crypto is not nearly that much of
a Mac-Killer, or more to the point, an Apple-Killer. (Love the Machine, Hate
the Company, remember?) What's killing Apple is Apple's sclerotic management
style, and, frankly, too much living high off the hog when margins were fat.
Of course, you never know. Apple could just keep cranking out more and more
machines, at smaller and smaller market shares, ad infinitum. Look at
Porsche (remember Ferry Porsche and what a "disaster" the Volkswagen was?),
or Rolls-Royce. Personally, I would bet that, *if* the Sclerotic Apple
scenario's the case, then jumping with both feet into crypto, and by
extension, financial cryptography and digital commerce, could add a few more
years to Apple's lifetime, but all that money might just go straight to
Apple's waistline *anyway* (at 360lbs soaking wet, *I* should talk...), and
make the end, if it occurs, even that much more grotesque.  ( Yeah, but what
a way to go... Fat Power! ;-))


And, yet, Vinnie's probably going to fill the room on September 5th and 6th.
Hell, he might even fill Chuck-E-Cheese to boot. How come? Because, even
though the market share is small, there's just enough there to support the
small developers who made the Mac a great machine in the first place.


There's a guy in Germany named Ruf. I still think he's around.  Don't ask me
how to say his name. What he does is buy brand-new Porsche 911s, fresh from
the factory, and "blueprints" them. That is, he takes them all apart, down
to the nuts and bolts, and rebuilds them *exactly* to the original design
specifications, remachining metal where necessary. You can imagine that,
with Porsches, there isn't much tolerence for production errors to begin
with, but blueprint them Mr. Ruf does. After he does that, he tweaks them
with all the aftermarket go-fast stuff it's possible to cram onto the little
30-year-old 911 design, some of which he's invented himself. After he's
done, they really do. Go fast, I mean. Usually, his tweaky stuff gets onto
his cars, now sold under the "Ruf" brand name, *waay* before it gets
adopted for production 911s. Mr. Ruf has been doing this for a long time.
His cars go for twice or three times what a production 911 goes for, if you
can imagine paying that much for a *very* fast Porsche 911. He has a very
long waiting list. He sells, say, 10 cars a year. He makes out like a
bandit. And he *loves* his job. There're a whole bunch of guys around
Stuttgart who do this kind of stuff. And *they* love their jobs, too.


That's why Vinnie's going to fill that room in Cupertino. (On the 5th and
6th of September, remember?) First of all, the developers who are left in
the Mac market are there because they love it. The old guys, who, like me,
can't get it up anymore, still hack Macs because they love them. The *new*
developers hack Macs because they can't get leave it *alone* and don't know
from market share anyway. They just love what they're doing.

                               <heh, heh. He said "get it up", Bevis>
           <heh, heh. Yeah. And up there, Butthead, he said "Stiffy">
                                      <No, Bevis. He said "Stiffing">
                               <Oh, yeah. heh, heh. *I* knew that...>

Mssrs. B & B aside, who *knows* what the women Mac developers feel, young or
old, because I'm not one. Or a woman, for that matter. :-). But I *bet*
they're there because *they* love the Mac, too. And, of course, *all* of the
Mac crypto developers also understand the importance of strong cryptography
to digital commerce, so they want to make sure the Mac has it, if they have
to do it themselves, just like Mr. Ruf and his friends blueprint those
brand-new Porsche 911s.


So, finally, I'm going to pull out a dusty old story from the Disney Canon:
Dumbo. <Oh, No! Not the Dumbo story!!! Not Again!!!> Yes. The Dumbo story.
Again.

Remember that Dumbo had a magic feather, given to him by the crows, so that
he could fly, which of course, he didn't really need, because he could fly
already, he just didn't know it. Yes, boys and girls, Vinnie and the Mac
crypto developers wanted, in fear of that 900-foot drop into a teeeny bucket
of water, to have Yet Another Nameless Cypherpunk, A Piece of the True
Crypto Cross, be a magic feather. So they could fly.

Well, it looks like Vinnie, and all those room-filling Chuck-E-Cheese-
Gopher-Banging Mac crypto developers will have to use their ears (or what's
between them, anyway) to fly instead.

Only this time, Dumbo's got a sack of grenades.

A "munition" indeed...


Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

<Heh, heh. Uh, anyone out there got a magic feather, uh, just in case?>
<Shut *up*, Bevis!>
<Owwwwww! My *'Nads*!>





-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgbH1PgyLN8bw6ZVAQGkrQP9GyrOI9NWlookyXQdbfdjmC437fxNbQuQ
g3CHsGMi4uhqO1UO6dF71XO7Osh57n//cVKF52Tv3b2UpOU3khtj15ASH7sOLaMs
KwDQYvNta1I/nL1k9L8mAnNUfEdkttfhqgKjDwB5nKvwwJqbOemG60Bz6jKzCO5T
cXOXOcEVyLE=
=Fjkr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/







From zachb at netcom.com  Tue Aug  6 00:11:17 1996
From: zachb at netcom.com (Zach Babayco)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:11:17 +0800
Subject: viruss'
In-Reply-To: <3205B2F7.7E74@cnmnet.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9608052107.A27020-0100000@netcom22>




On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, Zero Cool wrote:

> Does anyone know where thre is  good virus page????
> I know that there is one out there, but dont have the add.
> Zero Cool
> 
Do a web search for the word VIRUS and try posting this somewhere else - 
this isn't a virus newsgroup, last time I checked.





From JonWienk at ix.netcom.com  Tue Aug  6 00:23:11 1996
From: JonWienk at ix.netcom.com (JonWienk at ix.netcom.com)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:23:11 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <9608052116.AA09050@Etna.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <199608060242.TAA18997@dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com>


On Mon, 05 Aug 96, hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:
>The shells are removed sometime or other. Nothing is a 100% solution
>but anything that gives the criminal an extra thing to worry about 
>improves the chances that a mistake is made.
>
>Many people go to jail because of fingerprints on shell cases.

If the shell cases are NOT left at the crime scene, there is NO link between 
them and the crime. You are suffering from cranio-rectal inversion.

>I doubt that more than 32 bits of info will be required. Thats not 
>that difficult to imprint.
[snip]
>Not a problem, that type of machinery is a standard type of 
>industrial machine. Might be expensive to adapt the lines but 
>I doubt it.

That doesn't address the fact that (1) there are billions of unstamped shell 
casing extant, (2) stamping the side of a case will weaken it and be a 
significant safety hazard, (3) stamps in the head of the case can be 
filed/scraped off, (4) cases not left at the crime scene have no value as 
evidence, regardless of any serial stamps, extractor marks, etc. Even if you can 
prove a shell was fired in a particular gun, if there is no link between that 
gun and the crime, the "evidence" is worthless. You are suffering from 
cranio-rectal inversion.

>Not an issue. A person may have an excuse that explains why
>the blood is in his car or his fingerprints are on the knife but
>a conviction depends on more than one piece of evidence. If 
>there is information that gives the police a lead it is 
>usefull.

See above. You are suffering from cranio-rectal inversion.

>At present the police are investigating the purchase of white 
>powder - checking each purchaser out who fits the Olympic
>bomber profile. That is a lot of work for a much weaker lead.

That's BLACK powder, stupid! Also, profiling a bomber requires more than one 
crime. A profile is a psychological analysis of the patterns in a criminal's 
handiwork, and patterns cannot be clearly deliniated with a single crime.

>If a person says that they fired at a range then you have 
>narrowed the search scope to the guys at the range.

Huh? Smoke another one, Beavis!

>Not a problem, thats an opportunity. I build very large, very
>high reliability computer systems. I can build machines that
>deal with several million transactions a day for less than a 
>million and run them for less than a quarter million a year. That
>is cheap when one considers the cost of investigation saved.

Yeah, and lets make it mandatory for everyone to accept subcutaneous transponder 
implants monitored by your system. Can anyone say BIG Brother? Regardless of the 
system, some poor schmuck (or an army of them) is going to have to do the data 
entry work for your computer, or it is worthless. Remember the GIGO concept?

>Making that argument defeats your case. Irespective of the framers
>of the constitution nobody in Congress or the Administration believes
>that you have a right to take up arms against the government. In
>fact they are scared of the militia movement and the NRA. Every time
>you make that argument you make it harder for people to accept your
>case. 

The fact that the current government despises the intent of the people who wrote 
the Constitution and tries to circumvent and negate it to the maximum extent 
possible is the root of much of the disillusionment with and distrust of 
government in America today.

>Its like hearing a Marxist spout stuff from Capital to support a
>civil liberties. Regardless of wether the content makes sense the
>form of the argument is a complete turn off. 
>
>I used to side with HCI before I started talking to the 
>talk.politics.guns people. That convinced me that they were a threat
>to the security of the country - even before McVeigh sent me a
>mail defending his 2nd ammendment rights that looked very 
>much like yours. Regardless of whether he is guilty or not I
>still regard him and those that hold his views to be as 
>serious a threat to the USA as the Red Army Faction were in
>Germany, or the Red Brigades in Italy or the IRA in the UK.

Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than Tim McVeigh's guns.

>If people carelessly justify terrorism they are fueling that
>fire. Up until now the US has not had a serious terrorist 
>problem. If terrorism becomes widespread then don't imagine
>the constitution will be a protection. Thomas and Reinquist 
>are not going to stop measures to "protect the nation" even
>if like the WWII internement of Japaneese nationals they are in
>gross violation of the constitution. 
>
>If you think the wiretap bill is bad think on this, all guns
>of all types banned except where held by special license.
>Checkpoints at major road intersections. Stop and search
>patrols in city centers and the army on the street. Its not
>at all far fetched, the UKgovt took less than a year to 
>introduce such measures in Northern Ireland. Constitution or
>not, don't expect that the US Congress won't make a similar 
>response.

See my sigfile. These are shining examples illustrating why an armed populace is 
critical to freedom, even if some people do misuse firearms. I would rather be 
armed and take my chances against a crackhead looking for someone to mug than be 
disarmed and take my chances against government thugs who have discovered that 
they can act against the populace with impunity.

Jonathan Wienke

"1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full 
gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the 
world will follow our lead in the future!"
--Adolf Hitler

"46.  The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, 
transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. ...Consider the 
following statement:  I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist 
confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government."
--The 29 Palms Combat Arms Survey  
http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/Palms.htm

1935 Germany = 1996 U.S.?

Key fingerprint =  30 F9 85 7F D2 75 4B C6  BC 79 87 3D 99 21 50 CB






From jim at ACM.ORG  Tue Aug  6 00:37:05 1996
From: jim at ACM.ORG (Jim Gillogly)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:37:05 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960805234946.753F-100000@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
Message-ID: <199608060523.WAA04715@mycroft.rand.org>



Simon Spero <ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu> writes:
>one silly thought: lots of people use cypherpunks as the username and 
>password for all those websites that want an id. What about a cypherpunks 
>3-2-4 number for those cases where an SSN isn't appropriate. Anyone know 
>what J. Edgar Hoover's SSN was?

Yes, that does indeed sound silly.  BTW, the UNABOMer's secret ID number,
used to identify various communications with the NYT as being his, is
reported (Mad Genius and a government deposition) to be 553-25-4394, which
allegedly turned out to be the SSN of a prisoner somewhere in California.
I suppose it's not useful for this application, since it belongs to
somebody who might need it again sometime.

	Jim Gillogly
	14 Wedmath S.R. 1996, 05:21





From ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu  Tue Aug  6 00:48:18 1996
From: ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu (Simon Spero)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:48:18 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960806010151.008f8f48@panix.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960805234946.753F-100000@tipper.oit.unc.edu>


one silly thought: lots of people use cypherpunks as the username and 
password for all those websites that want an id. What about a cypherpunks 
3-2-4 number for those cases where an SSN isn't appropriate. Anyone know 
what J. Edgar Hoover's SSN was?



---
Cause maybe  (maybe)		      | In my mind I'm going to Carolina
you're gonna be the one that saves me | - back in Chapel Hill May 16th.
And after all			      | Email address remains unchanged
You're my firewall -    	      | ........First in Usenet.........





From hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu  Tue Aug  6 00:51:45 1996
From: hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu (hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 15:51:45 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <199608060242.TAA18997@dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <9608060554.AA01285@Etna.ai.mit.edu>



Contrary to reports of some sort of inversion it is not the case that
shell cases need to be found at the scene of a crime to cause an
arrest and conviction. There are many people who are serving time
after having left their fingerprints on shell cases found in a gun
recovered after a crime. If the gun can be linked to a crime scene
via balistics reports and the shells in the gun to an individual via
fingerprints that is circumstansial evidence.

Of course nobody gets sent to jail on a single piece of questionable
evidence (at least if they have a decent lawyer). But a weak piece
of evidence is sufficient to lead to a conviction if it is a lead.
Anything that reduces the search space for an investigating team
is an advantage for the police.

	Phill






From alanh at infi.net  Tue Aug  6 01:01:28 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:01:28 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <9608052116.AA09050@Etna.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960806013641.11416F-100000@larry.infi.net>


Phil,

The Japanese were not interned in the State of Kansas. The people 
wouldn't permit it and the FBI just quietly backed down.

The Nazis couldn't enforce the Yellow Star in Denmark. The people 
wouldn't permit it.

I can't speak about what people in the UK will permit. If they're all 
like you, they'll permit anything.

Oh the Administration and the Congress don't agree that we have a right to
defend our freedoms, if necessary, against them?  I work in a military
base in the heartland, not a computer lab in Cambridge - and I think
you're wrong about that - I don't think you could get enough American
troops to perticipate in disarming innocent civilians. And the Congress
and the Administration DO know it and are scared to death of it. 


Anyway, Phil, I was trying to ask your opinion about something.... Is 
there any freedom for which you would personally risk your life for?





From alanh at infi.net  Tue Aug  6 01:15:07 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:15:07 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <9608060607.AA01332@Etna.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960806021028.11416N-100000@larry.infi.net>


On Tue, 6 Aug 1996 hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:
> Several years ago the IRA attempted to murder my cousin. I have been 
> warned not to continue my political activity but I do so regardless.
> 
> I do not advocate the bringing of troops onto the streets but I see 
> it as the logicial response to the case put by the NRA. They are
> playing a tune I have heard before. Claim to stand for freedom while
> doing whatever is possible to encourage restriction of liberty.

  I have added you to my computerized list of individuals who advocate 
the violent overthrow of the US Constitution.

I am going to go to the law library and see what my options are, with 
respect to filing a petition to have you deported out of the United 
States.

This is not a rhetorical statement.





From remailer at cypherpunks.ca  Tue Aug  6 01:16:43 1996
From: remailer at cypherpunks.ca (John Anonymous MacDonald)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:16:43 +0800
Subject: PGP public key servers are NOT useful!
In-Reply-To: <199608052141.QAA15347@bluestem.prairienet.org>
Message-ID: <199608060552.WAA04209@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu>


"David E. Smith" <dsmith at prairienet.org> writes:
> Over the last couple of weeks, I've noticed a lot
> of subscribers who PGP clearsign their messages,
> but who haven't uploaded their keys to any of
> the public keyservers.
> 
> Those keys are most useful when they're
> available to people who might want to use them,
> so I'm asking those of you who haven't sent
> them to a keyserver to do so.

I, for one, make it a point of never using the PGP public key servers.
I make my key available by finger, and always check for people's keys
through finger.  The problem with the PGP public key servers is that
one has absolutely no control over what gets uploaded there in one's
own name.

If someone really wanted to prevent me from using PGP, for example,
that person could just upload 500 different PGP keys to the key
servers all with my E-mail address as the key ID.  Even if you already
have a PGP key of someone you trust who has certified my key, are you
really going to verify all 500 other keys until you find the one that
is certified by the real trusted person?

Moreover, what's to stop someone from downloading my key, adding an ID
"kkk grand wizard", signing it with a fake "David Duke" key, and
uploading the new signature to the PGP servers.  I don't want anyone
to be able to put such things on my PGP key in the place where most
people will go looking for it first.

Deleting a key from a PGP key server is probably even more difficult
than getting an error corrected on your credit report.  Even if one
keyserver deletes it, it will probably end up propagating there again
from another server.

The finger approach is far from perfect, because not everyone can run
a finger daemon accessible to the net at large.  Moreover, even people
with PGP keys in their .plan files often can't be fingered at their
mail hubs (in fact, people often receive E-mail at addresses which are
only DNS "MX records" which don't have corresponding IP addresses).

Thus, I'm not saying finger is the solution.  However, at least people
have control over the plausible PGP key finger locations in a way that
fits sensibly with the key ID's sought.  In other words, if I have
absolutely no affiliation with Berkeley, I should not be able to stick
a PGP key with an ID ending "<.. at cs.berkeley.edu>" where people will
primarily look for such keys.  (Of course I'm welcome put the key any
other place I have access to.)

Note finally that the key distribution problem addressed by the key
servers has nothing to do with key certification.  I think one of
PGP's greatest strenghts is that anyone can certify any one else's
public key.  I hate the idea of a hierarchical system where you might
have to pay $20 and wait 3 days to get a public key (Verasign I gather
does this for SSL certificates, though the cost/wait are probably
completely different).  Thus, while I'm advocating some kind of
hierarchical key distribution mechanism, I absolutely don't want to
see that kind of structure imposed on key certification.

In fact, the key distribution problem is just the opposite of key
certification in that one wants to prevent unwanted certificates and
keys from being interpreted as condoned by the supposed owner of the
PGP key.  Even if my key really was certified by someone a year ago,
if I've now forgotten the passphrase I don't want to keep having
people grab my old key.  I also don't want random attacks on my
character appended to my PGP key where most people will seek it.

Finally, for those who desire the "light security" of encrypting with
my PGP public key even though they can't verify any of the
certificates (and I do get plenty of such PGP-encrypted mail), it
might be nice to have a system in place that at least required an
active network attack to bypass.  You might argue that this would be
worse as it would encourage more people to use untrusted PGP keys.
However, consider SSH's mechanism whereby it acquires public keys
automatically at first and then keeps verifying the keys on subsequent
sessions.  It's not perfect, but I think it definitely improves the
security of the situation.  Anyway, if the NSA started mounting
massive active attacks from the internet backbones, we would at least
find out about it soon enough.

[Posted anonymously to prevent some wise guy from getting the
brilliant idea of uploading 500 fake PGP keys in my name...]





From alano at teleport.com  Tue Aug  6 01:44:03 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:44:03 +0800
Subject: Cookies on Microsoft Explorer?
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806062542.00a47d1c@mail.teleport.com>


At 03:48 PM 8/5/96 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Does anyone know what the equivalent technology is on Microsoft to
>Netscape's cookie technology?  Does Microsoft have support for cookies or 
>not?  

Internet exploder 3.0 supports cookies.

>All of the discussion on the list to do with
>cookies is related to Netscape.  Does this mean that if one switches to
>Microsoft Explorer one can avoid the problem?  Many thanks.

There is no escape.  Resistance is futile. You will be server pushed, filed,
tracked, counter digited, and numbered. You are not a free individual, you
are an IP address assigned from a dynamic pool.

Be seeing you!
---
|"Computers are Voodoo -- You just have to know where to stick the pins."|
|"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer:         |
| mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!"  | Ignore the man      |
|`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key  | behind the keyboard.|
|         http://www.teleport.com/~alano/          | alano at teleport.com  |






From blane at aa.net  Tue Aug  6 01:54:45 1996
From: blane at aa.net (Brian C. Lane)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:54:45 +0800
Subject: ****Tacoma, Washington Starts Taxing Internet Access 07/30/96
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960805181729.00e8c4a0@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: <3206e54a.46270083@mail.aa.net>


On Mon, 05 Aug 1996 11:17:29 -0700, you wrote:

>At 05:42 AM 8/5/96 -1000, NetSurfer wrote:
>>
>>On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>   	  				 
>>> >WASHINGTON, DC, U.S.A., 1996 JUL 30 (NB) -- By Bill Pietrucha.  
>>> >Tacoma, Washington, has just gained the distinction of being the 
>>> >only municipality in the United States to tax Internet Access 
>>> >providers (IAPs) like telephone service providers. 
>>> >
>
>I believe the reason the Tacoma ordinance is getting so much flack is that
>they are wanting to charge sales tax on all transactions that take place
>from ISPs in Tacoma.

  

>
>This type of taxation is not new.  Various jurisdictions have tried to use
>the same thing on mail order houses.  Having worked for a service bureau
>that dealt with mail order, I know what a hassle it is to try to keep track
>of such taxation.  There is a company that will sell you the data of all of
>the sales tax rates throughout the country.  This includes every little
>podunk city, county, and fire district tax.  They are divided by zip code,
>but that is no guarantees that you have the right place. The reality is that
>trying to "be legal" under such regulations is next to impossible, even with
>the proper data.  I know of few mail order firms that are willing to go to
>that extreme.  (Unless, of course, they have gotten the proper threats from
>some miffed tax baron.)
>
>And they wonder why there is so much disrespect for the law...
>---
>Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
>        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
>                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
>  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
>                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."
>
>

------- <blane at aa.net> -------------------- <http://www.aa.net/~blane> -------
     Embedded Systems Programmer, quick hacks on request, CryptoAnarchist
==============  11 99 3D DB 63 4D 0B 22  15 DC 5A 12 71 DE EE 36  ============





From jimbell at pacifier.com  Tue Aug  6 02:02:03 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:02:03 +0800
Subject: More to be paranoid about...
Message-ID: <199608060636.XAA29816@mail.pacifier.com>


At 01:50 PM 8/4/96 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
>At 10:14 PM 8/3/96 -0700, you wrote:
>>Take a look at:
>>     http://www.spiritone.com/cgi-bin/plates
>>Feed it an Oregon licence plate number and it will feed you back all sorts
>>of info about the person/victim.
>
>It's interesting to know that Senator Hatfield's wife's birthday
>is 1/17/29, and that the title to the car is held with a 
>security interest by the US SENATE EMPLOYEES FEDERAL CREDIT,
>and that (at least) Social Security Numbers weren't listed
>for the plates I checked.  Also that, unlike many states,
>the Governor doesn't have License Plate #1.

It turns out that I am indirectly (two steps removed) responsible for this 
information being publicized on the 'net.  I bought a copy of a CDROM that 
included this data (from a person who bought this data from the State of 
Oregon on magtape), and a friend of mine got a copy from me and made a copy 
for his friend, who decided to put it on the web as an accessible item.

In any case, contrary to Alan Olsen's implication, I think that this kind of 
thing is a step forward for freedom.  Government agencies already have 
access to this kind of information whenever they want; it's only the 
individuals who don't.  Indeed (as my friend pointed out, correctly) this 
information is only considered valuable because not everyone has it.  Making 
this information available puts government-types under the same "gun" as the 
rest of us already were.  

It is now being seen that driver's licenses, while ostensibly merely being a 
certification that we know how to drive, are most useful to government as a 
way to "legitimately" collect information on us, including our address and 
age.  Since the function of credentialing is being implemented using 
encryption in ways to protect privacy, I suggest that we should push the 
government in that direction.  





Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From alano at teleport.com  Tue Aug  6 02:18:51 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:18:51 +0800
Subject: Credit Cards over the internet
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806064420.00af96e8@mail.teleport.com>


At 02:46 PM 8/5/96 -0800, Vinnie Moscaritolo wrote:
>Just read a forwarded message from a merchant who indicated that:

{credit card hastles deleted]

I have been having some similar hastles setting up a site for credit card
usage.  It seems that the credit card companies are confused between
protecting cards over the net and validating credit card information.  (Two
entirly different problems.)  The broker we are going through seems to have
gotten a few clues, but it is taking ALOT of explaining.  (The site will be
running Stronghold when we are able to process credit cards. We are
currently running Apache 1.1.)  Actually I am having a harder time getting
through to the sysadmin at the host site why we need a commerce server than
I am with the credit card company...

It sounds like the scare stories on the news have taken their toll.
---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From jsw at netscape.com  Tue Aug  6 02:21:33 1996
From: jsw at netscape.com (Jeff Weinstein)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:21:33 +0800
Subject: Stealth cookies
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960806003319.00a5a274@vertexgroup.com>
Message-ID: <3206EFF8.6238@netscape.com>


John F. Fricker wrote:
> Solution?
> 
> 1) Don't put your name in the netscape configuration (d'oh)

  No, no, no.  Netscape navigator does not reveal your name or
put it into cookies.  The only way to get your name or other
personal information about you into a cookie is for you to type
it into a web site, and have that site send you back a cookie.

  The only time we reveal your name is in e-mail headers, and
when doing anonymous FTP when you have manually disabled the default
of sending 'mozilla@' as the anon ftp password.

	--Jeff





From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org  Tue Aug  6 02:30:12 1996
From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:30:12 +0800
Subject: The futility of trying to "tag" ammunition
In-Reply-To: <ae2bdb75040210042746@[205.199.118.202]>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960806050739.11416B-100000@mcfeely.bsfs.org>



> >> US it is not unreasonable to require each individual cartridge
> >> to be stamped with a serial number and for gun dealers to be

How about just numbering the criminals?  There's more room for the 
numbers, there's precedent, and less specialized equipment is required.

 ;)






From gnu at toad.com  Tue Aug  6 02:32:08 1996
From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:32:08 +0800
Subject: Looking for CJ's or State Dept. correspondence re "public domain"
Message-ID: <199608060718.AAA11804@toad.com>


We got a brief last week from the State Department in the Bernstein
case (in which we're trying to overturn the crypto export controls
on First Amendment grounds).  They state:

	"In fact, the State Department does not seek to control the
various means by which information is placed in the public domain.
Lowell Decl, para. 22.  The Department does not review scientific
information to determine whether it may be offered for sale at
newsstand and bookstores, through subscriptions, second-class mail, or
made available at libraries, or distributed at a conference or seminar
in the United States.  Id.

	"These clear examples are included in the ITAR to enable
	individuals to determine for themselves whether particular
	information is subject to regulation as technical data.
	Indeed, individuals rarely -- if ever -- seek a determinatino
	from the Department as to whether information is in the public
	domain, and the regularions are not applied to establish a
	prepublication review requirement for the general publication
	of scientific information in the United States."

I am wondering if anyone else has ever sent in a CJ request that
sought to determine whether the item in question was considered
"public domain" by the State Department.  Several CJ's of this type
can be found near the bottom of my crypto export web page, at
ftp://ftp.cygnus.com/pub/export/export.html.

Has anyone else had interactions with the State Department about
the "public domain" status of anything?  Please let me know.
--
John Gilmore                                    gnu at toad.com  --  gnu at eff.org
				RESTRICTED
    Notice. - This document contains information affecting the national
    defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Act
    (U.S.C. 50: 31, 32).  The transmission of this document or the
    revelation of its contents in any manner to any unauthorized person
    is prohibited.





From tcmay at got.net  Tue Aug  6 02:52:41 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:52:41 +0800
Subject: e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce
Message-ID: <ae2c29840d0210047e61@[205.199.118.202]>


[Note: My analysis of Apple Computer, and why I will not give a "pep talk"
to certain Apple Macintosh folks, is contained at the _end_ of this piece.
Skip forward if you like, or read my response to Bob H. to get the
background on why I am posting this.]

At 4:20 AM 8/6/96, Robert Hettinga wrote:

[much stuff elided]

>All of which brings up the *real* point of this rant. I mean, who *cares* if
>you can do crypto on the Mac or not? Why not stand back and watch the
>MacRubble bounce?
>
>My thinking about all of this started because I've been reading Vinnie's
>mail over his shoulder. (Yes. I'm shameless. When we're working on stuff
>together, we trade our mail about it. As they say in the Mac biz, "Sosumi".)
>That is, Vinnie's been out there scaring up speakers for this shindig that
>he "borrowed" the grenades for, and, well, in his tree-shaking (God help you
>if Vinnie shakes a tree you're in), he invites (if you could call what
>Vinnie sent an invitation :-)) Yet *Another* Nameless Cypherpunk (YANC) to
>come and give us what we hope would be a Patented Colorful Cypherpunk
>crypto-Peptalk, with Vinnie saying to him (YANC), in effect, we need him
>(YANC) for a proper Laying-On of Hands, him being a Piece of the True Crypto
>Cross, and all.

I have to assume you are referring to me, as I had an exchange with Vinnie
which resembles this. As you were given "over the shoulder" access to mail
I sent to Vinnie, by all accounts, I certainly will have no qualms
forwarding my correspondence on this issue to this list.

>Of course, Vinnie didn't stand a chance.  If we *could* consider Vinnie for
>it, (which we can't, because he's on the selection committee) he might have
>earned the coveted 1996 Black Rhino "Mr. Kevlar" award (for courage in the

Oh, he "had a chance." He just wasn't very persuasive. And given that I
don' think crypto needs to be tied to the Macintosh platform (which is
dead, even though it hasn't yet topped over, and even though people like me
continue to use it), more is needed than "We need you." I'm not big on
charity, and Apple is truly a charity case.

>face of imaginary gunfire) for his efforts. Actually, considering the, heh,
>caliber, of last year's winner, it's just as well. A, uh, bang-up job Mr.
>Weinstein of Netscape did last year. A hard one to top. And so, the search
>continues. Both for this year's "Mr. Kevlar", and, of course, for some other
>Piece of the True Cross. Or so we think. I'll get to that in a moment.
>
>What Vinnie got from Yet Another Nameless Cypherpunk, instead of "Yes, I'll
>come talk about crypto, the universe, and everything.", was Yet Another
>Rendition of the Apple Macintosh Massacree. In six-part ;-) harmony, of
>course. And, no, I won't sing it here in its 21-minute (not even 17 for

Clever writing, to some, but empty of calories. My "Massacree" will be
included at the end of this message. Judge for yourself.

>radio) entirety. However, I should really note here that no matter how
>reasoned and cogent YANC's arguments were (and cogent they were, too: upon
>reading them, I was halfway to the dumpster with my trusty old PB180,
>tears in my eyes, before I came to my senses), in general, one of the *big*
>reasons that Vinnie got the $0$AD ($ame Old $ong And Dance) Re the Future of
>the Mac as a Viable Platform was probably more because the aforementioned
>YANC has eschewed speaking opportunities like this for years anyway, and
>Vinnie probably didn't ask him with the Proper Deference Necessary for a
>Cypherpunk of That Stature. In fact, I *know* Vinnie didn't, because I read
>his mail ;-). However, that, of course, wasn't why YANC gave Vinnie the
>aforementioned Massacree in particular.

Your future as a mind reader, Bob, is limited. It is true that I avoid some
speaking engagements which appear to be "hype" and "pep talks." But I also
have elected to give a few talks, incuding one in Monte Carlo which took me
several weeks to prepare for, and one at CFP '95, arranged by our own Prof.
Michael Froomkin.

>YANC Massacreed Vinnie because there's a lot of *very* disappointed Mac
>users out there, YANC being a prominent example thereof. Love the computer.
>Hate the company. Hell hath no fury like a Mac user (not to mention
>shareholder) scorned. Heck. I understand *that*. I did the *same* thing just
>over a year ago this week. "Platforms are Meat", and all that. For what it's
>worth, YANC, I *feel* your pain... :-).

I'm not sure what you're drinking, but you might want to lay off for a few
hours before sitting down to write.

>So, I repeat, why *not* stand back and let the MacRubble bounce? No, this is
>not a segue for me to stand up in my chair and start singing the Apple
>Company Song at the top of my lungs, complete with a QuickDraw-VR DOOM
>environment file of One Infinite Loop right up there on the screen for y'all
>to marvel at and play with using your very own Newtons, all while I sing 100
>Company Song verses with a six-part MIDI chorus of my own voice (Yechhh!).
>Nope. Not me. Indeed, I really *do* say, "Why not?". That is, let's look at
>what happens if people *don't* develop crypto for the Mac.
>
>The truth is folks, not much.

I agree. Not much to be done about Apple. Too bad, but it's not something I
can do much about. I've known some of the early Apple folks since 1977, and
first invested in them in 1984. (Though I sold 90% of my stock in Apple a
year or so ago, at $45, well above its current level.) In 1986, upon my
departure from Intel, I bought a Macintosh Plus, the closest thing I could
afford to a Symbolics 3600. (Interesting note: a friend of mine said she
just saw an ad for a Symbolics: $100 takes it away. Except for the
likelihood that it would cost far more per month to run it, I'd buy it.
Maybe I still will....) Then I bought a Mac IIci, a Powebook 100, a
Powerbook 170, and then a Power Macintosh 7100av. Mostly I've been happy,
as I had access to a windows environment (before Microsoft tried to patent
the name "windows"), visual metaphor (a la my Symbolics), and an adequate
supply of programs, including: Excel, Photoshop, Painter, Eudora, etc., all
of which made their appearance on Macs before on Windows.

However, the same windows/Lisp machine/Xerox/Smalltalk appearance which
Apple stole from the Xerox and MIT machines is now available in robust form
in the form of Windows NT machines, with huge market share and incredible
performance. (I am "loyal" to the computing metaphor, not to the current
market Apple has.)

>First of all, we all think it'll be Real Bad News for Apple Real Soon
>if real-live strong cryptography isn't shoved as far down as it's possible
>to make it go into the Mac's operating system, and right now, dammit. But,

As my message to Vinnie (below) points out, Apple blew a couple of chances
it has to incorporate crypto and security. For one, it announced some sort
of System 7 signature system...like a lot of Apple announcements, nothing
more was heard of it and it today merits not even the slightest footnote.
Second, Apple could've _owned_ the "Internet telephony" market which Intel
(!!!!!) is now touting so highly: Macintosh AC models (660av. 640av, all
PowerMacs) had extensive audio in/out capabilities, with DSP or CPU powers
sufficient to implement secure teleconferencing.

Instead, we got me-too  products like "E-World," a now-defunct proprietary
version of Prodigy, and countless other "detour" products, including
OpenTransport, GeoPort, speech recognition (which doesn't really work, at
least not on my $5K Mac), the Newton, and endless catchily-named Apple
products.


>so *what*? The Mac's only, say, 5-7% of the computer market anyway, and the
>only possibly new, cool, stuff Apple's involved in, say, OpenDoc/Cyberdog,
>has 5%, maybe 10%, of *that*, so, who *cares*? Potential Mac crypto
>developers aren't effecting that many people at *all*. They would better
>spend their time doing CryptoJava++ or something, because there's *much*
>more market penetration *there*. Or, even better, developers should go do
>CAPI for Windows. I mean, that's where the *real* money is, right? So
>fergadaboudit, go write CAPI-code, I mean, Microsoft Gets The Internet Now,
>right? At least there'll be *active* developer support from the MotherShip,
>which is better than whatcha get from Apple ferchrissakes <He said, ducking
>a mysteriously appearing grenade fusilade from Vinnie's general direction.
>Can someone tell me *how* he pulls the pins and throws them all at once
>like that?>.

Bob, your rants lose effect when mixed with this Hunter S. Thompsonesque
writing style (" <He said, ducking a mysteriously appearing grenade
fusilade ..."). Maybe this comes from too much time spent in front of a
Macintosh?

[much more stuff elided]

>That's why Vinnie's going to fill that room in Cupertino. (On the 5th and
>6th of September, remember?) First of all, the developers who are left in
>the Mac market are there because they love it. The old guys, who, like me,
>can't get it up anymore, still hack Macs because they love them. The *new*
>developers hack Macs because they can't get leave it *alone* and don't know
>from market share anyway. They just love what they're doing.

Well, if you "can't get it up anymore," to use your words, maybe it's time
for you to move on to something else?

>Well, it looks like Vinnie, and all those room-filling Chuck-E-Cheese-
>Gopher-Banging Mac crypto developers will have to use their ears (or what's
>between them, anyway) to fly instead.
>
>Only this time, Dumbo's got a sack of grenades.

Well, good luck. For me, giving a pep talk to a bunch of tired old Mac
developers at a Chuck-E-Cheese--especially when I went to the first one, in
San Jose, in 1977-78--does not excite me in the slightest. After all, it's
not as if Apple people cannot come to the Bay Area Cypherpunks meetings (I
know of only one current Apple employee on our mailing list, actively, or
who attends meetings: Martin Minow).

I refuse to accept any burden of guilt for not volunteering to speak for 30
minutes at a conference which is poorly-defined to me and which would cover
material the attendees could get by subscribing to our list for a few days
or weeks or by attending a physical Cypherpunks meeting in the Valley.

I'm sorry (for Vinnie, never for me) that  Vinnie is pissed off at me for
not helping out at his Let's Save Apple conference, and that Bob feels it
necessary to rant about this Mysterious Cypherpunk who won't Help the
Cause.

Life is tough. I'm available as a consultant, of course, and Apple is, as
always, free to hire me as a consultant.

Attached below is my major response to Vinnie. I would not have raised the
issue here on this list, except for Bob's post. Take it or leave it.

--Tim


At 9:52 PM 7/23/96, Vinnie Moscaritolo wrote:

>Cut the Bullshit, Tim;

I normally don't respond to anyone who tells me to "Cut the Bullshit,"
"Knock it off," etc. In fact, I deleted your message as soon as I saw
this....then a few minutes later I elected to retrieve it from Eudora's
trash folder before I had emptied the Trash.

I'll respond here, but not to "dammits" and "Knock it offs." If you want to
calmly discuss things, fine. Otherwise, I'll just add you to my filter
file. No harm done.


>I am having to pull teeth and do this a guerilla effort, but dammit If I
>have to do it alone I will. SO DONT GIVE ME THIS "I was not welcome on the
>list"  crap, what I am trying to avoid is folks like  dave weiner.  who
>just bitch and dont offer any solutions. Most of what you say IS EDUCATED
>and needs to be heard. Tim if you sent me a message saying you want to be
>on the list, I would stop what I was doing and put you on in a second..

I'm not surprised you are having trouble pulling this together, for several
good reasons:

1. Apple is struggling, developers are focussing on Windows.

2. Crypto for the Mac is really dependent on a couple of main apps: mail
programs (Eudora, Claris E-Mailer, Lotus Notes, etc.) and Web browsers
(obvious name here). If you want Apple to be "in the game" on crypto, as it
clearly is not now, ask Claris why they are not supporting PGP or S/MIME.

3. And crypto is not really a "Macintosh" issue. The best programs are now
platform-neutral.

4. A "guerilla" program, absent a compelling need, is likely to generate
little support.

5. "Internet commerce" is indeed a Big Issue (and of course a massively
hyped issue). But it is unlikely in the extreme that the Mac could ever be
a central player...the focus is on Web browsers and other tools that
represent 95% of what Web users have. (Don't tell me about CyberDog...less
than 10% of the market has Macs, and probably less than 10% of them have
installed CyberDog. I don't personally know any Mac users planning to use
it. This may change, of course, but at this point its prospects are not too
bright.)

My point is simple: if your conference is the effective realization of the
goals of your Mac-Crypto mailing list, as appears to be the case (at least
to me), then I can't see how my discussion of political issues would be
consistent with your insistence that Mac-Crypto avoid issues that don't
involve coding.

(And I would not welcome the attention I might get at Apple if I were to
discuss what I know of "information liberation," including the NuPrometheus
League.) Friends of mine have been called by P.I.s investigating this
case.)

>>No "solution" predominantly on the Mac is a solution for the masses, who
>>are overwhelmingly using Windows today. (You surely know this...your
>>company is struggling to hold 5-7% of the new sales figure; you haven't
>>been above 10% for several years.)
>>
>
>so why do YOU use a mac? or do you.

I use a Mac, primarily these days to run Netscape, Eudora Pro, and a
handful of related tools. None of these are Mac-specific anymore, and in
fact the Mac is way behind in a lot of ways (e.g., automatic signing of
messages).

The Mac has perhaps 8-10% of the installed base, and something less than
this in terms of new sales. Of this 10% (charitably), I doubt more than 10%
has installed and used "CyberDog." So, perhaps 1% of users have access to
this (at least at this time).

(I don't know the % of Web sites hosted on Macs, but I know the Mac is
coming under fire there, too. Lack of "multi-homing," lack of Unix-type
robustness, and the power of NT servers, from what I read. In any case, Web
site hosting is not a major point of confluence with crypto issues. I know
Sameer Parekh and folks like him would laugh if anyone suggested they host
their sites on a Mac.)

I've watched with growing incredulity and confusion as Apple has gone off
on tangents which seem to have little value to its core customers. Sure,
some of these have succeeeded (QuickTime for one), but many are just
tangents, at least for the dozen or so home Mac users I know. For example,
OpenTransport, GeoPort, Publish and Subscribe, OpenDoc, Interactive Music
Toolkit, the Speech recognition stuff, and so on. Not to mention expensive
detours into the Newton.

(I don't fault Apple for pursuing these things; it's hard to know what will
be the Next Big Thing and all. What I fault them for is having a confusing
array of add-ons to the basic OS, with lots of confusion about what the
advantages are. I, for example, use plain old System 7.1.2, an external
28.8 modem, and fairly standard apps and tools. I see no need for GeoPorts,
OpenTransport, or any of that stuff. And when Apple stopped bundling the
System software with machines, and making upgrades free, and generating
multiple versions of System 7.5x, well, this all made my glad to just sit
all this confusion out.)

Can Apple do anything to "help crypto"? Not a thing, as near as I can tell.
Eudora is _still_ not putting PGP or S/MIME in in Eudora Pro 3.0, and
Netscape is doing whatever it is doing (as you know). Thus, all I care
about is what Qualcomm does with Eudora and what Netscape does with
Navigator. I don't care about what Apple puts in CyberDog, as I have no
immediate plans to use it as my browser or my mailer. I think I represent
about 80% or more of all Macintosh users, too.

>>I just don't see the point of trying to educate Apple people on something
>>so far from what they need to be doing.
>>
>
>Point is put up or shut up, I am giving you a chance to be heard, I dont
>give a flying hoot what you say, except that you make people aware of the
>issues.  Tim dont you know that outside of cp very little is known about
>crypto-anarchy. and what it mean.. hey even if you hate the very essence of
>apple, (and I know your don't) you can helpbe part of the solution instead
>of part of the problem...
>
>
>so whats it gonna be.

I don't buy this notion that I have to choose to be part of the problem or
part of the solution. Nothing Apple can do really matters at this point, as
they've lost the leadership role they once had and are increasingly
"marginalized."

Crypto tools are platform-independent, ideally. Unless crypto tools and
algorithms are "built in" in some very usable way to Copland, say, there
just is no role for Apple. Sure, you lean on Steve Dorner at Qualcomm to
get crypto into Eudora in a more central way, and work with Netscape in
some way, but not much else is to be done.

(And Apple dropped the ball a couple of years ago with the "digital
signature" stuff they announced...I forget the name, but it was some kind
of certificate-based system, probably called something typically Apple-ish
like "OpenCertification" or somesuch. I think it was introduced in 1994 or
so, about the time the 660av and 840av were rolled out. Nothing more has
ever come of it, not too surprisingly.)

And speaking of the av-series machines, and the later PPC machines (of
course), Apple blew it by not developing this as an "Internet phone" sort
of thing. Here they have had av-compatible machines (speakers, microphones,
DSP functionality) for a few years, and yet Microsoft and Intel are
grabbing the headlines with "Internet phone" systems! Jeesh.

(This is not something that talking to the bottom-level troops at a
"crypto" meeting can do, this indicates the complete lack of vision at
higher levels.)

Apple consistently blows its lead, and is now becoming irrelevant. (I don't
plan to switch, so long as my Web-centric apps continue to run and updates
are provided. And I have too many thousands of dollars tied up in Mac
hardware, including the usuals several gigs of disk, CD-R, laser printer,
Powerbooks, etc. So, it'll be several years before I have to switch.

But that sure doesn't mean I have to be a cheerleader for a probably doomed
system. I first bought Apple stock the day after the Mac was unveiled, on
January 25th, 1984, and added to my holdings over the years. I finally
dumped 90% of my shares last fall, for $45. And I'm glad I did.

There is nothing Apple people can do to "help crypto" at this time. And the
only thing they can do to help Apple survive is to do just that, help it
survive. As for what that might be, at this late date, I'm fresh out of
ideas.

You may think this is Apple-bashing. I avoid bashing Apple in public, as
the issues and themes are well-known to all. But you have framed your note
to me as a call for me to "put up or shut up," implying I have some duty to
help Apple and the Macintosh succeed. I do not.

I am available as a consultant, of course. I doubt Apple needs more more
consultant advising it  on corporate strategies, but this option is open to
you.

--Tim


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 at 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."









From bdurham at metronet.com  Tue Aug  6 03:28:35 1996
From: bdurham at metronet.com (Brian Durham)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 18:28:35 +0800
Subject: FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
In-Reply-To: <199608051211.GAA26432@zifi.genetics.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <3206F8E4.2781@metronet.com>


Anonymous wrote:
> 
> FUCK YOU, SHITOPUNKS
> DAVID STERNLIGHT

Well, I guess I don't have to take the pledge now.

Brian Durham





From lyalc at zemail.com.au  Tue Aug  6 03:47:40 1996
From: lyalc at zemail.com.au (lyal collins)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 18:47:40 +0800
Subject: Credit Cards over the internet
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960805234211.753E-100000@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
Message-ID: <3207FC8B.477E@zemail.com.au>


I agree it is over engineered, possibly in the wrong directions.
There are other ways to avoid merchant never sees the cardholders card 
number, though - and a lot cheaper.
lyal
-- 
All mistakes in this message belong to me - you should not use them!






From fair at cesium.clock.org  Tue Aug  6 07:47:39 1996
From: fair at cesium.clock.org (Erik E. Fair (Time Keeper))
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 22:47:39 +0800
Subject: e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce
Message-ID: <v02140b0dae2caf6e1f9c@[198.68.110.3]>


Just FYI, there is at least one other full-time Apple employee on this list.

The previous digital signature stuff from Apple was part of PowerTalk, our
own attempt to do an E-mail system as part of the base OS. We licensed the
crypto stuff from RSA (as did Lotus and a bunch of others at about the same
time). PowerTalk had good goals (full digital signatures, encrypted mail,
etc), but an exceedingly bad plan for getting there (completely proprietary
file formats and protocols, and incompletely fleshed out APIs for getting
at them).

Needless to say, it was a flop in the market, and we've let everyone know
that we've stopped development of it. Fortunately, we still have that RSA
license, and we may yet be able to do something useful with it before
either the license or the patent expires. I keep pressing people about
these issues when I get the chance, internally.

I haven't made any of the face-to-face meetings of the Cypherpunks because
I have been busy frying other fish since I got on the list. I post from
this odd return address because I prefer to use my private system and
domain for cypherpunks. At work, I'm

        Erik E. Fair <fair at research.apple.com>
        Apple Research Labs (nee Advanced Technology Group)







From shamrock at netcom.com  Tue Aug  6 11:44:55 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 02:44:55 +0800
Subject: e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce
Message-ID: <v02120d46ae2c9d988525@[192.0.2.1]>


At 0:20 8/6/96, Robert Hettinga wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce

Robert, you *really* need to cut back on that Ritalin. No, not just `one
more'. Put it *away*. Now!

;-)




-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From mclow at owl.csusm.edu  Tue Aug  6 11:45:31 1996
From: mclow at owl.csusm.edu (Marshall Clow)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 02:45:31 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960806044723.01073e4c@vertexgroup.com>
Message-ID: <v03007801ae2c9ebff6b6@[207.67.250.128]>


At 9:47 PM -0700 8/5/96, John F. Fricker wrote:
>Hmmm. Actually a long time ago I lost my job with Greenpeace out of refusal
>to sign an I-9 which was in '86 the Department of Justice's form to exhibit
>eligibility to work in the US. The form required that I present two pieces
>of photo identification or a driver's license to be authenticated by my
>employer. Maybe it's a CA state law that adds an additional skin tone
>criterium to for the filing of an I-9.
>
I have found that promising to provide the necessary docs, and then failing to do so, is the least confrontational and most effective way around this.

"Delay is the deadliest form of denial"


-- Marshall

Marshall Clow     Aladdin Systems   <mailto:mclow at mailhost2.csusm.edu>

"We're not gonna take it/Never did and never will
We're not gonna take it/Gonna break it, gonna shake it,
let's forget it better still" -- The Who, "Tommy"







From jimbell at pacifier.com  Tue Aug  6 11:52:49 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 02:52:49 +0800
Subject: Digital Telephony costs $2
Message-ID: <199608060636.XAA29824@mail.pacifier.com>


At 01:50 PM 8/4/96 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:

>One advantage of higher-speed modems is that you can get away with
>16kbps ADPCM coding, which is dirt-simple computationally;
>your 386 probably has enough horsepower to do it, though a PC's
>interrupt structure may make it tough to shove all the data in and
>out in real time.  You still need a sound card that'll do the
>A/D and D/A conversion simultaneously if you want full-duplex;
>that wasn't part of the original market vision of Soundblaster,
>so vanilla sound cards don't all do it.

What is unclear, however, is WHY they "had to" build a card that couldn't do 
full-duplex.  I mean, would there have been a problem implementing that?  Or 
was this just another one of those stupid design decisions which could have 
been easily fixed if it had been realized in time?


> It also has the advantage
>that the data is being moved through your CPU, so encryption is
>an easy add-on, rather than having one combined modem/voiceblaster
>card which doesn't have any hooks for crypto or other processing.

Well, I assume that if implemented as a new type of modem card, the 
processor can be used to do the data transfer.


>
>>Sure,  it may not be necessary to compress voice audio all the way down to 
>>2400 bps, since the current modem standards allow 28.8kbps and beyond, but I 
>>suggest that decreasing net traffic by a factor of 12 (28.8k to 2.4k) is a 
>>desirable goal.  
>
>One problem is that tighter compression methods are far more sensitive
>to network latency than crude ones, and need to process more milliseconds
>of speech before putting out a packet on the net (e.g. a 64-byte tinygram
>is 200ms of speech at 2400bps, vs. 32ms at 16kbps.)  For modem-to-modem
>communications, this is no problem; for Internet random delays it is.

I see what you're saying; this makes sense.  Maybe what the industry is 
going to have to do is to start out at 16kpbs, reserving full 2400 bps 
compression for a (near?) future time when network latencies are low and 
predictable.


>Also, another big difficulty with full-duplex transmission is that you
>need echo-cancelling, especially with high-latency circuits.
>Half-duplex is annoying, but it doesn't echo, and it's more tolerant
>of delay because you're not expecting it to have natural timing...

Fortunately, this is the kind of thing that DSP's are good at...


>>The reason I think a system I've described has a future is that modem 
>>manufacturers have a PROBLEM.  Their problem is that they've pretty much run 
>>out of room to improve the bit-pushing through a 3 KHz bandwidth.  
>
>Given that the "3KHz" is almost universally transmitted over 64kbps
>digital channels, there's really no point in pushing past 33.6 with
>analog-based coding; better to just do ISDN. 

The local phonecos still want to overcharge for ISDN, however.  Major 
bigtime problem.  ISDN looked great back in about 1980 when the fastest 
common modem was 300 baud, but it's lost much of its lustre competing 
against 33.6 kbps.  Maybe if ISDN were available at a premium of $5 per 
month or so...

Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From jimbell at pacifier.com  Tue Aug  6 14:18:26 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 05:18:26 +0800
Subject: Internet Economics
Message-ID: <199608060643.XAA00161@mail.pacifier.com>


At 09:15 PM 8/5/96 -0400, Duncan Frissell wrote:
>At 02:22 PM 8/5/96 -0800, jim bell wrote:
>>The current question is how to motivate individuals and companies to invest 
>>in improvements to the Internet that will benefit everyone. However, I don't 
>>think that will be the limiting factor that it may currently appear to be.  
>>Due to the nature of the Internet, there is nothing to prevent a company 
>>(such as AOL, Compuserve, or other) from building a shadow version of the 
>>Internet, through which all of its customer's traffic will pass until it 
>>emerges local to its destination.  
>
>Note that this is the business model for @HOME which will be handling the
>heavy lifting for various Internet Over Cable systems around the country.

They'll need it.  However, we can assume that POLDCs (Plain Old 
Long-Distance Companies) will fight back.  The easiest thing for them to do 
would be to offer a single-payment-per-year, unlimited-use LD telephone 
service for maybe $10 per month or so.  If, as various people have 
suggested, half the cost for LD is billing and customer service, they'll cut 
their costs by a factor of two and still make money.  This would take the 
wind out of the sails of domestic LD; it is unclear whether foreign LD would 
follow suit.


Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From apb at iafrica.com  Tue Aug  6 15:59:35 1996
From: apb at iafrica.com (Alan Barrett)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 06:59:35 +0800
Subject: Integrating PGP 3.0 Library with INN
In-Reply-To: <199608051829.NAA19030@galaxy.galstar.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.95.960806113638.23524E-100000@apb.iafrica.com>


On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, Igor Chudov wrote: 
> Has anyone thought of integrating PGP 3.0 library with INN? 

INN-1.5 will include a mechanism for PGP-authentication of control
messages (newgroup, rmgroup, cancel, ...).  My understanding is that
ordinary (non-control) messages will not be authenticated at all by innd
itself; that will still need to be done externally (by tools such as
PGPMoose). 

--apb (Alan Barrett)






From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk  Tue Aug  6 16:13:15 1996
From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 07:13:15 +0800
Subject: crypto CD source
In-Reply-To: <9608050810.AA04146@srzts100.alcatel.ch>
Message-ID: <199608060504.GAA00115@server.test.net>


Remo Pini <rp at rpini.com> writes:
> My wish list:
> 
> - - PGP
> - - A lot of algorithms in C, Pascal, ASM (for diverse processors)
> - - Private Idaho
> - - Pronto Secure
> - - a suite of html pages describing all files (I'll probably have to do that
>   myself)
> - - Netscape (the secure versions, if its legally feasable -> Netscape?)
> - - Crypto papers
> - - Crypto analysis papers
> - - Lawtexts concerning crypto (ITAR, France, ...)
> 
> Anything else?

Cypherpunks archive?

	http://infinity.nus.sg/cypherpunks/

The earlier archives were at www.hks.net, try mailing cactus at hks.net.

sci.crypt, sci.crypt.research archive?

Mirrors of:

	ftp.dsi.unimi.it
	http://www.cs.hut.fi/crypto/
	ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto

(plus Peter's collection).

Adam
--
#!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj
$/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1
lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)





From anthony at direct.it  Tue Aug  6 17:49:37 1996
From: anthony at direct.it (Anthony Daniel)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:49:37 +0800
Subject: European crypto export controls
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806130653.00694410@betty.direct.it>


Hello

I'm looking to find information on which European countries ban the
exportation of strong cryptography.

Please reply to: anthony at direct.it

Thanks in advance

Anthony






From aeisenb at duke.poly.edu  Tue Aug  6 17:53:17 1996
From: aeisenb at duke.poly.edu (Anne Eisenberg)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:53:17 +0800
Subject: DoubleClick: Does is track browsing across multiple sites?
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960806103613.20022F-100000@duke.poly.edu>


Does anyone know whether DoubleClick really is tracking browsing patterns
across multiple sites?  They claim to be able to do this; is it just
advertising hype, or does anyone have knowledge of its actually doing so?
Many thanks.

Anne Eisenberg
aeisenb at duke.poly.edu






From perry at alpha.jpunix.com  Tue Aug  6 17:55:51 1996
From: perry at alpha.jpunix.com (John Perry)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:55:51 +0800
Subject: New type2.list/pubring.mix
Message-ID: <199608061252.HAA01826@alpha.jpunix.com>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hello Everyone!

	The new type2.list/pubring.mix files reflecting the
disappearance of flame are now available by WWW from www.jpunix.com as
well as by anonymous ftp from ftp.jpunix.com.

- -- 
 John Perry - perry at alpha.jpunix.com -  PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome!
 WWW - http://www.jpunix.com
 PGP 2.62 key for perry at jpunix.com is on the keyservers.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgc/31OTpEThrthvAQEvvAP/Rs+vh7LDDbEdUkacVylsoBwHXTpfvV1l
aHl7e8zt3CCueAgAXYbdHI2QPB7eptWpizlQxP3JAWB8/Z9SBzQBP/FxKIlVPKGa
p//wvh+yiUHphBh/+6G3gtrkiGnYSXqgxvnwSLGnPNIdrXLnPMe66eTP4CW9E9ZD
TC02uA9d9qw=
=0Q+6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From snow at smoke.suba.com  Tue Aug  6 17:55:59 1996
From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:55:59 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <9608052116.AA09050@Etna.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960805215547.151A-100000@smoke.suba.com>


On Mon, 5 Aug 1996 hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:
> >weaken it).  
> I doubt that more than 32 bits of info will be required. Thats not 
> that difficult to imprint.

     You haven't spent a lot of time with guns & ammunition have you?
The most common size round (from what I have seen) is a .22, .25s & .32s 
are also very common. That isn't a lot of room. 
 
> >government are in the Constitution.  That's why the second amendment 
> >is there -- to empower the people to protect themselves against the 
> >government. 
> Making that argument defeats your case. Irespective of the framers
> of the constitution nobody in Congress or the Administration believes
> that you have a right to take up arms against the government. In

     It's the truth. If you can't stand the truth, get out of the gene pool.

Petro, Christopher C.
petro at suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow at smoke.suba.com






From charlee at netnet.net  Tue Aug  6 17:56:54 1996
From: charlee at netnet.net (kickboxer)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:56:54 +0800
Subject: test message
Message-ID: <199608061646.LAA26121@netnet1.netnet.net>


test
                                                                               






From hallam at ai.mit.edu  Tue Aug  6 17:59:25 1996
From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:59:25 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <4u6v5o$gt@life.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <3207B8DD.794B@ai.mit.edu>


Alan Horowitz wrote:

>   I have added you to my computerized list of individuals who advocate
> the violent overthrow of the US Constitution.
> 
> I am going to go to the law library and see what my options are, with
> respect to filing a petition to have you deported out of the United
> States.
> 
> This is not a rhetorical statement.

First off Alan posted private mail to the list. In this case mail
that was more than simply personal. 

Secondly unless Alan withdraws his allegations I will bring proceedings
against him for libel. While I accept his right to free speech I do
not accept that he has a right to attempt to restrict mine with his
threats of deportation. 


	Phill Hallam-Baker





From frissell at panix.com  Tue Aug  6 17:59:42 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 08:59:42 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806103803.0090e254@panix.com>


At 12:06 AM 8/6/96 -0700, Marshall Clow wrote:

>I have found that promising to provide the necessary docs, and then failing
to do so, is the least confrontational and most effective way around this.
>
>"Delay is the deadliest form of denial"

Works for me as well.  Likewise, self employment.

DCF






From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com  Tue Aug  6 18:01:28 1996
From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:01:28 +0800
Subject: Where can I obtain code similar to the Anonymizer?
Message-ID: <199608061540.IAA25410@sirius.infonex.com>


I am looking to find code so I can set up a "re-webber"
similar to www.anonymizer.com.  I thank Sameer and c2.org
for nicely putting a service like that up on the Net, and
am willing to pay a fee if necessary for this code.

If Sameer's code is not available, what is needed to do
a "re-webber"?

I apologize for my inexperience in this kind of stuff.

Thanks very much in advance,








From joelm at eskimo.com  Tue Aug  6 18:08:05 1996
From: joelm at eskimo.com (Joel McNamara)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:08:05 +0800
Subject: Censorship through proxy
Message-ID: <199608061625.JAA04294@mail.eskimo.com>


SingNet, one of Singapore's larger ISPs is telling all of their subscribers
they must move to using SingNet's proxy server by September 14, 1996 if they
want to have access to the Web.

If you try to access one of the SBA's banned sites, you'll get a message
that says, "The site you requested is not accessible."

Check out:

http://www.singnet.com.sg/cache/sbareg.html

It's interesting that in the blurb about the proxy server, they're marketing
it as offering "better and faster performance" than not using it.









From frissell at panix.com  Tue Aug  6 18:14:58 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:14:58 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806100644.00911380@panix.com>


At 07:37 PM 8/5/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:

>But the law says, these days, that I must verify the
>legality of workers *if* they appear to be dark-skinned, Mexican, Latin, or
>the like. I say "if" because there are no requirements in general for
>white-skinned, Anglo workers....no work permits, no proofs of citizenship
>(such a document is currently lacking in the American pantheon...I, a mixed
>descendant of Mayflower colonist and Scandinavian immigrants, lack such
>"proof").

Naughty naughty Tim.  You're violating the Immigration Control and
Nationality Act of 1986.  You are supposed to check all employee's IDs even
your own childrens' and fill out that I-9 form.  You have to verify identity
and right to work using a menu of documents ranging from passports and SS
cards to Driver's licenses and "American Indian Tribal Documents" (I gotta
get me some of them).  And there are special provisions to punish
discrimination against those who appear foreign.  After all, there are loads
of illegal Canadians and Irish here.  People are always coming from the
third world counties.  <G>

The law also required that a commission study whether or not the "foreign
appearing" were suffering discrimination because of the law and it reported
a few years later that sure enough, they were.

DCF






From minow at apple.com  Tue Aug  6 18:39:36 1996
From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:39:36 +0800
Subject: e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce
Message-ID: <v03007803ae2d271b50b8@[17.202.12.102]>


Cypherpunks as a spectator sport becomes interesting when a several
intelligent, articulate, people start a productive rant. Emphasis
on "productive."  Unfortunately, this rant is rapidly degenerating
into an emotional bickering between people who are capable of
accomplishing much more.

For the record, there are several Apple employees, some *very*
high up in the food chain, who receive selected postings from
Cypherpunks. For better or for worse, however, they are spared
pipebomb-punks, Sternlight-punks, Ritalin-punks, and most of
the other nonsense that permeates this mailing list.

I, for one, would appreciate the chance to hear Tim May present
"crypto-anarchy" and "crypto-privacy" -- in a much more coherent fashion
than I would get at a physical cypherpunks meeting or from the
mailing list. I'm not sure what Tim's consulting fee might be, but
I'd be happy to contribute a six-pack of Anchor Steam if that would help.

Vinnie is putting the "Mac Crypto" conference together in his spare
time using "borrowed" facilities in a way that stays below Apple's
"radar horizon". Think of it as a slightly more formal physical
cypherpunks meeting. He may be able to scare up a budget for drinks and
munchies, but don't expect a t-shirt.

As for the "Mac is dead," I'll leave that to another time and place.

Martin Minow
minow at apple.com









From rah at shipwright.com  Tue Aug  6 18:45:58 1996
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:45:58 +0800
Subject: Dumbo Lays an Egg (Was Re: e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce)
In-Reply-To: <v02120d46ae2c9d988525@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <v0300780fae2ceab5c642@[206.119.69.46]>


At 3:12 AM -0400 8/6/96, Lucky Green wrote:
> Robert, you *really* need to cut back on that Ritalin. No, not just `one
> more'. Put it *away*. Now!
>
> ;-)


*Now* I've gone and done it. In private e-mail, I've gotten things back
like "You're outta control, man.", and "....Boom... My brain exploded.
Summarize please." Usually, I get *nice* letters in my e-mail box after one
of these things...

Serves me right. On a second(!) read, it looks more like I didn't take
*enough* ritalin. Might have focused things down a *lot*...

That's what I get for trying out the May Method of rant-writing (i.e., fire
'em and forget 'em...). *Not* blaming May, of course, I'm just not *that*
smart. ;-). I mean, Heinlien never drafted his short stories, either. :-).
Yes, I know, Tim, You *Knew* Robert Anson Heinlien, and...

Anyway, next time, I'll let it compost a bit, like the other e$ rants I do.
On this one, I just sort of sat down, and, Flow, Vesuvius!, out comes a
rant, 6 hours later. One Command-E, and out it goes.

Now, of course, I'm reminded more of the time I played "Pinata" with the
wasp nest...

Sorry, folks. I'll be more considerate of your time on the next one. Promise.

Oh. In Re the "Hunter Thompson" stuff. I *did* read too much Thompson --
and Tom Wolfe, and lots of other people -- and frankly, unless I'm writing
something nice, dry, and pithy, which I can't do *all* the time, I can't
stop now. You are what you read too much of. I'm kind of, well, twisted,
that way, I guess.

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga




-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/







From unicorn at schloss.li  Tue Aug  6 19:24:12 1996
From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:24:12 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
In-Reply-To: <320652BC.31DF@netscape.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.94.960806122909.10763A-100000@polaris>


On Mon, 5 Aug 1996, Jamie Zawinski wrote:

> Black Unicorn wrote:
> > 
> [ ...random losers asking for your SSN... ]
> > > I was horrified and gave a random number.
> > 
> > You should always be horrified, and always give a random number.
> 
> Well, it would be nice if it was that easy.  You (legally) need to give
> the correct one to anyone who has to make a report about you to the IRS,
> right?  Such as your employer.  But it's not always clear who else needs
> it.  Is it needed to allow someone to do a credit check on you?  Is it
> needed to get a driver's license?  (The fine print on the DMV forms says
> "yes".)  Is it necessary to make use of employer-sponsored medical
> insurance?  (I suspect that the answer to this one is "no", except for
> the fact that when my employer set up my medical insurance they let the
> insurance company use my SSN as my insurance-related-ID-number.  But in
> any event, my dentist told me, "if you don't give it to us, they won't
> pay.")
> 
> I don't like the idea of having a universal ID number, but neither do I
> like the idea of having to go to extreme lengths to make the "right
> thing" happen for something where my effort will have only moral impact,
> not material.
> 
> If you already have a SSN, can you get a *new* one in any legal way?
> (Sort of the same idea as changing your phone number to avoid
> telemarketing scum...)

I explained a good deal of this in a post I made some time ago where I
related the tale of a friend who had simply made up a number and used it
since age 17.

The reality is that not much will be done, aside some form letters from
the IRS indicating that you seem to be using the wrong number, and won't
you please change it. 

I suppose that you might have to give it to the IRS if you want a refund,
but why to your employer?  Why not give your employer the wrong number
and correct it directly to the IRS when the IRS complains?

Ditto for your bank.

Almost no one can actually get the number related to your name, only
verify if the number you are using has been issued.

I am continually amazed at the number of people who surrender this number
simply because someone tells them that they have to or the sky will fall
in.

Bottom line, if someone besides the IRS or the SS people have your
name/number relation, it is because YOU gave it to them.

> 
> -- 
> Jamie Zawinski    jwz at netscape.com   http://www.netscape.com/people/jwz/
> ``A signature isn't a return address, it is the ASCII equivalent of a
>   black velvet clown painting; it's a rectangle of carets surrounding
>   a quote from a literary giant of weeniedom like Heinlein or Dr. Who.''
>                                                          -- Chris Maeda
> 

--
I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist
unicorn at schloss.li






From alanh at infi.net  Tue Aug  6 20:24:51 1996
From: alanh at infi.net (Alan Horowitz)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 11:24:51 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <199608061308.JAA24021@odin.nyser.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.91.960806193211.6907D-100000@larry.infi.net>


If you want to pay _with a check_, you play by their rules.  In fact, the 
word "pay" might not completely appropriate in that transaction.





From sandfort at crl.com  Tue Aug  6 20:26:20 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 11:26:20 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <3207B8DD.794B@ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960806152235.17794B-100000@crl4.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Tue, 6 Aug 1996, Hallam-Baker wrote:

> ...unless Alan withdraws his allegations I will bring proceedings
> against him for libel. While I accept his right to free speech I do
> not accept that he has a right to attempt to restrict mine with his
> threats of deportation. 

One of the ways UK and US laws differ is in regard to defamation.
In the US, truth is a defense.  In the UK it is not.  Phill may
have a tough time prevailing with such a suit.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








From lspeidel at earthlink.net  Tue Aug  6 21:13:28 1996
From: lspeidel at earthlink.net (Michael Cortes)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:13:28 +0800
Subject: THE WORLD IS SCREWD UP
Message-ID: <3207C10E.60AF@earthlink.net>


THIS WORLD IS SREWED UP i hate my life so mue hobbeys makeing time pipe 
bommbs so what is this all about huh what the fuck "anti terrisiom bill" 
damn sad ok so what does  this mean FREE COUNTRY hahahaha i laugh when i 
hear that term there is no free country and we never have a wright to 
privesy u know man this sux so much....... oh and to the government u can 
kiss my ass





From jsw at netscape.com  Tue Aug  6 21:23:48 1996
From: jsw at netscape.com (Jeff Weinstein)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:23:48 +0800
Subject: Stealth cookies
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960806171618.00a52aec@vertexgroup.com>
Message-ID: <3207E80C.79D1@netscape.com>


John F. Fricker wrote:
> Oh I was just being paranoid I guess. There used to be JavaScript that would
> automatically send email from a page. something like
> 
> <html>
> <body onLoad="document.mailme.submit()">
> <form method=post name="mailme"
> action="mailto:john at vertexgroup.com?subject=user address">
> <input type=hidden name="userAddress" value="done">
> </form>
> </body>
> </html>
> 
> But even if that still works it would be a good trick to associate it with a
> cookie.

  This was a bug that existed for a short time, and was fixed about
6 months ago.  Javascript can not submit mailto: forms at all, and
all mailto: forms now cause a warning dialog to come up(the dialog
can be turned off in preferences).

	--Jeff

-- 
Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist
Netscape Communication Corporation
jsw at netscape.com - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw
Any opinions expressed above are mine.





From David.K.Merriman.-.webmaster at cygnus.com  Tue Aug  6 21:35:18 1996
From: David.K.Merriman.-.webmaster at cygnus.com (David.K.Merriman.-.webmaster at cygnus.com)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:35:18 +0800
Subject: Cookies on Microsoft Explorer?
Message-ID: <199608061531.IAA05438@cygnus.com>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

To: cypherpunks at toad.com, aeisenb at duke.poly.edu
Date: Tue Aug 06 10:30:17 1996
> 
> Does anyone know what the equivalent technology is on Microsoft to
> Netscape's cookie technology?  Does Microsoft have support for cookies
>  or 
> not?  
> 
> All of the discussion on the list to do with
> cookies is related to Netscape.  Does this mean that if one switches to
> Microsoft Explorer one can avoid the problem?  Many thanks.
> 
> Anne Eisenberg
> aeisenb at duke.poly.edu
> 
> 

My MSIE3.0b2 does cookies - tho' I've told it to ask me if it's OK first 
:-)
I've even got a specific _sub-directory_ for cookies under my Windows dir. 
I just wish I could automate the refuse-it-if-it-doesn't-expire "policy" 
I'm running under.

Dave Merriman

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
PGP Email welcome and encouraged. Visit my web site at
         http://www.shellback.com/p/merriman
for my PGP key and fingerprint
"What is the sound of one hand clapping in a forest
with no one there to hear it?"
- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.2
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=WVf6
- -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgauP8VrTvyYOzAZAQH6sQP/U8kaDIUG1VrPqqaLaXLfvS0M3bpk8fq+
YUjVEbg94qTXZeCuw+D7dKbVOtX0WiFFcvqsrTtHfZPWZQ8uHPkgAX0EHpoPoOR4
Dx44XoZrHm/fYlQV7GJh5bxB4qrRg7a4ciJ9lSHfs1tCERy6U5R687rhizS3kJYm
SOR3MBilsTE=
=OawJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From David.K.Merriman.-.webmaster at cygnus.com  Tue Aug  6 21:57:31 1996
From: David.K.Merriman.-.webmaster at cygnus.com (David.K.Merriman.-.webmaster at cygnus.com)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:57:31 +0800
Subject: Cookies on Microsoft Explorer?
Message-ID: <199608061614.JAA06961@cygnus.com>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

To: cypherpunks at toad.com, aeisenb at duke.poly.edu
Date: Tue Aug 06 11:14:00 1996
> Dave:
> 
> Thanks very much for responding.  Yes, MSIE3.0b2 does support cookies. 
>  I
> have several more questions based on your answer, if you have the time:
> 
> 1.  Does it ask you each time a cookie is sent?  Some sites send many,
> many cookies.  This would mean that you are in some instances constantly
> declining, even dozens of times.  Have I got this right?  

I have IE3 configured to ask me for permission to accept a cookie. Yes, 
some sites send (n!)+1 cookies during a session. If they send too many, I 
personally move on to another site, after sending them email (!).

> 
> 2.  Is "refuse-it-if-it-doesn't-expire" actually printed on the screen? 
>  I
> understand that some servers set short expiration times.  Does Netscape
> actually say, "tell us what expiration time you want?"  Or is it done
>  some
> other way?

Sorry for the confusion - the refuse-it policy I mentioned is a personal 
policy; there's no option (yet) to configure something like that in IE3. 
The only two things I've personally seen have been cookies with specific 
expiration dates (which I usually accept, if the date is reasonable 
[IMHO]), and cookies that don't display an expiration (which I refuse 
out-of-hand). It seems to be a compromise that suits _me_; YMMV.

> 
> 3.  If you can't automate, does this mean you have to refuse every
>  time?
> (This is, I guess, the same as question 1.)  Many, many thanks.

I can 'automate' to the extent of automatically accepting all cookies; yes, 
by not accepting every cookie, I'm obliged to make a decision for each 
request. One of the 'benefits' of being somewhate security-aware :-)

Dave

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
PGP Email welcome and encouraged. Visit my web site at
         http://www.shellback.com/p/merriman
for my PGP key and fingerprint
"What is the sound of one hand clapping in a forest
with no one there to hear it?"
- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.2
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=WVf6
- -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMga4f8VrTvyYOzAZAQFSHQP+PDyrhYPZ6AMVyTk3ZSvlyF3rba9Xn7jZ
iGk3hN/2yPwdk2Oyaf7NOsL6WyyFPQOvfYgOhgb2Q49EPfhmqmo5PkZLEqb16f35
otKOAcAdKwMxwcG8aS7zEBrT4zquGoVRHxldJhfv71PUWihpsIxc4ZJKed9q+uCq
DjkRUtAW+2U=
=s19M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From sandfort at crl.com  Tue Aug  6 22:15:13 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 13:15:13 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <9608062338.AA01808@Etna.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960806175813.20074A-100000@crl4.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

When I wrote:

> >One of the ways UK and US laws differ is in regard to defamation.
> >In the US, truth is a defense.  In the UK it is not.  Phill may
> >have a tough time prevailing with such a suit.        ^^^^^^^^^
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  
> >[emphasis added]
           
Phill responded:

> In the first place cypherpunks is distributed in the UK. That
> means I can issue a writ in the UK. 

And that plus 75 cents will get you coffee.  Unless Alan is in
the UK, its repressive laws are of little consequence.


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~








From jimbell at pacifier.com  Tue Aug  6 22:28:01 1996
From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 13:28:01 +0800
Subject: Apple people on the list
Message-ID: <199608070252.TAA01351@mail.pacifier.com>


At 11:15 PM 8/6/96 GMT, John Young wrote:
>I'd like to hear Tim, too, in this Big Apple. RealAudio, perhaps. 

>What would you offer to set off Tim's simmering crypto-anarcho-volcano,
>make it heard round the planet? 

A plan.


Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com





From ichudov at algebra.com  Tue Aug  6 22:54:14 1996
From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 13:54:14 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <3207B8DD.794B@ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <199608070205.VAA17482@manifold.algebra.com>


Hallam-Baker wrote:
> Alan Horowitz wrote:
> >   I have added you to my computerized list of individuals who advocate
> > the violent overthrow of the US Constitution.
> > 
> > I am going to go to the law library and see what my options are, with
> > respect to filing a petition to have you deported out of the United
> > States.
> > 
> > This is not a rhetorical statement.
> 
> First off Alan posted private mail to the list. In this case mail
> that was more than simply personal. 
> 
> Secondly unless Alan withdraws his allegations I will bring proceedings
> against him for libel. While I accept his right to free speech I do
> not accept that he has a right to attempt to restrict mine with his
> threats of deportation. 

Relax, nobody will deport you. Once The Right Reverend Colin James III
(puke) tried to get me deported, with no result.

And unlike Horowitz, CJ3 was serious. CJ3 is much dumber than Horowitz 
though, in my opinion.

	- Igor.





From declan at well.com  Tue Aug  6 23:03:40 1996
From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 14:03:40 +0800
Subject: Waiting Game on wiretapping and crypto, from HotWired
Message-ID: <v01510101ae2d0b1a7fc7@[204.62.128.229]>





Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 05:15:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Declan McCullagh <declan at well.com>
Reply-To: Declan McCullagh <declan at well.com>
Subject: Waiting Game on wiretapping and crypto, from HotWired
To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu
Sender: owner-fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu

We have a four-week reprieve until the Senate returns. As I say in the
full article at the URL below, they've been worse than the House when it
comes to wiretapping/crypto/censorship. For instance, senators already
passed the Feinstein Amendment banning bomb-making info (on- and off-line)
as part of a defense appropriations authorization bill.

-Declan

---

http://www.netizen.com/netizen/
HotWired, The Netizen

Waiting Game
by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com)
Washington, DC, 5 August

   In a last-minute legislative crunch before the summer recess, House
   Republicans on Friday outmaneuvered their Democratic counterparts and
   coughed up a surprisingly reasonable anti-terrorism bill, which the
   Senate will act on when Congress returns next month.

[...]

   But the Senate has begun its own four-week vacation without voting on
   the measure, and they'll have plenty of time to reintroduce the
   missing [wiretapping] language when they return.

   The outlook, frankly, is dismal, says Don Haines of the American Civil
   Liberties Union. "The Senate has been much more interested in giving
   the FBI a blank check. They've been much more sympathetic to
   increasing wiretapping. They've been much less interested in
   protecting privacy," Haines said.

[...]

   Meanwhile, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) - a staunch opponent of
   the Communications Decency Act - continues to tout his Digital
   Telephony legislation, which he shepherded through Congress in 1994...

   Perhaps Harry Browne, the Libertarian Party's candidate for president,
   had it right when he said last week: "If we're not careful, half of
   the Bill of Rights will fall victim to the frantic desire of
   Republican and Democratic politicians to appear tough on terrorists."

   The last few years have seen several murderous acts of terror on
   American soil - and now, with the explosion of TWA Flight 800, in
   American airspace. Americans should brace themselves for even more...
   Whether the terror is foreign or domestic in origin, one thing's for
   certain: cries for a government crackdown will mount.

   But by granting their government police-state powers, Americans will
   have awarded terrorists their first substantial victory in the United
   States.

###







From dlv at bwalk.dm.com  Wed Aug  7 00:01:47 1996
From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 15:01:47 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960806100644.00911380@panix.com>
Message-ID: <D3o0RD47w165w@bwalk.dm.com>


Duncan Frissell <frissell at panix.com> writes:
> Naughty naughty Tim.  You're violating the Immigration Control and
> Nationality Act of 1986.  You are supposed to check all employee's IDs even
> your own childrens' and fill out that I-9 form.  You have to verify identity
> and right to work using a menu of documents ranging from passports and SS
> cards to Driver's licenses and "American Indian Tribal Documents" (I gotta
> get me some of them).  And there are special provisions to punish
> discrimination against those who appear foreign. ...

In New York State, there are periodic complaints from Sovok "refugees" like
Igor Chewed-Off, who come in with a I-94 visa (and authorization to work), and
get the green card after two years. They get welfare, but apply for jobs...
Some poor employer slob refuses to hire the Sovok, thinking mistakenly that he
can only hire amcits or green card holders (even though I-94 with authorization
is listed on I-9). The employer pays a hefty fine for "illegal discrimination",
of which the Sovok gets a cut. Nice racket. Did you ever try it, Igor?

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





From mccoy at communities.com  Wed Aug  7 00:03:15 1996
From: mccoy at communities.com (Jim McCoy)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 15:03:15 +0800
Subject: appropriate algorithm for application
Message-ID: <v02140b00ae2db6e5a520@[205.162.51.35]>


Cerridwyn Llewyellyn <ceridwyn at wolfenet.com> writes:
> I need an algorithm/protocol that is capable of encrypting numerous
> files with separate keys, but there also needs to be a master key
> that will be able to decrypt all of them.  Is there such a system
> that is relatively secure?  I'd prefer the system to be as secure
> as possible, but in this application, security is secondary to
> functionality.

You can get the basic functionality you require by using a regular hybrid
PKE system (pubkey encrypts symmetric session key) and encrypting the
session key with the public key of a "master key" as well.  For example,
assuming a user A and a master key C you just have the program A uses to
encrypt files operate in a manner similar to that used by PGP and other
public-key encryption systems [pubkeyA(sessionkey),IDEA(sessionkey,data)]
except in addition to the pubkeyA(sessionkey) which encrypts the random
key used to encrypt the actual data you add a masterpubkeyC(sessionkey)
section to the beginning of the file as well.  The resulting data packet
is [pubkeyA(sessionkey),masterpubkeyC(sessionkey),IDEA(sessionkey, data)]
This system is as secure as the public-key system used for encryption and
would actually be fairly easy to hack in to PGP, although the modified PGP
messages which contain the master key information would not be usable by
regular PGP.

jim







From tomw at netscape.com  Wed Aug  7 00:03:39 1996
From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 15:03:39 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <19960805204130906.AAB148@maverick>
Message-ID: <32080CFD.15FB@netscape.com>


For anyone who's interested, the antiterrorism bill is finally up on
Thomas.  It's H.R. 3953, the Aviation Security and Antiterrorism Act of
1996.  The discussion about it is also there, in the congressional
record.  It's interesting.

-- 
You should only break rules of style if you can    | Tom Weinstein
coherently explain what you gain by so doing.      | tomw at netscape.com





From tcmay at got.net  Wed Aug  7 00:32:08 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 15:32:08 +0800
Subject: e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce
Message-ID: <ae2cccd914021004de59@[205.199.118.202]>


At 5:01 PM 8/6/96, Martin Minow wrote:
>Cypherpunks as a spectator sport becomes interesting when a several
>intelligent, articulate, people start a productive rant. Emphasis
>on "productive."  Unfortunately, this rant is rapidly degenerating
>into an emotional bickering between people who are capable of
>accomplishing much more.

Note that I had made no mention of this exchange with VM on the list. I had
not echoed my "Mac is dead" points, and had not bad-mouthed the "Mac
Crypto" thing.

However, when my private e-mail to VM was commented upon, in a not so
thinly disguised form, and when Bob H. made it clear he'd been privy to my
e-mail, I felt justified in setting the record straight on my views, as
expressed in my e-mail to Vinnie.

(It was not, being an e-mail note, meant to be a closely-reasoned and
footnoted summary of Apple's problems, just a statement of why I had no
interest in giving a kind of pep talk to Apple folks.)

As to whether it's appropriate as a thread here on Cypherpunks, hey,
there's a "delete" key on most machines.

Again, I don't consider the Mac to be dead, at least not for several years.
The Amiga lives on, and it never had even a fraction of the peak market
share of the Mac. However, the focus of crypto has clearly moved well away
from the Mac. I noted where the emphasis needs to be, for maximum impact.
Namely, Eudora, Netscape, and other mail and Web programs.

It's a basic fact of life--think about it--that people on this list and
elsewhere are _not_ asking what Gil Amelio's stance on cryptography is.
They don't care, as Gil Amelio, Heidi Roizen, Guy Kawasaki, and all the
rest are simply not in the critical path. What people care about is what
plans Bill Gates, Jim Clarke, and Jim Bidzos have, or their factotums, as
these are the folks who will likely shape the commercial product landscape.

(As to why I don't switch, I have much time and money invested in Macs, and
they still work. As I said in one of my notes to Vinnie, I mainly use
Eudora Pro for mail, Netscape Navigator for browsing, and a handful of
other programs. There would be no compelling gain were I to scrap my Mac
investment and buy a Pentium Pro and Windows NT.)

--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 at 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."









From tcmay at got.net  Wed Aug  7 00:32:16 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 15:32:16 +0800
Subject: Internal Passports
Message-ID: <ae2d3dde170210046be8@[205.199.118.202]>


At 10:06 AM 8/6/96, Duncan Frissell wrote:
>At 07:37 PM 8/5/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:
>
>>But the law says, these days, that I must verify the
>>legality of workers *if* they appear to be dark-skinned, Mexican, Latin, or
>>the like. I say "if" because there are no requirements in general for
...
>Naughty naughty Tim.  You're violating the Immigration Control and
>Nationality Act of 1986.  You are supposed to check all employee's IDs even
>your own childrens' and fill out that I-9 form.  You have to verify identity
>and right to work using a menu of documents ranging from passports and SS
>cards to Driver's licenses and "American Indian Tribal Documents" (I gotta
>get me some of them).  And there are special provisions to punish
>discrimination against those who appear foreign.  After all, there are loads
>of illegal Canadians and Irish here.  People are always coming from the
>third world counties.  <G>
>
>The law also required that a commission study whether or not the "foreign
>appearing" were suffering discrimination because of the law and it reported
>a few years later that sure enough, they were.

On this last point, hardly surprising. After all, the "punishment" (risk,
cost) for not checking an obviously-Caucasoid person of apparent American
origins is effectively zero, while the punishment for hiring a Mexican who
may have slipped over the border and gotten a forged credential is high.
(Employers here in California have been penalized for hiring Mexicans whose
credentials turned out to be phony...I guess the employer was supposed to
have known this by some sort of ESP.) Simpler to avoid hiring Mexicans and
other dusky folks.

The law of unintended consequences...

BTW, I am _not_ a supporter of the Prop. 187 issue in California. Nor do I
in any way support the "deputization" of employers as agents of the
Immigration and Naturalization Service. This is comparable to deputizing
employers as agents of the Drug Enforcement Agency...though many companies
have bowed to pressure from the narcs and "D.A.R.E." lobby and have
drug-testing programs, they are not (yet) required by law to test all
employees, except in some particular job funcitons, etc.

As far as I am concerned, this country has never moved toward the general
concept of a "work permit" (permission by the government to get a job), and
it is a real danger of this anti-illegal-immigrant hysteria that we will
soon see the effective equivalent of "work permits." This will of course
give the authorities even more power.

We're getting closer and closer to the world of "The Shockwave Rider."

--Nicky Halflinger

HOW TO MAKE A PIPE BOMB:
"Buy a section of metal water pipe 1/2 by 6 inches long, threaded on both
ends.  Buy two metal caps to fit.  These are standard items in hardware
stores.  Drill a 1/16th hole in the center of the pipe. This is easy with a
good drill bit. Hanson is a good brand to use.  Screw a metal cap tightly
on one end. Fill the pipe to within 1/2 inch of the top with black powder.
Do not pack the powder. Don't even tap the bottom of the pipe to make it
settle.  You want the powder loose.  For maximum explosive effect, you need
dry, fine powder sitting loose in a very rigid container." (more
information at http://sdcc13.ucsd.edu/~m1lopez/pipe.html, or by using
search engines)







From jya at pipeline.com  Wed Aug  7 00:39:53 1996
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 15:39:53 +0800
Subject: CRN on Crypto Roadblock
Message-ID: <199608061732.RAA18656@pipe5.t2.usa.pipeline.com>


   Computer Reseller News, 8-05-96, p. 51 
 
   Channel feels pinch of export limitations -- VARs Hit 
   Encryption Roadblock 
 
   By Charlotte Dunlap & Deborah Gage 
 
 
   Could 40 bits of code cost you that multimillion-dollar 
   bid? 
 
   Andrew Sheppard, president of Branford, Conn.-based Espion 
   Inc., just returned from a frustrating business trip to 
   Europe, where he said he lost a number of accounts with 
   financial institutions because he could not deliver 
   software with more than 40 bits of encryption key length. 
 
   Sheppard, who recently tried to sell his encryption wares 
   to clients in Europe, said he lost business to competitors 
   offering stronger encryption. 
 
   "There is a real demand for this type of product, and yet 
   I find myself thwarted at every single opportunity by this 
   stupid law, which everyone realizes is unnecessary," 
   Sheppard said. 
 
   Sheppard said potential clients that turned him down during 
   his recent trip included Banco Santander, a Madrid-based 
   bank; the London office of Credit Suisse; Logica Systems of 
   London; and the financial reporting arm of Reuters' news 
   service in London. 
 
   As the trend toward networking-sensitive information grows, 
   woes tied to encryption export limitations are spreading to 
   the VAR community. The dilemma of shipping overseas 
   anything other than light versions of security software is 
   starting to sabotage the efforts of Internet resellers. 
 
   Because 40 bits of code is considered to be breakable by an 
   elementary hacker, major corporations with data to protect 
   are reluctant to trust U.S. technology. So, U.S. resellers 
   are being turned away while multinational corporations turn 
   to foreign technologies. 
 
   The debate between business and the U.S. government about 
   export limitations is getting increasingly heated with the 
   growth of the Internet. The Pro-Code Bill, which aims to 
   relax export restrictions, has just been introduced, and 
   prominent Silicon Valley executives are trekking to 
   Washington regularly to argue the case. Jim Bidzos, 
   president and chief executive of encryption market leader 
   RSA Data Security Inc., Redwood City, Calif., has spent a 
   lot of time in Washington. 
 
   "The big picture in terms of what's happening is all of our 
   communications and document storage is moving from paper 
   and filing cabinets to the Internet and disk drives. We 
   need crypto technology in order to protect this," he said. 
   But resellers are getting discouraged and do not see a 
   quick resolution with law makers. Meanwhile, they are 
   losing business at a staggering rate. 
 
   Norm Yamaguchi, director of sales for RSA master reseller 
   Secure Distribution Inc., said he could have tripled the 
   size of his million-dollar company this year if it were not 
   for U.S. export laws dictating a maximum 40-bit key 
   encryption length to his clients' international offices. 
 
   "To say this law is causing me problems is a massive 
   understatement," Yamaguchi said. The reseller currently is 
   in talks with Price Waterhouse to get them to standardize 
   on Oakland, Calif.-based Secure Distribution's security 
   products, but will likely lose the contract because of the 
   40-bit key length limitation. 
 
   Resellers' fear of losing business to foreign players is 
   not paranoia, either. The Business Software Alliance has 
   identified 500 encryption products that can be purchased in 
   foreign countries. Information about the stronger foreign 
   technology can be obtained easily through the Internet. 
 
   "The laws are punishing U.S. companies, and we're losing 
   business to foreign countries because they can offer the 
   same thing. The law is not holding back the flow of 
   encryption, it is just holding back U.S. companies from 
   making money," he added, calling it a "lose-lose 
   situation." 
 
   Reseller Al Hill, vice president of engineering for 
   Successful Systems Solutions, Rancho Cordova, Calif., has 
   to surrender part of his solutions services in order to 
   keep his foreign clients. 
 
   "We ship units to England, Hong Kong and Singapore, and we 
   have to downgrade the software [to 40 bits] on all of them. 
   They were rather upset but smart enough to realize they 
   could upgrade the security themselves," he said, adding 
   that he has lost business because he could not complete 
   projects himself. 
 
   "We have to make sure the APIs in the software are 
   available so people overseas can tie them into their 
   [security] applications," he said. Similarly, Dave Johnson, 
   senior account manager of Precision Computers Inc., 
   Portland, Ore., said he lost an account with a 
   multinational company with offices in France because "it 
   became too troublesome for them to implement U.S. products 
   because of the legal problems." 
 
   Uncle Sam's View 
 
   U.S. companies and civil libertarians have been battling 
   the government since 1991, when the proposal of the Clipper 
   Chip first surfaced. At that time, the government proposed 
   splitting the encryption keys and holding a portion of them 
   in escrow, giving law enforcement officials with court 
   orders a back door through which to conduct electronic 
   surveillance. To date, the U.S. government has budged 
   little from its original idea. 
 
   The Clipper Chip idea was squelched, but the government 
   refuses to concede that strong encryption is not a munition 
   because it believes national security is at stake. In 
   recent weeks, Vice President Al Gore proposed a compromise: 
   The government would extend the types of software that 
   could be exported, perhaps to include healthcare or 
   insurance instead of just finance, and allow long keys if 
   countries where the United States has government-to- 
   government agreements could hold keys in escrow. A 
   24-member technical advisory committee is expected to 
   produce a blueprint for establishing the Federal Key 
   Management Infrastructure in September. 
 
   The Vendor's View 
 
   Software executives remain disgruntled with the 
   government's progress. "Do we really want government- 
   to-government agreements?" asked Eric Schmidt, Sun 
   Microsystems Inc.'s Chief Technology Officer. "The U.S. has 
   protections that other countries don't. France, for 
   example, is noted for industrial espionage." 
 
   Microsoft Corp. Senior Vice President Craig Mundie said an 
   escrow system would create an expensive bureaucracy, 
   adding: "This should really be described as a key-leasing 
   system. This will create a huge new business in extracting 
   keys from the public. If you want to make sure that your 
   key is not compromised by law enforcement officials, you're 
   going to need insurance. There will be a whole service 
   industry around keys." 
 
   Vendors also argue that the government's reasoning is not 
   legitimate. "The current controls do not keep encryption 
   out of the hands of the criminals. They keep it out of the 
   hands of individuals and corporations," said Sybase Inc. 
   Director of Data and Communications Security Development 
   Thomas Parenty. 
 
   Sun, Microsoft and other companies would like complete 
   deregulation of encryption. Three bills that would lift 
   government restrictions and prohibit mandatory key escrow 
   are working their way through Congress, although none are 
   likely to pass this year. 
 
   NEXT WEEK: Measuring the level of difficulty in cracking 
   code. 
 
   [End] 
 
   Thanks to LG. 
 
 
 
 
 
 





From jamesd at echeque.com  Wed Aug  7 01:06:31 1996
From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A. Donald)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 16:06:31 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <199608070517.WAA03969@dns2.noc.best.net>


At 08:20 PM 8/4/96 -0400, Hallam-Baker wrote:
> It would be entirely foolish for the crypto
> lobby to allow themselves to be tied to the NRA. The NRA has
> no choice but to support civil liberties, there is no reason
> why the wider civil liberties movement needs to support the
> NRA.

First they came for the communists .....

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 at echeque.com






From hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu  Wed Aug  7 01:07:58 1996
From: hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu (hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 16:07:58 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <199608070205.VAA17482@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <9608070531.AA02593@Etna.ai.mit.edu>



I was rather more angry that Alan published a private correspondence
on a public mailing list. I live in the same city as between twenty
and thirty members of a group that have in the past tried to murder my
familly. If he wasn;t such a fool he would have realised that I deliberately
did not post the message to the list. 

	Phill





From ichudov at algebra.com  Wed Aug  7 01:20:27 1996
From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 16:20:27 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <9608070531.AA02593@Etna.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <199608070525.AAA21051@manifold.algebra.com>


hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:
> 
> 
> I was rather more angry that Alan published a private correspondence
> on a public mailing list. I live in the same city as between twenty
> and thirty members of a group that have in the past tried to murder my
> familly. If he wasn;t such a fool he would have realised that I deliberately
> did not post the message to the list. 
> 

Wow! Why did they want to murder your family?

	- Igor.





From sandfort at crl.com  Wed Aug  7 01:25:16 1996
From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 16:25:16 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <9608070525.AA02577@Etna.ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960806222122.18670B-100000@crl7.crl.com>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          SANDY SANDFORT
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C'punks,

On Wed, 7 Aug 1996 hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:

> 
> Au contraire, the UK is as obnoxious in exporting its laws as
> the US...

Fine, Phillll can sue in the UK.  I'm sure Alan is quaking in his
boots at the prospect.  As I said, Phillll is going to have a 
tough time prevailing.  Of course, if Phillll thinks he has a
winner, he should double dip and offer me a wager on the outcome
of his suit.  (Yeah, that'll happen when primates take wing out 
of my derriere.)


 S a n d y

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~







From shamrock at netcom.com  Wed Aug  7 02:03:47 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:03:47 +0800
Subject: Stealth cookies
Message-ID: <v02120d04ae2db6282eb6@[192.0.2.1]>


At 17:49 8/6/96, Jeff Weinstein wrote:
[...]
>  This was a bug that existed for a short time, and was fixed about
>6 months ago.  Javascript can not submit mailto: forms at all, and
>all mailto: forms now cause a warning dialog to come up(the dialog
>can be turned off in preferences).

You have done a lot to improve security. It is not going unnoticed.


-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu  Wed Aug  7 02:08:21 1996
From: hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu (hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:08:21 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960806175813.20074A-100000@crl4.crl.com>
Message-ID: <9608070525.AA02577@Etna.ai.mit.edu>



Au contraire, the UK is as obnoxious in exporting its laws as the
US. The Prime Minister of Greece when (accurately) accused of corruption
in the Greek press sued them in the UK courts and won $200K

In recent years many Tory Grandees have benefited from the libel
lottery. Amongst them Lord Aldington who was accused of being involved
in war crimes during WWII and 'won" 1.75 million which the European
Court of Human rights rejected as being "disproportionate". Lord
Archer recently won $1 million after a couple of newspapers alledged
that he might have been sleeping with the prostitute he was photographed
giving 5000GBP to (and afterwards claimed not to have met).

With the exception of the suicide act its probabky the stupidest and
most damaging law that ever got passed in the English system.

		Phill





From jamesd at echeque.com  Wed Aug  7 02:08:56 1996
From: jamesd at echeque.com (James A. Donald)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:08:56 +0800
Subject: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
Message-ID: <199608070517.WAA03971@dns2.noc.best.net>


At 10:15 AM 8/5/96 -0800, jim bell wrote:
> The molecular difference between TNT and picric acid is a methyl group, 
> weight 15 (on TNT) substituted for a hydroxyl, weight 17 (on 
> picric acid.)   If there is a difference, it is a very small one.

Picric acid is easier for amateurs to make than TNT.

It has the same energy per unit mass as TNT, but it's destructive
power is greater because of the substantially higher velocity of
detonation.

It is far less predictable and far easier to detonate than TNT.  Also
TNT has the advantage that it can be melted and poured into molds,
and it is cheaper to manufacture in large quantities.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              				|  
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 at echeque.com






From hal9001 at panix.com  Wed Aug  7 02:18:44 1996
From: hal9001 at panix.com (Robert A. Rosenberg)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:18:44 +0800
Subject: FAA to require transponders on all aircraft passengers
In-Reply-To: <199608042050.NAA12512@toad.com>
Message-ID: <v03007802ae2c8c62a9da@[166.84.220.80]>


At 13:50 -0700 8/4/96, Bill Stewart wrote:


>My guess about how they'll be used is to replace the bar-code
>stickers used by many baggage-handling systems - they'll stick
>one on at checkin, corresponding to the number on your ticket,
>track them when they load them on the plane (so they know
>that all the bags correspond to people expected to get on the plane,
>as well as knowing the bags are getting on the correct plane),
>and track the tickets to make sure that all the people expected
>to get on the plane actually do get on (I think they use bar-code
>readers or OCR today, and that'll probably continue.)

They better hold off loading the containers with the luggage until they
lock down/up the plane so they can verify who got on (and can pull any
unaccompanied luggage). It is either that or unloading the plane if there
is a missing passenger.







From blane at aa.net  Wed Aug  7 02:49:14 1996
From: blane at aa.net (Brian C. Lane)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 17:49:14 +0800
Subject: ****Tacoma, Washington Starts Taxing Internet Access 07/30/96
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960805181729.00e8c4a0@mail.teleport.com>
Message-ID: <320824da.6417327@mail.aa.net>


On Mon, 05 Aug 1996 11:17:29 -0700, you wrote:

>At 05:42 AM 8/5/96 -1000, NetSurfer wrote:
>>
>>On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>   	  				 
>>> >WASHINGTON, DC, U.S.A., 1996 JUL 30 (NB) -- By Bill Pietrucha.  
>>> >Tacoma, Washington, has just gained the distinction of being the 
>>> >only municipality in the United States to tax Internet Access 
>>> >providers (IAPs) like telephone service providers. 
>>> >
>I believe the reason the Tacoma ordinance is getting so much flack is that
>they are wanting to charge sales tax on all transactions that take place
>from ISPs in Tacoma.

  A slight correction. They are imposing a 6% tax on the Gross receipts of
all Internet Providers who have customers in Tacoma. This includes AOL,
Compu$erve, and my local favorites - aa.net and eskimo.com

  Tacoma also wants these companies to buy a $72 a year business license.
There are the beginnings of an uprising against this, the mayor has called
for it to be repealed, but the City Council (In all of its bureaucratic
wisdom) wants to wait and see what happens. There's a public meeting on the
27th of August.

>
>This type of taxation is not new.  Various jurisdictions have tried to use
>the same thing on mail order houses.  Having worked for a service bureau
>that dealt with mail order, I know what a hassle it is to try to keep track
>of such taxation.  There is a company that will sell you the data of all of
>the sales tax rates throughout the country.  This includes every little
>podunk city, county, and fire district tax.  They are divided by zip code,
>but that is no guarantees that you have the right place. The reality is that
>trying to "be legal" under such regulations is next to impossible, even with
>the proper data.  I know of few mail order firms that are willing to go to
>that extreme.  (Unless, of course, they have gotten the proper threats from
>some miffed tax baron.)

  Plus the fact that the taxation of these services (well, IMHO all
taxation is ...) is not based on services provided to the business by the
city. My provider is located in seattle, and has lines in Tacoma. They use
no Tacoma services, and yet Tacoma says that the provider owes them money.

  Its just another grab for money by the simple minded bureaucrats.
Hopefully we can toss some more of these jokers out of office the next
election.

   Brian

p.s. Sorry for the previous aborted message. The printer dialog popped up
in the middle of typing and it the message somehow got sent out.

------- <blane at aa.net> -------------------- <http://www.aa.net/~blane> -------
     Embedded Systems Programmer, quick hacks on request, CryptoAnarchist
==============  11 99 3D DB 63 4D 0B 22  15 DC 5A 12 71 DE EE 36  ============





From alano at teleport.com  Wed Aug  7 03:11:03 1996
From: alano at teleport.com (Alan Olsen)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:11:03 +0800
Subject: Cookies on Microsoft Explorer?
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960807070636.00a7ffa8@mail.teleport.com>


At 09:14 AM 8/6/96 -0700, David.K.Merriman.-.webmaster at cygnus.com, wrote:

>I have IE3 configured to ask me for permission to accept a cookie. Yes, 
>some sites send (n!)+1 cookies during a session. If they send too many, I 
>personally move on to another site, after sending them email (!).

If the site sends you *LOTS* of cookies with no expire date, then they have
probibly compiled their Apache server with the mod_cookie module.  The
cookies are only used by the log files and i am willing to bet that most
people who have that option compiled in do not even read the logs.
---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."







From rp at rpini.com  Wed Aug  7 03:12:17 1996
From: rp at rpini.com (Remo Pini)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:12:17 +0800
Subject: crypto CD source
Message-ID: <9608070607.AA05020@srzts100.alcatel.ch>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

To: cypherpunks at toad.com
Date: Wed Aug 07 08:04:50 1996
That's all well (your diverse site/mirror-suggestions), but my local 
phonecompany charges by the minute. If I download the lets say 500MB for 
the CD, I'm broke! Does anyone have direkt access to the sites and can make 
a DAT-backup? (In some format I can read: WinNT Backupprog)?

Thanks,
Remo

- --------< fate favors the prepared mind >--------
Remo Pini                            rp at rpini.com
PGP:  http://www.rpini.com/remopini/rpcrypto.html
- ------< words are what reality is made of >------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBMggyBhFhy5sz+bTpAQGLjQf9EX3/mJQa6woKTZN5uz8dma8Cpv/PFQTC
zsV5h0pjDLiA0RdIZexPJMfTNw+ZFyPdNkma9PgB60kGf2CrNrqLlBWv5XmZQ2HH
kTqcuou2mHm/JeJv5m8v7Vckm8BmTtvdpL2mWK8pG0iB5fWbwiTo9VkyCrwfq/q+
BoAaGS4zkNOTuTlmWo/zwkheEVdV5gRjwI+IyHCTQMZ9rFRqLvmOYxClcEQ0X7C4
X5pFIZgaxw7u953MNbnmyeGVwpHqahhi8mn8mblKpVG2KIxR17lC9lKcZFygTAqA
eddDvrCnCNcyH4zrWksOvPCZfqQbH5mBuFskxjSC1ZXgz+1ZoGKpOw==
=veJq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




From drose at azstarnet.com  Wed Aug  7 03:16:02 1996
From: drose at azstarnet.com (David M. Rose)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:16:02 +0800
Subject: [NOISE] Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <199608062350.QAA18315@web.azstarnet.com>


Hallam-Baker wrote:

>First off Alan posted private mail to the list. In this case mail
>that was more than simply personal. 
>
>Secondly unless Alan withdraws his allegations I will bring proceedings
>against him for libel. While I accept his right to free speech I do
>not accept that he has a right to attempt to restrict mine with his
>threats of deportation. 
>
>
>	Phill Hallam-Baker
>

Oh goody! Another Hallam-Baker-generated p*ssing contest.  Perhaps you
fellows should settle your differences with a bet. Oops, I forgot. The good
"Doc" dishonors his wagers with a series of fantastic and infantile
"misunderstandings".






From tcmay at got.net  Wed Aug  7 03:16:49 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:16:49 +0800
Subject: Censorship through proxy
Message-ID: <ae2d3ca1160210042150@[205.199.118.202]>


At 4:23 PM 8/6/96, Joel McNamara wrote:
>SingNet, one of Singapore's larger ISPs is telling all of their subscribers
>they must move to using SingNet's proxy server by September 14, 1996 if they
>want to have access to the Web.
>
>If you try to access one of the SBA's banned sites, you'll get a message
>that says, "The site you requested is not accessible."
>
>Check out:
>
>http://www.singnet.com.sg/cache/sbareg.html

Sing Sing (the country is now a prison, so...) is one of the states we
should think about targetting for "special attention." Not in the sense of
violence, but in the sense of offering help to freedom fighters, those who
want to use stego, web proxies, etc.

I wonder what would happen if "Computers, Freedom, and Privacy '98" was
held in Sing Sing?

--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 at 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."









From rp at rpini.com  Wed Aug  7 03:17:25 1996
From: rp at rpini.com (Remo Pini)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:17:25 +0800
Subject: THE WORLD IS SCREWD UP
Message-ID: <9608070619.AA05456@srzts100.alcatel.ch>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

To: cypherpunks at toad.com
Date: Wed Aug 07 08:16:48 1996
> THIS WORLD IS SREWED UP i hate my life so mue hobbeys makeing time pipe
> bommbs so what is this all about huh what the fuck "anti terrisiom bill"
> damn sad ok so what does  this mean FREE COUNTRY hahahaha i laugh when i
> hear that term there is no free country and we never have a wright to 
> privesy u know man this sux so much....... oh and to the government u
> can kiss my ass

And here I was thinking my English sucks! By the way, keyboard do have keys 
like ".,;:".

:-)


- --------< fate favors the prepared mind >--------
Remo Pini                            rp at rpini.com
PGP:  http://www.rpini.com/remopini/rpcrypto.html
- ------< words are what reality is made of >------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBMgg01BFhy5sz+bTpAQFz9ggArJOn4g8i/xREcEAjYXAO5oB+Jt6wUox1
dMh9GYpoYiYkb2qzpvQ9kK7JRMbehZRqhsltPQ7ydn1hNs/v+O+M4MG6I0FoIJg4
mmpEY7DDfLmqyPUAgEFq07re3pGraeteLFdSTlDvjxiBNw2+0K1EjQWHVVgxT/2p
CKeKW8/v/dSA68TFVFcBlYKbNYZREUeEhTLhFLmuXXXkJcC3orrO0ODaENT7MWUz
o1uCPq0v+XM+WMhNji5dIkVN6/SJQ0QT1MjocCmOFuMAa/UW8lwX2BPqBvI3K1ao
EOb8hHDut+yMExRI2X6rtC3u8lgvm/8i58BBc1IncuI1Oxgn1ivmDw==
=hwr+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




From hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu  Wed Aug  7 03:18:21 1996
From: hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu (hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:18:21 +0800
Subject: [NOISE] Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
In-Reply-To: <199608062350.QAA18315@web.azstarnet.com>
Message-ID: <9608070000.AA01836@Etna.ai.mit.edu>



>Oh goody! Another Hallam-Baker-generated p*ssing contest.  Perhaps you
>fellows should settle your differences with a bet. Oops, I forgot. The good
>"Doc" dishonors his wagers with a series of fantastic and infantile
>"misunderstandings".

Actually I'm now happy to accept the bet but in the forum of my choice:-

http://www.ideosphere.com/ideosphere/fx/main.html


	Phill





From jon at taurus.apple.com  Wed Aug  7 03:18:23 1996
From: jon at taurus.apple.com (Jon Callas)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:18:23 +0800
Subject: Apple people on the list
Message-ID: <v02130504ae2d6c856d70@[17.130.22.227]>


A quick response to Tim May's recent mail.

I'm an Apple employee. I'm on the cypherpunks list, but I'm not sure if Tim
would consider me active. I read cypherpunks on one of the edited versions
(the "frogfarm" edition, many thanks to its editor, Damaged Justice), but I
subscribe to and read Coderpunks. I do, however write software and papers on
security and crypto. I have done so for over six years.

One of the reasons I subscribe to Cypherpunks is, in fact, Tim May. Whenever
I see something he's written, I read it, which is more than I can say for
most of Cypherpunks. When I was getting all of Cypherpunks, I used Tim's
messages as navigation buoys.

I am disappointed that Tim won't be at the Mac Crypto conference. I thought
it was an excellent idea for him to speak, and think it would still be an
excellent idea. I would like to hear his views in a forum more detailed than
the short things that go on Cypherpunks. As for me, I'm going to be giving a
talk at the conference on using, abusing, and constructing random number
generators. The talk is an updated reprise of the talk and paper I gave at
MacHack '96.

A number of us would also like to hear Tim speak. I'm sure that as a
consulting fee we can come up with enough t-shirts and beer that it will make
the drive back over 17 even more harrowing than it usually is. I'll toss in a
copy of the Macintosh Entropy Manager, but since I'm giving it away to anyone
who wants it, it's not much. Perhaps I can autograph a floppy or something.

        Jon Callas
        Senior Scientist
        Apple Labs, Advanced Communications and Collaboration
        jon at taurus.apple.com
        http://www.merrymeet.com/jon







From JonWienk at ix.netcom.com  Wed Aug  7 03:18:24 1996
From: JonWienk at ix.netcom.com (JonWienk at ix.netcom.com)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:18:24 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <199608070325.UAA22254@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com>


On Tue, 06 Aug 96, hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:
>
>Contrary to reports of some sort of inversion it is not the case that
>shell cases need to be found at the scene of a crime to cause an
>arrest and conviction. There are many people who are serving time
>after having left their fingerprints on shell cases found in a gun
>recovered after a crime. If the gun can be linked to a crime scene
>via balistics reports and the shells in the gun to an individual via
>fingerprints that is circumstansial evidence.

I am very skeptical of this. When a gun is fired, the shell casing becomes quite 
hot--hot enough to burn skin. (I have learned this from experience--once when 
firing my semi-auto .22 at a range, an ejected casing bounced off a post next to 
me and landed inside my collar. The resulting burn formed a blister on my neck.) 
This kind of heat has a tendency to evaporate the skin oils that fingerprints 
are composed of, which is going to make getting any useful print from the case 
extremely difficult. Also, when the gun is fired, the pressure inside the case 
presses it flat against the chamber wall, which is going to smudge the print, 
especially on semi-autos where extraction occurs while there is still a 
significant amount of pressure in the case. Furthermore, most shell cases are 
too small to get anything close to a complete print, which makes positive 
matching even more difficult. It is much more believable that prints were taken 
from the gun, which is handled more (thereby collecting more prints) and which 
generally doesn't reach skin-damaging temperatures.

Regardless of feasibility of collecting prints from cases, serial numbers on 
ammunition is still a stupid idea. Currently, all firearms are required to have 
serial numbers. However, serial numbers only rarely help solve crimes. Most 
criminals use weapons that have had the serial number welded over, filed off, 
etc. or that have been stolen, so the gun is registered in someone else's name, 
or both. Registration is a vastly more effective tool for the government to know 
where most of the lawfully owned firearms are (and who owns them) than it is at 
preventing or solving any crime. Putting serial numbers on ammo has all of the 
same problems, except the paperwork would be worse because people purchase ammo 
more frequently than guns.

Imagine someone breaks into your house while you are gone, and steals your 
serial-numbered gun and serial-numbered ammo. Then he uses them to stick up some 
of the local Stop-N-Rob's in your neighborhood while wearing the same gloves and 
ski mask he wore at your house. He fires numerous shots and reloads the gun 
several times, leaving fired cases in each store. After the last robbery, he 
dumps the gun in a storm drain, burns the gloves and mask, and catches the next 
flight to Tahiti. Do you really think that serial numbers on the gun or the ammo 
are going to help YOU?

Also, 32 bits of serial number is not enough. Over a billion rounds of .22 Long 
Rifle are fired in the US annually. Need I say more?

Since there are already natural means of positively matching bullets to guns, 
guns to cases, and guns to fingers, which cannot be used to falsely implicate 
anyone, , and since the claimed benefits of serial numbering can easily be 
circumvented by unscrupulous persons (in other words, CRIMINALS) I contend that 
serial numbers are a much better tool for facilitating a police state than for 
reducing crime.

On Tue, 6 Aug 1996, Rabid Wombat <wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org> wrote:
>How about just numbering the criminals?  There's more room for the 
>numbers, there's precedent, and less specialized equipment is required.

obCrypto: How about defining the "number" as an MD5 hash of the X-Y coordinates 
of the entry points of 15 pellets of 00 buckshot in the criminal's chest, sorted 
in ascending order X, Y? (ORDER BY X ASC, Y ASC)
Jonathan Wienke

[End of gun rant. Sorry for burning up so much list bandwidth on this, but I 
recently had an experience where gang members were following me around for 
several weeks, trying to intimidate me from testifying against some of their 
friends who beat the crap out of some of my neighbors with sawed-off baseball 
bats... "Cold, dead, fingers" and all of that.]

"A conservative is a liberal who got mugged last night."
--Lee Rodgers

"1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full 
gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the 
world will follow our lead in the future!"
--Adolf Hitler

"46.  The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, 
transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. ...Consider the 
following statement:  I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist 
confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government."
--The 29 Palms Combat Arms Survey  
http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/Palms.htm

1935 Germany = 1996 U.S.?

Key fingerprint =  30 F9 85 7F D2 75 4B C6  BC 79 87 3D 99 21 50 CB






From hal9001 at panix.com  Wed Aug  7 03:20:58 1996
From: hal9001 at panix.com (Robert A. Rosenberg)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:20:58 +0800
Subject: TrustBucks
In-Reply-To: <64gf4trmj9@nowhere.com>
Message-ID: <v03007800ae2c81fb3823@[166.84.220.80]>


At 1:11 -0500 8/2/96, TrustBuckFella wrote:


>Examples: Say Alice wants to pay Bob in TrustBucks, and Bob agreed to
>accept payment in this form. Alice has several options for paying him.
>
>*       Alice already has some TrustBucks( Bob ).
>
>                Alice pays Bob.
>
>*       The amount is small enough that Bob trusts Alice directly.
>
>                Alice and Bob swap TrustBucks( Alice ) for TrustBucks( Bob )
>                Alice pays Bob.
>
>        I know this looks like an extra piece of complexity, but it's
>        really not. By insisting that only TrustBucks( Bob ) are payment
>        to Bob, we insure that Bob can't manipulate what currency he
>        will accept to his advantage, which would otherwise be a
>        problem. For instance, Bob cannot refuse to make good on his
>        debts while accepting other people's money.

I fail to see why/how the initial swap of  TrustBucks(Alice) for
TrustBucks(Bob) followed by Alice returning the TrustBucks(Bob) [as
supposed payment] differs from her just paying with the TrustBucks(Alice)
in the first place [ie: He is willing to accept the TrustBucks(Alice) as
payment for the TrustBucks(Bob) that she will use to pay off her debt]. The
net result is the same - Bob has the same amount of TrustBucks(Bob) in
circulation and has an amount of TrustBucks(Alice) equal to Alice's payment
[the back and forth of the TrustBucks(Bob) is just playing "Right
Pocket/Left Pocket"].







From accessnt at ozemail.com.au  Wed Aug  7 03:22:35 1996
From: accessnt at ozemail.com.au (Mark Neely)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 18:22:35 +0800
Subject: The Solution: 20 Beautiful women
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960807080312.00695a08@ozemail.com.au>


Fellow Cypherpunks,

Maths was never my strong point, but this response (from my statistician
g/f) sounds convincing...but then, maybe I'm biased :)

-----8<-------

According to your friendly neighbourhood statistician (ie me) the answer can be
deterined as follows:

Suppose we have 20 beautiful women and we call them W1, W2 through to W20.  For
any given women, say Wi where 1<=i<=20, we have only two choices, choosing her
or rejecting her.  Knowing that she's beautiful anyway, we assume that:

Probability(Choosing Wi)=Probability(Rejecting Wi)=0.5

Now, let Wn where 1<=n<=20 be the most beautiful woman, then the probability of
getting the most beautiful woman is:

Probability(Getting Wn)
        =Probability(Rejecting W1) * Probability(Rejecting W2) *
                Probability(Rejecting W3) * ... * Probability(Rejecting Wn-1) *
                Probability(Choosing Wn)
        =(0.5)^(n-1) * (0.5)
        =(0.5)^n

Now we know that the value for a fraction raised to any of the valid values of n
(defined above to be 1<=n<=20) can be maximised by minimising the power to which
the fraction is raised.  So we take the minimum possible value of n, namely n=1.

Thus Probability(Getting Wn)=(0.5)^n=0.5.  This gives us the highest chance of
choosing the most beautiful woman.

This could have been done more intuitively and less rigorously by considering
the fact that when we multiply any fraction by another fraction, it always
becomes a smaller fraction (and hence our probability is reduced).

So you can see there is a moral in this story, can you not?

I pat myself on the head.  I am extremely brilliant.

She who is most luscious
___
Mark Neely - accessnt at ozemail.com.au 
Lawyer, Internet Consultant, Professional Cynic
Author: Australian Beginner's Guide to the Internet (2nd Ed.)
	Australian Business Guide to the Internet
	Internet Guide for Teachers, Students & Parents
WWW: http://www.ozemail.com.au/~accessnt






From ceridwyn at wolfenet.com  Wed Aug  7 04:12:44 1996
From: ceridwyn at wolfenet.com (Cerridwyn Llewyellyn)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:12:44 +0800
Subject: appropriate algorithm for application
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806232209.006e2c84@gonzo.wolfenet.com>



I need an algorithm/protocol that is capable of encrypting numerous
files with separate keys, but there also needs to be a master key
that will be able to decrypt all of them.  Is there such a system 
that is relatively secure?  I'd prefer the system to be as secure
as possible, but in this application, security is secondary to 
functionality.  Thanks... //cerridwyn//






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Aug  7 04:12:55 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:12:55 +0800
Subject: Freeh slimes again: Digital Telephony costs $2 billion now  ...
Message-ID: <199608070259.TAA17442@toad.com>


>>> Louis Freeh is now asking the Congress for $2 billion to fund
>>> Digital Telephony.  Yes, that is FOUR TIMES what he said it

>How many crimes, approximately, are going to be solved or prevented by the 
>expenditure of this $2 billion dollars?  One hundred?  A thousand? 

I haven't been able to find the reference, but a month or two ago
there was an article on the net or in a newspaper about the targets
of wiretapping - how many wiretaps were for drugs, gambling, tax evasion,
and of course terrorism.  The number of wiretaps for bombs and guns
was something low like 80 in the last 5-10 years - about 1/10%. 
        (Did anybody else see this article??)
On the other hand, the recent articles in the press about increasing
bomb-related crimes in the US; it's up to about 3000/year from 2000 in 5 yrs.
So maybe 1/10% of the bombing investigations  have even used wiretapping.

So why is Louis Freeh ranting up and down about the need to
ban encryption because he needs wiretapping to catch terrorists?
At least he could be honest and rant about the need to stop the
hordes of drug dealers and escalate the War On Gambling.


#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Aug  7 04:13:00 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:13:00 +0800
Subject: Corporate e-mail policy
Message-ID: <199608070259.TAA17453@toad.com>




>    "Electronic mail may be monitored if there is sufficient reason to
>     believe that it is being improperly used which includes, but is not
>     limited to: mail to competitors, more than 20 recipients (spam), and
>     incoming mail from questionable sources.  If such monitored mail is
>     encrypted the employee must provide a clear text version of the mail
>     which is to be unencrypted under supervision to avoid substitutions.
>     Any employee refusing to make available such mail will be ...."

Official mail to competitors, the press, or customers is probably something
you'd want an official copy of anyway, and the employee should be
able to decide intelligently what to keep (unless your lawyers say
to always keep everything, in which case the legal department should
be responsible for maintaining the archives....)

Incoming encrypted mail you can (presumably) get an employee to decrypt.
Outgoing encrypted mail may not support that - PGP, for instance,
supports an encrypt-to-self option, but if you don't use it,
and didn't record the outgoing message, you _can't_ decrypt it.
Writing something into a policy that will get an employee fired
for refusing to do something that can't be done with the available tools
is not a good idea.  I'm not highly impressed with the idea of 
snooping on employees' mail, even if it _is_ your company.
If you don't trust them, don't hire them.  If you do trust them,
don't eavesdrop.   And if they're ripping you off and don't have the sense
to sneak their sotlen data outside the building by sneakernet
or other untappable mechanism, you probably should have fired them
for incompetence long ago anyway.

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU  Wed Aug  7 04:24:34 1996
From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. ALLEN SMITH)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:24:34 +0800
Subject: e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce
Message-ID: <01I7YR8ENYFK9JD1RF@mbcl.rutgers.edu>


	If you're wanting someone to talk on NuPrometheus, you might try
Barlow.... he's already been investigated for it and doesn't seem likely
to be harrassed again. Of course, _getting_ him could be a problem.
	-Allen





From proff at suburbia.net  Wed Aug  7 04:25:10 1996
From: proff at suburbia.net (Julian Assange)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:25:10 +0800
Subject: Fixes to loop.c et al. for DES,IDEA,stego now done
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.890918054255.204A-100000@HellSpawn>
Message-ID: <199608070806.SAA26988@suburbia.net>


> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > 
> > This directory contains patches to the Linux kernel to enable encryption and
> > steganography of filesystems. Encryption allows you to have a scrambled
> > partition or file that, with the proper pass phrase, you can mount, just
> > like a normal filesystem. Steganography allows you to hide a filesystem in
> > the low bits of, say, an audio file. You can even combine these two to hide
> > a scrambled filesystem in the low bits of an audio file (see the example,
> > below).
> 
> 
> 
> With the addition of stego, this arrangment seems to be rather similar to 
> CFS.  So the question on my mind, is can the loop device(s) be 

Since when has CFS had any steganography features?

--
"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely  exercised for the good of its victims  
 may be the most  oppressive.  It may be better to live under  robber barons  
 than  under  omnipotent  moral busybodies,  The robber baron's  cruelty may  
 sometimes sleep,  his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who  
 torment us for own good  will torment us  without end,  for they do so with 
 the approval of their own conscience."    -   C.S. Lewis, _God in the Dock_ 
+---------------------+--------------------+----------------------------------+
|Julian Assange RSO   | PO Box 2031 BARKER | Secret Analytic Guy Union        |
|proff at suburbia.net   | VIC 3122 AUSTRALIA | finger for PGP key hash ID =     |
|proff at gnu.ai.mit.edu | FAX +61-3-98199066 | 0619737CCC143F6DEA73E27378933690 |
+---------------------+--------------------+----------------------------------+





From anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com  Wed Aug  7 04:25:41 1996
From: anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com (anonymous-remailer at shell.portal.com)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:25:41 +0800
Subject: THE WORLD IS SCREWD UP
Message-ID: <199608070617.XAA03942@jobe.shell.portal.com>


At 05:02 PM 8/6/96 -0500, you wrote:
>THIS WORLD IS SREWED UP i hate my life so mue hobbeys makeing time pipe 
>bommbs so what is this all about huh what the fuck "anti terrisiom bill" 
>damn sad ok so what does  this mean FREE COUNTRY hahahaha i laugh when i 
>hear that term there is no free country and we never have a wright to 
>privesy u know man this sux so much....... oh and to the government u can 
>kiss my ass


TAKE it to a shrink... not Cypherpunks!

Ps. learn to spell!






From shamrock at netcom.com  Wed Aug  7 04:31:11 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:31:11 +0800
Subject: Censorship through proxy
Message-ID: <v02120d05ae2db6d15662@[192.0.2.1]>


At 18:12 8/6/96, Timothy C. May wrote:

>I wonder what would happen if "Computers, Freedom, and Privacy '98" was
>held in Sing Sing?

We'd all get caned?



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From sebago at earthlink.net  Wed Aug  7 04:32:00 1996
From: sebago at earthlink.net (Allen Robinson)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:32:00 +0800
Subject: "Eternity service" paper request
Message-ID: <199608070146.VAA04336@norway.it.earthlink.net>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

To: cypherpunks at toad.com
Date: Tue Aug 06 20:53:31 1996
A couple of weeks ago Hal mentioned Ross Anderson's Eternity
Service paper (URL: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk:80/users/rja14/#Lib).

As Hal described it at the time:

>The goal of the Eternity service is to make published information
>permanently and ineradicably available, despite efforts on the part of
>powerful attackers to destroy it.  The attack model explicitly
>includes governments.  This has obvious relevance to current
>controversies involving copyright, trade secrets, etc.

[. . . .]

>Anderson's basic concept is of a network of storage servers in widely
>scattered jurisdictions.  He uses cryptography so that although the
>servers store data, no single computer knows exactly what is stored in
>the encrypted files it holds.  Keys to the data are spread across the
>network using secret sharing techniques, with mutual cooperation among
>the servers being necessary to decrypt files.  (I believe the files
>themselves are redundantly stored on individual servers, but they are
>encrypted with keys which are split.)  Anonymous communications are
>used among the network of computers to reply to requests, so that
>attackers can't tell which computer produced a requested document.

At the time I thought this sounds quite interesting and filed the 
information away for a time when I would have an opportunity to
get the paper and read it.  I finally created that opportunity
recently only to find the paper at the above URL in a format I have
a *lot* of difficulty reading.  I'm a little embarrassed to ask such a
thing, but does anyone know a location where this paper resides in
plain-vanilla ASCII?

Many thanks.

AR

#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#
"The road to tyranny, we must never forget, begins with the
destruction of the truth." -- Bill Clinton, Oct. 15, 1995
at the University of Connecticut.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Allen Robinson.........................sebago at earthlink.net
PGP public key FE4A0A75     available from major keyservers
fingerprint 170FBC1F7609B76F 967F1CC8FCA7A41F

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgf3H3sdZ07+Sgp1AQHEYQP/cthh/U8MwguYjuDJkrMNScwCaLrBm+rv
7SJS5Oogln7ItVfMDCUGISVNABCg4gr4taqW8OnStmegZxqsYJevLu5qYVTPvdWG
wPDbBu2rHfHc6aHS1am727Vv9EJTb452tlDkXQuQApH4TUh9mYUe6oIxVenKSxNC
jbPGgzxgvvo=
=qhoi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----






From iang at cs.berkeley.edu  Wed Aug  7 04:34:02 1996
From: iang at cs.berkeley.edu (Ian Goldberg)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:34:02 +0800
Subject: Fixes to loop.c et al. for DES,IDEA,stego now done
Message-ID: <199608062350.QAA10693@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

As I mentioned before, the hooks to DES (and IDEA; with Nicholas Leon's
patches) in loop.c and {mount,losetup}(8) are horribly broken.
For example, the DES key you type in is totally ignored, and only the first
byte of the IDEA key you enter is relevant.  As well, the DES code was using
PCBC mode, and IDEA was using ECB mode.

I've fixed the key management (the key is based on a SHA1 hash of the pass
phrase you enter), and changed both DES and IDEA to use CBC mode.

Adding other encryption methods (Blowfish, for example) should be
straightforward.  In fact, I'm planning to add a facility for dynamically
adding and removing general data transformation modules (maybe for 2.1...).

In addition, I've implemented steganography (hiding a filesystem in the low
bits of, say, an audio file), and fixed some assorted bugs in loop.c
(incorrect variables were being used in some places, and a deadlock was fixed
having to do with making a loop device on top of another loop device).

The patches are available from:

ftp://ftp.csua.berkeley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/filesystems/linux/index.html

Since that site seems to be down a lot, there's an alternate site:

ftp://csclub.uwaterloo.ca/pub/linux-stego/index.html

Note that there's one file that contains crypto that users outside of the
US and Canada must not download.  See below for further details and
instructions.

Attached is the text version of index.html.  Share and enjoy.

   - Ian

- -----------------8<--------------------8<----------------
Encryption and Steganography for Linux

This directory contains patches to the Linux kernel to enable encryption and
steganography of filesystems. Encryption allows you to have a scrambled
partition or file that, with the proper pass phrase, you can mount, just
like a normal filesystem. Steganography allows you to hide a filesystem in
the low bits of, say, an audio file. You can even combine these two to hide
a scrambled filesystem in the low bits of an audio file (see the example,
below).

Installation instructions

  1. Get a fresh copy of linux-2.0.11.tar.gz from your favourite site.
  2. Patch it with the loopfix-2.0.11.patch file found in this directory.
     This fixes some bugs in the loop block device driver, and adds
     steganography support to it. Hopefully this will go into the standard
     kernel soon.
  3. Now you want to add cryptography support. Due to a strange US
     regulation, this has to be split up into two pieces. The first piece,
     export-2.0.11.patch, doesn't actually contain any cryptograhy; it just
     contains the changes to the Makefiles and documentation, etc. to
     reflect the eventual presence of cryptography. You should get this file
     and patch it into the result of step 2.
  4. If the site you are downloading these files from is in the US or
     Canada, you may only download the second piece, crypto-2.0.11.patch, if
     you are also in the US or Canada. If you are not, here's what's in the
     file, and where to get it:
        o The file contains the files drivers/block/idea.c, kernel/des.c,
          include/linux/idea.h and include/linux/des.h.
        o To get these files, go visit
          http://www.binary9.net/nicholas/linuxkernel/patches/ and get the
          patches des-1.0.patch and idea-1.0.patch.
        o Edit these patches and remove everything in them that isn't
          related to one of the four files listed above.
        o What you have left should be functionally equivalent to
          crypto-2.0.11.patch.
  5. Take either crypto-2.0.11.patch or what you got from outside the US,
     and patch it into the result of step 3.
  6. You now have a complete kernel. Compile as usual.

You will also need an updated version of the mount and losetup commands in
order to use this. To get these, download mount-2.5k from
ftp://ftp.win.tue.nl/pub/linux/util/mount-2.5k.tar.gz. Then get the patch
mount-2.5k.patch from this directory, and patch it into the sources. Compile
and install.

It would be really good if these patches to the kernel and to mount for
steganography and encryption were made standard, and enabled by default. The
reason for this is that it would be more suspicious for someone to have a
"special" kernel with stego capabilities than to just have a regular kernel,
configured in the default way.

Sample encrypted and stego'd filesystem

In this directory are two audio files. Alice-Bob.orig.au is a file I
downloaded from http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/labs/theorique/Alice-Bob.html.
The other file, Alice-Bob.au, is the same, except that it has an encrypted
filesystem hidden in the low bit of each byte. You can listen to each of
them, and see how much difference there is (it's just in the noise). To see
the filesystem, get a new kernel and mount/losetup as descibed above. Also
make sure you have loop devices in /dev/loop*, as described below. Then:

# losetup -e stego /dev/loop0 Alice-Bob.au
Use the low bits of each (b)yte, (s)hort, or (l)ong?
(Use lowercase letters for little-endian; uppercase for big-endian.)
b/s/l/B/S/L: [b]
# mount /dev/loop0 /mnt -oloop,encryption=idea
Pass phrase: What are we going to do tomorrow night, Brain?
# ls -al /mnt
total 220
drwxr-xr-x   3 root     root         1024 Aug  4 10:47 ./
drwxr-xr-x  23 root     root         1024 Aug  4 01:50 ../
drwxr-xr-x   2 root     root        12288 Aug  4 10:46 lost+found/
- -rw-r--r--   1 root     root           71 Aug  4 10:47 passwords
- -rw-------   1 root     root       208247 Aug  4 10:47 world_domination_plans
# umount /mnt
# losetup -d /dev/loop0

Usage instructions

First, make sure you have devices called /dev/loop0, /dev/loop1, ...,
/dev/loop7. If not, make them as follows:

# cd /dev
# for i in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7; do mknod loop$i b 7 $i; done
# chgrp disk /dev/loop[0-7]
# chmod 660 /dev/loop[0-7]

A note on choosing pass phrases: Pass phrases can be up to 128 characters
long. It's in your best interests to choose a good one. Make it long, and
hard to guess. There are FAQs out there on how to choose a good pass phrase,
I think.

Finally, here is a copy of the file
Documentation/filesystems/loop_crypt.txt:

Encryption and Steganography for Linux
- --------------------------------------

The "loop" block device driver allows you to "hide" a filesystem in
a disk partition or in a regular file, either using encryption (scrambling
the data) or steganography (hiding the data in the low bits of, say,
a sound file).

To use this, you will need updated versions of the "mount" and "losetup"
commands.  They are both in the mount-2.5k, which you can get from

 ftp://ftp.win.tue.nl/pub/linux/util/mount-2.5k.tar.gz

but you will need to patch it with the changes from

 ftp://ftp.csua.berkley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/filesystems/linux/mount-2.5k.patch

Also, if you want to use DES or IDEA encryption and not just XOR (which,
encryptionwise, is really terrible), you'll need to get the crypto patches
to the kernel.  If you're in the US or Canada, you can get them from

 ftp://ftp.csua.berkley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/filesystems/linux/crypto.patch

Otherwise, check

 ftp://ftp.csua.berkley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/filesystems/linux/index.html

to see how to get them.

How to use it
- -------------

Here are a number of examples:

To create an encrypted floppy (using IDEA):

Put a floppy in drive 0.
# dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/fd0 bs=1k seek=8
# losetup -e idea /dev/loop0 /dev/fd0
Pass phrase: (type a pass phrase here, up to 128 characters)
# mke2fs /dev/loop0
# losetup -d /dev/loop0

To use it again:
# mount /dev/fd0 /mnt -text2 -oloop,encryption=idea
Pass phrase: (type the same pass phrase)
# cd /mnt
(use the disk)
# cd /
# umount /mnt

To make a DES-encrypted filesystem in a regular file:

Decide on a filename and how big you want your encrypted filesystem to be.
Suppose you choose /root/private/rndseed as your filename, and you want
it to be 10MB (10240K).  Create it as follows:

# dd if=/dev/urandom of=/root/private/rndseed bs=1k count=10240
# losetup -e des /dev/loop0 /root/private/rndseed
Pass phrase: (type a pass phrase here, up to 128 characters)
# mke2fs /dev/loop0
# losetup -d /dev/loop0

To use it:
# mount /root/private/rndseed /mnt -text2 -oloop,encryption=des
Pass phrase: (type the same pass phrase)
# cd /mnt
(use the disk)
# cd /
# umount /mnt

There is an additional "feature" (well, _I_ think it's a feature) by
which you could mount the above filesystem on /root/private, even though
a file in that directory is being used to store the filesystem itself.
(Note of course that the encrypted file won't be visible when the
filesystem is mounted, and that only loop files don't count as "usage";
if you're _in_ that directory, or some process has any file in that
directory open, the mount won't work.)

To hide an IDEA-encrypted filesystem in the low bits of an audio file:

Let "penguin.au" be your sound file.
# losetup -e stego /dev/loop0 penguin.au
Use the low bits of each (b)yte, (s)hort, or (l)ong?
(Use lowercase letters for little-endian; uppercase for big-endian.)
b/s/l/B/S/L: [b]  (.au files store 1-byte samples, so say "b" here)
# dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/loop0 bs=1k seek=8
# losetup -e idea /dev/loop1 /dev/loop0
Pass phrase: (type a pass phrase here, up to 128 characters)
# mke2fs /dev/loop1
# losetup -d /dev/loop1
# losetup -d /dev/loop0

And to use it:
# losetup -e stego /dev/loop0 penguin.au
Use the low bits of each (b)yte, (s)hort, or (l)ong?
(Use lowercase letters for little-endian; uppercase for big-endian.)
b/s/l/B/S/L: [b]  (.au files store 1-byte samples, so say "b" here)
# mount /dev/loop0 /mnt -text2 -oloop,encryption=idea
Pass phrase: (type a pass phrase here, up to 128 characters)
# cd /mnt
(read secret info from files here)
# cd /
# umount /mnt
# losetup -d /dev/loop0

Note: if you don't have /dev/urandom, do this:

# cd /dev
# mknod random c 1 8
# mknod urandom c 1 9
# chown root.root random urandom
# chmod 666 random urandom

Last update: 19960806 by Ian Goldberg <ian at cypherpunks.ca>

This work derives from work by a number of people, including:
Werner Almesberger <almesber at bernina.ethz.ch>
Andries Brouwer <Andries.Brouwer at cwi.nl>
Ian Goldberg <ian at cypherpunks.ca>
Nicholas J. Leon <nicholas at binary9.net>
Theodore Ts'o <tytso at athena.mit.edu>
Eric Young <eay at psych.psy.uq.oz.au>
- -----------------8<--------------------8<----------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMgfZsEZRiTErSPb1AQGf9wP8Cu0h79vowZVME3dJGhCQM8AbelCOHEck
O51uZ6o5Fwv3mPsZ0E15IyYns1mLYT4slWQ2VY2vEoTsT6pM4og+45/ZP3aRJh5i
mBgNulbRvxf/eqlmDBT6433JFrdAVAWHwGcMFTUXewHQJZ3x4WyIzvk1hHv++OGo
jn96Pbr71Qs=
=13QI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





From jya at pipeline.com  Wed Aug  7 04:35:36 1996
From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:35:36 +0800
Subject: Apple people on the list
Message-ID: <199608062315.XAA27999@pipe5.t1.usa.pipeline.com>


I'd like to hear Tim, too, in this Big Apple. RealAudio, perhaps. 
 
 
Tim's views are far more substantial and worthwhile than those play-it-safe
Pro-Code dronings. 
 
 
And his pith should go out far and wide, around the world, not only out
there on its edge. 
 
 
Vinnie, Robert, All Appledom, do your global duty, don't miss this chance
to leapfrog the small-beans promoters of the crypto industry. 
 
 
What would you offer to set off Tim's simmering crypto-anarcho-volcano,
make it heard round the planet? 
 
 





From nozefngr at mail.apple.com  Wed Aug  7 04:50:54 1996
From: nozefngr at mail.apple.com (Christopher Hull)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 19:50:54 +0800
Subject: e$: Watching the MacRubble Bounce
Message-ID: <199608070210.TAA12996@scv1.apple.com>


>
>I, for one, would appreciate the chance to hear Tim May present
>"crypto-anarchy" and "crypto-privacy" -- in a much more coherent fashion
>
>Vinnie is putting the "Mac Crypto" conference together in his spare
>time using "borrowed" facilities in a way that stays below Apple's
>"radar horizon".

Ah, so I'm not the only one who makes nefarious use of R&D4 
(Burning Man, Mike Jittlov, and other pseudo-events) ;-)

Looking forward to it.

>
>As for the "Mac is dead," I'll leave that to another time and place.

The press is a little difficult to believe when they come out with 
nonsense like  "Apple is finally upgrading an aging product line".
Excuse me?  Yes, the last new Mac one could buy was the IIfx?

San Jose Mercury News, A Division of Microsoft Press.
(I wonder if I should extend the Shakespeare award beyond the net).

-Chris



..    But there *are* a million monkees on the net,
..    and I still aint seen no Shakespeare!             <me>
...
...    smtp: nozefngr at apple.com
..     page: 1.800.680.7351
..     http: http://virtual.net/Personal/nozefngr/
..     icbm: lat37*21'.lon121*5'
..
..  the kabuki project: http://remarque.berkeley.edu/kabuki/







From vinnie at webstuff.apple.com  Wed Aug  7 05:08:59 1996
From: vinnie at webstuff.apple.com (Vinnie Moscaritolo)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:08:59 +0800
Subject: Mac Crypto/ internet commerce workshop registration
Message-ID: <v03007811ae2db56cce13@[204.179.131.59]>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----BY SAFEMAIL 1.0-----

Attention:

I have setup a webpage to handle registrations for the Mac Crypto/ internet
commerce workshop.

http://webtuff.apple.com/~opentpt/crypto.html

please signup and book your airlines and hotel as soon as you can.

I am still looking for presenters,  if you plan to talk, please drop
me an outline, pronto

ciao

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----BY SAFEMAIL 1.0-----
Version: 2.6.i

iQCVAwUBMggHRfMF2+rAU+UdAQEocwQAi347wC62qlgoV0E8nL2E57beK0Uo3fjo
0ZYSYSwu0zOdF9gqGyBfM0ZEHFGh9CEiJik3JCKww4B4Pl6HVWjm9Ay1DN4IqdOo
fvanrRRJXcBi00HnyaJmjq9jIrsGoH6nZ3sxM58yaldm/6iVuKezhgBprPF0WwOr
aq9NPOZaePg=
=Zm8+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




Vinnie Moscaritolo
Apple Developer Tech Support
http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/
Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Aug  7 05:14:12 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:14:12 +0800
Subject: Digital Telephony costs $2
Message-ID: <199608070602.XAA21713@toad.com>


At 11:34 PM 8/5/96 -0800, you wrote:
>What is unclear, however, is WHY they "had to" build a card that couldn't do 
>full-duplex.  I mean, would there have been a problem implementing that?  Or 
>was this just another one of those stupid design decisions which could have 
>been easily fixed if it had been realized in time?

1) Costs money - especially critical if you're trying to either
-  get a new product accepted by the market (when they were becoming popular) or
-  compete in a me-too market (after they became popular and costs came way
down.)
2) DSPs tend to be really tight on resources, especially RAM,
   which you need to do multiple programs at once.  $5-10 DSPs are 
   especially tight.  They're starting to come with mini operating systems.
3) They probably didn't think of Internet Telephony as a market
-  They were PC folks, and while _we_ all knew about the Internet,
   it was probably 1/4 as big as now and earlier on the hype curve
-  It's only been recently that soundcards have been ubiquitous enough
   for people to assume they're there for a product like Internet phone
-  28.8 modems are fast enough.  14.4 are marginal.  9.6 is _really_ marginal.
4) Most of their market wants other things - MIDI, game noises,
   talking applications, occasional recording and sound processing.
   Voice crunching is mostly used for answering machines and 
   fancy voice-response telephony units "Press 1 if you want to Press 2."

>> It also has the advantage
>>that the data is being moved through your CPU, so encryption is
>>an easy add-on, rather than having one combined modem/voiceblaster
>>card which doesn't have any hooks for crypto or other processing.
>Well, I assume that if implemented as a new type of modem card, the 
>processor can be used to do the data transfer.

If you're doing the voice crunching and A/D conversion and telephony
all on the modem card, with everything tightly integrated
to fit in your tiny cache, why put in hooks for the processor to intervene?

>>Given that the "3KHz" is almost universally transmitted over 64kbps
>>digital channels, there's really no point in pushing past 33.6 with
>>analog-based coding; better to just do ISDN. 
>
>The local phonecos still want to overcharge for ISDN, however.  Major 
>bigtime problem.  ISDN looked great back in about 1980 when the fastest 
>common modem was 300 baud, but it's lost much of its lustre competing 
>against 33.6 kbps.  Maybe if ISDN were available at a premium of $5 per 
>month or so...

Depends on the telco.  Here in PacBell's fiefdom, home ISDN costs only
a bit more than two voice lines, and you get two lines out of it.
Local calls are a penny or four a minute daytime, free at night.
This may change soon - the telco is appalled to find out that
computer people think "it's free at night" means "it's free at night" :-)

There's getting to be enough ISDN support that an ISDN-based 
phone program might find some market - especially if it can use
higher sampling rates and ADPCM compression to get better sound out of
56-64 kbps than a regular phone can, and maybe you could support a
shared-whiteboard program as well.  Still need to do something about
echo control, though.  However, I wouldn't recommend writing a free
encrypted ISDN telephone program, though - you wouldn't be able
to export that on the Internet.  But a phone program that lets users plug in
their own algorithms for echo control, with an API that supports
exchanging parameters - now _that_ would be a phone program.

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From pjn at nworks.com  Wed Aug  7 05:14:32 1996
From: pjn at nworks.com (pjn at nworks.com)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:14:32 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Interna
Message-ID: <TCPSMTP.16.8.6.-13.10.32.2645935021.659902@.nworks.com>


 (There is a really good joke in my response. Try to figure it out.
  Be the first one on your block to realize what the numbers mean)

 
 In> Anyone know  what J. Edgar Hoover's SSN was?


 Yeah, 276-77-3737


 P.J.
 pjn at nworks.com

... Hey, Worf! I hooked Data up to a modem... Wanna see?

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR]







From stewarts at ix.netcom.com  Wed Aug  7 05:24:07 1996
From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:24:07 +0800
Subject: Stealth cookies
Message-ID: <199608070259.TAA17434@toad.com>



At 03:48 PM 8/5/96 -0400, Anne Eisenberg <aeisenb at duke.poly.edu> wrote:
>All of the discussion on the list to do with
>cookies is related to Netscape.  Does this mean that if one switches to
>Microsoft Explorer one can avoid the problem?  Many thanks.

MSIE also does cookies.  Netscape 3.0b5 has a nice option to let you
choose whether to accept a cookie or not.  However, what's the problem
you're trying to solve?  Sites have several ways to find out information
about you, which they can use immediately or coordinate with other things
0) Stuff the site knows about itself, like contents and time
1) Stuff you tell them by filling in forms
2) Your IP address (not always very useful...)
3) Information your browser sends (somewhat adjustable.)
4) Information your browser sends that a site asked you to keep for it
        (i.e. cookies.)

For the most part, this doesn't leak a lot of information;
even cookies can only pass things the sites already knew between sessions.
The cookie spec is well-designed, only allowing cookies to be retrieved
by the machine or domain that set them in the first place.

However, there's a way to cheat the cookie spec; I don't know
if this was intentional, but it was realized quickly by the market :-)
The issue is that your browser sends along an HTTP_REFERRER variable,
which points to the last page you visited before the current page.
It's useful for sites to find out where their pages are being referenced,
and they may (legitimately) want to only give out information if you're
coming from one of their previous pages.  This does also mean that
a page (www.alice.com/interesting.html) can hand its name to another page
or program (www.bob.com/cgi/count-stuff.pl)  by including an inline reference
to it.  But that site can send your browser a cookie marked bob.com, which is 
accessible by _it_, not by the referring page.  This means that 
if you later connect to www.carol.com/foo.html, which references bob's
count-stuff program, bob.com can retrieve the bob.com cookie that 
has information about your connection to alice.com.  If alice.com and
bob.com store some identifying information (e.g. alice.com records
a connection from 192.9.200.1 at 12:34:59 UTC, and bob.com records 
a connection from 192.9.200.1 at 12:35:01 UTC, and bob.com stores a reference
to that in the cookie (either storing the information directly, or more
likely, storing a record-id number referencing a database entry,
and carol.com and bob.com similarly share a reference, then alice, bob,
and carol can coordinate what happened in the two sessions.
Maybe Bob just knows that there's market correlation between viewers of
Alice's Brownie Company and Carol's Congressional Consulting, or maybe
they also share the credit card number, flavors, and addresses you gave
alice.com
with the search criteria you gave carol.com to find you've been donating
special brownies to that congresscritter you've been lobbying.
Without the cookie hack, the ability to correlate is limited to the
common information that you've given the two sites, which tells
them that some Netcom user with Mozilla 3.2b7.7 did it,
which isn't enough to run a targeted campaign donation request
or send out the FBI or whatever.

Doubleclick.com is the site that's wellknown for exploiting the feature,
and their web site is interesting.  If you're using 3.0b5, try
different combinations of accepting or rejecting cookie requests....

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com
# <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> 	Defuse Authority!






From rah at shipwright.com  Wed Aug  7 05:27:39 1996
From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:27:39 +0800
Subject: Phill's evil twin Skippy
In-Reply-To: <199608062350.QAA18315@web.azstarnet.com>
Message-ID: <v03007801ae2dad9e03f0@[206.119.69.46]>


At 7:50 PM -0400 8/6/96, David M. Rose wrote:
> Oh goody! Another Hallam-Baker-generated p*ssing contest.  Perhaps you
> fellows should settle your differences with a bet. Oops, I forgot. The good
> "Doc" dishonors his wagers with a series of fantastic and infantile
> "misunderstandings".


The weirdest thing happened to me today. (Nooo, not *that* wierd thing,
something *else*.) A gentleman proporting to be Phill Hallam-Baker (at
least his check said so, and they actually *do* clear...) showed up at the
DCSB meeting and had lunch. Very pleasant guy.  Quite civil, if a little
bit statist, and way too Hegelian for my blood...

Frankly, I think someone's *spoofing* Dr. Hallam-Baker, on the net or in
person. I can't figure out which one's which.

Anyone have some theories on this? Does he have an evil twin Skippy? The
world wants to know.

Will the real Phillip Hallam-Baker please stand up and thottle your evil twin?

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga




-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com)
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender."
                -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard,
                       for Bart Simpson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/







From shamrock at netcom.com  Wed Aug  7 05:33:40 1996
From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:33:40 +0800
Subject: Apple people on the list
Message-ID: <v02120d03ae2db5810751@[192.0.2.1]>


At 16:15 8/6/96, John Young wrote:

>What would you offer to set off Tim's simmering crypto-anarcho-volcano,
>make it heard round the planet?

Bottle o' Scotch (my private stash). Free Ecash account.



-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock at netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.
   Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November.
   Vote Harry Browne for President.







From janee at okway.okstate.edu  Wed Aug  7 05:35:29 1996
From: janee at okway.okstate.edu (Steve Coltrin)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:35:29 +0800
Subject: SSNs (was Re: Internal Passports)
Message-ID: <20758330@Okway.okstate.edu>


Simon Spero <ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu> wrote:

>one silly thought: lots of people use cypherpunks as the username and 
>password for all those websites that want an id. What about a cypherpunks 
>3-2-4 number for those cases where an SSN isn't appropriate. Anyone know 
>what J. Edgar Hoover's SSN was?


According to one of "George Hayduke"'s books, Richard Nixon's was 567-68-0515.

-spc





From tcmay at got.net  Wed Aug  7 05:41:24 1996
From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:41:24 +0800
Subject: Talking about Crypto Anarchy
Message-ID: <ae2d4666190210046ce1@[205.199.118.202]>



I'm going to use John's comments as a jumping off point for some things I
probably should have said a while ago.

At 11:15 PM 8/6/96, John Young wrote:
>I'd like to hear Tim, too, in this Big Apple. RealAudio, perhaps.
>
>Tim's views are far more substantial and worthwhile than those play-it-safe
>Pro-Code dronings.
>
>And his pith should go out far and wide, around the world, not only out
>there on its edge.
>
>Vinnie, Robert, All Appledom, do your global duty, don't miss this chance
>to leapfrog the small-beans promoters of the crypto industry.
>
>What would you offer to set off Tim's simmering crypto-anarcho-volcano,
>make it heard round the planet?

As I think I made clear, there is little either Vinnie or Bob have "failed"
to do. I'll explain this below. It is true that I am not much of a fan of
Bob's writing style, with nuggets of truth buried in bloviations about
sacks of grenades, rubber rafts, shaking trees, pieces of the true cross,
ad nauseum, but, then, "style" is something I tend to react to perhaps more
than most. (Not the variations in style of the hundreds of folks who post
here, but the florid excesses so common in "neo-journalism," where it seems
the writers are paid by the word--as perhaps they are--and wrap their few
nuggets in stock phrases and cutesy pastiches of Chandler, Wolfe, Gibson,
Joyce, and the whole Sick Crew.

Back to important issues. Let me summarize:

1. A while back there was an announcement (I thought by Vinnie, but he
denied it to me) of a "Mac Crypto" mailing list. This announcement, which I
no longer have (not in my own archives, and not in the few CP archives that
seem to still be reachable on the Web) mentioned that the list would focus
on "real" cryptography, and _not_ on political issues (including,
presumably, the main topics that have motivated my contributions for the
past several years, and longer).

Fair enough, as the owner/maintainer of a list is free to set his policies.
I of course did not join this list, as I don't think a list which only
discussed quadratic residues and elliptic curve methods is exactly my cup
of tea...there are plenty of textbooks and other lists for this.

2. So, when Vinnie sent me his "Mac Crypto Needs You!" mini-rant, my
natural conservatism toward such things kicked in. I am not, as must be
clear now, one of those "Rah rah rah! We need to evangelize crypto!" folks.
I take a neo-Calvinist position on such things. Hustling memes is
distasteful to me. (Some will say my posts here are an attempt to sell my
ideas. Fair enough, but this is a forum I find acceptable.)

3. I told Vinnie I was not interested, that giving a "pep talk" to Mac
developers is not my thing, and that if my views on politics, crypto
anarchy, the undermining of governments, money-laundering as a tool of
liberation, etc., were not deemed acceptable for his list, then I would not
feel welcome at Apple Computer talking about the same. (In his reply, he
said he'd never said any such thing about politics not being welcome on Mac
Crypto....I could have sworn I saw such a thing, but, like I said, I can't
find this message anywhere I've looked.)

4. Blah blah blah. That is, you saw my longer article I sent to Vinnie,
explaining why I was not too interested. I won't repeat the points here.

5. I thought the subject was closed, as Vinnie then said that perhaps I was
_not_ the right person after all. I agree with this. I am not an
"evangelist," at least not one in the mold of the ever-bubbly Guy Kawasaki.
Nor am I in the mold of a Robert Hettinga. Maybe I'm more like H.L.
Mencken, or, at least I'd like to be.

Evangelists disgust me. I can't read anything Kawasaki gibbers about, nor
can I read the neo-journalism of "Spencer Katt," "Mac the Knife," or
"Robert X. Cringely."

(If you don't recognize these names, these are the terminally-hip gossip
columnists and "rumormongers" of the three leading trade rags. The style is
pretty similar to that used by Brock Meeks, Robert Hettinga, and the like.)

Now on the the Big Issue.

6. I've given up on discussing crypto anarchy in short talks because nearly
nobody in the audiences I've done it for has the foggiest notions of what
I'm talking about, and I've found no short, sweet, simple methods of
getting across the implications. Many audiences have no idea of how public
key encryption even works, let alone how digital money might work.

(Thus, panel discussions on "cryptography" bog down almost immmediately on
basic issues. There's no way to get to the "juicy" stuff when 20 minutes is
spent trying to educate an audience about what a prime number is!)

Consider how long it takes a new subscriber on this list, one who
presumably heard about this list from a background of some familiarity with
the idea of encryption, to get to the point of understanding what the terms
and phrases in my sig mean. I'd say it takes at least several weeks, with
detours into Schneier to read up on the basics, and some mental effort to
think through how anonymous remailers work, what digital money might mean
for tax collection, etc.

Even at the Hacker's Conference, which I last attended in 1993, the
discussions of cryptography were deeply unsatisfying to me. My panel, on
crypto, bogged down in trying to get across to a technically pretty
competent audience the implications of strong crypto. Clearly, the hour or
so we had was not enough, and people could only get the barest glimpses.

7. In several radio talk shows I have done, the same is true. Given that
there just isn't enough time for a careful explication of the necessary
background, the discussion and the questions from callers to the show stay
at the most basic level. While I am not dismissing the importance of basic
questions, it's clear that the discussion can never move on.

Thus, discussions tend to never get beyond the "think of crypto as
envelopes...would you want your messages all on postcards?" level. (This
envelope-postcard analogy is of course due to Phil Z., and he seems more
comfortable than I in giving this kind of talk over and over again.)

8. Even articles in "Liberty" and "Reason" magazines (plus more obscure
magazines like "Extropy") have to spend most of the article explaining the
basics, ending with a glimpse into a few topics of more recent vintage.
Mostly, it is hopeless to get into "crypto anarchy," when the article is
about how public key encryption works.

(Note: This observation is part of a larger issue about the difficulties of
building on past work. It is why so many fractious debates never get beyond
the opening salvos...over and over again. The debate over nuclear power (or
gun rights, or...) comes to mind, and I have, as with crypto anarchy, given
up on trying to "convince" groups of the truth of my views: nearly everyone
I talk to is so ignorant of the basics of radiation, containment, half
lives, ionizing radiation damage, alternatives, etc., that all discussions
bog down at the most basic of levels. When I used to have the energy--and
the foolishness--to bend someone's ear about nuclear power for a couple of
hours, I could _sometimes_ see the glimmerings of a change in positions,
the flicker of a change in preconceived notions. Mostly there was only
blankness and hostility. I get the same reaction when I try to explain the
techno-libertarian implications of strong cryptography.)

9. So, while John Young and others might want like that my "pith should go
out far and wide, around the world, not only out there on its edge," the
plain fact is that it can't go out in a talk lasting only a few hours, or,
much more likely, lasting less than an hour.

Certain after dinner speakers are adept at getting one or maybe two simple
points across in a talk--usually with some judicious humor to drive the
point home--but I am not one of them. Maybe one of you is, but not me. In
any case, getting "one or two ideas across" is not of much interest to me.

(I've also seen David Chaum struggle to just get the basic idea of
"credentials without identity" across to a tecnical audience...even when he
concentrates on only getting a single facet of his ideas across, the light
bulbs just don't go off in the heads of the audience members...at least
this was what I witnessed.)

I know there are some lawyers and law professors on this list, so the
analogy to law might be useful. To wit, can a lawyer or professor be
expected to really explain to a lay audience some complicated subject? Or
is a series of ground-laying lectures needed first? While there are
presumably lawyers willing to give pleasant after-dinner speeches on, say,
"tort reform," I suspect that very little information is conveyed to lay
audiences. (And, as I've said, I am not a talented dinner speaker.)

10. Finally, I am not a "motivational coach." I don't give pep talks to
people at companies to help them save their companies, or their platforms.
Thus, I am not interested in giving a "go out and win one for the Gipper!"
pep talk at Apple.

I hope this makes things clearer. And bear in mind that I actually _did_
spend a vast amount of my time putting together a compendium of my thoughts
and ideas in my "Cyphernomicon." [ URL:
http://www.oberlin.edu/~brchkind/cyphernomicon/ ] At more than a megabyte,
and with various chapters on crypto anarchy, anonymous markets, remailers,
and all sorts of implications, it is the fullest embodiment of my thinking
extant in any one place. Some say it would make for a start on a book, but
I can't see any publishers rushing to publish such a book (one publisher
asked me to "submit a proposal" for a book on how to use PGP...this is the
level of what publishers want from me...needless to say, I discarded his
business card immediately).

And so it goes. I'm not interested in giving a pep talk to Apple or its
developers, I outlined my reasons in other messages. And I don't believe
there's any way to adequately explain the collection of ideas I call
"crypto anarchy" in much less than a lecture series. Even if someone were
to sponsor or arrange such a lecture series, as has been done for things
like nanotechnology, I'd have to think long and hard about committing to
this. My inclination is to tell those who ask for such a talk or lecture
series to "RTFM."

Regards,

--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 at 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."









From frissell at panix.com  Wed Aug  7 05:43:31 1996
From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 20:43:31 +0800
Subject: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960806235136.0092c204@panix.com>


At 05:16 PM 8/5/96 -0400, hallam at Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote:

>Making that argument defeats your case. Irespective of the framers
>of the constitution nobody in Congress or the Administration believes
>that you have a right to take up arms against the government.

Have you checked with Helen Chenoweth (R-Idaho) or B1-Bob Dornan (R-Orange
County) about this assertion.  Not to mention our former black radical
friend from Oakland in Congress.  I bet you could find a fair number of
supporters for the concept of the "right of revolution" in Congress and
other parts of the government.  Better hunting on Usenet, of course.

When former Idaho congressman and senator Steve Syms was first running for
Congress, his slogan was "Traditionally, Americans have had three means of
preserving their freedoms.  The jury box, the ballot box and -- when those
failed -- the cartridge box."

In addition it seems to me that a certain "Mobe" leader and campus
revolutionary